Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 887 posts

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#621

Post by DuskStar »

crooked-v wrote: post #606
DuskStar wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think someone attempting to get an Uber pickup (or getting dropped off by an Uber) in the middle of CHOP/CHAZ might have had some problems. Particularly at night. Or any "drop me off within the ongoing protest" ride, really.

Problems? Sure. It's going to be hell to try and get in and out of the area, since you'll have to either go at about two miles an hour while people move out of the way (while regularly stopping and waiting for unorganized crowds), or just go around the long way. 'Getting dragged out of your car and beaten'? No, unless the police do it ( https://www.newsbreak.com/georgia/atlanta/news/1577488884462... ).

If you're going to include individual incidents, you should include the CHAZ/CHOP shooting, and the various "people beat up the car as it drives through" occurrences too. Sure, those cars may have done something to offend/anger/threaten the protesters, but...

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#622

Post by crooked-v »

smsm42 wrote: post #551
newacct583 wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's absolutely true, and it's one of the reasons that society benefits from the idea of an "employee" relationship, where you can rely on a single corporation, beholden to some kind of public consensus, to enforce a uniform set of rules. A world where everyone is a "contractor" is one where everyone is subject to the tragedy of the commons. (e.g. "You can't get a ride in a poor neighborhood") But part of t…

Taxis have had "You can't get a ride in a poor neighborhood" for ages. If California kills Uber, we're back to the same taxis. So how exactly what is happening now helps solve the "You can't get a ride in a poor neighborhood" problem? > Those features aren't a good faith attempt to comply with the law There can be no good attempt to comply with this (completely terrible) law from Uber, since this law was meant to out…

> There can be no good attempt to comply with this (completely terrible) law from Uber

Actually, it's very simple: treat them as employees, including granting required benefits and paying them at least minimum wage for time worked (presumably at the higher of either minimum wage or per-trip earnings for the time period).

Nothing about this is incompatible with allowing employees to pick their own working hours.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#623

Post by amscanne »

gamblor956 wrote: post #131
amscanne wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You compare uber to etsy, but uber sets a price and does not even list the name of the driver till you order to pay. Yes, but the driver is similarly offered the fare, and may choose to accept or not. This is actually one of the critical distinctions between employees and non-employees. If they were an actual employee, Uber would be able to just assign the fare to them. This is also unlike taxis, where, if your lig…

The important factor for employee vs contractor isn't whether the worker can accept/reject the job, since employees have that option under many union contracts, and in fact this is how many restaurants have operated for decades (where "job" = "shift"). What matters is whether the worker can independently decide what fare to charge (even if in practice the fare is limited by market forces to what a customer/client wou…

I get your point, but I think the restaurant analogy is flawed.

With restaurants, there’s an ongoing relationship and and expectation about shifts. There’s just a small amount of flexibility. The employee with take some good ones, some bad ones (with more good ones probably going to folks with more seniority, or those favored by the managers).

One couldn’t show up every couple weeks for two peak hours at the restaurant and expect to work. But some Uber drivers do exactly that.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#624

Post by asdff »

qeternity wrote: post #610
baron_harkonnen wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if they don't have better alternatives? Sometimes I actively look forward to the tech job market collapsing.

> And if they don't have better alternatives? Then it would seem applying more pressure to their already unprofitable employer is an unwise move...

Better not ban child labor if it puts kids out of work, right?

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#625

Post by sixothree »

smsm42 wrote: post #526
aslfksdfl wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had Uber drivers pick me up and refuse to go to the part of the city I wanted to go to... complete pain in the ass (and also racist in this specific case). Uber offered me $5 for my trouble each time, which is... very Uber.

If the part of the city is unsafe (as some parts of some major cities are frequently nowdays) to the point the driver risks being assaulted by a mob, dragged out and beaten or shot, and their vehicle destroyed - I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to refuse such ride. No ride worth your life, and unless you're paying 1000x the Uber rates, no ride is worth your car ruined.

It sounds like you're making assumptions that the driver cited a reason when he did not. Where from that comment did you get the driver feared being "assaulted by a mob, dragged out and beaten or shot, and their vehicle destroyed". Was it the part where he said it was racist?

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#626

Post by JakeTheAndroid »

a13n wrote: post #535
slipheen wrote: post #494

Them shutting down is a perfectly acceptable outcome. California has essentially told them "You're doing an illegal thing". They're response is essentially "Oh yeah? Well then, we'll stop doing the illegal thing!" Thank you? That's what you were asked to do in the first place? If they aren't interested in operating legally, then pivot or disband the company.

I think this puts pressure on the government to find a compromise, because Californians will be pissed that Uber stops working.

Either that, or in the wake of this some other company finds a way to achieve this same result in compliance with the laws and captures the market. I think both outcomes would be acceptable.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#627

Post by asdff »

ghaff wrote: post #43

Maybe I'm cynical but "temporarily shut down" sounds like a formula to: - Inconvenience a certain class of urbanites who have grown accustomed to being driven around in the hopes that they - Complain loudly to their representatives and other governmental officials in the hope that - The state will reverse this judgement

At this point, Uber is acting childish. They refuse to play by the rules, and opt to take their ball and go home. What is it with SV companies and petty schoolyard tier drama like this? Just follow the damn law.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#628

Post by canada_dry »

deminature wrote: post #423
Will_Do wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's pretty interesting! In my view, the set your own fare part and penalty removal definitely moves them from the "employee" zone to "self-employed" in the everyday definition. I guess AB5 is much more strict.

AB5 imposes an ABC test on businesses after the precedent set by Dynamex [1]. The specific point of contention the judge has is the B of the ABC - that is whether drivers 'perform work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business'. Uber argues it is a technology company first, and drives/delivers second, whereas the judge argues the opposite. Convincing arguments can be made for both sides. The mo…

> Uber argues it is a technology company first, and drives/delivers second

I can see Uber desperately looking for non-obvious applications for its core software to strengthen its argument.

Suggestions?

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#629

Post by smsm42 »

crooked-v wrote: post #597
core-questions wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazing that you're downvoted. Are HN posters really so sheltered that they don't know that this is a reality in many major American cities? I'm sure it's in areas they never visit, for totally unspecified reasons, but it's real. There are areas (e.g. in Camden NJ) where the police will tell you to not stop your car for any reason, just get through and get out. Pretending this isn't a reality or that it doesn't have…

There's a major difference between 'unsafe because of high crime rates' (the actual case in some places) and 'unsafe because an entire mob of random people will manifest out of the ether, drag you from your car, and beat you up' (the nonsense part). The latter has been seeing increasing use lately as part of the endless barrage of 'all of (city name) is a flaming ruin constantly prowled by antifa supersoldiers' claim…

It doesn't have to be "constant". It's enough to happen to you once to cost you tens of thousands of dollars, or your health, or, if you're very unlucky, your life. I've seen photos of people with firearms drawn stopping motorists at protests. You can talk all day about how it doesn't happen, but I've seen photos and videos of that happening. There's no way I would go to such place for $20/hr (Uber's average wage in SV, for example). It's just not worth the risk.
Post reply on HN