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

641–650 of 887 posts

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

#641

Post by slipheen »

lhh wrote: post #638

> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC on Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order. “Any business model that relies on shortchanging workers in order to make it probably shouldn’t be anywhere, whether California or otherwise,” he said. This type of attitude drives me crazy. These companies have paid billions of dollars to drivers, who voluntarily decided…

That's a really harmful outlook.

If company A decides that they are going to pay their workers (say) $3/hr, and illegally bypass the minimum wage, it _DOESN'T MATTER AT ALL_ if they can find workers willing to work for that amount.

As a society, we've decided that certain offers aren't acceptable, even if you can find someone desperate enough to take the offer.

You shouldn't get to just ignore the law because you're big enough.

(And Yes, in practice big companies do ignore laws more than they should. That's a bad thing, and a reason to do better, not a reason to give up).

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

#642

Post by apta »

lhh wrote: post #638

> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC on Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order. “Any business model that relies on shortchanging workers in order to make it probably shouldn’t be anywhere, whether California or otherwise,” he said. This type of attitude drives me crazy. These companies have paid billions of dollars to drivers, who voluntarily decided…

They want private companies to pay for the government shortcomings of not providing affordable healthcare and other benefits.

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

#643

Post by manfredo »

solidasparagus wrote: post #601
manfredo wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not. Is Apple in the business of producing records because it runs iTunes? No, it's in the business of software (and hardware), and some of that software is used to sell music. Trying to claim that a software service to run a marketplace to sell X is the same thing as actually running a business of building or doing X takes some mental gymnastics.

Yes, Apple is absolutely a music publishing company (among other things) because it runs iTunes.

It's a music publishing company as much as DoorDash is a restaurant. You use DoorDash to get food, but DoorDash is not the person actually making the food. Likewise Apple sells music, but said music is actually recorded and published by some other entity.

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

#644

Post by xeromal »

ivraatiems wrote: post #348
chrisseaton wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't 'lay off' people you don't employ in the first place.

Like the State of California, I reject your premise that Uber drivers are not employees. But what would you call it, and how does that change the argument about why they're doing this?

Do you not think that uber has some employees and some contractors?

What about the people that just work for a little side hustle. Like 5-10 hours a week?

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

#645

Post by ivraatiems »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #537
ivraatiems wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like the State of California, I reject your premise that Uber drivers are not employees. But what would you call it, and how does that change the argument about why they're doing this?

Honestly, how do you expect Uber to, overnight, suddenly change their entire business model, and interview and choose who to hire on full time? And this is in addition to determining benefits, over time, managing those new employees, etc etc. There is so much that needs to be changed for this to happen, it would be more shocking if Uber didn't shut down.

I think they could do it if they wanted to.

Uber has over 22,000 employees [1]. They have HR professionals whose whole job is managing those employees. And they have billions of dollars available to do whatever they need to.

If they wanted to make every driver in California a W-2 employee, I am confident they could do it as quickly as they wanted. And the court wouldn't make them immediately stop. They wouldn't need to shut down. They just need to begin transitioning. Courts are generally reasonable. They'll understand changes take time.

Shutting down is entirely their way of giving the finger to California for making them do something they didn't want to do.

[1] https://www.uber.com/newsroom/company-info/

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

#646

Post by apta »

rrrazdan wrote: post #375

Well this just sucks. As a frequent SF visitor, Uber/Lyft used to be my primary way of moving around. I don't drive. I also don't see who benefits from this. You had a well functioning service for the users that will be disrupted. You had a flexible way to earn for drivers that will be disrupted. I chat with drivers a lot (to practise my English) and lots of drivers really like chatting too ( A lot of them were recen…

It just reeks of incompetence and laziness, not to mention failing to go after the real problem of not having proper healthcare and other benefits that is the job of the government to provide.

They could easily survey drivers to determine how many hours a day they work, who's doing it full time, and if they are, why. However, it's just easy to make a new broken law to add to the already broken laws.

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

#647

Post by pishpash »

speby wrote: post #619
chucknthem wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Former Uber employee here...unfortunately many of those changes either made rider experience worse or made the marketplace less efficient. Lyft gained share as a result of these changes. At the current rate, the gig industry will be regulated out of california and other regions that follow suit (this surely sets regulatory precedence for others). The product won't be at a mass market compelling price point without a…

I would agree and what's especially bad about it is that these changes complicate what was what made Uber so special. You could quite literally press a button to summon a ride and it would show up, you'd get in, and they'd take you to exactly where you inputted, and then you'd get out, no other fussiness to deal with like tipping or unpredictable pricing, etc. These changes make Uber become more like the traditional…

You vote for politicians whose ideology is to micromanage your life including taking a cut of your money, you get exactly that.

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

#648

Post by [deleted] »

tfehring wrote: post #613
deminature wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Whether Uber's business is providing taxi service or just providing a platform for independent drivers to connect with clients, intuitively it seems like the work drivers do is clearly within the usual course of Uber's business. What would Uber's counterargument look like here? Am I just reading it too literally?

[deleted]

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

#649

Post by Slartie »

remote_phone wrote: post #596
JKCalhoun wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or an opportunity for a new ride-share company that doesn't claim their employees are contractors.

Even taxis claim their drivers as contractors.

An individual taxi driver owning a cab, a license if necessary, paying for his insurance and getting the money from his passengers is an individual contractor, yes.

It's just that he contracts with the individual riders, not any higher-up monopolistic business entity that sets arbitrary business-driven rules that all taxi drivers have to follow.

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

#650

Post by pishpash »

justapassenger wrote: post #387
chucknthem wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Former Uber employee here...unfortunately many of those changes either made rider experience worse or made the marketplace less efficient. Lyft gained share as a result of these changes. At the current rate, the gig industry will be regulated out of california and other regions that follow suit (this surely sets regulatory precedence for others). The product won't be at a mass market compelling price point without a…

Goal of the government isn't to make marketplaces efficient. Regulations focuses more on making them "fair", "safe" and "non-discriminator". Note - definition of those is very political and open to huge interpretations. Gig-working enjoyed unregulated market, which is great for efficiency. But law is catching up now. Note - I'm not arguing that laws passed by government are correct. But they're in line with what gove…

Except in this case they make it less fair, safe and non-discriminatory because those in government think they can ignore basic economics.
Post reply on HN