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

691–700 of 887 posts

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

#691

Post by jjcon »

jonahhorowitz wrote: post #607
jjcon wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you but I also think that they should have waited. Right now is a terrible time to wipe out the gig economy. So many people are turning to it and it is creating value. Economic/employment changes like this one are best suited when the market is strong because people job mobility is higher etc.

There was no choice to "wait". AB5 was passed to fix the law because of a court decision [0]. Had they (the CA Legislature) not passed AB5, the court finding in Dynamex would be just as bad for Uber. The court doesn't have an option to "wait" just because it's a recession. Uber doesn't have a choice to "wait" because this ruling is going to go into effect in ~10 days unless the stay is extended. [0] - https://scocal.…

Courts can absolutely choose when to take cases

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

#692

Post by staplers »

core-questions wrote: post #571
smsm42 wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

  Are HN posters really so sheltered that they don't know that this is a reality in many major American cities?
Man the irony here is really lost.

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

#693

Post by icebraining »

stingraycharles wrote: post #578
icebraining wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why were taxi drivers better off? They were also generally not considered employees (in the US). If anything, the appearance of Uber appears to have spurred some action in defence of taxi drivers, long ignored and kept out of the Fair Labor Standards Act and other legislation to protect the rights of workers. In fact, for example in NYC, they generally had to pay to work , by being forced to rent cars from medallion…

Don’t you think the power balance between Uber and taxi drivers versus the situation before is different? I’m aware that the US generally already had a very poor system for taxi drivers, but I don’t believe Uber did not make things better. And don’t forget that Uber also has Uber Eats — delivery drivers are most definitely far worse off with that than when they were working for the restaurants themselves.

> Don’t you think the power balance between Uber and taxi drivers versus the situation before is different?

Yes, Uber is more susceptible to competition than the old taxi companies. Where I live there are already three providers, and I stopped using Uber because the other takes a lower cut from the driver.

In the medallion system, you had to submit to Friedman, because even if another provider offered better conditions, they had a small number of medallions.

Competition between employers helps workers.

> I’m aware that the US generally already had a very poor system for taxi drivers, but I don’t believe Uber did not make things better.

Ok, why?

> And don’t forget that Uber also has Uber Eats — delivery drivers are most definitely far worse off with that than when they were working for the restaurants themselves.

Which restaurant replaces its drivers with UberEats? At least around here, the restaurants that already had drivers kept them, and UberEats even lets clients order from those restaurants and have the delivery be made by their own drivers. They just expanded the labor market to restaurants that did not delivery beforehand. I fail to see how can that be worse than before.

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

#694

Post by julianozen »

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…

A lot of drivers were sure forced to drive for Uber for lack of other alternatives but that is not Uber's problem. They did not add to the problem. Society failed there. This law helps no one and is a clear example of no skin in the game virtue signalling trumping common sense.

I think this is a good point and is correct.

But if society has failed the drivers, shouldn't new regulation be the solution?

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

#696

Post by enraged_camel »

lhh wrote: post #678
slipheen wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> That's a really harmful outlook. Harmful how, exactly? I don't agree that the government should be deeming any type of agreement that adults voluntarily enter into as illegal. The notion that the government should be doing that strikes me as very condescending to the governed. Shouldn't people be allowed to make their own decisions on what is best for their own lives? If someone is in a position where a $3/hr job i…

>> I don't agree that the government should be deeming any type of agreement that adults voluntarily enter into as illegal.

You cannot legally own slaves, even if both parties are consenting adults. So clearly, your premise is flawed: there are absolutely things that the government can determine to be illegal. In California, this includes exploitative labor relationships (again, even if both parties consent to the agreement).

>> Seems to me that the opposite dynamic is at play here - these companies have become large enough to be the target of legislation.

No, they got large enough by ignoring the law. We know this because Uber's only real "moat" is the size of its network. From a technology standpoint, it's fairly easy to replicate, and we have indeed seen this happen across the board. The problem of course is that Uber benefited from first-mover advantage, and quickly got so large and so well-funded that it could litigate and stonewall any local government or other party that raised issues with its labor practices.

That is coming to an end, now. And to that, I say: it's about damn time.

(I don't want to single out Uber either. Airbnb is the exact same: they became massively successful mostly by ignoring local zoning and hotel laws.)

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

#697

Post by Melting_Harps »

olyjohn wrote: post #567
sneak wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is forced to drive for Uber. If they are, presumably they feel Uber’s existence is better than Uber’s nonexistence, otherwise they would be doing something else. The fact that Uber was their #1 choice means Uber driving was an upgrade for their options.

Or Uber doesn't tell you the whole story of what you're actually going to make after gas, maintenance, repairs and insurance. There is a reason that 60% of their drivers leave after 6 months. https://www.businessofapps.com/data/uber-statistics/ More likely people don't find out the true costs of being an Uber driver until they wear out their cars, and have to start paying for repairs and maintenance. When your car is…

> Or Uber doesn't tell you the whole story of what you're actually going to make after gas, maintenance, repairs and insurance.

It's mainly this.

I did a deep dive on Doordash during the pandemic/lockdown while I was going back to school for Supply Chain and Logistics as I wanted to take a better look at how it worked. I even did a few dashes myself.

And the people I spoke to, including the owners of the resteraunts, weren't aware of the many hidden costs of these gig economy services. Which is why you have vigilantes like the guy who did that Pizza DD arbitrage and then went on to tell the the whole World about it and ended with; F' Doordash [1]. Then the taxes as an independent contractor at the end of the year are something they seldom take into account as they've never been an independent contractor before.

These systems are pretty damn predatory and I think the people (business and tech side) who work on them should have to do a mandatory couple of shifts on their own dime every month to get a perspective of what is occurring.

When I lived in Switzerland, one of the coolest things I heard about certain management roles was about how the SBB requires that management and above have to do the more 'menial' work to get a better grasp of what is occurring at the passenger level and help improve the system. My friend was a manager of one of the branches in Bern and she had to go around and collect tickets and clean the train once in a while.

She said it is humbling, but also very useful as it helps her tackle some issues she wasn't even made aware of. Gig economy work has the reputation it does, but the loftier position at these places are extremely isolated from what is actually taking place, which seems like it could be much more of a disconnect than outright malice that's occurring--or at least I'd like to believe that.

'$2 Buck Tony [Xu]' should go back and do it again himself and see how he deals with the app crashes and delayed in order processing.

1: https://themargins.substack.com/p/doordash-and-pizza-arbitra...

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

#698

Post by gamblor956 »

manfredo wrote: post #484
gamblor956 wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) True. But until about 1 month ago, Uber drivers didn't get to set their own rates, and they were punished for not accepting rides. Moreover, a key issue for this test is that Uber matches drivers to riders, so the normal independence that would be expected from a "platform" does not exist. 2) I laughed so hard I scared my neighbor's dog. Uber is a transportation service that happens to use technology (in the form…

So now Craigslist needs to be regulated as an automobile dealer because it hooks up people selling cars to each other? Is Apple in the business of recording music because it runs iTunes? Does DoorDash need to have their offices inspected for food safety because they run a market for food delivery. No. Craigslist operates a platform for selling cars, it doesn't actually sell cars itself. Apple doesn't actually make mu…

No, not sure how you even got there with Craigslist, and even if AB5 was relevant there's an exception for direct sales that would exempt craiglist and similar sites like ebay.

AB5 doesn't apply outside of the worker classification context, so your rambling about Doordash and food safety regulations is just bizarre. You're right that DoorDash is in the food delivery business and so its delivery drivers would be its employees under AB5 (and thats what the underlying case decided). Door Dash is not in the food preparation business, so restaurant workers wouldn't be treated as DoorDash's workers.

Contrary to your insistence otherwise, running a platform that connects buyers and sellers of something is not the same thing as actually providing that good or service yourself. People say that it takes mental gymnastics to arrive at this conclusion. I see the opposite: how do you manage to convince yourself that people writing code at Uber are in the same line of business as getting behind the wheel of a taxi? How do people convince themselves that a PM at DoorDash works at a restaurant?

I agree that running a platform that connects buyers and sellers in a marketplace is not the same as providing that good/service itself, which is why Amazon Marketplace and eBay don't run afoul of AB5. But UBER/LYFT DOES NOT RUN A MARKETPLACE. They would have to make significant changes to their apps to be considered "marketplaces" by any reasonable or historic definition of the term.

This is akin to saying Expedia is in the airline business.

This is not at all like saying Expedia is in the airline business. Expedia operates like a marketplace. It buys inventory from airlines and hotels and resells them to customers. The ultimate commercial relationship is still between the customer and the airline/hotel. That is not the case with Uber/Lyft as they are currently structured: both the rider and the driver have the commercial relationship with Uber and it only exists through Uber.

And for 3 & 4 this could easily be resolved by having driver set up their own LLCs. But I'm not convinced this is actually a requirement. Plenty of people are contractors and fill out 1099s without operating their own LLC or partnership or some other type of company.

AB5 provides a lot of exemptions, so it's not necessary in every context. Rideshare drivers aren't one of the exemptions.

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

#699

Post by s1artibartfast »

arrty88 wrote: post #334

Big question for the room - are current taxi drivers W2 or 1099?

They are generally 1099 contractors, which have been reclassified as employees under AB5. In addition, they often have to rent their cars from the shop and pay the city for medallions to operate.

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

#700

Post by bagacrap »

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

s/complain/vote favorably on prop22
Post reply on HN