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

711–720 of 887 posts

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

#711

Post by lhh »

enraged_camel wrote: post #696
lhh wrote: post #678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 ag…

> 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).

If someone wants to sell themselves into slavery, I say let them (though perhaps there should be an exception if they're not of sound mind). Or alternatively, maybe slavery is just the degenerate case that removes your agency, and should be disallowed on that basis.

I challenge your premise that it's possible to consider a labor relationship exploitative if both parties voluntarily enter into it.

> No, they got large enough by ignoring the law.

Sure, but I think this is unrelated to my point. I still contend that any voluntary agreements should be allowed, with size of company involved having no bearing on the matter.

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

#712

Post by smoe »

rubatuga wrote: post #446
pininja wrote: post #166

I work at Uber outside of the rides/eats business and observed many feature releases to adjust the business after AB5. What I saw released: - Enabling drivers to see where a rider is going before accepting the trip [0] [2] - Removed a main penalty for declining rides, “No More 85% Acceptance Rate Requirement For Uber Pro” [2] - Drivers get set their own fare with a multiplier [1] (the article details screenshots and…

This is horrible for customers, the worst part is when drivers don't want to pick you up.

I have never used Uber so I'm a bit ignorant. What is so bad about a driver not wanting to pick up? Wont it just keep searching for the next one. It is not really different than if there for one reason or another no drivers are available nearby?

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

#713

Post by pishpash »

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…

It's clear to me that Prong B of AB5 is broken and it's not fixable, except by arbitrary exemptions galore. Rather than admitting this, the state seems hellbent on shoehorning this law into something politically motivated against gig companies.

All the actions on the state's part points to bad faith.

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

#714

Post by Jommi »

slipheen wrote: post #641
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…

However, if company A is in a free market industry they would not be able to sustain that 3$/hr.

Uber has been able to sustain their policies for close to 10 years now. Its pretty clear that drivers are being paid an amount close to their actual value. If they werent, they would be working for some other job.

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

#715

Post by dimgl »

slipheen wrote: post #641
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…

I really don't understand why people are so afraid to let the free market decide what works and what doesn't. Government intervention very often leads to poor outcomes.

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

#716

Post by manfredo »

gamblor956 wrote: post #684
manfredo wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the Apple analogy is entirely accurate. Apple is in the music business. But it's not in the business of making music, it's in the business of selling music. Apple is in the music business in the same vein that a record shop is in the music business. Uber is in the personal transportation business, at a broader high level. It's in the business of operating a market for rides. Just like how a record store doesn't a…

We agree that Apple is just selling music, not making it. We disagree on how analogy that applies to Uber. On its 10K, Uber identifies "gross bookings" as its primary revenue stream. Not "net bookings" or "commissions" or "marketplace fees." Gross bookings. Meaning that it treats all of the income from a ride as its own income, meaning that it's primary business activity is providing transportation services. The same…

What impact does this have on the classification of drivers? When Uber takes $10 from a passenger for a ride, and contracts out a driver to transport the passenger for $8 then Uber has a booking for $10 and an expense of $8 for contracting out that ride. This doesn't change the fact that the driver is a contractor who sets their own hours and can drive for competitors.

Yes, Uber and Lyft are involved in providing transportation services but their involvement is in connecting customers with transportation providers. Calling Uber and Lyft taxi companies makes about as much sense as calling an Expedia an airline. Expedia provides air transport, but through reselling the services of airline companies like Delta or Alaska. Uber and Lyft provide transport by reselling the services of independent contractors. Uber and Lyft are taxi companies as much as Expedia is an airline: they're not.

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

#718

Post by pishpash »

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?

Please first define what is "work in the usual course of business". What work that any contractor does, given that it is work contracted for a necessary economic purpose within the business of the contracting party, isn't within the latter's usual course of business?

Gig companies are market makers. By their very nature they are sitting in the middle of transactions and would be without a job without the transacting parties. Are all transacting parties therefore employees of market makers?

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

#719

Post by whynotminot »

mlrtime wrote: post #665
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.

How is an area racist?

The area wasn't, the driver was. Keep up!

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

#720

Post by senkora »

typest wrote: post #105
senkora wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that not normal? That’s been my typical experience with using Uber/Lyft outside of urban centers.

Well, this IS an urban center, so no, it’s not normal.

Great, thanks!
Post reply on HN