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

731–740 of 887 posts

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

#731

Post by Retric »

gamblor956 wrote: post #662
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…

Taken to its furthest extent, AB5 makes Airbnb hosts Airbnb employees, Amazon marketplace sellers Amazon employees, eBay sellers eBay employees, Twitch streamers Twitch employees, etc. Airbnb: no, because hosts aren't being paid for providing services, they're being paid for providing access to their accommodations. Its a subtle distinction but one that matters legally since it means there isn't a compensation-for-wo…

Twitch streamers also retain ownership of their content which is often repackaged for revenue on YouTube.

Twitch is really the least employee vs employer relationship as payment is essentially independent of specific actions preformed by the streamer. It’s not like a streamer is paid to beat a boss, or even play a specific game it’s a question of entertaining people.

IMO it’s the closest to a ‘new economy‘ out there, though sharing roots with earlier real time online performers (porn).

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

#732

Post by jlarocco »

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, whereas the judge argues the opposite.

That argument reminds me of the George Costanza quote, "It's not lying, if you believe it."

Regardless of what they consider themselves, everybody else thinks of them as a big taxi company.

> Taken to its furthest extent, AB5 makes Airbnb hosts Airbnb employees, Amazon marketplace sellers Amazon employees, eBay sellers eBay employees, Twitch streamers Twitch employees, etc.

I don't think it does, and that sounds like FUD. Do you have any references of those businesses actually being required to reclassify vendors as employees?

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

#733

Post by s1artibartfast »

karzeem wrote: post #682
dtech wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safe and maybe fairer for consumers yes, not so much for the employees. That's why they are getting ruled against with employment law. I can think of quite a few other businesses who would love to toss out all employee protections and benefits. I'm sure it would slightly lower prices and improve efficiency here and there. Is that worth the cost though?...

The taxi industry has existed for a long time with a lot of the regulations that people are trying to force onto Uber. But drivers flocked from taxis to Ubers as soon as that option became available. That suggests that at least for those who've opted into Uber, Uber is preferable. Reducing the availability of that option (which is what these rules will cause) is going to hurt them, because the fact that they're doing…

>The taxi industry has existed for a long time with a lot of the regulations that people are trying to force onto Uber.

Not really. Most taxi drivers are 1099 contractors as well. They pay the dispatcher a cut of the fair for connecting them with the ride. They either own their cab and medallion, or rent them from the dispatch company.

It will be interesting to see if Cali prosecutors go after the dispatch companies the way they are going after uber and lyft.

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

#734

Post by tlogan »

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…

The goal of AB5 is to help drivers - so they can get health insurance, etc.

All these changes Uber is doing just so that drivers are not employees.

The question here is: what is the problem with making drivers employees? How much money that will be?

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

#735

Post by ashtonkem »

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.

This is a capital strike (as compared to a labor strike). It should be viewed in that way.

Uber isn't shutting down to comply with the law, they're shutting down in CA in protest of the law.

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

#736

Post by aslfksdfl »

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…

I take it your experience in cities is extremely limited.

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

#737

Post by s1artibartfast »

kingnothing wrote: post #452
mrfusion wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can’t uber just position itself as a lead generation service for drivers?

Uber positions itself that way all over the place: Uber is a tech company that connects riders and drivers. It is not a taxi service.

The absurd part is that this is exactly what a taxi service does as well. Most Taxi drivers are 1099 contracts that are connected with rides by dispatch.

Taxi driving contractors have less autonomy than uber drivers, but you don't see Cali prosecutors going after taxi companies.

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

#738

Post by phatfish »

pishpash wrote: post #650
justapassenger wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

A government can ignore "basic economics" (bit of a vauge term), the government creates the environment that businesses exist in.

If "basic economics" produce a result that is clearly unethical or a detriment to society then it can be ignored.

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

#739

Post by madeofpalk »

pishpash wrote: post #647
speby wrote: post #619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This is not it.

The problem is that the law does not account for ‘gig workers’, so produces are shoehorned into one extreme or the other.

I don’t think that Uber drivers should be employees, but I think the law should afford (enforce companies to give) them more protection than they get as ‘contractors’.

It’s funny - the laws and regulations changed to accommodate ride sharing, creating specific schemes for them. But it hasn’t for this new bread of worker.

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

#740

Post by e12e »

gamblor956 wrote: post #662
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…

Taken to its furthest extent, AB5 makes Airbnb hosts Airbnb employees, Amazon marketplace sellers Amazon employees, eBay sellers eBay employees, Twitch streamers Twitch employees, etc. Airbnb: no, because hosts aren't being paid for providing services, they're being paid for providing access to their accommodations. Its a subtle distinction but one that matters legally since it means there isn't a compensation-for-wo…

> Airbnb: no, because hosts aren't being paid for providing services, they're being paid for providing access to their accommodations.

Hotels aren't classified as a service in the US? Or is this going along with the fiction that Airbnb is different from hotels (and not subject to regulations etc) the same way uber isn't a taxi service?

Post reply on HN