Finally, California tends to set trends for the rest of the country. Would we see other states go the California way and change classification of ICs to employees?
Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
771–780 of 781 posts
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#772Lots of HN comments are here like "I know people who prefer to be contractors", "My sister's neighbours little brother actually doesn't want to be treated with respect by Uber", blah This is utter nonsense. Being a contractor means being self employed. You don't get paid leave or sick pay. It's a risk taking and doesn't make any sense in the gig economy where the wages are close to minimum rates. If you are truly sel…
>... we should treat each other with more dignity... You mean like respecting their decision to engage in gig work despite every other available option? That kind of dignity? The whole issue is pretty rich coming from California. If people are struggling the answer is never that the cost of living is too high due to rediculous zoning and environmental regulations, clearly it's the greedy companies that are the proble…
Are people engaging in gig work because it has several advantages over "every other available option"? What other options do people who drive for Lyft/Uber as a day job have? And what are the advantages Uber/Lyft & working as a contractor offer?
Maybe zoning effects should be part of a discussion on the cost of living in California, exploitation of immigrants is deplorable and awareness should be raised and actions taken, but does that make Uber/Lyft exploiting workers a non-issue?
I'm not from the US and am not aware of the specifics in California, but being from a country which has faced severe economic crises I've seen people "choosing" a shitty option despite every other shitty option.
I can't say I understand where you're going with most of what you're saying, or how informed you are of gig workers situation.
I saw a pretty good movie by Ken Loach: _Sorry We Missed You_, that thought was really spot on on the issues of gig work:
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#773Lots of HN comments are here like "I know people who prefer to be contractors", "My sister's neighbours little brother actually doesn't want to be treated with respect by Uber", blah This is utter nonsense. Being a contractor means being self employed. You don't get paid leave or sick pay. It's a risk taking and doesn't make any sense in the gig economy where the wages are close to minimum rates. If you are truly sel…
>All gig workers are slaves and we should treat each other with more dignity and upgrade them to employees. It's our bloody duty as a decent human being. Lyft/Uber can upgrade them to employees but the arithmetic of bottom-up economics means Uber has to raise prices to cover full employment benefits. The raised fares conflict with what passengers are willing to pay . E.g. even though yellow medallion taxis often cost…
To think that if only the Confederate states would have made that iron-clad argument back then, the civil war would have been avoided. Imagine how low the prices could be if we still had slaves.
If your business is unsustainable without taking advantage of the workers then it ought not to exist.
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#774Lots of HN comments are here like "I know people who prefer to be contractors", "My sister's neighbours little brother actually doesn't want to be treated with respect by Uber", blah This is utter nonsense. Being a contractor means being self employed. You don't get paid leave or sick pay. It's a risk taking and doesn't make any sense in the gig economy where the wages are close to minimum rates. If you are truly sel…
My guess is that the full story is this: Most Uber/Lyft drivers say they don't want to be considered employees because, for most of them, this isn't actually their job. It's just a side gig. I can't really speak to larger urban areas because I tend to prefer public transit when it's a viable option, but, in the smaller cities where I take most my rideshare rides, a pretty large percentage of the drivers I chat with e…
What Uber and Lyft have essentially done here is to make their employees pay a substantial portion of what would otherwise be corporate taxes, and pocket that difference as profits while their drivers actually meet the legal criteria to require classification as employees. They shouldn't just be getting ordered to begin complying with the law, this should have resulted in a class action law suite for damages and a felony tax evasion case brought against them.
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#775Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s incredible how many people just start from the assumption that these services must exist and then work backward from that. Obviously you run into serious dissonance when you arrive at the pricing problem, where the solution is quite simple: they shouldn’t exist. Then you can start thinking about real solutions to urban transit that have existed for more than a century.
The starting assumption is that free and rational adults are choosing to work for the wage and customers are choosing to pay a sufficient price, so it should exist. That's not working backward, or dissonance--it's an acknowledgement of reality. It's a different unrelated group claiming that it shouldn't exist if it doesn't provide the pay / benefits they think it should.
See heavy drugs, prostitution and violence market as some examples where two consenting adults is not enough to form a legitimate business.
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#776Earlier quoted context omitted.
The starting assumption is that free and rational adults are choosing to work for the wage and customers are choosing to pay a sufficient price, so it should exist. That's not working backward, or dissonance--it's an acknowledgement of reality. It's a different unrelated group claiming that it shouldn't exist if it doesn't provide the pay / benefits they think it should.
Are we willing to allow, even to facilitate that as a society? See heavy drugs, prostitution and violence market as some examples where two consenting adults is not enough to form a legitimate business.
True: it is not the case that we should fundamentally allow any association between two consenting adults. No, this does not justify preventing it in other cases.
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#777Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#778Earlier quoted context omitted.
Standard employees also can just not show up as they want. Entirely possible for both contractors and employees.
Employee would be fired.
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#779Earlier quoted context omitted.
Incorrect. I cannot do these jobs. I would quickly lose my ability to walk and use my hands. And no one hires someone who randomly needs to take weeks off and can only work 5-10 hours a week when they can work at all. Not sure why you think you know what my limitations are. Or where you get the idea that employers actually hire disabled people. Look at the unemployment rate for disabled people.
No, I am not saying you can be a nurse. I am saying there are jobs out there that Uber can model a employer / employee relationship after that will still give you the flexibility you desire and need.