Rideshare operations are being suspended in California • Hacker News Board

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#321

Post by seanmcdirmid » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 5:58 PM UTC

theplague42 wrote: post #212

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of these issues would go away if employers weren't responsible for providing healthcare group plans. But then again Europe also has similar drives to classify Uber/Lyft drivers as full time employees so they are entitled to other benefits and employment securities (but those don't exist in a very strong form in the USA anyways).

Employers are not required to provide health plans. The issue is that Uber provides _some_ employees with health plans while keeping their lower-paid workers classified as contractors, even if they work essentially full-time.

> Employers are not required to provide health plans.

Employers are required to provide health plans to any part or full time employees (excluding contractors) who work more than 30 hours a week.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#322

Post by hpkuarg » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 5:59 PM UTC

dumbfoundded wrote: post #257

ciarannolan wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "liberal states bad" trope has popped up on conservative media in the last year or so, so you'll see a lot more of it on places like HN.

Yeah, pretty much all of the best state economies are extremely liberal (1). I think the anti-tax sentiment on HN is from people who make a lot of money and then realize they have to pay taxes. They attribute their success entirely to themselves and then whine about giving anything back to the environment that enabled them. California certainly has giant problems but don't let it distract you from the big picture. (1…

Half of the top ten in that list cannot be called "extremely liberal" (or for some, even moderately liberal) -- Utah, Idaho, Nevada, Florida, and Arizona; even fewer in the next ten.

I don't disagree with you vis-a-vis the anti-tax sentiment, but you're making a strong claim that extremely liberal state government policies drive economies, and that's a reach.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#323

Post by lotsofpulp » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 6:00 PM UTC

lhorie wrote: post #318

lotsofpulp wrote: post #72

Yes, voters in the US want to give people education, healthcare, and unemployment (or basic income-ish) benefits. Voters in the US also don’t want to pay for any of this. Hence, the politicians that get elected are ones that give people education via student loans, and healthcare/unemployment benefits tied to employer/employment status. Those politicians get to claim they helped people, and they get to claim they kep…

Is it really a matter of whether voters want to pay taxes, though? Consider that in California (US), if you make 100k, you pay an avg tax rate of ~29% (marginal 41%), vs in Ontario (Canada), you pay an avg tax rate of ~28% (marginal 43%). At a glance, these look like fairly comparable tax rates. But Ontario has free public healthcare based on residence status, while Cali doesn't. So a better question might be what is…

People all up and down healthcare earn far higher pay in the US than anywhere else.

Discussions about other causes for US taxes to be so high can get very political very quick because the myriad tax deductions available to the asset owning class, as well as the unaccounted for defined benefit / retiree healthcare debt that US governments have at all levels, and then you can get into military spending and so on and so forth.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#324

Post by cactus2093 » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 6:01 PM UTC

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #143

gibolt wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are tons of people who could have replaced their car with rideshare and maybe some public transit, and still come out cheaper. Insurance, parking, fuel, depreciation, maintenance, and random events add up. If you don't need it for commuting, most of the recurring rideshare costs vanish. If you need to make an extra long occasional trip, car rental for a day or two outweighs ownership. Edit: To be clear, anythin…

An unlimited use trolley/bus pass is $150/month in my city. Suppose I spend $200/month on gas/insurance/maintenance. The marginal cost of having commutes that take half as much time, to me, is worth it. Otherwise, you could be spending 30 more hours a month commuting to save $50.

Now add $300/month for a parking space in an apartment building, $10/day for parking in a garage downtown near your office, plus your car payment/depreciation of the car you're driving.

Also not all public transit trips take twice as long as a car. In many urban places (which is where any of this scenario makes sense) at rush hour a trip on public transit is often about equivalent to driving if not shorter.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#325

Post by manigandham » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 6:01 PM UTC

lefrenchy wrote: post #310

dannyw wrote: post #6

I used to drive for Uber, a few hours a week during my downtime when I was bored and had nothing better to do. The earnings weren’t great, but it was very helpful as an extra. I had a fuel efficient car and kept track of all my expenses for deductions and made above minimum wage. I’ve met plenty of lovely and fascinating people and had great, enjoyable conversations. I barely had any issues with riders. This extra in…

This is where the gig economy shines, when people want to use it to make extra money on the side or push to achieve financial goals. However, by your own admission you did it because you were "bored" and wanted to make some money. Unfortunately many gig workers don't have the privilege. I'm assuming here but you probably had another job and benefits. There are many workers who don't, and are turning to Uber or Lyft j…

Driving jobs already exist if that’s what they wanted. Turning ridesharing into full-time employment doesn't solve anything other than removing the freelance opportunity for many who find it fits their situation best.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#326

Post by dntrkv » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 6:02 PM UTC

tedivm wrote: post #299

dntrkv wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The legislation doesn't outright ban those things, but the economics won't work out at scale if Uber has to classify the drivers as employees. Do you want low-commitment employment (from both sides) or do you want employee benefits. You can't have both.

If the economics of Uber don't work when Uber is responsible for treating their drivers right, giving them a minimum wage, and offering benefits- then it sounds like their business model is simply exploiting the working class.

The problem is that many drivers prefer having the flexibility to work 5 hours one week and then 50 hours the next. With the new rules, this would not be possible. By taking away this option, you are telling drivers they need to commit to Uber as a legit job. Considering the vast majority of Uber drivers I've ever spoken to use it as a side gig to earn extra cash, I will bet they side with Uber on this one.

The idea that someone can clock-in, work 2-3 hours, clock-out and then clock in again in 2 weeks tells me this isn't a real job. We need another classification.

And the problem here isn't that Uber's model doesn't work. Uber can transition to this new classification and adjust their business model to make it work, the bigger problem is that the drivers don't want it to work this way. The service works because it can respond to minute-by-minute demand. That's not possible with the new rules.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#327

Post by manigandham » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 6:05 PM UTC

theplague42 wrote: post #208

subdane wrote: post #31

Am I nuts, or is the heart of this issue really the fact that our healthcare system is built on tying benefits to full time jobs?

I think the heart of the issue is VC-backed startups trying their hardest to circumvent laws until they are big enough that enforcing the laws makes people mad.

Perhaps laws should actually reflect what the citizens want.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#328

Post by compycom » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 6:06 PM UTC

malandrew wrote: post #298

compycom wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's reasonable for a government to crack down on businesses where the entire operational structure is designed to subvert that government's tax code and regulations.

SCOTUS came to a different conclusion in Gregory v Helvering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_v._Helvering Government doesn't exist to collect taxes. They are there to provide governance. Taxes are a necessary evil that should be kept to a minimum to provide the service of governance. If someone can come up with a legal operational structure that gets around taxes then that the government didn't do its job. It'…

> If someone can come up with a legal operational structure that gets around taxes then that the government didn't do its job.

Right, they passed a law, AB5, to better do that job.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#329

Post by dang » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 6:06 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #72

Yes, voters in the US want to give people education, healthcare, and unemployment (or basic income-ish) benefits. Voters in the US also don’t want to pay for any of this. Hence, the politicians that get elected are ones that give people education via student loans, and healthcare/unemployment benefits tied to employer/employment status. Those politicians get to claim they helped people, and they get to claim they kep…

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24225110.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#330

Post by mullingitover » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 6:08 PM UTC

lefrenchy wrote: post #310

dannyw wrote: post #6

I used to drive for Uber, a few hours a week during my downtime when I was bored and had nothing better to do. The earnings weren’t great, but it was very helpful as an extra. I had a fuel efficient car and kept track of all my expenses for deductions and made above minimum wage. I’ve met plenty of lovely and fascinating people and had great, enjoyable conversations. I barely had any issues with riders. This extra in…

This is where the gig economy shines, when people want to use it to make extra money on the side or push to achieve financial goals. However, by your own admission you did it because you were "bored" and wanted to make some money. Unfortunately many gig workers don't have the privilege. I'm assuming here but you probably had another job and benefits. There are many workers who don't, and are turning to Uber or Lyft j…

> Unfortunately many gig workers don't have the privilege.

Gig work turning into full time work out of necessity is the band-aid on the bullet wound. The unemployment numbers were down, in large part due to gig work, but that work never should've been counted as real employment.

So rather than address the underlying problem with something like the New Deal's Works Progress Administration, which was the real and necessary answer, we papered things over with gig work out of a deep-seated philosophical hatred of government as a primary employer.

Now, rather than admit gig work was never a real solution for employment, we're trying to force it to be that by fiat, and acting shocked when this wrongheaded strategy isn't working.