Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

lyft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

731–740 of 1001 posts

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#731

Post by twobeararms »

weyland108 wrote: post #592
AgloeDreams wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing is stopping a regulated Uber/Lyft from doing this without underpaying workers. Minimum wage laws exist for a reason, after standard IRS tax deductions Uber and Lyft pay WAY under minimum wage.

This is not about minimum wage. It’s about gig work. There is quite a few people who like to do this part time. I think the real crux of the issue is health benefits. If you are not working full time you don’t get health insurance and that drives most laws like these which seem misdirected.

I think that's where a lot of people really overlook this. I'd be curious to see the percentages of 'full time' drivers vs gig drivers. Plenty of drivers I know just work this a couple hours a day to help cover cost of a new car or for beer money. It's not intended to support full time work. Like a small protein bar isn't meant to be a meal replacement. I wonder if Uber/Lyft should have fought the amount of time or rides that somebody can complete per day as a means to keep it really classified as a gig whereas they've set themselves up by allowing people to attempt to be full time drivers.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#732

Post by tanilama »

mcguire wrote: post #437

" As employees they would have to work set schedules and shifts, would not be able to work for multiple app-based companies and would have reduced earning potential — and many jobs would actually be eliminated. " ( https://prop22facts.com/lyft/ ) Is that something mandated by California? As far as I know, everywhere else I've been, work-schedules and anti-moonlighting are restrictions placed by the employer, not the…

The law makes their business model unprofitable so they are losing money if they keep operation

Of course the next step is to stop operating.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#734

Post by TheOperator »

boreas wrote: post #536
AgloeDreams wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Ridesharing' (Which is a hilarious term for the simple fact that the ride is not being shared, the driver is not intending to go to your favorite bar. ) isn't a 21st century situation or solution. It's not a profitable or a good force in an economy, it does not pay a reasonable wage for anyone to live on, it is not environmentally friendly unless done in large quantities of people,(which is called a bus). Ridesharin…

Ridesharing created a more or less competitive market for this slice of the transportation sector. Competitive markets are the best way to allocate resources. If you don't agree with that, it will be hard to have a productive discussion. But if you do agree with that, shouldn't we resolve inequalities by directly supporting the least fortunate (with cash) rather than force parties into arbitrary economic relationship…

Competitive markets combined with regulation are the way we allocate resources in virtually every country. Unchecked competition can lead to exploitative races to the bottom, concentration of capital in the hands of people who cannot use it efficiently, and wanton externalising of costs (pollution, insurance, congestion). Ridesharing did create a competitive market and now its negative aspects should be curtailed.

I'm not in favour of a return to the 40 hour workweek which seems arbitrary and archaic and smacks of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I would prefer an equivalent to the 40 hour workweek for contractors, we have price controls for farm workers, but for some reason act as though it's normal for Uber drivers to work for effectively well under minimum wage. We need to ensure the drivers are getting a bigger share of the proceeds at the time the profits are being generated, not afterwards after labour has lost all of its negotiating leverage and granted a massive warchest of money to capital. States like California should be competitive and fight for a share of profits, not passively roll over.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#735

Post by sergiotapia »

baggy_trough wrote: post #713
seankimdesign wrote: post #699

Kudos on that moral victory California. You robbed my mobility-impaired younger sister of her legs without providing any alternative. Fuck your sorry excuse of public transit filled with gawkers and requiring her to wonder whether there will be connected sidewalks for her to solve her last-two-mile trip on her chair. "Oh, but Uber and Lyft were brought down by their own greed" Well, where is the non-greedy alternativ…

Why do you assume good intentions? It's more likely that this law was the result of campaign bribes from unions. Unions want to have fewer (unionized) people employed at higher compensation. Gig workers go against that because there is higher employment at lower compensation.

"You follow drugs, you get drug addicts and drug dealers. But you start to follow the money, and you don't know where the fuck it's gonna take you."

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#736

Post by anigbrowl »

rsweeney21 wrote: post #147
JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who forced Lyft to shut down? Was it the state, or did they freely choose to cease operations? Obviously, spin will characterize this in any way that's advantageous. But nobody 'forced' Lyft to close.

Their business model is on-demand transportation. The business model doesn't work if the workforce is not also on-demand. I don't think that's spin, but maybe society decides that we don't like on-demand businesses.

That's their rationale for shutting down, which is still a choice they've chosen to make. Basically, they're going on strike as a corporation.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#737

Post by tick_tock_tick »

eggsnbacon1 wrote: post #618

When the monopolistic rideshare titans were banned in Austin there were local competitors within weeks. They kinda sucked for a few months, but by the time Lyft and Uber returned they worked quite well. They also paid the drivers FAR better, I heard on driver forums that it was easy to make over 20 an hour. Most drivers I talked to were very upset when Lyft/Uber returned, because they took over 50% pay cut. With the…

The state doesn't get a choice the people will vote on proposition 22 which is already polling very well; Uber and Lyft will get there exemption.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#738

Post by henryfjordan »

dmode wrote: post #231

I dislike Uber and Lyft's practices as much as the next guy. But I also believe AB5 is a terrible bill and will be voting in November to exempt Uber and Lyft from AB5. AB5 was written to impose a 20th century employment model to a 21st century situation. As such, the bill is distorted that it carve out hundreds of exemptions to musicians, freelancers, journalists, doctors, hair stylists and so on and so forth. A bill…

AB5 was an absolute cop-out by the CA Legislature. They should have defined a third class of workers with protections somewhere in between Contractors and Employees.

But when it comes to the vote in November, a vote to exempt Uber/Lyft from AB5 is a vote to strip drivers of all protections. Uber and Lyft will be free to go back to exploiting drivers for Maybe you are hoping the legislature will eventually come up with that third way once forced to, but there's a lot of momentum behind a popular vote. No US legislature has proven themselves particularly effective in the last few years. Let's not leave people out to dry while hoping some politicians will do their jobs.

[1] https://www.vox.com/2018/10/2/17924628/uber-drivers-make-hou...

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#739

Post by matmann2001 »

So, if Prop 22 is the solution to this mess, then it's natural to ask:

1) What do services like Uber/Lyft/Doordash (who are proposing Prop 22) currently offer in terms of benefits?

2) How do current benefits compare to what will be mandated by Prop 22?

3) If there is any difference, why? Is a state law required to treat your contractors better than the bare minimum?

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#740

Post by fred_is_fred »

fdshgaerfhe wrote: post #728
seankimdesign wrote: post #699

Kudos on that moral victory California. You robbed my mobility-impaired younger sister of her legs without providing any alternative. Fuck your sorry excuse of public transit filled with gawkers and requiring her to wonder whether there will be connected sidewalks for her to solve her last-two-mile trip on her chair. "Oh, but Uber and Lyft were brought down by their own greed" Well, where is the non-greedy alternativ…

Where in California does your sister live that doesn't offer Paratransit services?

Or taxis.
Post reply on HN