Uber and Lyft shutdown in California averted as judge grants emergency stay • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber and Lyft shutdown in California averted as judge grants emergency stay

#81

Post by jwilber » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 8:18 PM UTC

epicide wrote: post #37

kreutz wrote: post #25

Why not let the market decide? If drivers are so unhappy why not just seek some alternative form of work? Uber/Lyft do not force anyone to hop online.

Because a lot of drivers start driving because they already can't find an alternative form of work? Or they already have another job (or several) that does not pay enough. However, they can't find yet another job with flexible enough hours. When the job market is garbage, "just let the market solve it" doesn't really cut it.

But Uber/Lyft have nothing to do with the job market being garbage. If anything, they provide options to help ameliorate the situation.

Instead of the government playing court for something nobody wants, maybe they can do their job: set an an appropriate minimum wage, ensure better safety nets so people don’t need 3 jobs, provide better options to employers so jobs aren’t lost, etc.

Re: Uber and Lyft shutdown in California averted as judge grants emergency stay

#82

Post by vore » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 8:18 PM UTC

macinjosh wrote: post #66

asdasfasdfasdf wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"personal risk" This is kind of the state of the country really. Ridesharing is an OK gig until you get into an accident, you're fine without health insurance until you get injured, you don't really need a union until you start getting treated unfairly, you can pay for college as long as you consistently have a good salary... we're being statistically gaslit with the idea that most people can scrape by without higher…

I think you're gas lighting us by ignoring the fact that this personal risk is taken at personal choice. If someone wanted the arrangement that comes with an employee/employer relationship there are jobs that offer that. But not everyone wants that, some people prefer, for their own reasons that are really none of your business to be an independent contractor. This is about choice plain and simple.

Not everyone has that choice, which is why so many people depend on gig economy jobs as their livelihood.

If you do not have in-demand skills for the market, have a family to feed, and the cost of training exceeds your expenses, Uber/Lyft might be one of your only job options.

Re: Uber and Lyft shutdown in California averted as judge grants emergency stay

#83

Post by tedivm » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 8:19 PM UTC

blakesterz wrote: post #6

"Uber and Lyft say drivers prefer the flexibility of working as freelancers, while labor unions and elected officials contend this deprives them of traditional benefits like health insurance and workers’ compensation." I was curious about what drivers think. I guess they're not happy [1] but want to be independent contractors still [2]. 1. https://therideshareguy.com/uber-driver-survey/ 2. (In a May online survey dra…

That survey has been thrown around a lot, but there are a lot of problems with it. A big issue is that the survey was explicitly of people who follow a specific website (and potentially align with that websites opinions).

Another is that once you explain that California allows flexible schedules even for employees a lot of people who say they want to stay independent contractors change their mind. The biggest thing that drivers want is flexibility in their schedules, and there's a lot of misinformation saying they'd be required by law to sign up for shifts if they were employers. Once you correct for this FUD and drivers realize their favorite part of being a contractor isn't at risk anymore the answer seem to shift quickly.

Even if it was true though- most people who work at sweat shops are happy to have the job because they need the money. That doesn't mean that it's right to allow crappy conditions for them.

Re: Uber and Lyft shutdown in California averted as judge grants emergency stay

#84

Post by RangerScience » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 8:19 PM UTC

macinjosh wrote: post #66

asdasfasdfasdf wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"personal risk" This is kind of the state of the country really. Ridesharing is an OK gig until you get into an accident, you're fine without health insurance until you get injured, you don't really need a union until you start getting treated unfairly, you can pay for college as long as you consistently have a good salary... we're being statistically gaslit with the idea that most people can scrape by without higher…

I think you're gas lighting us by ignoring the fact that this personal risk is taken at personal choice. If someone wanted the arrangement that comes with an employee/employer relationship there are jobs that offer that. But not everyone wants that, some people prefer, for their own reasons that are really none of your business to be an independent contractor. This is about choice plain and simple.

We make choices within contexts other people create.

Re: Uber and Lyft shutdown in California averted as judge grants emergency stay

#85

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 8:19 PM UTC

throwawaygh wrote: post #72

When companies like Uber/Lyft depend on safety nets like unemployment without ever paying into the system, what’s happening is that our children are paying for returns on VC capital. People profiting from these types of companies should feel bad about themselves.

[deleted]

Re: Uber and Lyft shutdown in California averted as judge grants emergency stay

#86

Post by compycom » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 8:19 PM UTC

kreutz wrote: post #68

ccktlmazeltov wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't let the market decide because the market is doomed (in the treating-people-as-human-beings sense) by the lack of infrastructure in the first place: - no healthcare means you're a slave of whatever you can find, - tipping culture means your employer can pay you shit

They can find work elsewhere then?

Unless you are entrepreneur with access to capital, I'm not sure how you can expect individuals to will a good employer into being if none is to be found. Using the government to create better conditions for the working class is a completely reasonable use of the political process.

Re: Uber and Lyft shutdown in California averted as judge grants emergency stay

#87

Post by jon-wood » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 8:19 PM UTC

hammock wrote: post #56

Skunkleton wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...Uber drivers reported earning $13.47 per hour, which means that on average, drivers report that their car is costing them over $6 per hour to operate. If you were to drive full time, that would get you about 27k/year, which is about the average income that a taxi driver makes. Rideshare companies are asking you to take more personal financial risk than you might as a taxi driver, but giving you more flexibility.…

Who says driving for Uber/Lyft should be a full-time job, or statutorily viable as a full-time job? If you consider it only as a second or third job, then it makes a lot more sense that your second or third job is not going to pay as well or have the same benefits as your first job. Those aspects would be expected and reasonable. The low-risk, high-reward jobs fill your primary job slot, then you seek other options a…

That you don’t bat an eyelid at people needing a second or third job to make ends meet is in itself an indictment of the general state of the US.

Re: Uber and Lyft shutdown in California averted as judge grants emergency stay

#88

Post by c1b » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 8:20 PM UTC

throwawaygh wrote: post #72

When companies like Uber/Lyft depend on safety nets like unemployment without ever paying into the system, what’s happening is that our children are paying for returns on VC capital. People profiting from these types of companies should feel bad about themselves.

sounds like you don't know any Uber/Lyft drivers

Re: Uber and Lyft shutdown in California averted as judge grants emergency stay

#89

Post by cltby » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 8:20 PM UTC

throwawaygh wrote: post #72

When companies like Uber/Lyft depend on safety nets like unemployment without ever paying into the system, what’s happening is that our children are paying for returns on VC capital. People profiting from these types of companies should feel bad about themselves.

When people like you create social safety nets like unemployment without ever paying into the system, "what's appending" is that Uber and Lyft are paying for your moral grandstanding.

People shifting the costs of their moral choices to strangers should feel bad about themselves.

Re: Uber and Lyft shutdown in California averted as judge grants emergency stay

#90

Post by Daishiman » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 8:21 PM UTC

macinjosh wrote: post #66

asdasfasdfasdf wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"personal risk" This is kind of the state of the country really. Ridesharing is an OK gig until you get into an accident, you're fine without health insurance until you get injured, you don't really need a union until you start getting treated unfairly, you can pay for college as long as you consistently have a good salary... we're being statistically gaslit with the idea that most people can scrape by without higher…

I think you're gas lighting us by ignoring the fact that this personal risk is taken at personal choice. If someone wanted the arrangement that comes with an employee/employer relationship there are jobs that offer that. But not everyone wants that, some people prefer, for their own reasons that are really none of your business to be an independent contractor. This is about choice plain and simple.

Personal risk isn't an isolated thing. Thousands of people taking personal risk have systemic effects, and these companies aren't paying into it, even though everyone around these "risk-takers" suffer the consequences.