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

971–980 of 1001 posts

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#971

Post by aidenn0 »

lostcolony wrote: post #386
aidenn0 wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that mean that when I remodel my house, I would have to negotiate on time and materials terms, lest the contractor accidentally underbid and end up with less than minimum wage? I think the law rightfully distinguishes between truly negotiable contracts and take-it-or-leave-it terms offered by a party with more negotiating power.

Of course not. The prices someone sets are not related to the wages they're paid. You're paying a price; you're not paying a wage. The contractors are paid a wage by the business owner; if he pays them less than minimum wage it's illegal; if he pays them more, but does not recoup that cost on the job because he underbid it, that's a business loss.

I'm not talking about a general contractor, I'm talking about when I hire one guy to do some work on my house.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#972

Post by aidenn0 »

sneak wrote: post #900
lostcolony wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course not. The prices someone sets are not related to the wages they're paid. You're paying a price; you're not paying a wage. The contractors are paid a wage by the business owner; if he pays them less than minimum wage it's illegal; if he pays them more, but does not recoup that cost on the job because he underbid it, that's a business loss.

Why do we treat these things differently? Why is the GC permitted to make bad business decisions and earn below minimum wage, but the people he employs are not? This is entirely arbitrary.

Because one is assumed to be negotiated in good faith while the other is an adhesion contract?

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#973

Post by aidenn0 »

skrtskrt wrote: post #455
aidenn0 wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think part of the problem in the US is that the current status is so bad, that everyone has a different proposed solution. Single payer is also seen as too paternalistic by a large minority of the US, so there is that as well.

> I think part of the problem in the US is that the current status is so bad, that everyone has a different proposed solution. “Everyone has different solutions” as in the two parties, both corporatist through and through, are only willing to offer solutions that nip around the edges of the problem with ridiculously complex regulations that ultimately result in less competition and higher profits for healthcare congl…

I don't watch cable news. I know dozens of people who are vehemently opposed to single-payer. The reasons are paternalism and distrust of government to get things right.

To a certain extent, I agree with the second; I'm kind of glad that the current administration doesn't have control over my health care...

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#974

Post by bassman9000 »

dmode wrote: post #725
bassman9000 wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shameless plug of my own post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24226783

What has your posts got to do with anything ? Are you saying that the massive success of LA, SF, and CA economies are due to Democratic politicians ?

Mostly despite Democratic politicians, not thanks to. And degrading fast, as we can see in cases like this, or the more than evident net outflow.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#975

Post by claudeganon »

runarberg wrote: post #930
sickygnar wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not able to drive because of epilepsy and have to rely on ride share apps when family members can't drive me. It's expensive but public transportation doesn't exist here. Around 1/100 people are epileptic and the chance of a seizure during one's life is double digits, so it's not an insignificant amount of people. Mine is "well controlled" but the consequences of accidents can be extreme. Plenty of other conditio…

Honest question: Has there been a mass action lawsuit against this lack of options for you and other people in your situation? It would seem to me that your county or municipality is in violation of some ADA regulations. If not, and lawyers agree there is no case (yet), then there is an obvious gap in the ADA regulation, and it should be fixed. Everyone has equal rights to get around their community, and it is massiv…

Not the OP, but the ADA only requires that existing businesses/services accommodate disabilities, not provide them where they don’t exist. There’s no mandate to provide transportation for the disabled in the US.

Unsurprisingly, Uber and Lyft have also been violating the ADA for pretty much their entire existence, arguing that they don’t have to comply and settling with states and cities when they lose cases:

https://www.fastcompany.com/90343921/lyft-claims-its-not-a-t...

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#976

Post by tmp538394722 »

smsm42 wrote: post #704
adrr wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are taxi apps that are similar in functionality to Uber and Lyft. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/curb-the-taxi-app/id299226386

I decided to check for myself and registered in the app. The nearest ride is in 20 minutes (about 2x from the rideshares) and the price from my house to SFO is about $160. My last ride with Uber was about $70. Make your own conclusions. Oh yes and the app is buggy as heck, losing internet connection all the time (on my home wifi!) and getting stuck in random places.

I mean, one conclusion is that Lyft and Uber are not charging enough to continue to operate.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#977

Post by SamWhited »

lhorie wrote: post #292
SamWhited wrote: post #63

We had this same thing happen in Austin when Uber and Lyft pulled out after having a hissy fit about fingerprinting and background checks and not parking in the bus lanes. As soon as they pulled out half a dozen alternatives sprung up that paid better (I always used Ride Austin, a not-for-profit). If you're a rider just take the bus, bike, or get any other cab service (seriously, they all have apps now and they maint…

I read RideAustin was going to shut down[1] this year and so did Fasten and Fare a few years ago [1] https://communityimpact.com/austin/central-austin/impacts/20... .

That's extremely sad; I moved away towards the end of last year so I haven't been keeping up with it sadly :(

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#978

Post by manigandham »

tedivm wrote: post #957
Majromax wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The issue is that they're still considered employees which means predetermined shifts Is there anything in California labour law or AB5 that requires predetermined shifts? What would prevent Uber/Lyft from allowing its now-employees to volunteer for an X-hour shift at any point that demand forecasts suggest it would be useful?

There's nothing in California law that requires predetermined shifts. The only rules are that if you do have predetermined shifts, you have to pay for at least half the shift even if you send someone home early. All of these people talking about predetermined shifts are just pretty FUD with no backing in reality.

Are you assuming that Uber will pay you for time and yet let you just turn on the app and sit in a parking lot wherever you want?

What do you call it when Uber tells an employee where, when and how long to work?

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#979

Post by manigandham »

azinman2 wrote: post #952
manigandham wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's your subjective opinion. Millions of riders and drivers think it's a great business, and full-time driving jobs already exist for those who want them. Why should drivers not have a choice? What if flexibility is important to them? Why do hours matter they're a contractor? Should they not set their own time? Do you also oppose freelance writers or artists that work 40+ hours?

Should kids have a choice if they want to engage in child labor? Should people be able to sell their organs or children for money? Opt into slavery? The reason why we have legislation that creates regulation is because there's a body of people trying to look out for the larger common good, particularly when existing labor laws are being skirted around. If there wasn't a problem of exploitation of this entire business…

These aren't kids, they're adults. Some countries do allow voluntary organ donation for kidneys, pieces of liver, etc and it works fine (so yes that should be a choice). Slavery is clearly not free exchange of value.

Who's looking out for drivers? Do they have any experience of driving? Why do most drivers want flexibility and say they're against these changes then? Why don't the existing unfilled driving jobs suffice for those who want jobs? If drivers are clearly choosing to be rideshare contractors instead of other open jobs, why should they no longer have that choice?

If you're going to remove people's freedom then you better have an absolutely perfect explanation of what they're supposedly suffering from. If the best you can think of is that some people don't make as much as you want then that's just not good enough.

If CA wanted real change, a new 3rd classification should've been created, or offer public health and benefits pools that all contractors can pay into. Instead this is the same state that fines tax-paying citizens for not having health insurance but offers it for free to illegal immigrants. So no, I don't see how CA govt represents the people or has any idea about the common good.

Post reply on HN