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

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

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 688 posts

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

#491

Post by URSpider94 »

We have long ago decided that we don’t let people give away certain rights, even if they do it freely, even if they want to. I can’t work for a business for free, or for below minimum wage, even if I call myself an “unpaid intern”. I can’t work for a business as a child (below working age). I can’t ask a business not to withhold income tax from my paycheck, or to not pay their half of the social security tax, or withhold my half. My employer has to pay into the unemployment insurance pool on my behalf.

We have these rules because every unscrupulous employer out there has exploited one or more of these ploys at some time in the past, and would gladly do so again.

Companies are constantly looking for ways to avoid one or more of these restrictions. One way is to claim someone is a contractor - basically another business - and therefore is responsible for making sure its own employees are treated according to the law (usually there’s only one employee...). This is a constant cat and mouse game.

Uber and Lyft claim to be transportation marketplaces where riders and drivers meet up and contract for services, except they dictate every aspect of the transaction, other than when the drivers choose to work. It’s not 100% of the way employees at Wal Mart or McDonalds are treated, but it’s at least 80% there. We have to draw the line somewhere, and the TNC’s have fulfilled almost all of the standard tests for when someone is considered an employee.

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

#492

Post by momokoko »

serjester wrote: post #99

Completely anecdotal but I bring this question up every time I drive in an Uber and overwhelmingly the drivers tell me they want to stay independent. No one is forcing drivers into their jobs. I really struggle to understand why we need bureaucrats imposing their idea of what a market should look like on an fairly efficient market. From my experience the drivers are perfectly aware of the costs that go into driving s…

Because I’m stuck footing the bill for everything Uber(and by proxy their drivers) are not paying into.

Currently, we all paid for their Covid unemployment benefits that they did not pay into.

We pay for unpaid hospital bills after accidents because they did not pay into workers compensation.

We’ll pay for disability after those accidents that they did not pay into.

Uber and Uber drivers a freeloading off a system we are paying into.

If they want to pretend they are not employees, then they should all have to pay into all these things themselves.

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

#493

Post by [deleted] »

jschwartzi wrote: post #247
dmode wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem is that driver’s want to remain independent, but their cost is borne by the society. Such as the recent CAREs act had unemployment for drivers. I am assuming they also get subsidized healthcare, and would be eligible for Medicare ? Their employers don't really contribute to these things. But perhaps the law should just have complied them to contribute via additional taxes instead of asking them to…

If you're an IC, you have to pay Self-Employment Tax to cover the employer's part of the payroll tax deductions. Plus you're also liable for all the usual payroll taxes. That burden doesn't go away just because you get a 1099 instead of a W-2. So it's the drivers who are in theory paying in to healthcare subsidies and Medicare.

[deleted]

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

#494

Post by Cookingboy »

URSpider94 wrote: post #491

We have long ago decided that we don’t let people give away certain rights, even if they do it freely, even if they want to. I can’t work for a business for free, or for below minimum wage, even if I call myself an “unpaid intern”. I can’t work for a business as a child (below working age). I can’t ask a business not to withhold income tax from my paycheck, or to not pay their half of the social security tax, or with…

>other than when the drivers choose to work.

You can't just hand waive away a fundamental difference like that. From my conversation with some Lyft/Uber drivers they really treasure that aspect and they would rather quit if they are forced to be regular employees with dictated working hours.

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

#495

Post by mikeryan »

kyle_martin1 wrote: post #426
JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They want to stay independent, fine. Then actually treat them like independent contractors. Let them set rates. Let them decline rides without facing penalties by the platform. Make the changes necessary to fit the independent contractor model. And not just the rideshare company, but the state too: these workers need unemployment insurance, as Covid has shown, and somebody needs to pay for it: be it the workers or th…

I worked for SuperShuttle developing their driver mobile app. I can tell you for a fact that a big reason SuperShuttle failed is because the drivers were independent. They would consistently reject low cost trips and wait it out until they got one "mega" trip so that they only need to actually work for about 3 hours/day. Some days they wouldn't take any trips, just hang out in the van playing Flappy Bird. This was a…

Then the “fix” would be to make the shuttle drivers employees right?

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

#496

Post by danans »

lopmotr wrote: post #473
Fauntleroy wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely that you'll have weight problems because healthy food and lifestyles are much more difficult to acquire and maintain without sufficient wealth.

Really? Walking is free but driving isn't. More food costs more than less food. And lots of boring difficult healthy food (eg. veges) is cheaper than more pleasurable easy food (eg. fast food). Being unemployed provides more time to do healthy things than having a busy job. I'd say the reason poor people are unhealthy is the same as the reason they're poor - unwillingness to work.

> Walking is free but driving isn't.

Living in safe neighborhood to walk in isn't cheap, nor is a gym membership, nor is having time to drive to a nice neighborhood or trailhead to hike.

> Being unemployed provides more time to do healthy things than having a busy job.

People who are chronically unemployed but physically able often have a serious mental health issue that prevents them from holding down a job.

> I'd say the reason poor people are unhealthy is the same as the reason they're poor - unwillingness to work.

The working poor usually have little time in their day to exercise for health, especially when they are working multiple low wage jobs to make ends meet. Many of them work physically demanding jobs that are bad for their health, and are exhausted by the end of their work day - and not a "good" kind of exhaustion at that.

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

#497

Post by deepGem »

URSpider94 wrote: post #491

We have long ago decided that we don’t let people give away certain rights, even if they do it freely, even if they want to. I can’t work for a business for free, or for below minimum wage, even if I call myself an “unpaid intern”. I can’t work for a business as a child (below working age). I can’t ask a business not to withhold income tax from my paycheck, or to not pay their half of the social security tax, or with…

"except they dictate every aspect of the transaction" - I think they do it out of necessity, here in India at least.

Ferrying passengers is a very risky business. So protect the passengers, Uber/Lyft have no other option but to kind of police every aspect of the driver - passenger transaction. Despite all that, there were multiple rapes of women in Uber/Ola cars in India, drivers were ghosting Uber/Ola, they have tried to outsmart the routing algorithms by crowding in hot zones, tried to take cash from passengers without running the trip and what not.

While I espouse for drivers being treated fairly, whether as employees or contractors it's not that simple to bring in protections for the drivers without monitoring/scrutiny.

The contractors/employees of McDonalds are in a very different setting, and their customers are almost at no risk and there is little to no scope for embezzling cash, short of robbing the joint. So the comparison doesn't really hold true.

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

#498

Post by URSpider94 »

Cookingboy wrote: post #494
URSpider94 wrote: post #491

We have long ago decided that we don’t let people give away certain rights, even if they do it freely, even if they want to. I can’t work for a business for free, or for below minimum wage, even if I call myself an “unpaid intern”. I can’t work for a business as a child (below working age). I can’t ask a business not to withhold income tax from my paycheck, or to not pay their half of the social security tax, or with…

>other than when the drivers choose to work. You can't just hand waive away a fundamental difference like that. From my conversation with some Lyft/Uber drivers they really treasure that aspect and they would rather quit if they are forced to be regular employees with dictated working hours.

Becoming an employee doesn’t necessarily mean you have to work a rigid schedule. There are plenty of employees, like flight attendants, who bid on shifts on a periodic basis, and who have the opportunity to trade or add shifts freely.

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

#499

Post by SamReidHughes »

coldpie wrote: post #78
hammock wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I was curious about what drivers think. I guess they're not happy [1] but want to be independent contractors still [2]. If the employers don't want the change... and the employees don't want the change... and the customers don't want the change... and the shareholders don't want the change... and the residents of California don't want the change (exhibited by the threads yesterday with outcry over the decision to sh…

I'm not a resident of California (rather, Minnesota), but I do want it to change. I don't use gig services because I think anyone doing 40[1] hours of work deserves a wage they can live off of, along all the other employment protections we've worked so hard to implement. Gig services are cheap because they don't meet that requirement. If gig services were required to meet that minimum wage and workers' rights, then I…

In California, if they cared about that, they could move that needle with housing policy, and nationally, with an immigration program that focuses on high end talent (such as H1B’s), letting low end wages lift up. That’s a real bouyancy that would make Uber drivers better off.

“Employment protections” are not important at all for workers’ prosperity. Just imagine if they were absent. The most marginal workers would be better off.

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

#500

Post by neosat »

URSpider94 wrote: post #491

We have long ago decided that we don’t let people give away certain rights, even if they do it freely, even if they want to. I can’t work for a business for free, or for below minimum wage, even if I call myself an “unpaid intern”. I can’t work for a business as a child (below working age). I can’t ask a business not to withhold income tax from my paycheck, or to not pay their half of the social security tax, or with…

> other than when the drivers choose to work. That's not true. What about who else they can work for? That's not enforced either.

Which other businesses commonly allow people to work when they want, work for whatever competition they want, take any amount of 'vacation' in between?

You're fitting something new into an existing category by handwaving away lot of important nuance, when it is exactly this nuance that makes a ton of difference and why the new type of work may not fit into an existing category.

Post reply on HN