Uber: “Yes on Prop 22” popups shown to drivers • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber: “Yes on Prop 22” popups shown to drivers

#51

Post by amacneil » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 12:29 AM UTC

acadien wrote: post #3

I am so against prop22 it pains me so here I am ranting on the internet. What's going on is a negotiation between the state and these companies that are able to take advantage of a gap in how insurance and other benefits work. Instead of actively negotiating with the state, Uber/Lyft/Doordash and many others have simply asked to maintain the status quo, screw the drivers, just business as usual. Drivers do not get be…

> exempt all drivers from getting basic benefits like health insurance

I've yet to hear a solid argument for why something as personal & private as health insurance should be decided by my employer. Expanding this to gig workers (who typically work multiple jobs) seems like madness to me.

I would be far more interested in seeing California lead the country in designing a better model than attempting to shoe horn contract work into an outdated system.

Re: Uber: “Yes on Prop 22” popups shown to drivers

#52

Post by Wowfunhappy » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 12:29 AM UTC

meatmanek wrote: post #46

acadien wrote: post #3

I am so against prop22 it pains me so here I am ranting on the internet. What's going on is a negotiation between the state and these companies that are able to take advantage of a gap in how insurance and other benefits work. Instead of actively negotiating with the state, Uber/Lyft/Doordash and many others have simply asked to maintain the status quo, screw the drivers, just business as usual. Drivers do not get be…

It's worse than "maintain the status quo". It prohibits the state legislature from making any amendments to prop 22 without a 7/8ths majority, and requires any such amendment be "consistent with, and furthers the purpose of" prop 22.

Wait, how does that even work? You can make a law that says the law can't be repealed by a majority vote? They're not proposing an amendment to the state constitution are they?

(Excuse me if I'm not quite so read up on this topic—I don't live in California.)

Re: Uber: “Yes on Prop 22” popups shown to drivers

#53

Post by germinalphrase » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 12:30 AM UTC

tpmoney wrote: post #37

acadien wrote: post #3

I am so against prop22 it pains me so here I am ranting on the internet. What's going on is a negotiation between the state and these companies that are able to take advantage of a gap in how insurance and other benefits work. Instead of actively negotiating with the state, Uber/Lyft/Doordash and many others have simply asked to maintain the status quo, screw the drivers, just business as usual. Drivers do not get be…

It seems to me like this would have been the perfect opportunity to become the first state to decouple benefits from employment. Recognize that gig jobs are going to become more of a thing in various ways, and set up state sponsored benefit plans for gig workers. Start a mini UBI that covers 4 weeks PTO at the median California wage, open up medicaid eligibility, etc. If the problem is these people don't have benefit…

Would the state offer benefits in proportion to the number of hours worked as a contractor?

Re: Uber: “Yes on Prop 22” popups shown to drivers

#54

Post by ivalm » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 12:30 AM UTC

vsareto wrote: post #26

ivalm wrote: post #16

Doing some more exploration on this. Apparently until you click “yes” it would spam you. And if you did click “yes” then your riders would get a message when they take a ride that you support prop 22. https://twitter.com/unicorn__voice/status/131753631910332825...

>Tweet: Thats infuriating, misleading and probably illegal Anyone know what is potentially illegal about this?

It would be definitely illegal if Uber drivers were employees. As of now I bet it is not illegal.

Re: Uber: “Yes on Prop 22” popups shown to drivers

#55

Post by username90 » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 12:30 AM UTC

threatofrain wrote: post #22

acadien wrote: post #3

I am so against prop22 it pains me so here I am ranting on the internet. What's going on is a negotiation between the state and these companies that are able to take advantage of a gap in how insurance and other benefits work. Instead of actively negotiating with the state, Uber/Lyft/Doordash and many others have simply asked to maintain the status quo, screw the drivers, just business as usual. Drivers do not get be…

What's the threat of Uber going away? What's the moat? Wouldn't another company simply fill the vacuum? That is, unless Uber's whole venture is unprofitable.

Uber works by making drivers responsible over their time. By making Uber responsible for the drivers time they need to change their business model to that of a normal taxi service where they have more control over the drivers, since being responsible for something you don't have control over isn't a position you want to be in. And when they have to work as a normal taxi service then there is no point to Uber, they can't survive as a taxi service so they just have to pull out.

Re: Uber: “Yes on Prop 22” popups shown to drivers

#56

Post by caymanjim » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 12:31 AM UTC

mmanfrin wrote: post #18

acadien wrote: post #3

I am so against prop22 it pains me so here I am ranting on the internet. What's going on is a negotiation between the state and these companies that are able to take advantage of a gap in how insurance and other benefits work. Instead of actively negotiating with the state, Uber/Lyft/Doordash and many others have simply asked to maintain the status quo, screw the drivers, just business as usual. Drivers do not get be…

And they include language in the bill that it can't be overturned except by a 7/8ths majority which would make it functionally immune to being overturned, ever.

I'd be surprised if that part passed legal muster. It's like trying to backdoor a constitutional change in how laws are passed.

Re: Uber: “Yes on Prop 22” popups shown to drivers

#57

Post by Swizec » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 12:31 AM UTC

zestyping wrote: post #36

tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #23

I have to preface this by saying I'm not defending Uber - I haven't followed the debate around this proposition. But...lots of people in tech, and on this site, have long been pushing companies to hold and voice political opinions. To those of you who have - did you really, honestly think that these companies would not also become vocally active in their own political interests? Did you really think they'd only speak…

Can you say more about what you mean? "Pushing companies to hold and voice political opinions" is not how I would characterize it — at least for my part, I conceive of it as "Pushing companies to behave ethically."

There’s a lot of “No bystanders, you’re with us or you’re against us” among the woke elite these days. On every issue.

Pushing companies to hire diversely is good. Makes them more ethical and less biased.

Pushing companies to add “black lives matter” banners on their corporate landing pages ... eh that’s got nothing to do with ethics.

Re: Uber: “Yes on Prop 22” popups shown to drivers

#58

Post by ccortes » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 12:31 AM UTC

avalys wrote: post #25

alex_young wrote: post #2

Isn’t there something deeply unethical about telling your employees how to vote?

Not at all. Coercing employees to vote a certain way, or penalizing them for failing to do so, would be clearly unethical. But I don’t see how a company telling their employees to vote yes on 22 is any different from an activist group telling people to vote no.

>But I don’t see how a company telling their employees to vote yes on 22 is any different from an activist group telling people to vote no.

Well the company pays you every month and the activist group doesn't so I guess that's a big difference.

Re: Uber: “Yes on Prop 22” popups shown to drivers

#59

Post by Fordec » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 12:31 AM UTC

tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #23

I have to preface this by saying I'm not defending Uber - I haven't followed the debate around this proposition. But...lots of people in tech, and on this site, have long been pushing companies to hold and voice political opinions. To those of you who have - did you really, honestly think that these companies would not also become vocally active in their own political interests? Did you really think they'd only speak…

I'm sorry, I'm clearly missing something. When were companies last not engaged in political lobbying for their own interests?

Re: Uber: “Yes on Prop 22” popups shown to drivers

#60

Post by makecheck » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 12:32 AM UTC

We should fight for a system where people can actually be paid enough to live from ONE JOB. (This solves all kinds of other problems, like freeing up time so people can finally live more relaxed lives and invest in themselves, including in their own health.)

Yet we live in a society where multiple jobs are often required just to survive. And in that scenario, it is strange to require “your employer” to give you benefits because you only need one of them to do so. If you have two healthcare plans, one is “wasted”. It probably makes more sense for each of your employers to somehow cover 50% of the plan cost.

I doubt Uber/Lyft even want to pay partial benefits though, since their whole profitability seems to be defined in terms of drivers being taken advantage of.