Live data from Hacker News

Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

theguardian.com

301–310 of 401 posts

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#301

My husband drives for Uber, and I’m glad the proposition passed as it is. He drives the way Uber was originally envisioned. He goes out some nights if there’s a surge, and in the morning on the way to work he points the app toward our stores and grabs a person (pre-pandemic) or a food delivery (today) on his way in. It pays for gas money, car maintenance, and then some. Some months he makes a few hundred dollars. Som…

I think the question if the law make sense or not is somehow distracting us from a bigger problem. The big problem I see is that it is perfectly clear that the decision factor was money put into political campaign done not by politicians, which are sort of accountable for what they do (they might not just get elected), but by people who simply had enough money. Democracy sort of worked because elected representatives…

It is completely false that this Passed purely because they spent alot of money

Your belief on that is based on reporting bias, reporters never talk about when an initiative's that went counter to the HUGE amounts of money poured in (for or against), for example the Right to repair in MA which has huge money from all the major auto manufacturers, and an ad campaign claiming that if you voted for right to repair rapists would get your garage codes...

It is click bait to talk about how "company X bought regulation" but it is rarely true, even in CA there were a few ballot measures this year that failed even with massive amounts of money being spent on supporting them.

Money in politics if often used as a scapegoat to explain away why some issue failed, or some issue succeed with out having to accept the fact that majority disagreed with you, as it often hard to admit that the majority rejects your world view

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how part time employment requires him to be classified as a contractor, not an employee.

I'd say part of being a contractor is setting your own hours. If you determine when or where you do a thing for a company, it feels like contracting to me.

Being a contractor means setting your own contracts. Choosing hours is part of that, but you can offer flexible hours to part-time employees to the extent your business permits, nothing saying you can't.

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#303
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have the complete opposite anecdotal experience. Your 2nd paragraph is exactly what prop22 added. Now full-time drivers enjoy some benefits.

Full time drivers already enjoyed benefits under California law. While Prop 22 talked about giving benefits, that’s not what the law does in practice at all. In fact, it actually removes protections. The key to this surprising revelation is that Uber et al wrote proposition so that only when you’re actively driving do the minutes count towards the amount you need to gain the benefit. In other words, to get the 25 hou…

Did you even read the wording of the prop?

What you are describing is completely wrong. It's incredible how short sighted people get when they want to go all out and lash at the "evil" gig economy companies. Like really, the wording is publicly available for you to read.

Engaged time is time from accepting the gig, to the time the gig ends. Waiting is included. That's it.

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#304
post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your relationship cannot be determined by this example. You could be an employee or contractor for uber. In either case driving someone is a service you provide to Uber customers.

> In either case driving someone is a service you provide to Uber customers. No. Look at https://arcade.city . Their drivers are independent business operators, because they own the relationship with the riders. Uber drivers not only don't own the relationship with riders, but they're forbidden from owning it, which is what makes them employees. It's literally against the terms of service for Uber drivers to act as i…

That could be a part of the contract between driver and uber. You cannot sell to our (uber) clients while offering a service for us.

The driver can set his/her own prices. When they decide which rideshare to use many use price to determine who they want to work for. If they decide Uber they get a scaling scale / surge pricing.

The driver doesn't set the customer price. They can only control the price Uber pays them.. some have asked for more and some have walked over it.

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#305
post #256
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your automobile analogy is actually extremely apt because when the car was invented and "jay drivers" (the original term) began killing hundreds of thousands of people, public consensus began to form around strictly limiting the speed of cars. The auto industry successfully lobbied local legislatures and shifted public opinion through a massive marketing campaign in order to create the crime of "jaywalking". This is…

I have heard this story multiple times. But if it's true, then why are roads pretty much the same, as concerns walking vs driving, wherever you go in the world? If things would have naturally been different if only it weren't for some lobbyists, how come things aren't that way at least somewhere?

Well roads do vary in their physical form and the social norms that govern their use in different parts of the world based on a lot of factors.

But I would say roads in developed areas are pretty much the same everywhere because cars are only made one way. The social consensus I mentioned was moving towards requiring a governor on cars that would shut their engines off if they exceeded 25 mph. If that had succeeded and endured, roads would look very different. But the economic effects that cars produce in accelerating the free flow of commodities, labor, and capital necessitated a rupture with the established order so that automobiles could continue to develop to be bigger, faster, and more powerful.

The similarities in road form and norms around the world represent an equilibrium between the current level of car technology and the amount of injury and death resulting from their use that society can metabolize.

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#306

My husband drives for Uber, and I’m glad the proposition passed as it is. He drives the way Uber was originally envisioned. He goes out some nights if there’s a surge, and in the morning on the way to work he points the app toward our stores and grabs a person (pre-pandemic) or a food delivery (today) on his way in. It pays for gas money, car maintenance, and then some. Some months he makes a few hundred dollars. Som…

> I feel strongly like this law was pushed by people who want Uber to be a full-time job. It’s not. According to you. It's clearly a full time job for most drivers. The fact that you think it shouldn't be doesn't change that. What do you expect full time taxi drivers to do exactly? Go back to working for local taxi companies and get zero customers?

Anecdotally, I feel like at least 1/3 of my Uber/Lyft rides are from someone that I'd categorize as a part-timer. (I almost always chat with my driver and ask about their experience driving.) From that (and the much larger number of hours a full-time driver would drive), I conclude that there are probably more part-time drivers than full-time drivers.

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#307
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And where does the line go?

Can you please elaborate, because, in the case of Uber/Lyft, it's simple, if you force when drivers go, they can't refuse clients, etc. Then you are not "just" a platform to connect driver and people looking for a ride. If you are imposing rules, other than local regulations, to the drivers, you are an employer, and you should follow labour law. If you use Stripe API for examples, if you follow the law, and their T&C…

So if you do only one of those things are you still an employer or now a platform?

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say part of being a contractor is setting your own hours. If you determine when or where you do a thing for a company, it feels like contracting to me.

Being a contractor means setting your own contracts . Choosing hours is part of that, but you can offer flexible hours to part-time employees to the extent your business permits, nothing saying you can't.

Isn't every time you confirm a ride a contract?

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#309
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the same distinction between part time and full time work, a lot of things kick in when you work more than 35-40 hours for a company. It's not about limiting people's time it's about making sure companies don't take advantage of people. You can make a similar argument about all labor regulations, eg why limit people to 40 hours if they're willing to work more for the same pay if their employer doesn't want to pa…

> You can make a similar argument about all labor regulations, eg why limit people to 40 hours if they're willing to work more for the same pay if their employer doesn't want to pay overtime? Which is why all such regulations are ridiculous. You "help" someone by requiring higher pay for overtime, the employer responds by prohibiting overtime. The worker still wants more than 40 hours, so they take a second job, stil…

> Which is why all such regulations are ridiculous.

Most of those regulations were written in blood, toil, and tears - they deserve more respect than that. You are correct - regulations often limit an individual's ability to maximize their own gains in order to lift the overall floor. If you want to maximize your income, start a private car service and build your own clientele like an actual independent operator.

Alternatively, we could offer public healthcare, social housing, and food guarantees, decoupling work from survival. Then the regulations would be ridiculous.

Re: Gig economy companies spent more than $200M to bankroll Proposition 22

#310
post #69

My husband drives for Uber, and I’m glad the proposition passed as it is. He drives the way Uber was originally envisioned. He goes out some nights if there’s a surge, and in the morning on the way to work he points the app toward our stores and grabs a person (pre-pandemic) or a food delivery (today) on his way in. It pays for gas money, car maintenance, and then some. Some months he makes a few hundred dollars. Som…

It's anecdotal but I always chat with my Uber drivers and nearly 100% of them are driving full time. I assume it's a "most rides are driven by a full-timer, most drivers are part timers" situation. I don't really see why we need a third category, it should just be that some drivers are full time and some are not. I don't believe that Uber could sufficiently fulfill even half the rides with only the true part timers s…

People treating it as a full time job are suffering because it wasn’t meant to be a full time job. And they are clogging the system because there are often not enough rides for all the drivers. The biggest complaint I hear from drivers is about downtime. They want to be making money while in the car not waiting at the gas station for a rider.

It may seem heartless but I’m not sure whom to blame for the problems that come from treating rideshare as a full time job except the drivers who chose to do that themselves. Despite the gross advertising budget it seems like the gig economy companies were in the right.

Really, the issue is further up. It’s a universal loss of low skill labor. These people should have more real employment opportunities in society. If it was easier to get a basic job with benefits it would be way easier to accept whatever arrangement Uber was offering without legislating them. And Uber would inherently have to treat them more fairly as well.

Post reply on HN