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

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

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 401 posts

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

#351

Post by lacker »

JamesBarney wrote: post #104
esrauch wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Where are you taking Ubers? I'm surprised by this since even low level entry jobs, like hostessing(sp?), working at the grocery store, delivering pizza, all pay better than Uber. In Houston almost everyone I talked to were - retired, raising kids, had another jobs, going to school, or had some health issues that prevented full time employment. The vast majority of the economy is made up of jobs where a company tells…

In Oakland there are a lot of Uber drivers who seem like they don’t speak English well enough to get a job like a grocery store checkout clerk. From my time working in retail I have also known many people who couldn’t get enough hours at their primary job, but its scheduling constraints meant it was hard for them to find a second job that fit in with it. Uber or similar gig work seems ideal for these situations.

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

#352

Post by mike00632 »

traceddd wrote: post #310
esrauch wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You can literally blame the companies who aren't giving them benefits...

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

#353

Post by missedthecue »

tschwimmer wrote: post #330
ericabiz wrote: post #51

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…

If there are some months that he only makes a few hundred dollars, it's possible that you're actually losing money on depreciation (even if you're net positive on current costs like gas and maintenance). This is something that I see very few drivers talk about but influences your earnings significantly. Depreciation is a real cost. If at the time you sell your car your car, you get $X, but driving for Uber caused you…

I hear this thrown around a lot, but to the best I can discern, it is simply unfounded. Uber and Lyft seem to pay between $1-$2 a mile. There are sites where you can put in the model and year of your car and get real life depreciation figures. Unless you're ubering around in a McLaren, you're just not depreciating at a higher rate than what Uber pays.

Prius, probably the most common ride sharing car, has a total cost, including fuel, depreciation, and maintenance, of about $0.39 cents per mile.

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

#354

Post by mike00632 »

momokoko wrote: post #348
renewiltord wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bro, I'm picking up the bill for your kids (or if you're childless then someone's kids) to go to school. So maybe stop with this nonsensical view of society where you have to cover all your costs. Obviously some of us net positive into the government. That's how society works.

Because other people specifically do have to pay into workers compensation because we collectively decided everyone should. Her husband and Uber are gaming the system to avoid that responsibility.

And it should be mentioned again that Uber drivers out of work are currently receiving benefits that Uber avoided paying into.

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

#355

Post by gyudin »

jonathankoren wrote: post #273
esrauch wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

According to a survey of SF drivers[0] 71% of drivers work 30 or more hours, and 50% work 40 or more. More troubling, 53% relied on gig work for all of their income. Another 10% said gig work accounted for at least 75% of their income. [0] https://transform.ucsc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/OnDema...

The problem with Uber they kinda spoiled drivers. It was a low-skilled job but for many years even my friends were making around 6 grands a month with a help of tax optimizations and hefty bonuses. And none of them were ready to switch to any other low skilled job and get like $20 per hour ~ $3200 a month before taxes.

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

#356

Post by jonathankoren »

Anon1096 wrote: post #282
jonathankoren wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to a survey of SF drivers[0] 71% of drivers work 30 or more hours, and 50% work 40 or more. More troubling, 53% relied on gig work for all of their income. Another 10% said gig work accounted for at least 75% of their income. [0] https://transform.ucsc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/OnDema...

Not only are the authors of that survey biased, but they are outright admitting to manipulating the data to suit their ends. From the slides: Key goal: Representative sample of on-demand _work_ being done in the city, not of all on-demand _workers_. (emphasis not mine) The team making the study has selected parameters to examine basically exactly to produce a number where the majority of rideshare is full-time. So is…

Just because you don’t like the findings, doesn’t mean that it’s biased.

As far as the distinction between work and workers, it’s who is doing the work. If most people with an driver app are idle, they’ve removed themselves from the candidate pool. They’re irrelevant. It’s no different than talking about active users versus total accounts made. In other words, if you want to know how policies affect people, you look at who is affected.

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

#357

Post by mike00632 »

blix wrote: post #133
oftenwrong wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why "especially progressives"? Surely people who advocate for your healthcare to be free, and for universal worker protections are doing more to help you than others? Gig work is a poor replacement for a proper "safety net". Imagine how fucked you would be if you were not able to do that gig work. Universal healthcare would have you covered.

For people with 'untreatable' or 'psychogenic' chronic illnesses, universal healthcare would just mean a different institution denies your claim for treatment. Progressives, especially in 2020, don't look kindly on people who lack faith in medical institutions. A lot of people with chronic illness have found themselves in this category after being failed by these institutions.

The 'anti-progressive' viewpoint is about people using their varied abilities in the free market to make it themselves. It assumes that everyone is at least a little abled in something and that something is enough to pay the bills. It's pure ideology. The reality is that if you are injured and suddenly can't do you're job then you likely have 0 bread-winning ability until you learn a new skill or set yourself up in a new career if that is even possible.

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

#358

Post by mike00632 »

coldcode wrote: post #230
SmokeyHamster wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the point. People deserve to be paid what they agree to be paid. The value of money relative to a product or service is subjective. If Bob agrees to mow a lawn for $10, Joe doesn't have the right to object and demand that Bob be paid $20. That's immoral and not how markets should work.

In a true market the pay for a worker with no special skills will trend towards 0. Uber drivers cannot decide what to charge, Uber does. How much an Uber driver makes is entirely up to Uber, and Uber is losing money on every ride so in the long run they have to either increase the price or pay the driver less. My (large) employer pays for my health insurance in the US which has to be added to what we charge. Uber has…

It would make sense if Uber limited the hours employees could work. Make all of these stories about happy part time workers 100% the case. Or if some drivers work full time then pay for their benefits, let Uber lose more money per ride because that doesn't seem to matter.

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

#359

Post by rthrowaway1223 »

LatteLazy wrote: post #292

It's sad that no one wanted a compromise solution. First the state government insisted everyone be 100% employees, then the only option on the ballot was keep that or 0%. So now we're at 0.

Disclaimer: I’m a former Uber employee

Dara (Uber CEO) did advocate for a third category in a New York Times op-ed in August. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/10/opinion/uber-ceo-dara-kho...

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

#360

Post by gvhst »

Jommi wrote: post #303
jonathankoren wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

However, what isn't covered (and this is especially pertinent for ride sharing) is the time between ending a job and taking the next job.

While I wouldn't expect anything like full-time pay, Uber/Lyft et. al. still get a benefit of having drivers on call (lower wait times for their customers). I personally would have liked to see some compensation (within reason) for time spent on call but not on a ride. Not sure how easy it would be to make both a fair and reasonably un-cheatable system, but its something that should have been considered.

Post reply on HN