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

Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

knock-la.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 125 posts

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#51

Post by JMTQp8lwXL »

ndespres wrote: post #12
mullingitover wrote: post #8

This of course has led to a lot of 'I told you so!' and finger-wagging that voters were too stupid, and shouldn't be allowed to have the initiative system because they're too easily manipulated. Prop 22 wasn't unclear. The voters knew what they were voting for, which was to keep the status quo with regard to gig economy jobs, and roll back the broad, messy legislation that the state legislature had enacted. Had Prod…

>>"We can't paper over our lack of viable careers by creating low-skilled jobs that pay the same as jobs requiring a college education." Well, why can't we? If we are saying that these types of jobs need to exist, why can we not agree that the people who do the job deserve to be compensated with a living wage and deserve dignity and stability?

We paper over the fact that stocks and real estate are predominantly appreciating due to the low interest rate environment. It's the only way to keep the party (and economic growth) going.

I concur. It's rich to me that, for some problems, papering over is a completely legitimate approach to 'solving' the problem, but when the same approach is suggested in a different context, it is immediately dismissed.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#52

Post by slg »

mc32 wrote: post #45
slg wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rideshare industry likely couldn't have supported this 5 years ago and it was clear that something like AB5 was going to happen for years. Prop 22 provides unprecedented clarity on how ridesharing will be legislated in California for the foreseeable future.

Let's suppose you're right, Uber and Lyft and DD all knew this and despite this knowledge thought, you know what, yeah it's uncertain but let's set CA as our HQ and concentrate our efforts there anyway... Vons and Pavilions are not the same as Uber, Lyft, etc. I think they did it because they thought it was time to change their delivery logistics and were not waiting for concretization of the law around this. Put ano…

You are establishing weird timelines on these decisions. Uber, Lyft, etc set themselves up in California because they consider themselves tech companies. The state of California likely couldn't have cared less about the special class of workers they employed until the group reached a critical mass which obviously didn't happen before these companies were founded. I don't know specifically when they reached critical mass, but it was likely within the last 5 years. At that point it became clear that the state needed to do something. AB5 was one of those attempts.

Companies like Albertsons who could benefit from these businesses weren't willing to commit to embracing them until there was stability in the industry. For all the faults of Prop 22, it provides stability through its incredibly high requirements for repeal or amendments. Companies like Albertsons now have the stability they desired and will embrace these rideshare companies to save a few bucks by shifting a greater financial burden onto individual drivers.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#53

Post by bluedino »

whalesalad wrote: post #15

Everyone is so against this move but it I was a grocery store I wouldn’t want this responsibility either. These stores are in the business of groceries, not delivery. They got into delivery because they had to and I’d imagine it was losing a lot of money and not to mention tough for them to accomplish and manage. Everyone else and their brother is moving to doordash white label because it makes the most sense. They f…

>> People are most upset about the health insurance aspect. The issues need to be decoupled

The employer should pay for it. It’s a benefit like retirement savings.

If employers want better employees, they can offer fully-paid or low deductible plans to their employees.

I do not want the US government running healthcare.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#54

Post by zajio1am »

ndespres wrote: post #12
mullingitover wrote: post #8

This of course has led to a lot of 'I told you so!' and finger-wagging that voters were too stupid, and shouldn't be allowed to have the initiative system because they're too easily manipulated. Prop 22 wasn't unclear. The voters knew what they were voting for, which was to keep the status quo with regard to gig economy jobs, and roll back the broad, messy legislation that the state legislature had enacted. Had Prod…

>>"We can't paper over our lack of viable careers by creating low-skilled jobs that pay the same as jobs requiring a college education." Well, why can't we? If we are saying that these types of jobs need to exist, why can we not agree that the people who do the job deserve to be compensated with a living wage and deserve dignity and stability?

> why can we not agree that the people who do the job deserve to be compensated with a living wage

Living wage based on locally inflated housing prices is just fundamentally broken concept. It is just ideological cover for wealth transfer from productive economy to landlords (by focusing on 'living wage' based on market housing costs and not on 'affordable rents' based on market wages). If there is an excess of workers and a shortage of housing, one cannot determine apriori where is a proper balance between 'living wages' and 'affordable rents', it is necessary to let market find the balance.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#55

Post by Jommi »

slg wrote: post #29
Jommi wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Untrue. 1) This has always been allowed, but AB5 made it illegal. Then a shitton of industries got granted exceptions to it, and ride-hailing + food-delivery did the same. 2) Prop22 can be be amended only by a seven-eighths vote of the Legislature or a new ballot measure — AND state labor laws can be superseded by federal laws and regulations for enterprises that affect interstate commerce. Please stop spreading fals…

I answer point one here[1]. Point two is why I threw a "basically" in that sentence. Yes, you are technically correct that the state can change it with a 7/8ths majority. However requiring a supermajority that high is a nearly unprecedented requirement for the legislature and it is one that is going to be nearly impossible to achieve. I honestly don't know what you consider "false information" here beyond me saying "…

You realize many laws don't allow any legislative input at all right? By default, a law enacted by ballot measure can only be changed by another law enacted by ballot measure.

You can go learn something about it from here: https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/initia...

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#56

Post by Jommi »

slg wrote: post #38
Jommi wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How on earth can you say prop22 has provided any stability, when we are literally discussing an article bashing it, and with there being multiple ways of it being still repealed? Explain yourself.

Prop 22 is much more stable than AB5 because the requirements to change it are much more difficult to reach.

We are not talking about stability of AB5, but rather the situation before it. It was trivial for most other industries to get excemptions to AB5 (there are tens, if not close to 100 excemptions now). So what really changed with prop22 comapared to before AB5?

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#57

Post by mc32 »

slg wrote: post #52
mc32 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's suppose you're right, Uber and Lyft and DD all knew this and despite this knowledge thought, you know what, yeah it's uncertain but let's set CA as our HQ and concentrate our efforts there anyway... Vons and Pavilions are not the same as Uber, Lyft, etc. I think they did it because they thought it was time to change their delivery logistics and were not waiting for concretization of the law around this. Put ano…

You are establishing weird timelines on these decisions. Uber, Lyft, etc set themselves up in California because they consider themselves tech companies. The state of California likely couldn't have cared less about the special class of workers they employed until the group reached a critical mass which obviously didn't happen before these companies were founded. I don't know specifically when they reached critical m…

Albertson's doesn't need it. They would use a third party AB 5 or not. It may cost more if AB 5 were in effect, but it's still less than having your logistics in-house.

Having someone else do your deliveries and such has been a thing for a long time. Companies have gone back and forth depending on who's doing the bean counting and what they think is crucial to business. Sometimes they would split it. Some in-house some hired out.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#58

Post by Pfhreak »

zajio1am wrote: post #54
ndespres wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>"We can't paper over our lack of viable careers by creating low-skilled jobs that pay the same as jobs requiring a college education." Well, why can't we? If we are saying that these types of jobs need to exist, why can we not agree that the people who do the job deserve to be compensated with a living wage and deserve dignity and stability?

> why can we not agree that the people who do the job deserve to be compensated with a living wage Living wage based on locally inflated housing prices is just fundamentally broken concept. It is just ideological cover for wealth transfer from productive economy to landlords (by focusing on 'living wage' based on market housing costs and not on 'affordable rents' based on market wages). If there is an excess of worke…

Ok, why can't we just say housing isn't a market, it's priced primarily for livibility and less for some concept of quality. Then living wage doesn't need to be opened to inflated housing markets.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#59

Post by isoskeles »

ndespres wrote: post #36
julienb_sea wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is denying that independent contractors deserve dignity and stability. Imposing a forced employment framework violates the dignity of non-full time contractors who want a side income to supplement their normal job. This discussion also should account for the benefit to society of having safe and low cost transportation and delivery options, which raises the dignity of many people who otherwise could not afford…

This is a story about a grocery store chain replacing their own employees who perform a job at the company, with "independent contractors" from a 3rd-party service. I'm not sure what case you're trying to make, whose dignity are you saying is violated? Who said anything about taxis? Why are you arguing to me against raising minimum wage, when all I said was that people deserve a living wage?

> Why are you arguing to me against raising minimum wage, when all I said was that people deserve a living wage?

Well, you said:

> why can we not agree that the people who do the job deserve to be compensated with a living wage and deserve dignity and stability?

How do you propose that a person doing a "job" earn a "living wage" without making changes to the minimum wage? I sense much more of an argumentative tone to your comments than the person you're replying to, by the way.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#60

Post by CydeWeys »

bluedino wrote: post #53
whalesalad wrote: post #15

Everyone is so against this move but it I was a grocery store I wouldn’t want this responsibility either. These stores are in the business of groceries, not delivery. They got into delivery because they had to and I’d imagine it was losing a lot of money and not to mention tough for them to accomplish and manage. Everyone else and their brother is moving to doordash white label because it makes the most sense. They f…

>> People are most upset about the health insurance aspect. The issues need to be decoupled The employer should pay for it. It’s a benefit like retirement savings. If employers want better employees, they can offer fully-paid or low deductible plans to their employees. I do not want the US government running healthcare.

Why, from first principles, should healthcare be tied to employment? Most other countries don't do it this way. That we do it here is just an accident of history (healthcare as a benefit is not treated as taxable).
Post reply on HN