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

61–70 of 125 posts

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#61

Post by renewiltord »

Spooky23 wrote: post #35
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…

Yes, it was clearly unethical to rob these employees of the freedom of being piecework contractors. Only through pulling bootstraps and making lemonade from lemons will these uneducated wretches be able to bask in the sunshine of freedom. Back in the glory days of Victorian England you could flip a boy a farthing for grocery delivery... I for one and pleased the make these opportunities available.

As entertaining as it must be to you to write in this style, it is quite annoying to read.

Clearly GP was saying "we had to choose between a few well-paid jobs with many unable to access them or many low-paid jobs; it's a trade-off". It's obvious that that statement is intended to consider everyone's well being, not just some idle nobility as you imply.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#62

Post by takeda »

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…

The law that prop 22 is overriding was patching loopholes with employment law. Where companies exploited employees by making them independent contractors so they don't have to provide benefits.

The law in question (AB5) essentially banned hiring employees as independent contractors if they were performing a primary function of the business.

While I didn't support prop 22, and still think it is bad that it passed (and no, voters are dumb and did not know what they were voting for), I think this is totally unrelated to Prop 22 or AB5. Most likely after many drivers got sick and became unavailable for weeks due to covid, Vons decided to outsource delivery.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#63

Post by dragonwriter »

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…

> 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.

Prop. 22 didn't restore the pre-AB5 legal status quo, which was set by the 2018 Dynamex decision which AB5 largely codified and created some exemptions from.

> The small fraction of 'full-time' gig workers would've come out ahead. The much larger majority of part-time gig workers would've lost their side job.

No, they wouldn't. The Dynamex/AB5 would require some workers that under Prop 22 are contractors to be regular employees, but it would not require them to be full-time employees. This was among the very many bits of misinformation spread to sell Prop 22.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#64

Post by m4eta »

Jommi wrote: post #55
slg wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

The will of the people will not be superceded. Why would we allow legislature to overpower a ballot measure? We voted. The only thing people can be upset about is their lack of educating themselves on what they were voting for in the ballot measure. People cannot be coddled when it comes to their vote. Any undue influence would rot the inside and then why have a democracy?

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#65

Post by slg »

Jommi wrote: post #55
slg wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

>"I’ve looked at a lot of ballot measures over the years," said Moylan, adding that a two-thirds majority is common.

>But a seven-eighths "super, super, super-duper majority," she said, "is new as far as I’m aware."[1]

It is relatively standard for propositions to include some ways for the legislature to amend the law. It isn't a full legal requirement, but it is common. The a 7/8 majority is nearly impossible to reach on anything but the most milquetoast bills. That requirement was seemingly included so they supporters of the bill could feign that it was flexible while not really conceding any possibility of it being changed. If Prop 22 is going to be amended or repealed, it basically has to be done through the popular vote.

[1] - https://calmatters.org/politics/post-it/2020/10/california-a...

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#66

Post by renewiltord »

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.

You're trapped in the present and unable to think of a better future. This is all better horse rhetoric: "horses should be trained to go drink their own water and poop in designated areas just like they can be trained to seek food".

No. The right answer is to deregulate healthcare so that you can buy it from anywhere. You can still have your AMA-certified doctors, but if you can get other doctors as well, you'll be better off.

The reason for that is that while wealthy people like the US middle class worry about the quality of care, everyone below them merely worries about access. Even care that is a fifth as good, if accessible will be superior to inaccessible care that is currently available.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#67

Post by Anon1096 »

slg wrote: post #32
Anon1096 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Prop 22 which was passed on the backs of a nearly $200m campaign You mean, passed on the backs of nearly 10 million voters . I always find it strange to tout the line of how much money was spent in an election, as if to say that the voters have no agency or culpability. Clinton spent nearly 2 times what Trump did and still lost. Money does not equal votes if the people don't support an issue.

Money buys votes at the margin. Everyone agrees on this including the people who supported Prop 22 otherwise they wouldn't have spent some $175m more than their opponents.

That doesn't mean the voters were brainwashed into supporting something they otherwise wouldn't have.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#68

Post by Jommi »

dragonwriter wrote: post #63
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…

> 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. Prop. 22 didn't restore the pre-AB5 legal status quo, which was set by the 2018 Dynamex decision which AB5 largely codified and created some exemptions from. > The small fraction of 'full-time' gig work…

AB5 should definitely not be regarded as the "status quo" at any point. It was a terrible terrible, which was evidenced by the 50+ amendments it has since received.

Full-time or not has no distinction in this argument. You are nitpicking.

Re: Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

#69

Post by renewiltord »

Pfhreak wrote: post #58
zajio1am wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Because there is an existing large class of people (2 in 3 Americans) who have acted based on the idea that housing is a market and have bought a home on that basis. They have no interest in altering the status quo. To add to that, you can't choose what housing is priced by unless you have government price controls and that is a cure that's worse than the disease.
Post reply on HN