Delivery people are currently out earning chefs, wait staff, and many restaurant owners.
Source: I am friends with several restaurant owners in NYC.
Uber, DoorDash Sue NYC to Stop Delivery Drivers from Getting a Minimum Wage
61–70 of 124 posts
Re: Uber, DoorDash Sue NYC to Stop Delivery Drivers from Getting a Minimum Wage
#62To be clear before I say anything: I think the entire food delivery app business model is bad for all parties involved and that these companies are bad actors. But … I don’t think the cities are properly accounting for the ease of using multiple apps? If a driver is logged into Uber and Doordash and GrubHub on 3 phones waiting for a delivery they probably should not be accruing $17.96*3 per hour at that time. But it…
> To be clear before I say anything: I think the entire food delivery app business model is bad for all parties involved and that these companies are bad actors. Funny I have the exact opposite opinion. I think it's good for all parties involved. Restaurants get a bigger market. Delivery people get more freedom at work. Eaters get convenience. Delivery apps get a piece of the revenue for efficiently routing drivers a…
>Delivery people get more freedom at work.
Getting paid 7 bucks an hour in NYC: that's freedom, baby!
Re: Uber, DoorDash Sue NYC to Stop Delivery Drivers from Getting a Minimum Wage
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If a driver is logged into Uber and Doordash and GrubHub on 3 phones waiting for a delivery they probably should not be accruing $17.96*3 per hour at that time. Why not? The entire shtick of Uber et al is that employees choose their hours and gain "freedom" from employees. This is what freedom looks like. Employers can't tell freelance contractors how they should behave. They decide a contract, they get a service a…
The agreement is that if you earn a wage you have your time available for the employer, so they could no longer reject offers. You're saying that they should get both the benefits of freelancers (pick work) and employees (minimum wage).
So?
The employer can refuse to contract with them if they can't fulfill their obligations
Re: Uber, DoorDash Sue NYC to Stop Delivery Drivers from Getting a Minimum Wage
#64it would force companies to pay workers for any time logged into the app, regardless of whether they were delivering or not Heh. Do these companies interview their gig workers? Could I collect some passive cash like this? What a soul sucking job interview that would actually be: What makes you a great delivery bicycle person and where do you see yourself in 5 years? So in other words, these companies would mandate th…
Presume this is the sticking point for the companies as well since now they will have to actually manage their drivers to actually ensure they are working and not just gaming it.
So it will end up being the additional cost from the minimum wage plus everyone else required to police it.
Re: Uber, DoorDash Sue NYC to Stop Delivery Drivers from Getting a Minimum Wage
#65What a crap business model these companies have if they rely on haggling over legal loopholes to operate. The business case, at best, is the status quo remains with material threats to their operations if these laws change. This is a lose-lose for everyone. Ignore the morality arguments, why risk your money on something with almost zero upside and all this downside? Suing the government is not a sign of strength
There’s a competitor in India called BluSmart right now that’s running all electric, fully owned fleets. The drivers are paid fair hourly wages and thus have no incentive to refuse rides or not wait. The cars are simply parked at earmarked charging spots in the city. Their own vetted drivers can unlock the cars at any point and start picking up passengers before dropping it off at a charging station.
The rides are somehow cheaper, have no surge pricing, and from some insider reports, has profitable unit economics.
Their app isn’t quite as snappy, but it works fine.
They’re eating Uber’s lunch in my city and makes me wonder how Uber is screwing this up so badly.
Re: Uber, DoorDash Sue NYC to Stop Delivery Drivers from Getting a Minimum Wage
#66To be clear before I say anything: I think the entire food delivery app business model is bad for all parties involved and that these companies are bad actors. But … I don’t think the cities are properly accounting for the ease of using multiple apps? If a driver is logged into Uber and Doordash and GrubHub on 3 phones waiting for a delivery they probably should not be accruing $17.96*3 per hour at that time. But it…
> If a driver is logged into Uber and Doordash and GrubHub on 3 phones waiting for a delivery they probably should not be accruing $17.96*3 per hour at that time. Why not? The entire shtick of Uber et al is that employees choose their hours and gain "freedom" from employees. This is what freedom looks like. Employers can't tell freelance contractors how they should behave. They decide a contract, they get a service a…
Not employees but contractors. If they are employees they can be forced to sign non-competes.
Re: Uber, DoorDash Sue NYC to Stop Delivery Drivers from Getting a Minimum Wage
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What a crap business model these companies have if they rely on haggling over legal loopholes to operate. They will be fine. It's the consumers and delivery drivers who will mostly pay for it.
> consumers and delivery drivers who will mostly pay for it The players: restaurants, drivers (current and former), platforms and consumers. Former drivers, those who don’t make the new cut, will lose. Drivers who stay on will gain. Looking at leverage, consumers are less likely to bear the burden than restaurants. Given the new fixed cost of operating a delivery platform, the incumbents’ threat of competition from n…
That seems more like an interim step to me. I imagine what will follow is one of three things:
1. An affected restaurant increases costs for online purchases to compensate.
2. An affected restaurant stops offering delivery. If it's not worth the money, why offer it?
3. An affected restaurant gets its own drivers. That's how delivery used to operate before the gig economy, and it allows them to control costs and fees.
I've already seen restaurants start putting on delivery charges, and often significant ones (a $6 delivery charge doesn't seem unusual where I am).
> But the platforms’ role in it will be more stable and secure.
I don't think it will be. The platforms currently offer discoverability and drivers. If platforms aren't willing to bear the costs of the drivers, restaurants will stop using their driver services. And if the platforms are reduced to just discoverability, it becomes much easier for competitors to enter the market.
Re: Uber, DoorDash Sue NYC to Stop Delivery Drivers from Getting a Minimum Wage
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea but Apple didnt sue the government because of some issues affecting the profitability of their main business model. This comparison makes no sense. Companies that have made similar moves are Uber, Airbnb for example, but not Apple.
> but Apple didnt sue the government because of some issues affecting the profitability of their main business model Fine, Disney. Or hell, Oracle [1] and Boeing [2]. Is there a serious view that someone suing the government always does so out of desperation? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Enterprise_Defense_Infra... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSeries_dumping_petition_by_Bo...
While I generally agree that suing the government isn't in and of itself and indicator of desperation, I also feel like there's a distinction between the lawsuits that are always immediately thrown around contesting government contract awards compared to lawsuits filed against legislation.
In the former, companies sue because it doesn't really cost them much to try and see if something works out in their favor, while in the latter they're suing because the legislation would have some negative effect on their existing business.
Re: Uber, DoorDash Sue NYC to Stop Delivery Drivers from Getting a Minimum Wage
#69To be clear before I say anything: I think the entire food delivery app business model is bad for all parties involved and that these companies are bad actors. But … I don’t think the cities are properly accounting for the ease of using multiple apps? If a driver is logged into Uber and Doordash and GrubHub on 3 phones waiting for a delivery they probably should not be accruing $17.96*3 per hour at that time. But it…
I disagree, the business model works out just fine for a lot of people.
At the core of the problem is the concept if a contractor. These cities are trying to go around a federally defiend concept of contracting. You agree, as a self-employed business operator to provide services and get paid for it. Employees on the other hand provide labour which means performing assigned tasks under a specific job title, typically under some sort of management with performance reviews and accomodations provided. Anyone from IT workers to general contractors contract out services as a business, not labour as an employee.
When you hire a general contractor to fix your roofing for example, they are not your employee, you don't have to pay them minimum wage, withold taxes or provide medical care and paid vacation to them. I have been a contractor and hated it but I know people who love it.
The scale and nature of Uber's business is no reason to treat them differently when everyone is supposed to be equal under the law. Taxii drivers were typically independent contractors as well unless they had their own medallion back in the day.
I have not read any argument so far as to why Uber and friends should be treated differently.
I would hate to pay more for their services just because a bunch of people who can't ger a job elsewhere want to force uber into employing them when it wants to contract them. Most people I have met who do this work have another day job and uber is extra income. If you wanna do it full time, you can pick locations like airports for uber and downtown areas for doordash and ubereats, especially in places like manhattan or miami and make much more than minimum wage.
To be clear, under this law, the guy who hustles and makes $25/hr will get paid minimum wage just like the guy who takes a nap in his car near his house until he gets an order/ride. Essentially, in addition to other burdens, they want drivers to be paid for being available but also drivers would have to be told where to work and how to work, for example you can't park in the middle of nowhere, where you know you won't get any orders and get paid for it.
Re: Uber, DoorDash Sue NYC to Stop Delivery Drivers from Getting a Minimum Wage
#70What a crap business model these companies have if they rely on haggling over legal loopholes to operate. The business case, at best, is the status quo remains with material threats to their operations if these laws change. This is a lose-lose for everyone. Ignore the morality arguments, why risk your money on something with almost zero upside and all this downside? Suing the government is not a sign of strength
There’s a competitor in India called BluSmart right now that’s running all electric, fully owned fleets. The drivers are paid fair hourly wages and thus have no incentive to refuse rides or not wait. The cars are simply parked at earmarked charging spots in the city. Their own vetted drivers can unlock the cars at any point and start picking up passengers before dropping it off at a charging station. The rides are so…
> makes me wonder how Uber is screwing this up so badly
This is just guesswork. May it be related to the VC funding that holds them afload, where at every turn they need to think about the future (and quick-as-possible) 10x return on investment that is in the fine-print of the VC contracts?
Or they may be so imbibed by startup-culture "Greed is good" mentality from the very start, that it is unthinkable to consider not squeezing it, and shaving off for every penny.