When you read the article and realize that they’re actually complaining about a raise.
Shipt’s algorithm squeezed gig workers, who fought back
131–140 of 161 posts
Re: Shipt’s algorithm squeezed gig workers, who fought back
#132Went looking for a reason to be angry, didn’t find one (quite the opposite!) but meh… just protest anyway lol
Re: Shipt’s algorithm squeezed gig workers, who fought back
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't want to live in a world which is controlled unilaterally, and intransparently by a group of people who assume they have a full picture of the situation and assume they understand moral completely I have thought about this topic for a while at the time that I worked with Law data (e.g. Family Law and Military Law), and I just came to the conclusion that several societal institutions and it's agents are inher…
I would like to have a more algorithmic society with human in the loop calling the final shots and placing the rationale on top Let’s re-audit the algorithm regularly; say, perhaps, a central committee revisits and revises the plan every 5 years?
Like elections?
Re: Shipt’s algorithm squeezed gig workers, who fought back
#134A clear case of adverse selection in the old pricing model. From a game-theoretic perspective in a gig marketplace you don’t want jobs that are strictly better, else sophisticated market participants (workers) will select the best ones leaving chaff - and a worse experience - for the less sophisticated participants. What you are looking for is preference optionality, eg one Uber driver might prefer not to do very lon…
I used to fly into Pittsburg and take an Uber to my grandparents house 40 miles away. For years I could always get an Uber but then after the pandemic my trip was rejected so frequently that I had to start renting a car. So basically no one wanted the gig and Uber never told me my ride was unreasonable. Something changed in the algorithm to benefit drivers, Uber, or both, at the expense of the customer, and that info…
Sounds like the issue is Uber was not willing to increase the price for that ride to what it should be (which, frankly, could be as much as double the per-mile or per-minute cost of a downtown trip, because of deadheading empty back to downtown, since usually drivers can only find customers in a core "downtown" or other key area(s), and then once they drive them out to the burbs, they are stuck deadheading empty back to the hot area.
I assure you if they had just offered a higher price, some driver would have taken it, assuming that price wasn't then too high for you to be OK with it.
A lot of companies actually underprice their stuff a little relative to the market to avoid outrage and accusations of gouging. It's easy to find these -- look for the shortages. Proper pricing prevents shortages, by definition. But people tend to get a lot more pissed off if once or twice a month, eggs cost $40/carton, than if once or twice a month, eggs have run out by the time they get to the store. The first feels like a human is out to get you, the second seems like a natural accident. Humans aren't rational economic actors.
Of course, this infuriates me as it does anyone with a semester of microeconomics.
Re: Shipt’s algorithm squeezed gig workers, who fought back
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
> [W]e hate being charged what something is worth to us. I'll rephrase this in a way that's more straightforward and clear: > We hate being charged every penny we could conceivably pay for a given thing. In part because many ordinary folks believe that a fair deal is for businesses to cover the cost of R&D for the thing and the cost of getting it to us, as well as a reasonable profit to cover both expected future sup…
> as well as a reasonable profit to cover both expected future support and future R&D for improvements and/or new products. That would be a weird definition of profit. Profit is what is left after expenses (like future support and R&D). But I will admit R&D is an oddball (there a taxation difference between R&D, compared against earning profits then investing the profits into a startup). Do you have a pension, or own…
That's why they said "reasonable profit" not just "profit". Most people regard it as unfair or even immoral to charge dramatically more than how the parent describes "reasonable profit".
People probably regard excessive profits as immoral for a variety of reasons:
There are situations where people have little choice but to accept a deal. E.g. imagine someone requiring a drowning person to agree to pay a million dollars to be rescued.
Increased profits are often "unearned" in that they don't stem from something like working harder or innovating. Encouraging innovation and hard work is one of the primary justifications given for capitalism.
Society's operation is often based on the assumption that things will be priced perfectly. E.g. no one would be able to retire if companies where able to perfectly match prices and pay.
The rich hurting the poor in order to become even more rich is considered immoral in almost all philosophies.
Re: Shipt’s algorithm squeezed gig workers, who fought back
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to fly into Pittsburg and take an Uber to my grandparents house 40 miles away. For years I could always get an Uber but then after the pandemic my trip was rejected so frequently that I had to start renting a car. So basically no one wanted the gig and Uber never told me my ride was unreasonable. Something changed in the algorithm to benefit drivers, Uber, or both, at the expense of the customer, and that info…
Sounds like the issue is Uber was not willing to increase the price for that ride to what it should be (which, frankly, could be as much as double the per-mile or per-minute cost of a downtown trip, because of deadheading empty back to downtown, since usually drivers can only find customers in a core "downtown" or other key area(s), and then once they drive them out to the burbs, they are stuck deadheading empty back…
I wonder if it may not be that humans are irrational actors so much that they have insufficient data and may not strictly speaking be optimizing for avoiding shortages.
I could see people being upset if they knew that eggs where out because some rich person bought a disproportionate number of them; it's just that normally they can't know.
I think that most people's preference for limited resources would be a low price with a limit on how many a person can purchase (which is what many stores do during shortages). It seems to me that people care more about making sure that everyone can get some eggs without being gouged than they care about avoiding shortages in aggregate.
Re: Shipt’s algorithm squeezed gig workers, who fought back
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are entering an era where corporations have perfect data. They can charge each customer exactly the maximum amount possible, and pay each worker the exact minimum amount possible
> They can charge each customer exactly the maximum amount possible The company captures the consumer surplus. Generally currently we often get way more value than we pay for. We hate having that surplus taken away from us and we hate being charged what something is worth to us. Two questions: How do we fight back? Is it unfair that we pay the amount that something is worth to us individually? Currently think of any…
If every product/service has exactly zero consumer surplus, then consumers won't have any reason to prefer product/service A at price p over product/service B at price q, or even over not spending money at all. This will kill innovation, since business competition is based on providing a higher consumer surplus (better quality for the same amount of money, or same quality for less money). This is a clear market failure, therefore this kind of discriminatory pricing should be made illegal.
Re: Shipt’s algorithm squeezed gig workers, who fought back
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are entering an era where corporations have perfect data. They can charge each customer exactly the maximum amount possible, and pay each worker the exact minimum amount possible
> They can charge each customer exactly the maximum amount possible The company captures the consumer surplus. Generally currently we often get way more value than we pay for. We hate having that surplus taken away from us and we hate being charged what something is worth to us. Two questions: How do we fight back? Is it unfair that we pay the amount that something is worth to us individually? Currently think of any…
I don't think it should be a question of fairness. Not everyone is a producer. Everyone is a consumer, including producers. Therefore, it is socially optimal that, wherever welfare surplus exists in price levels, more of it should be consumer surplus than producer surplus.
Re: Shipt’s algorithm squeezed gig workers, who fought back
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are looking for this in the article > It wasn’t a clear case of wage theft, because 60 percent of workers were making about the same or slightly more under the new scheme. Your statement that "some 30+% are getting at least 10% more" assumes that there is no wage theft - which is not cut in stone.
Aren’t gig workers contractors? Is it wage theft if I negotiate a lower price with my local timber yard?
Gig workers fall into a grey area between contractor and employee, depending on the particular jurisdiction and particular job. There are many ongoing legal battles trying to update outdated legal frameworks that don't quite account for modern realities. It is not as simple as you buying lumber.
Re: Shipt’s algorithm squeezed gig workers, who fought back
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are looking for this in the article > It wasn’t a clear case of wage theft, because 60 percent of workers were making about the same or slightly more under the new scheme. Your statement that "some 30+% are getting at least 10% more" assumes that there is no wage theft - which is not cut in stone.
I mean, it wasn't "a clear case of wage theft" as these weren't wage workers; and in any case it's not like they weren't told ahead of time how much the order would pay.
Do you know that for a fact they were told the total amount including tips, as well as all the details of the job, like items needed and delivery locations ahead of time? Gig apps often withhold info until after a worker accepts, to reduce workers ability to focus on desirable orders. In some jurisdictions Uber drivers don't see the final destination until after they accept a ride.