Revolt of the Delivery Workers • Hacker News Board

Re: Revolt of the Delivery Workers

#211

Post by CryptoPunk » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 8:52 PM UTC

jessaustin wrote: post #160

CryptoPunk wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sad to see they succeeded in obtaining a legal right to restrict other people's right to freely contract, and an indoctrinated public passively accepts it.

Going on strike was the freely chosen decision of the delivery workers. Their employer freely chose to meet their demands rather than going out of business. Sure, the bosses might have preferred to pay independent contractors pennies to work 90 hours a week and destroy their own health, but in just societies that isn't an option.

The laws surrounding striking violate the employer's contract liberty. For example, the employer cannot simply fire the contractors/workers striking, and replace them with people willing to accept their offer.

>>but in just societies that isn't an option.

Someone offering people work on terms that you think are inadequate is not unjust. Interfering in private interactions between other consenting adults, to deny them the option to engage in some voluntary interaction, is what's an unjust act, that is predicated on an unearned sense of moral superiority.

And such an interjection doesn't improve the opportunities available to workers in general. If it were that easy, we could set a minimum wage of $500/hr, under which all employment offers are illegal, and create instant prosperity.

The correct wage level, for maximizing economic development, and by extension, wage growth, is set by market forces, via the intersection of supply of labor, and the output that people are willing to trade for that labor.

Re: Revolt of the Delivery Workers

#212

Post by CryptoPunk » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 9:01 PM UTC

jamil7 wrote: post #166

CryptoPunk wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sad to see they succeeded in obtaining a legal right to restrict other people's right to freely contract, and an indoctrinated public passively accepts it.

The Foodora workers who unionised and won a better contract in Norway were never self-employed, they were always on part-time contracts. What they achieved was for their equipment (bikes, smartphone and clothing) to be compensated by their employer and a higher hourly wage. Would love to see some of your reasoning for how exactly this outcome restricted other workers rights?

>>Would love to see some of your reasoning for how exactly this outcome restricted other workers rights?

It prevents other workers from underbidding them, by making it illegal for the employer to hire those workers due to the contract liberty suppressing mandate to engage exclusively in collective bargaining with the union.

Forcing companies to pay more than market wages is also bad for society at large by discouraging investment into such companies. More investment into companies leads to lower consumer prices which translates to an effective wage hike for all workers.

Re: Revolt of the Delivery Workers

#213

Post by CryptoPunk » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 9:07 PM UTC

modo_mario wrote: post #157

CryptoPunk wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sad to see they succeeded in obtaining a legal right to restrict other people's right to freely contract, and an indoctrinated public passively accepts it.

Why do you think they did? Usually what is the case is that they use these people as workers (Making it so that they can't set their own rates or contract freely like someone who isn't an employee could) but then call them something else to avoid workers protections and liabilities.

Extra-contractual worker protections and liabilities are simply prohibitions on voluntary interactions between consenting adults (those contracts that exclude said protections/liabilities). Mandating minimum employment benefits is not economically sound, or consistent with a free society.

With respect to the first point, forcing companies to overpay for labor (whether directly, through above market wages, or indirectly, through reduced management flexibility, or more costly benefits) results in higher unemployment, as previously profitable hiring opportunities become unprofitable, and a less optimal allocation of company funds, that leads to less economic development, which is the source of all wage growth.

Also mandatory benefits are a cookie-cutter solution that reduce the flexibility that employers and workers have to reach terms that maximize the benefit the worker enjoys with a given expenditure of resources by the employer. For example, the mandate may require 4 weeks of paid leave a year, while a particular worker may prefer less paid leave, and instead higher hourly wages, but the mandate prevents this. Given companies have a limited amount of funds available to spend on labor expenses, there is an opportunity cost attached to every mandatory benefit.

Re: Revolt of the Delivery Workers

#214

Post by nzmsv » Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 9:33 PM UTC

aerosmile wrote: post #187

CodesInChaos wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd rather compare the US with Western Europe. Homicide in the US is 5x that of Germany, and 10x that of Norway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention...

My point was not to defend the crime rate in the US, but to address a question that a person from Russia asked - why does it sound like living in NYC is like watching some Western movie, whereas the same cannot be said about Moscow? It sounded strange, because all it takes is a few YouTube searches to witness the level of violence that exists in Russia that far exceeds anything you'll see in the US. Russia really is…

You have never been to Russia and yet feel comfortable saying it is "something else in this regard", basing the statement on a YouTube search.

The average stats are about the same, but that's as useful a number as the average temperature of the patients in a hospital.

For the places a visitor is likely to go, Russia will definitely feel safer. Crime there is largely pushed out of the densely populated city cores and into the outskirts. In the US, it's the opposite. A downtown core looks (and smells) like a dystopia unimaginable to most citizens of the world. People are always shocked at how terrible the world cities that heard about so much look in person.

Re: Revolt of the Delivery Workers

#215

Post by TapWaterBandit » Tue, Sep 21, 2021, 4:28 AM UTC

chowchowchow wrote: post #185

aerosmile wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoiler alert: the murder rate in Russia is 40% higher than in the US, and that's despite the very different gun laws [1][2]. Nothing ruins a good story like facts. That's also why you should always raise before you launch or enter a new market, etc. People are suckers for a story, and our brains are pre-wired to explain phenomena rather than to question them. Once you master that psychology (and manipulation) of peo…

Ah yes, Russia. Long held as the standard to which the US should aspire to in many ways, including its murder rate.

It's deceptive anyway. Healthcare is much better in the USA than in Russia, including in the treatment of potential homicides.

If you combined murder rate + ICU entry rate for both countries due to violent crime, I think the stats would tell quite a different story.

Re: Revolt of the Delivery Workers

#216

Post by rsj_hn » Tue, Sep 21, 2021, 4:44 AM UTC

bradleyjg wrote: post #89

refurb wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SF was always rough but has definitely gotten a bit more lawless. I wonder if we’re seeing history repeat itself? Cities grew in the 50’s, then saw people leave in the 60-70’s, then return in the 90’s.

The usual explanations for the prior crime wave were exogenous—crack cocaine and leaded gasoline are the two I’ve seen most frequently. On the other hand, this latest round seems to be the result of poor policy choices.

There are plenty of non-exogenous causes, they just don't have the same cool-factor for publication as things like leaded gasoline. For example many people were released from institutions during the massive de-institutionalization push that started in the mid 50s [1], going from ~340 institutionalized people per 100,000 in 1955 to about 60 per 100,000 in 1980. One can even argue that the sum of incarcerated and institutionalized has averaged roughly constant (about 450 per 100,000) with a dip during the period of increasing criminality from the 1960s to the 1990s as the incarceration rate had to climb from ~100 to ~450 per 100,000 to make up for the mass de-institutionalization.

The cited study is pretty interesting:

"The juxtaposition of these trends and the current high incidence of severe mental illness among those behind bars begs the question of whether the mentally ill have simply been transinstitutionalized from mental hospitals to prisons and jails. A related question concerns the extent to which the unprecedented growth in incarceration since the late 1970s is driven by a reduction in public investment in inpatient mental health services. Past changes in sentencing and corrections policies are currently under heightened scrutiny as state prison populations are at record levels and many states are seeking to scale back correctional populations with an eye on the fiscal benefits of doing so. To the extent that the run-up in state prison populations was driven by deinstitutionalization, the current focus on sentence enhancements and the evolution of the U.S. sentencing regime may be misplaced."

[1] https://gspp.berkeley.edu/assets/uploads/research/pdf/p71.pd...

Re: Revolt of the Delivery Workers

#217

Post by rsj_hn » Tue, Sep 21, 2021, 5:13 AM UTC

CodesInChaos wrote: post #181

aerosmile wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoiler alert: the murder rate in Russia is 40% higher than in the US, and that's despite the very different gun laws [1][2]. Nothing ruins a good story like facts. That's also why you should always raise before you launch or enter a new market, etc. People are suckers for a story, and our brains are pre-wired to explain phenomena rather than to question them. Once you master that psychology (and manipulation) of peo…

It'd rather compare the US with Western Europe. Homicide in the US is 5x that of Germany, and 10x that of Norway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention...

The U.S., however, does not have the demographics of Western Europe.

Just like you can't compare Western Europe to Japan (it is much more violent in comparison, but again, different demographics).

The US is maybe 50% Europe, 30% Latin America, 8% Asia, 12% Africa, and if you look at the UN intentional homicide tables and take the weighted average by continent, you'll end up with an expected intentional homicide rate of about 5 per 100,000, which is right where the US is.

So stop pretending we are Western Europe - we aren't.

Re: Revolt of the Delivery Workers

#218

Post by awild » Tue, Sep 21, 2021, 8:47 AM UTC

CryptoPunk wrote: post #212

jamil7 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Foodora workers who unionised and won a better contract in Norway were never self-employed, they were always on part-time contracts. What they achieved was for their equipment (bikes, smartphone and clothing) to be compensated by their employer and a higher hourly wage. Would love to see some of your reasoning for how exactly this outcome restricted other workers rights?

>>Would love to see some of your reasoning for how exactly this outcome restricted other workers rights? It prevents other workers from underbidding them, by making it illegal for the employer to hire those workers due to the contract liberty suppressing mandate to engage exclusively in collective bargaining with the union. Forcing companies to pay more than market wages is also bad for society at large by discouragi…

Yes obviously, people are being taken their right to live in extreme poverty. Thanks for standing up to the little people.

Re: Revolt of the Delivery Workers

#219

Post by jamil7 » Tue, Sep 21, 2021, 9:56 AM UTC

CryptoPunk wrote: post #212

jamil7 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Foodora workers who unionised and won a better contract in Norway were never self-employed, they were always on part-time contracts. What they achieved was for their equipment (bikes, smartphone and clothing) to be compensated by their employer and a higher hourly wage. Would love to see some of your reasoning for how exactly this outcome restricted other workers rights?

>>Would love to see some of your reasoning for how exactly this outcome restricted other workers rights? It prevents other workers from underbidding them, by making it illegal for the employer to hire those workers due to the contract liberty suppressing mandate to engage exclusively in collective bargaining with the union. Forcing companies to pay more than market wages is also bad for society at large by discouragi…

> It prevents other workers from underbidding them

Reread my comment, they were never able to underbid each other in the first place they already had a fixed hourly rate, the strike and subsequent contract negotiated a higher rate so nothing to do with their ability to underbid was changed since it was never possible. So I'll ask again, how are did this specific incident restrict the rights of other workers?

Re: Revolt of the Delivery Workers

#220

Post by CryptoPunk » Tue, Sep 21, 2021, 11:01 AM UTC

jamil7 wrote: post #219

CryptoPunk wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Would love to see some of your reasoning for how exactly this outcome restricted other workers rights? It prevents other workers from underbidding them, by making it illegal for the employer to hire those workers due to the contract liberty suppressing mandate to engage exclusively in collective bargaining with the union. Forcing companies to pay more than market wages is also bad for society at large by discouragi…

> It prevents other workers from underbidding them Reread my comment, they were never able to underbid each other in the first place they already had a fixed hourly rate, the strike and subsequent contract negotiated a higher rate so nothing to do with their ability to underbid was changed since it was never possible. So I'll ask again, how are did this specific incident restrict the rights of other workers?

The company did not agree to anything freely. When the contractors striked, the company was prevented, by contract right violating laws, from replacing the strikers with new workers. They were therefore being extorted, and agreed under duress. The agreement prevented other workers, who are willing to work for the previous hourly wage, from underbidding the unuionized workers.