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

Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

lyft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 1001 posts

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#641

Post by jawns »

crondung wrote: post #534
tehwebguy wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I am fairly sure it's a straight up lie! Just because someone is an employee doesn't mean the employer can't give them flexible hours

if you pick your own hours and your own pickups, you are not anyone's employee -you by definition are your own boss. to be an employee, you have to have your hours and your work defined by your employer. employers tell you what work to do and when to do it. flexible hours don't work when at 4pm on tuesday dispatch yells you to pick someone up. california is forcing all rideshare contractors to be employees. that's no…

This is incorrect.

Determining whether someone is an independent contractor has always involved multiple factors. Flexibility of working hours is just one of the factors.

You cannot say categorically that having the ability to choose your own hours makes you an independent contractor rather than an employee.

Other factors include:

* What level of control does the employer have in dictating HOW the work is done?

* Is the worker performing work that is outside the usual course of the employer's business?

* Is it customary for the work to be performed as an independent trade?

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#642

Post by slfnflctd »

AgloeDreams wrote: post #382
Balgair wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much did the wear and tear on the car take out? I've been thinking of doing the same, but i keep hearing that when you factor in all the repairs you'll have to do, then it comes out at pretty much a wash.

Fun fact: the average pay per mile is less than the US Government's Standard driving deduction.

I can personally testify to this. My rule of thumb as a driver was that I had to drive roughly twice as many miles as dollars I needed, i.e. $0.50 a mile.

It was absolutely a lifesaver and exactly what I needed at the time. But it's debatable whether it could have been sustained long term.

Personally, I think if instead of chasing imaginary Level 5 autonomy madness with billions of dollars, they had done the unsexy thing and simply paid drivers better, they might not be in this mess. It's pretty insane that they take half of every fare and still can't turn a profit-- seems like a clear sign somebody screwed up &/or made the wrong bet.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#643

Post by Scoundreller »

samatman wrote: post #610
silviogutierrez wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A while ago — and I have no citations for this — I read it was easier to just pay for private rides for every accessible person than to make NYC and SF's public transportation accessible. Yes, in perpetuity. Considerably cheaper, too. Why then, go through the effort? Because they should be integrated into society like all others. I firmly believe public transportation has benefits beyond efficiency. Something about a…

Well, I don't have a wheelchair-bound piano tuner handy to ask, so I'll have to model this person based on other wheelchair users I've been acquainted with over the years. So let's ask this imaginary person: Would you rather get free rides everywhere you need to go, or have to wait in the rain/snow/heat for the bus, feeling the stress of inconveniencing others with the ramp, and having to wheel yourself the rest of t…

> Would you rather get free rides everywhere you need to go or have to wait in the rain/snow/heat for the bus

At least in Toronto, the para-transit fares are the same as the regular transit system fares.

Sometimes they send you a taxi, but other times they send around a mini-bus that operates like an UberPool and may not save you any time.

Even if a Lyft/Uber would be cheaper, if the gov is subsidizing it, they’ll pay for the lowest priority to save 3 cents.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#644

Post by davrosthedalek »

gridlockd wrote: post #263
JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The business model doesn't work if the workforce is not also on-demand. Have they tried it to confirm it 'doesn't work'? Maybe rideshare companies need to reduce their cut, and start putting more of that money into the driver's pocket. Doesn't mean it can't be a profitable business, though possibly low-margin. Have they tried paring back development costs, marketing costs, etc?

Uber and Lyft aren't profitable, never have been and may never be. The idea is that if only you build a strong enough brand and network, somehow there will be money in it. In the meantime, they'll operate at a loss. If they leave the California market, they'll simple lose money slower .

I never understood the way Uber wanted to win. There is essentially zero moat, especially because the drivers are not employees in their model. So even a small competitor can just slightly pay more to the drivers, and cost slightly less to the riders, to grow. The only way out is replacing the driver, and protecting that technology. I don't see either of that happening. If technology gets good enough, Tesla/GM/VW will have it too. And they have a cheaper access to cars.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#645

Post by idoh »

AgloeDreams wrote: post #552
tathougies wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, Uber and Lyft have reduced drunk driving rates, provided mobility to thousands of people who otherwise may not have it, and generally made life easier for millions, if not billions, of people around the world. It's almost like one can enrich themselves while helping others.

Nothing is stopping a regulated Uber/Lyft from doing this without underpaying workers. Minimum wage laws exist for a reason, after standard IRS tax deductions Uber and Lyft pay WAY under minimum wage.

“Underpaying” workers. There are many long term Lyft / Uber / Instacart contractors out there. They have communities, share tips, etc. They seem fairly well educated on how much they are getting, and decide its worth it to tghem. How can you say they are underpaid?

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#646

Post by electricviolet »

cactus2093 wrote: post #604
AgloeDreams wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Ridesharing' (Which is a hilarious term for the simple fact that the ride is not being shared, the driver is not intending to go to your favorite bar. ) isn't a 21st century situation or solution. It's not a profitable or a good force in an economy, it does not pay a reasonable wage for anyone to live on, it is not environmentally friendly unless done in large quantities of people,(which is called a bus). Ridesharin…

I agree with you on one point, "ridesharing" is a silly word. I would call it something like an "Open Car Service". The main reason I can't get on board with the rest of this line of argument is that it ultimately just comes down to paternalistic protection of the poor disenfranchised gig workers that you clearly view as being less than capable, rational adult humans. The number of gig economy workers has been growin…

MLM companies continue to be popular, despite the fact that the majority of people lose money by participating.

I agree that portions of the left can be paternalistic sometimes, but that doesn't mean Uber and Lyft aren't exploitative.

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#647

Post by tjr225 »

nodesocket wrote: post #520
meatmanek wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lyft _chose_ to hurt the drivers instead of complying with the law. This is a transparent ploy by Lyft and Uber to try and extort the state into changing the law by holding their drivers' livelihoods ransom.

Or perhaps it's basic business and economics. Lyft and Uber's business is built on the assumption that drivers provide on-demand transportation. The business model doesn't work if the workforce is not also on-demand. Instead of vilifying companies, perhaps it might be beneficial to understand the business aspects of decisions instead of jumping to conclusions based on knee jerk emotional outrage.

Did their business model work even when their workforce was on-demand?

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#648

Post by calyth2018 »

fotta wrote: post #344

Another group caught in the collateral damage is people in wheelchairs. Paratransit sucks in most places and where wheelchair accessible Uber/Lyft is available they provide a much better service. This is an especially vulnerable population because it's not like a wheelchair user can just find a friend with an accessible vehicle to take them to appointments, etc.

In BC, Canada, Handydart is part of the public transit system. Paratranspo is part of OCTranspo under the Ottawa Transit system.

Cost would be basically the same as normal bus ride.

The municipalities could, you know, fund transit?

In the Valley, I was talking to some interns. It was a 50 minute walk, 40 minute bus ride, and 15 minute bike ride. Basically the only reason why you'd take the bus is you can't afford a bike?!?

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#649

Post by twobeararms »

jawns wrote: post #571
ianferrel wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's an anti-moonlight clause, I think it's saying that you can't do what many drivers do now, which is sign on to both apps and wait for a ride to come in, then sign out of the one you're not serving. If you're an employee on the clock, you can't be on the clock for two different organizations at the same time.

This is not the only way to employ workers, though. We often think of "on the clock" employment in terms of shift work, where the worker has a scheduled, fixed-length shift with a single employer, and whether they're actively working during that time or waiting around for the employer to tell them what to do next, they're paid for the hours on the clock. But it is possible for ridesharing companies to employ workers…

In California though an issue with your "micros-shifts" is that California State Laws would apply things like call in pay for this and would also have to pay minimum hours for an employee showing up for a short shift. If an employee gets called in to do 30 minutes of work, the company has to pay the employee at least a certain amount of hours I think it's 2 or 4. So that micro shift of a 10 minute ride, Uber/Lyft would have to pay them 2-4 hours wages at a minimum. So the micro-shifts wouldn't work with current state laws. https://www.employmentlawhandbook.com/wage-and-hour-laws/sta...

Re: Rideshare operations are being suspended in California

#650

Post by bodono »

stefan_ wrote: post #608
woeirua wrote: post #29

I suspect that California is going to backpedal on this pretty quickly. Uber and Lyft are popular. Going back to taxis is going to be very unpopular. IMO, if the California Republican party was smart they would make this a wedge issue in the next election. "Elect us, and we'll make it possible to use Uber again."

California literally paid billions in unemployment to rideshare drivers during Corona, funds that Uber and Lyft didn't contribute a cent to, but you feel it's sensible Republican policy to declare "next year, we'll do it all over again"?

Lol. Do you think they'll pay more or less in unemployment benefits now that Uber and Lyft have left entirely?
Post reply on HN