Can you believe Uber has paid $186 million to fight CA than to help drivers? That says it all. Why can’t Uber and lyft pay fair wages and give drivers a safety net instead of being a big baby saying they’ll leave? Uber and lyft don’t care about you. They would rather leave California than to lose some money and give drivers a safety net to fall back on IF NEEDED. The narrative paints lyft/Uber being a big baby out of the picture. Blaming ca over their own selfish greed. VOTE NO ON PROP 22. “Uber works because it's cheap and it's quick," he wrote. "But it's become clear to me that this is only possible because countless drivers are spending their personal time sitting in their cars, waiting to pick up a ride, completely unpaid. Workers are subsidizing the product with their free labor." https://www.sfgate.com/cnet/article/Uber-engineer-speaks-out-on-company-s-186M-15626337.php?utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&fbclid=IwAR3mv4kdPUIaGO-ruVjGWwEsD-Cr7JKxbP4KHA7yb9ErCdUX3BB9j-SXOnE
This is the battle between taxi and Uber/Lyft. Your money and your choice
"But it's become clear to me that this is only possible because countless drivers are spending their personal time sitting in their cars, waiting to pick up a ride, completely unpaid. Workers are subsidizing the product with their free labor." Will he be happier if company pays them the same money by reducing hourly rate and including wait time into it? I consider commute time as a part of my working hours, and make a decision based on the overall salary and overall time I spend to business-related activities. Wait time varies day over day, but over time it can be averaged and considered fixed, that makes it similar to commute time of office workers. Drivers may decide whether they want to trade that time to Uber given the wages they get paid.
It's a little easier when your choice is between high paying tech jobs. That said, you likely also spend less overall in an idle state, not being paid but not situated in a way where you can pursue better opportunities. I accept that there will always be people exploited in one way or another but I see how CA would want to regulate this arrangement.
High-paying jobs do not appear out of blue. Nobody regulated the market to pay above average salaries. It happened because of lack of people with a required skill set. Taxi is a low-skill job, almost anybody can do it. If the wages are artificially increased, more drivers will tend to enter the market while less people will be willing to pay for a ride. Since Uber will not able to decrease wages, they will need to decrease number of drivers. So drivers are in theory paid more, but in practice they are jobless. Outcome: 1. Taxi is less affordable. 2. Part of currently working drivers are jobless. 3. Remaining drivers are lucky to be paid more doing the same work. This raise has nothing to do with their skills or quality of service. 4. Uber gets less profit. 5. CA politicians report another win.
It's not just the drivers paying with their time. All taxpayers are subsidizing their non-employees for benefits that are generally given to employees. The only winners here are people who very frequently taxi around, the ride share companies, and a small set of true side gig workers. Everyone else is worse off.
Don’t drivers pay taxes?
Its not as simple as you make it out to be. Who was gaining when taxi companies were overchanrging and taxi drivers took a million dollar loan for medallion, just union workers and city officials. Uber has allowed a random person to start working sure it doesnt pay them 15$ per hour but its more options
“"These companies have lost in the legislative process, they’ve lost in court. Now this is a last-ditch but well-funded effort to permanently take control of all terms and conditions of employment of their workers. If it’s successful, corporations in any industry would know that with enough cash and enough spin, you can buy your way to deregulation."
this law was specifically written and that too retroactively to screw over gig companies, talk about a witchhunt. Musicians, writers were given exemptions however not uber/lyft this is political vendetta.
Legislator funded by taxi unions writes awful law (requiring 100s of exceptions) targeted at specific companies and then feigns surprise and disgust when they fight back in court and at the ballot box.
Come on... SJW much? Every big company have lobbied in one way or another. Personally I think voting Yes on Prop22 is the right way to go. Many of the people who drive for Uber / Lyft don't want to be company employees. They usually operate both services at the same time, by making them into employees you're forcing them to pick and choose which can potentially limited their income
Trying being an Uber driver for a week. You’ll laugh at the pennies you’ll make even if you switch to lyft, no one tips, and when covid struck no safety net basically a majority of the number of drivers reduced and now applying for special gig worker (TAXPAYER FUNDED) unemployment benefits. Does this sound okay to you? Bc that’s the reality that you want to ignore.
So much BS in a single paragraph. No one tips? Boo hoo! Tips are overrated social standard, you don't tip your bus driver on the shuttle to MPK You don't tip the pilot who flys the airplane you're flying in. So... Boo hoo! And sorry, in an economy where business owners of 30 years had to shut down due to covid panic reaction by Dem leadership... Yes, it sucks, for everyone.
Pretty sure if prop 22 fails, all the gig workers will be out of a job in this state. The business literally can’t operate if it’s forced to do what the law asks considering it’s not even profitable as is. So ultimately NO to prop 22 means destroying all the jobs anyway. At least YES gives the workers the option they’ve always had...to choose to work if they desire.
I get really scared every time legislation tries to incorporate some sort of "protection" for workers, renters, etc. Rent control was supposed to protect renters from ever-increasing costs. Now look at Mountain View for example. Rental companies run gimmicks like "2 months free", yet refuse to reduce their rental prices, because they prefer to lock you into that high price. They fear if they do price reduction, then they can't increase their prices as quickly.
Is the author still employed?
I was told he was already on his way out. But this is second hand information. 🤷♂️
This is what democrats do best. Adding stupid regulations only harms everyone in the long run.
Fitness
Yesterday
3216
Very thin yoga pants
AMA
Yesterday
1359
I have worked at TikTok US core tech for 3 years. AMA.
Tech Industry
Yesterday
422
Which AI company is the most prestigious in 2024?
Tech Industry
Yesterday
1919
I do tech screens at Google. AMA
Tech Industry
Yesterday
799
East Asian Men don’t talk to me bc I’m Vietnamese
(In before lyft/Uber/DoorDash employees scramble in with pitchforks)