6 ms·

2024 Headline Class action lawsuit in California: Uber not allowed to replace 360,000 drivers with self driving cars

yazaddaruvala 11y ago
Is it bad that all I care about is getting a self driving Uber-like?
bpodgursky 11y ago
idk why people are instinctively downvoting. If Uber drivers are really classified as employees, and the NLRB decides that whatever category this is has a right to force collective bargaining, they could very easily prevent self-driving cars from being rolled out by Uber. Many unions, famously automotive ones at GM, have blocked the closures of plants which were running at 10% capacity.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  Actually, false. The NLRB could not decide not to allow self driving cars. What could happen is local or state governments could acquire self driving cars and then provide rides to citizens (as they do with other mass transit systems), and legislate private self driving car companies out of existence (as the roads are government-owned).
  - bpodgursky 11y ago
    ? I never claimed the NLRB could prevent it. I said that Uber's drivers could unionize, and through collective bargaining, that union could prevent the rollout (from their point of view, prevent Uber from laying off any drivers). Which is absolutely true.
- zzalpha 11y ago
  Umm no. They couldn't. Uber, today, is (probably) breaking the law by hiring contractors but treating them as employees. It's actually a very easy line to cross and any contractor or business working with contractors should know those laws well, as crossing that line without reporting it is, among other things, a violation of tax law (and I guarantee you if Ubers contractors are classified as employees, they'll be hearing from the IRS). Roboticizing the workforce does not involve breaking labour and tax laws. It's simply replacing labour with automation, something that's been going on since the cotton gin was invented.

Is it bad that all I care about is getting a self driving Uber-like?

idk why people are instinctively downvoting. If Uber drivers are really classified as employees, and the NLRB decides that whatever category this is has a right to force collective bargaining, they could very easily prevent self-driving cars from being rolled out by Uber. Many unions, famously automotive ones at GM, have blocked the closures of plants which were running at 10% capacity.

toomuchtodo 11y ago
Actually, false. The NLRB could not decide not to allow self driving cars. What could happen is local or state governments could acquire self driving cars and then provide rides to citizens (as they do with other mass transit systems), and legislate private self driving car companies out of existence (as the roads are government-owned).
- bpodgursky 11y ago
  ? I never claimed the NLRB could prevent it. I said that Uber's drivers could unionize, and through collective bargaining, that union could prevent the rollout (from their point of view, prevent Uber from laying off any drivers). Which is absolutely true.
zzalpha 11y ago
Umm no. They couldn't. Uber, today, is (probably) breaking the law by hiring contractors but treating them as employees. It's actually a very easy line to cross and any contractor or business working with contractors should know those laws well, as crossing that line without reporting it is, among other things, a violation of tax law (and I guarantee you if Ubers contractors are classified as employees, they'll be hearing from the IRS). Roboticizing the workforce does not involve breaking labour and tax laws. It's simply replacing labour with automation, something that's been going on since the cotton gin was invented.