5 ms·
So basically you're saying that if they didn't cheat, they wouldn't be where they are? I'm not seeing anything in your post that justifies them ignoring labor
by s73v3r 11y ago
So basically you're saying that if they didn't cheat, they wouldn't be where they are?
I'm not seeing anything in your post that justifies them ignoring labor laws.
- closetnerd 11y agoI understand it differently. Labor laws aren't inherently good for either parties, employers or employees, necessarily. Perhaps the labor laws need to be reformed and/or scaled back.
- dragonwriter 11y ago> Perhaps the labor laws need to be reformed and/or scaled back. Perhaps if you want to suggest specific alterations and arguments for them, that would be productive.
- closetnerd 11y agoWell in this case, the need to classify Uber drivers as employees.
- s73v3r 11y agoI do not see how labor laws are not good for employees. Unless you're an apologist who says that unless we let employers fuck people over, they won't bless us with their benevolence and jobs.
- mgraczyk 11y agoNo, I'm saying that if they hadn't "cheated", none of the jobs that Uber drivers currently have would exist. Many of them would be employed by Taxi companies, many would be doing something else entirely, some would be unemployed. I just don't see how Uber's existence could have been possible if they strictly followed employment law, nor do I see how Uber drivers would be better off if Uber didn't exist. Therefore Uber drivers are better off because Uber did not strictly follow employment laws.
- pfisch 11y agoBy the same logic I should be able to open up sweat shops in the US and employ a bunch of migrants to work at them. Like why are there any employment laws at all? I should be able to pay below minimum wage and employ children of destitute families.