7 ms·

I think there's another problem with this. I recently was rear-ended while I was stopped at an intersection, and the second question my insurance company asked

I think there's another problem with this. I recently was rear-ended while I was stopped at an intersection, and the second question my insurance company asked me is if the car was being used for commercial (ride-sharing) services then or at any time. I wasn't, but I assume this kind of delivery would be commercial use, and the cost to add this to your insurance would be way too expensive to make it worth it for the employees.

Glyptodon 9y ago
I assume Walmart's going to have to carry car insurance for deliveries. It doesn't seem like there's any reasonable way they'd be able to "contractor loophole" it.
- rectang 9y ago
  Per the TechCrunch article, workers need to submit proof-of-insurance to participate. The wear-and-tear is going on employee vehicles rather than company vehicles, the additional distance they travel will increase their personal insurance rates, and as with rideshare they will need to pay additional riders on their policies. (If they don't have the riders their policies will be canceled as soon as they make a claim!) These additional costs make the deal worse for employees and better for Walmart in ways which are hard for the workers to understand. But I guarantee you that Walmart has studied it to death and knows exactly what advantage it brings them!
  - SilasX 9y ago
    >Per the TechCrunch article, workers need to submit proof-of-insurance to participate. I assume that's because of "we only want people on this who are insurable drivers in good standing to begin with" and not because of "we expect your personal policy to cover this". >These additional costs make the deal worse for employees and better for Walmart in ways which are hard for the workers to understand. But I guarantee you that Walmart has studied it to death and knows exactly what advantage it brings them! Walmart isn't Uber. I suspect they're much more cautious about making sure the relevant risks have the appropriate insurance. I also suspect they'll pay for mileage, but will probably try to get away with some "estimated increase in commute" rather than paying for the full distance to delivery.
    - rectang 9y ago
      > I assume that's because of "we only want people on this who are insurable drivers in good standing to begin with" and not because of "we expect your personal policy to cover this". The costs I enumerated accrue to the employee even if Walmart has insurance covering drivers while they are "online" and actively making deliveries. If that even got by you, what chance does the average worker have?
      - SilasX 9y ago
        I get your general point (about non-obvious risks), but I addressed it with the point about compensated mileage, which is how these costs are paid for elsewhere. Edit: and it's not obvious at all that Walmart's policy won't cover any insurance missed by the personal policy, as is the case with Uber -- hence the comment!
  - gozur88 9y ago
    >These additional costs make the deal worse for employees and better for Walmart in ways which are hard for the workers to understand. That's pretty patronizing. I wouldn't assume people are stupid just because they work for Walmart. This could be a great deal for people who need extra money. If I'm driving down a street anyway, it's not much of an imposition to drop off a package and not much wear and tear on the car.
    - jbooth 9y ago
      It's not patronizing, I don't think I'm stupid and I had no idea of the insurance implications.
    - GCA10 9y ago
      Reinforcement from an unlikely quarter! The Big Ugly for anyone working in retail the past 20 years is that stores have done almost nothing to improve workers' productivity. Price scanners were a 1990s innovation and there hasn't been much to follow. So it's very hard for workers to make an economic case that they should be getting paid more. (There's a human-decency case, but that doesn't always prevail.) In fact, average retail wages were 62% of the national average pay in 2000, and they're 55% now. More numbers are here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeanders/2017/05/23/the-looming-retail-bailout/#4c99383a4ec7 https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeanders/2017/05/23/the-loo.... What was a bad job then has become a worse job now. Wal-Mart's new initiative isn't entirely beautiful, but it represents the first effort in a long time to say: "Hey, we discovered something about you that's more valuable than we realized. Your commute home is a potential asset to us, and to date we've paid you zero for it. We've now got a mechanism to pay you something for it, as long as you're willing to do Task X for Payment Y." It's a lot easier for wages to go up -- in any field -- when workers create more value. We can argue about whether Wal-Mart has defined Task X and Payment Y properly, but at least this is a fresh idea in a field that's been devoid of them for a long time.
      - prostoalex 9y ago
        > stores have done almost nothing to improve workers' productivity They also got their lesson with Amazon and other online retailers taking productivity to the max by streamlining warehouse operations and removing physical retail with its inefficiencies and expensive leases out of equation. Currently US retail market can be broken down into three large groups - already bankrupt (Circuit City, Good Guys, Borders, Forever 21, Payless Shoe Stores), close to bankruptcy (JC Penney, Sears), or scaling down in order to avoid bankruptcy (Target, Macy's, Fresh and Easy). Improving worker productivity at this point is as useful as optimizing horse-feeding stations a year after Henry Ford has unveiled Model T - you're likely to achieve a local maxima and claim a success, but the global maxima meanwhile changed significantly.
  - Glyptodon 9y ago
    Where I work we need to submit proof of insurance to drive our own vehicles to job locations/for work purposes, but we are still covered under an employer policy when driving for said business purposes. They just don't want to deal with drivers whose vehicles aren't already personally insured (which seems sane). My understanding is that this is pretty normal, though I'm not 100% sure if it's an outgrowth of liability concerns or legal obligation. Either way, I can't imagine that Walmart wouldn't have a similar practice in place. Not that I disagree that Walmart's cutting out hypothetical fleet maintenance costs with what they're doing. I'm sure there are a variety of advantages for them however they're structuring it.
  - mahyarm 9y ago
    A lot of rideshare / delivery companies include insurance as part of their service fee while you are delivering / driving people. I would assume walmart would do something similar.
- LyndsySimon 9y ago
  Walmart's scale is such that they could easily self-insure.
- LyndsySimon 9y ago
  Walmart's scale is such that they could easily self-insure.
- piffey 9y ago
  If they follow their usual model they'll probably find some way to offload the cost onto taxpayers.
panzagl 9y ago
Most pizza delivery is done using an employee's car, so I imagine this is a well-trod path legally.
- marme 9y ago
  yes and it has been ruled that while you are delivering a pizza you car is not covered by your regular insurance unless you have a commercial use policy
- slezakattack 9y ago
  There are significantly more ride-sharing drivers on the road than pizza delivery cars.
  - obmelvin 9y ago
    Yes, but from a legal precedent standpoint pizza delivery cars are more relevant

Glyptodon 9y ago

I assume Walmart's going to have to carry car insurance for deliveries. It doesn't seem like there's any reasonable way they'd be able to "contractor loophole" it.

rectang 9y ago
Per the TechCrunch article, workers need to submit proof-of-insurance to participate. The wear-and-tear is going on employee vehicles rather than company vehicles, the additional distance they travel will increase their personal insurance rates, and as with rideshare they will need to pay additional riders on their policies. (If they don't have the riders their policies will be canceled as soon as they make a claim!) These additional costs make the deal worse for employees and better for Walmart in ways which are hard for the workers to understand. But I guarantee you that Walmart has studied it to death and knows exactly what advantage it brings them!
- SilasX 9y ago
  >Per the TechCrunch article, workers need to submit proof-of-insurance to participate. I assume that's because of "we only want people on this who are insurable drivers in good standing to begin with" and not because of "we expect your personal policy to cover this". >These additional costs make the deal worse for employees and better for Walmart in ways which are hard for the workers to understand. But I guarantee you that Walmart has studied it to death and knows exactly what advantage it brings them! Walmart isn't Uber. I suspect they're much more cautious about making sure the relevant risks have the appropriate insurance. I also suspect they'll pay for mileage, but will probably try to get away with some "estimated increase in commute" rather than paying for the full distance to delivery.
  - rectang 9y ago
    > I assume that's because of "we only want people on this who are insurable drivers in good standing to begin with" and not because of "we expect your personal policy to cover this". The costs I enumerated accrue to the employee even if Walmart has insurance covering drivers while they are "online" and actively making deliveries. If that even got by you, what chance does the average worker have?
    - SilasX 9y ago
      I get your general point (about non-obvious risks), but I addressed it with the point about compensated mileage, which is how these costs are paid for elsewhere. Edit: and it's not obvious at all that Walmart's policy won't cover any insurance missed by the personal policy, as is the case with Uber -- hence the comment!
- gozur88 9y ago
  >These additional costs make the deal worse for employees and better for Walmart in ways which are hard for the workers to understand. That's pretty patronizing. I wouldn't assume people are stupid just because they work for Walmart. This could be a great deal for people who need extra money. If I'm driving down a street anyway, it's not much of an imposition to drop off a package and not much wear and tear on the car.
  - jbooth 9y ago
    It's not patronizing, I don't think I'm stupid and I had no idea of the insurance implications.
  - GCA10 9y ago
    Reinforcement from an unlikely quarter! The Big Ugly for anyone working in retail the past 20 years is that stores have done almost nothing to improve workers' productivity. Price scanners were a 1990s innovation and there hasn't been much to follow. So it's very hard for workers to make an economic case that they should be getting paid more. (There's a human-decency case, but that doesn't always prevail.) In fact, average retail wages were 62% of the national average pay in 2000, and they're 55% now. More numbers are here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeanders/2017/05/23/the-looming-retail-bailout/#4c99383a4ec7 https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeanders/2017/05/23/the-loo.... What was a bad job then has become a worse job now. Wal-Mart's new initiative isn't entirely beautiful, but it represents the first effort in a long time to say: "Hey, we discovered something about you that's more valuable than we realized. Your commute home is a potential asset to us, and to date we've paid you zero for it. We've now got a mechanism to pay you something for it, as long as you're willing to do Task X for Payment Y." It's a lot easier for wages to go up -- in any field -- when workers create more value. We can argue about whether Wal-Mart has defined Task X and Payment Y properly, but at least this is a fresh idea in a field that's been devoid of them for a long time.
    - prostoalex 9y ago
      > stores have done almost nothing to improve workers' productivity They also got their lesson with Amazon and other online retailers taking productivity to the max by streamlining warehouse operations and removing physical retail with its inefficiencies and expensive leases out of equation. Currently US retail market can be broken down into three large groups - already bankrupt (Circuit City, Good Guys, Borders, Forever 21, Payless Shoe Stores), close to bankruptcy (JC Penney, Sears), or scaling down in order to avoid bankruptcy (Target, Macy's, Fresh and Easy). Improving worker productivity at this point is as useful as optimizing horse-feeding stations a year after Henry Ford has unveiled Model T - you're likely to achieve a local maxima and claim a success, but the global maxima meanwhile changed significantly.
- Glyptodon 9y ago
  Where I work we need to submit proof of insurance to drive our own vehicles to job locations/for work purposes, but we are still covered under an employer policy when driving for said business purposes. They just don't want to deal with drivers whose vehicles aren't already personally insured (which seems sane). My understanding is that this is pretty normal, though I'm not 100% sure if it's an outgrowth of liability concerns or legal obligation. Either way, I can't imagine that Walmart wouldn't have a similar practice in place. Not that I disagree that Walmart's cutting out hypothetical fleet maintenance costs with what they're doing. I'm sure there are a variety of advantages for them however they're structuring it.
- mahyarm 9y ago
  A lot of rideshare / delivery companies include insurance as part of their service fee while you are delivering / driving people. I would assume walmart would do something similar.
LyndsySimon 9y ago
Walmart's scale is such that they could easily self-insure.
LyndsySimon 9y ago
Walmart's scale is such that they could easily self-insure.
piffey 9y ago
If they follow their usual model they'll probably find some way to offload the cost onto taxpayers.

panzagl 9y ago

Most pizza delivery is done using an employee's car, so I imagine this is a well-trod path legally.

marme 9y ago
yes and it has been ruled that while you are delivering a pizza you car is not covered by your regular insurance unless you have a commercial use policy
slezakattack 9y ago
There are significantly more ride-sharing drivers on the road than pizza delivery cars.
- obmelvin 9y ago
  Yes, but from a legal precedent standpoint pizza delivery cars are more relevant