4 ms·

"I think the author is painting this in the worst possible light." You should work for any sort of delivery or courier service. This 'worst possible light' is

"I think the author is painting this in the worst possible light." You should work for any sort of delivery or courier service. This 'worst possible light' is daily business for companies like Papa Johns and others that claim their drivers are merely 'contractors.' This is also quite illegal - you can not pay to work. It's literal extortion - you have to pay us in order to receive this amount of wage. No, the courts frown upon this.

PatientTrades 9y ago
> This is also quite illegal - you can not pay to work You do know the offer is optional right? If a driver doesn't want to pay $115 for the 33% rate increase then they don't have to. Did you read that part? Also, many drivers could benefit from this especially if they drive full time in popular areas.
- drewrv 9y ago
  There are all sorts of optional deals that are illegal.
- lightedman 9y ago
  "You do know the offer is optional right?" You do know that such an offer is illegal, right? It is literally "If you pay us, we'll pay you more later on." It's the actual beginning of a Ponzi Scheme.
  - AnthonyMouse 9y ago
    > You do know that such an offer is illegal, right? Which law does it violate? > It's the actual beginning of a Ponzi Scheme. Your argument is of the form "Romans build roads, therefore people who build roads are Romans." Ponzi schemes don't have actual customers, which inherently leaves the people at the bottom of the pyramid holding the bag. Uber pays drivers from fares. There is no pyramid.
    - lightedman 9y ago
      Uber's been running at a consistent loss. Ponzi Schemes don't have customers? There have been plenty of "multi-level marketing' businesses selling things like perfumes, knives, even candle wax, and have been ruled as Ponzi/Pyramid Schemes. It's the exact same behavior - pay us to make money.
      - AnthonyMouse 9y ago
        > Uber's been running at a consistent loss. So do a million other startups. That doesn't mean the drivers don't get their money. > Ponzi Schemes don't have customers? The majority of the scam's revenue comes from payments from workers rather than sales to customers. > It's the exact same behavior - pay us to make money. Pyramid schemes have pyramids.
        lightedman 9y ago
        "Pyramid schemes have pyramids." Almost every business has a pyramid structure - that's literally basic business management for all but the most n00b of startups. It's the behavior that defines a Pyramid Scheme and this behavior matches it almost 100% to the definition. In fact there's a nice database of plenty of other companies acting EXACTLY like this and subsequently getting their butts handed to them in court - http://www.mlmlegal.com/legal-cases/Illinois_v_Unimax.php http://www.mlmlegal.com/legal-cases/Illinois_v_Unimax.php is one of my favorite cases to read because it very clearly demonstrates what Uber is doing here is illegal - just because you aren't required to do it or buy into it doesn't mean it isn't illegal in the first place.
        AnthonyMouse 9y ago
        > Almost every business has a pyramid structure So do Egyptian Pyramids but that isn't the relevant structure. Do you really not understand how a multi-level marketing scam works? You pay to sign up, then you get paid for signing people up. The obvious problem is that this is recursive and exponential, which quickly exhausts the available supply of suckers so that the people at the bottom lose money because there is no one for them to sign up. That dynamic is not at play here. There is no recursion. You don't pay to sign up and then get paid for signing people up, you pay to sign up and then get paid for driving people around. The people who get driven around don't have to sign people up. There are lots of professions where you have to pay to work. Many trades require the tradesman to buy their own tools. A proprietor who wants to work in a booth at a fair has to pay for the booth. That doesn't make them Ponzi schemes.
- viraptor 9y ago
  The higher rate is there to incentivise more people. The stable state is at the point where enough drivers opt-in that they all get to just the break-even point.
kingnothing 9y ago
IANAL, but it's similar to how cabs, barbers, strippers, and other contractors operate.
- dawnerd 9y ago
  They're renting space though. An uber/lyft driver isn't renting a medallion or a barber seat.
  - sokoloff 9y ago
    Salespeople pay for leads. Businesses pay for online clicks. Advertisers pay for eyeballs. I don't see this as a bright-line case.
    - hydrogen18 9y ago
      Would you agree that none of those people pay their employer in that case? I certainly agree salespeople pay for leads, but it is usually an outside party supplying them.
      - sokoloff 9y ago
        To keep it close to Uber, many cab drivers rent their cabs/medallions from the cab company. In the taxi (and Uber) case, I believe most of those are contractor relationships, not employee relationships.
        hydrogen18 9y ago
        Correct, but I could go rent the cab for a flat fee and just drive it around for my own personal wishes if I wanted to. They might put some restrictions on it (don't drive outside the city, no interstate) but otherwise I'd be fine. As far as medallions go, that is just the result of government regulation. Plenty of industries wind up being populated with nothing more than a bunch of rent seekers. The government sets up an artificial scarcity where there is none to control negative externalities. The fix is easy: require the license holder to be the one that actually uses it. No leasing to others. As far as I know, no one has done that for commercial licensing. Ironically for private licenses (fishing license, etc.) this is already the case.

PatientTrades 9y ago

> This is also quite illegal - you can not pay to work You do know the offer is optional right? If a driver doesn't want to pay $115 for the 33% rate increase then they don't have to. Did you read that part? Also, many drivers could benefit from this especially if they drive full time in popular areas.

drewrv 9y ago
There are all sorts of optional deals that are illegal.
lightedman 9y ago
"You do know the offer is optional right?" You do know that such an offer is illegal, right? It is literally "If you pay us, we'll pay you more later on." It's the actual beginning of a Ponzi Scheme.
- AnthonyMouse 9y ago
  > You do know that such an offer is illegal, right? Which law does it violate? > It's the actual beginning of a Ponzi Scheme. Your argument is of the form "Romans build roads, therefore people who build roads are Romans." Ponzi schemes don't have actual customers, which inherently leaves the people at the bottom of the pyramid holding the bag. Uber pays drivers from fares. There is no pyramid.
  - lightedman 9y ago
    Uber's been running at a consistent loss. Ponzi Schemes don't have customers? There have been plenty of "multi-level marketing' businesses selling things like perfumes, knives, even candle wax, and have been ruled as Ponzi/Pyramid Schemes. It's the exact same behavior - pay us to make money.
    - AnthonyMouse 9y ago
      > Uber's been running at a consistent loss. So do a million other startups. That doesn't mean the drivers don't get their money. > Ponzi Schemes don't have customers? The majority of the scam's revenue comes from payments from workers rather than sales to customers. > It's the exact same behavior - pay us to make money. Pyramid schemes have pyramids.
      - lightedman 9y ago
        "Pyramid schemes have pyramids." Almost every business has a pyramid structure - that's literally basic business management for all but the most n00b of startups. It's the behavior that defines a Pyramid Scheme and this behavior matches it almost 100% to the definition. In fact there's a nice database of plenty of other companies acting EXACTLY like this and subsequently getting their butts handed to them in court - http://www.mlmlegal.com/legal-cases/Illinois_v_Unimax.php http://www.mlmlegal.com/legal-cases/Illinois_v_Unimax.php is one of my favorite cases to read because it very clearly demonstrates what Uber is doing here is illegal - just because you aren't required to do it or buy into it doesn't mean it isn't illegal in the first place.
        AnthonyMouse 9y ago
        > Almost every business has a pyramid structure So do Egyptian Pyramids but that isn't the relevant structure. Do you really not understand how a multi-level marketing scam works? You pay to sign up, then you get paid for signing people up. The obvious problem is that this is recursive and exponential, which quickly exhausts the available supply of suckers so that the people at the bottom lose money because there is no one for them to sign up. That dynamic is not at play here. There is no recursion. You don't pay to sign up and then get paid for signing people up, you pay to sign up and then get paid for driving people around. The people who get driven around don't have to sign people up. There are lots of professions where you have to pay to work. Many trades require the tradesman to buy their own tools. A proprietor who wants to work in a booth at a fair has to pay for the booth. That doesn't make them Ponzi schemes.
viraptor 9y ago
The higher rate is there to incentivise more people. The stable state is at the point where enough drivers opt-in that they all get to just the break-even point.

kingnothing 9y ago

IANAL, but it's similar to how cabs, barbers, strippers, and other contractors operate.

dawnerd 9y ago
They're renting space though. An uber/lyft driver isn't renting a medallion or a barber seat.
- sokoloff 9y ago
  Salespeople pay for leads. Businesses pay for online clicks. Advertisers pay for eyeballs. I don't see this as a bright-line case.
  - hydrogen18 9y ago
    Would you agree that none of those people pay their employer in that case? I certainly agree salespeople pay for leads, but it is usually an outside party supplying them.
    - sokoloff 9y ago
      To keep it close to Uber, many cab drivers rent their cabs/medallions from the cab company. In the taxi (and Uber) case, I believe most of those are contractor relationships, not employee relationships.
      - hydrogen18 9y ago
        Correct, but I could go rent the cab for a flat fee and just drive it around for my own personal wishes if I wanted to. They might put some restrictions on it (don't drive outside the city, no interstate) but otherwise I'd be fine. As far as medallions go, that is just the result of government regulation. Plenty of industries wind up being populated with nothing more than a bunch of rent seekers. The government sets up an artificial scarcity where there is none to control negative externalities. The fix is easy: require the license holder to be the one that actually uses it. No leasing to others. As far as I know, no one has done that for commercial licensing. Ironically for private licenses (fishing license, etc.) this is already the case.