3 ms·

I think a lot of labor situations are different (not just low vs high wage). With Uber, one of the defining characteristics is that there are (basically) only

by mdasen 8y ago

I think a lot of labor situations are different (not just low vs high wage). With Uber, one of the defining characteristics is that there are (basically) only two employers (Uber and Lyft). If there were hundreds of equivalent employers, the employer doesn't have the same control over the wage. When labor has few or one option, unions can certainly provide a counter-balance to the power that employers have. However, Uber also provides an easy way to view consumer price increases due to wage increases. I know that Uber has moved to more of a fixed-price model now, but let's pretend that Uber still had a per-mile/minute model. Uber charges $X per mile and $Y per minute and Uber takes 20% giving 80% to the driver. At that point, the absolute most that a union could increase driver wages without increasing consumer prices is 25%. If Uber was charging $1 and drivers were getting $0.80, if the union wanted a 50% raise Uber couldn't still charge $1 because drivers would be taking $1.20. I think the network effects of Uber and Lyft make it hard for labor to have power in those situations. However, given that Uber's gross margin is a percentage of receipts, it's easy to see how it would push prices higher. I'm not saying it's not a worthwhile trade-off, but it's hard to argue that Uber drivers getting paid 25% more wouldn't cause fares to increase.

sdenton4 8y ago
The argument here isn't about wages, though: it's about using collective power to ensure that workers don't get pushed into bullshit arbitration when the company does something awful. (Not that uber would ever do anything awful, of course.)
bobthepanda 8y ago
As a society, we chose to push children out of the labor market even though that made things more expensive. We pushed for weekends, time off, the 40-hour workweek and overtime, even though it made things more expensive. At the end of the day, racing to the bottom in the pursuit of lower prices is not an unmitigated good. (To be clear, I'm not saying you disagree with any of these points, these are just my $.02.)
amyjess 8y ago
I think the reason why Uber and Lyft drivers won't unionize is because there's little incentive for them do do so. Not that many drivers actually drive full-time for a living. A lot of them are just temps. They do some driving on the weekend to make some extra money, they're doing it temporarily while they're between jobs, and so on. If they get fed up with Uber and Lyft, they'd be more likely to just walk away than fight. Case in point: I rode with one guy a few months ago who was on paternity leave... he took up Lyft driving because his wife had no paid maternity leave so he drove during his three months paid paternity leave to make up for the family missing out on his wife's income for a few months. Once his wife is working again, he's done driving. And we're also, as a society, at a point where service jobs are almost fungible. If McDonald's fires you, you can get a job at Taco Bell. Even the same kind of service job doesn't matter. If you get tired of Uber jerking you around, you can find a restaurant and become a waiter. None of the skills involved in these jobs are particularly hard to train for. Every service job is going to require that you have basic customer service skills, and you can take those from job to job. Driving is a fundamental skill in most of America; if you can drive a car and understand Google Maps, you have the skills to drive for Uber or Lyft. For other service jobs, you don't need years of experience to take people's orders at a counter, scan groceries, or do tier 1 customer support. When unions first came to prominence, we had an industrial economy, not a service-based one. Chances are, you lived in a small town where there was just one factory, and the town probably only exists because of the factory. If you got fired, you were screwed. If the factory closed, everyone in town was screwed. And if you've been working with the same specialized proprietary factory equipment for years, it's going to take a long time to re-train you on another factory's equipment, so that's another disincentive to switching jobs. Hence unions. tl;dr Service workers, including Uber and Lyft drivers, don't unionize because losing your job doesn't mean that you and your family are hopelessly screwed.

by mdasen 8y ago

sdenton4 8y ago

The argument here isn't about wages, though: it's about using collective power to ensure that workers don't get pushed into bullshit arbitration when the company does something awful. (Not that uber would ever do anything awful, of course.)

bobthepanda 8y ago

As a society, we chose to push children out of the labor market even though that made things more expensive. We pushed for weekends, time off, the 40-hour workweek and overtime, even though it made things more expensive. At the end of the day, racing to the bottom in the pursuit of lower prices is not an unmitigated good. (To be clear, I'm not saying you disagree with any of these points, these are just my $.02.)

amyjess 8y ago

I think the reason why Uber and Lyft drivers won't unionize is because there's little incentive for them do do so. Not that many drivers actually drive full-time for a living. A lot of them are just temps. They do some driving on the weekend to make some extra money, they're doing it temporarily while they're between jobs, and so on. If they get fed up with Uber and Lyft, they'd be more likely to just walk away than fight. Case in point: I rode with one guy a few months ago who was on paternity leave... he took up Lyft driving because his wife had no paid maternity leave so he drove during his three months paid paternity leave to make up for the family missing out on his wife's income for a few months. Once his wife is working again, he's done driving. And we're also, as a society, at a point where service jobs are almost fungible. If McDonald's fires you, you can get a job at Taco Bell. Even the same kind of service job doesn't matter. If you get tired of Uber jerking you around, you can find a restaurant and become a waiter. None of the skills involved in these jobs are particularly hard to train for. Every service job is going to require that you have basic customer service skills, and you can take those from job to job. Driving is a fundamental skill in most of America; if you can drive a car and understand Google Maps, you have the skills to drive for Uber or Lyft. For other service jobs, you don't need years of experience to take people's orders at a counter, scan groceries, or do tier 1 customer support. When unions first came to prominence, we had an industrial economy, not a service-based one. Chances are, you lived in a small town where there was just one factory, and the town probably only exists because of the factory. If you got fired, you were screwed. If the factory closed, everyone in town was screwed. And if you've been working with the same specialized proprietary factory equipment for years, it's going to take a long time to re-train you on another factory's equipment, so that's another disincentive to switching jobs. Hence unions. tl;dr Service workers, including Uber and Lyft drivers, don't unionize because losing your job doesn't mean that you and your family are hopelessly screwed.