5 ms·

And I clearly laid out what is wrong with 1 & 3. 1. Uber loses billions a year already, and they should lose more? 3. Health care? You kidding me? That's $300

by kolbe 8y ago

And I clearly laid out what is wrong with 1 & 3. 1. Uber loses billions a year already, and they should lose more? 3. Health care? You kidding me? That's $300+ a month in the US, which would be a $15 billion/year expense for Uber. Demands need to be structured in reality.

maxxxxx 8y ago
Maybe Uber’s business model should be structured in reality instead of basing it on large cash inflows plus underpaid workers who get no benefits?
duiker101 8y ago
It's a negotiation. You want a 100k job? You say you want a rate of 150k and the company will negotiate. It would be foolish to not assume this and it would be even more foolish to assume that Uber will just spontaneously give more to the drivers instead of their executives.
- Kalium 8y ago
  You're absolutely right! It's definitely a negotiation. It might be worth considering that an opening bid that's too high in a negotiation sometimes just convinces the counterparty to walk away. If you ask for 150k and want 100k, there's a good chance the company might just say "Sorry, we can't afford that" - and then you have nothing. Again, you're completely right. This is unquestionably a negotiation. At the same time, it would be foolish to assume that all opening bids are equally likely to be treated as reasonable.
  - duiker101 8y ago
    That's where the shutdown part comes in play. Uber can't just say "I don't care" because with the more drivers taking part they are the ones to lose the most, in reputation and money.
    - Kalium 8y ago
      With at most 4000 drivers spread across many cities, it sounds right now like Uber will be positioned to shrug it off entirely.
      - duiker101 8y ago
        Unfortunately that is indeed very possible but unless things change at some point more people are going to join, or at least, I hope for them.
atonse 8y ago
"Yeah how insane are they, to think that they should get health benefits? Must be lunatics." - Some software person that likely works in a job with great health benefits and thinks they're somehow more entitled to them.
- wutbrodo 8y ago
  I don't know if you don't understand the point being made or you're just being intellectually dishonest, but software jobs with benefits are almost wholly not "show up when you want and work however much you want", as in the case under discussion. The claim is that requiring an entity to provide health benefits (given that we're too dysfunctional as a country to make it the govts responsibility) is justifiable when you're signing over the bulk of your time to them, in a way that perhaps isn't true when you have the relationship that Uber drivers have to Uber: working any imaginable combination and quantity of hours and doing exactly as little work as you'd like. I'm not saying I'm convinced by the argument, and I'm not saying any of the above is correct. But it is the point being made, and low-effort snarky garbage like your comment just generates more heat than light and doesn't move anyone closer to understanding the situation.
lm28469 8y ago
To the people who replied: he's not wrong though. The only reason Uber still exists is because it is modern day slavery. The bet of uber was to get rid of drivers asap and get a fleet of autonomous vehicles [0], they were _way_ too optimistic, now they're just slowly dying and trying to diversify (bikes, food, &c.). You can't sell a $10 product for $7 indefinitely. Uber is the symptom of a broken system, pumping seemingly unlimited investors money based on false promises. The only winners in this game already left the boat (Kalanick for example). This type of slave like jobs were predicted in the 60s already: > If the social labor (time) engaged by the society is not to diminish because of automation (or any other less extreme form of increasing the productivity of labor), then new jobs have to be created. Services, the tertiary sector, swell the ranks of the army of distribution and are a eulogy to the current commodities; the additional forces which are mobilized just happen to be suitable for the organization of redundant labor required by the artificial needs for such commodities. - Guy Debord [0] https://www.computerworld.com/article/2945817/uber-will-buy-all-the-self-driving-cars-that-tesla-can-build-in-2020.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/2945817/uber-will-buy-...
deadmetheny 8y ago
> 1. Uber loses billions a year already, and they should lose more? It's as if they're an unsustainable business being propped up by VC money that would implode on itself in an instant if that were to go away or something. > 3. Health care? You kidding me? That's $300+ a month in the US, which would be a $15 billion/year expense for Uber. oh no the horror won't somebody think of the unicorns
- conanbatt 8y ago
  > 3. Health care? You kidding me? That's $300+ a month in the US, which would be a $15 billion/year expense for Uber. > oh no the horror won't somebody think of the unicorns Spoken like someone unaware of how employment works for people that make less than 40k a year.
markovbot 8y ago
Ubers business model is structured in mistreating their workers. Their workers are demanding better treatment. Uber has no right to continuing operating as they have been. This is not about making the math work for Uber, it's about treating humans with the slightest bit of humanity. If the math doesn't work, they shouldn't be in business.
- buzzerbetrayed 8y ago
  This line of thinking makes no sense. If I offer you $1/day to take care of my yard then don’t take the job. That doesn’t mean I exploited you for offering. Making it cost significantly more for Uber to get drivers will just make the price of an Uber go up, the demand go down, and people losing their job as an Uber driver.
  - bryanlarsen 8y ago
    If I need to feed my family and your $1/day offer is the best I get, then I'll have to take that $1/day offer. So yes, it's exploitative. My refusal of your $1/day offer may also disqualify me from welfare or other benefits. So just by making the offer you may put somebody into a lose-lose situation.
atonse 8y ago
I very well understand the point. But it takes a certain level of willful ignorance on the part of the parent post to somehow think that it's crazy for one class of people to want health insurance because it somehow hurts another class of people (business owners). Because they didn't say "uber drivers that work 8 hours a month?" they said "Uber drivers". I agree with you that the only pragmatic solution is to follow the rest of the industrialized world and move to a single payer system, then we just stop having this debate and even talking about who is more deserving of worry-free healthcare. (Not talking about you, just the parent post).

by kolbe 8y ago

maxxxxx 8y ago

Maybe Uber’s business model should be structured in reality instead of basing it on large cash inflows plus underpaid workers who get no benefits?

duiker101 8y ago

It's a negotiation. You want a 100k job? You say you want a rate of 150k and the company will negotiate. It would be foolish to not assume this and it would be even more foolish to assume that Uber will just spontaneously give more to the drivers instead of their executives.

Kalium 8y ago
You're absolutely right! It's definitely a negotiation. It might be worth considering that an opening bid that's too high in a negotiation sometimes just convinces the counterparty to walk away. If you ask for 150k and want 100k, there's a good chance the company might just say "Sorry, we can't afford that" - and then you have nothing. Again, you're completely right. This is unquestionably a negotiation. At the same time, it would be foolish to assume that all opening bids are equally likely to be treated as reasonable.
- duiker101 8y ago
  That's where the shutdown part comes in play. Uber can't just say "I don't care" because with the more drivers taking part they are the ones to lose the most, in reputation and money.
  - Kalium 8y ago
    With at most 4000 drivers spread across many cities, it sounds right now like Uber will be positioned to shrug it off entirely.
    - duiker101 8y ago
      Unfortunately that is indeed very possible but unless things change at some point more people are going to join, or at least, I hope for them.

atonse 8y ago

"Yeah how insane are they, to think that they should get health benefits? Must be lunatics." - Some software person that likely works in a job with great health benefits and thinks they're somehow more entitled to them.

wutbrodo 8y ago
I don't know if you don't understand the point being made or you're just being intellectually dishonest, but software jobs with benefits are almost wholly not "show up when you want and work however much you want", as in the case under discussion. The claim is that requiring an entity to provide health benefits (given that we're too dysfunctional as a country to make it the govts responsibility) is justifiable when you're signing over the bulk of your time to them, in a way that perhaps isn't true when you have the relationship that Uber drivers have to Uber: working any imaginable combination and quantity of hours and doing exactly as little work as you'd like. I'm not saying I'm convinced by the argument, and I'm not saying any of the above is correct. But it is the point being made, and low-effort snarky garbage like your comment just generates more heat than light and doesn't move anyone closer to understanding the situation.

lm28469 8y ago

To the people who replied: he's not wrong though. The only reason Uber still exists is because it is modern day slavery. The bet of uber was to get rid of drivers asap and get a fleet of autonomous vehicles [0], they were _way_ too optimistic, now they're just slowly dying and trying to diversify (bikes, food, &c.). You can't sell a $10 product for $7 indefinitely. Uber is the symptom of a broken system, pumping seemingly unlimited investors money based on false promises. The only winners in this game already left the boat (Kalanick for example). This type of slave like jobs were predicted in the 60s already: > If the social labor (time) engaged by the society is not to diminish because of automation (or any other less extreme form of increasing the productivity of labor), then new jobs have to be created. Services, the tertiary sector, swell the ranks of the army of distribution and are a eulogy to the current commodities; the additional forces which are mobilized just happen to be suitable for the organization of redundant labor required by the artificial needs for such commodities. - Guy Debord [0] https://www.computerworld.com/article/2945817/uber-will-buy-all-the-self-driving-cars-that-tesla-can-build-in-2020.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/2945817/uber-will-buy-...

deadmetheny 8y ago

> 1. Uber loses billions a year already, and they should lose more? It's as if they're an unsustainable business being propped up by VC money that would implode on itself in an instant if that were to go away or something. > 3. Health care? You kidding me? That's $300+ a month in the US, which would be a $15 billion/year expense for Uber. oh no the horror won't somebody think of the unicorns

conanbatt 8y ago
> 3. Health care? You kidding me? That's $300+ a month in the US, which would be a $15 billion/year expense for Uber. > oh no the horror won't somebody think of the unicorns Spoken like someone unaware of how employment works for people that make less than 40k a year.

markovbot 8y ago

Ubers business model is structured in mistreating their workers. Their workers are demanding better treatment. Uber has no right to continuing operating as they have been. This is not about making the math work for Uber, it's about treating humans with the slightest bit of humanity. If the math doesn't work, they shouldn't be in business.

buzzerbetrayed 8y ago
This line of thinking makes no sense. If I offer you $1/day to take care of my yard then don’t take the job. That doesn’t mean I exploited you for offering. Making it cost significantly more for Uber to get drivers will just make the price of an Uber go up, the demand go down, and people losing their job as an Uber driver.
- bryanlarsen 8y ago
  If I need to feed my family and your $1/day offer is the best I get, then I'll have to take that $1/day offer. So yes, it's exploitative. My refusal of your $1/day offer may also disqualify me from welfare or other benefits. So just by making the offer you may put somebody into a lose-lose situation.

atonse 8y ago

I very well understand the point. But it takes a certain level of willful ignorance on the part of the parent post to somehow think that it's crazy for one class of people to want health insurance because it somehow hurts another class of people (business owners). Because they didn't say "uber drivers that work 8 hours a month?" they said "Uber drivers". I agree with you that the only pragmatic solution is to follow the rest of the industrialized world and move to a single payer system, then we just stop having this debate and even talking about who is more deserving of worry-free healthcare. (Not talking about you, just the parent post).