4 ms·

Except these are adults of sound mind willingly entering into the agreement. I absolutely loathe these types of arguments first because its false equivalence an

by Grimm1 6y ago

Except these are adults of sound mind willingly entering into the agreement. I absolutely loathe these types of arguments first because its false equivalence and secondly, because why do you know better than the Freelance Journalists who were hurt by this? Stop nannying.

vkou 6y ago
Adults of sound mind enter into all sorts of highly regulated agreements, starting from employment, to tenancy, to gym memberships, to even things like marriages [1]. The reason for why all those agreements are highly regulated isn't because they adults entering them are not of sound mind. The reason for it is that there is often a large imbalance of power between the two parties in the contract. This kind of regulation has been the foundation of common law for nearly a millennium, and has been present in other legal systems for far longer than that. [1] (As it turns out, you can't [2] marry someone with the stipulation that they can't divorce you, or with a fly-by-night, grossly inequitable pre-nup. [2] Well, you can, but the judges will laugh your contract out of the room when you try to enforce it.
- Grimm1 6y ago
  Economic regulation of this order has not been around > 300 years in fact it's only been really been a question of what is the right balance since post industrialization. And the fact we're having this discussion at all means there are arguments to be had in either direction for worker regulation of this nature. I personally believe over regulation is harmful and we're currently seeing that harm play out to independent workers in multiple industries in California.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- twblalock 6y ago
  That's a pretty generic argument. We all know the government creates regulations. Why are you defending AB5 specifically? Why is this specific regulation good? Keep in mind that it has had a lot of negative, unintended side effects already.
free_rms 6y ago
This argument has been made against every single expansion of worker rights in American history. When the dust settles, business carries on just fine while we get to enjoy things like a 40-hour week with overtime pay if the employer needs more, safety regulations, sick leave, etc.
- Grimm1 6y ago
  Do you have an actual point?
- JSavageOne 6y ago
  > overtime pay I'm going to guess most of us here on HN aren't getting any overtime pay
  - reissbaker 6y ago
    That's because we make over $41/hour (the legal threshold for exemption from overtime pay for salaried employees, where the "hours" are determined by average working hours per week). At that rate, we're not exactly suffering.
    - JSavageOne 6y ago
      I don't think that's quite true - so long as one is salaried, one generally doesn't get paid overtime. I had a $70k/yr salaried job once with no overtime pay.

by Grimm1 6y ago

vkou 6y ago

Adults of sound mind enter into all sorts of highly regulated agreements, starting from employment, to tenancy, to gym memberships, to even things like marriages [1]. The reason for why all those agreements are highly regulated isn't because they adults entering them are not of sound mind. The reason for it is that there is often a large imbalance of power between the two parties in the contract. This kind of regulation has been the foundation of common law for nearly a millennium, and has been present in other legal systems for far longer than that. [1] (As it turns out, you can't [2] marry someone with the stipulation that they can't divorce you, or with a fly-by-night, grossly inequitable pre-nup. [2] Well, you can, but the judges will laugh your contract out of the room when you try to enforce it.

Grimm1 6y ago
Economic regulation of this order has not been around > 300 years in fact it's only been really been a question of what is the right balance since post industrialization. And the fact we're having this discussion at all means there are arguments to be had in either direction for worker regulation of this nature. I personally believe over regulation is harmful and we're currently seeing that harm play out to independent workers in multiple industries in California.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
twblalock 6y ago
That's a pretty generic argument. We all know the government creates regulations. Why are you defending AB5 specifically? Why is this specific regulation good? Keep in mind that it has had a lot of negative, unintended side effects already.

free_rms 6y ago

This argument has been made against every single expansion of worker rights in American history. When the dust settles, business carries on just fine while we get to enjoy things like a 40-hour week with overtime pay if the employer needs more, safety regulations, sick leave, etc.

Grimm1 6y ago
Do you have an actual point?
JSavageOne 6y ago
> overtime pay I'm going to guess most of us here on HN aren't getting any overtime pay
- reissbaker 6y ago
  That's because we make over $41/hour (the legal threshold for exemption from overtime pay for salaried employees, where the "hours" are determined by average working hours per week). At that rate, we're not exactly suffering.
  - JSavageOne 6y ago
    I don't think that's quite true - so long as one is salaried, one generally doesn't get paid overtime. I had a $70k/yr salaried job once with no overtime pay.