4 ms·

That poll is an exercise in false-dichotomy. They didn't ask "What percentage of drivers would like to earn at least minimum wage after expenses?". I bet you 80

That poll is an exercise in false-dichotomy. They didn't ask "What percentage of drivers would like to earn at least minimum wage after expenses?". I bet you 80%+ of respondents would have said yes to that too. Given the choice between "Let us be ICs" and "Uber/Lyft leave CA" or "Half of drivers will lose their jobs", of course the data is going to show people want to be ICs. That choice ignores the third option, which is Uber/Lyft treat people with dignity.

bhupy 6y ago
Did you read the poll? The questions were fairly straightforward: "Thinking about your work driving or delivering with app-based rideshare and food delivery companies, do you prefer to be an independent contractor or an employee?" "Even though you are not sure, if you had to choose would you prefer to be an... Independent contractor 58 Employee 42" "Thinking about your own income, for you is rideshare driving/delivery: Your only personal source of income 19 Your biggest source of personal income, but not the only source 17 A significant source of personal income, but not the biggest 25 Just supplemental income, not a significant source of personal income 38" I recommend reading through the entire thing: https://ac32b1ba-8f5b-411f-91ab-b7ae9a046606.usrfiles.com/ugd/ac32b1_63f0f776a70a4cc5b532f4521ebab453.pdf https://ac32b1ba-8f5b-411f-91ab-b7ae9a046606.usrfiles.com/ug... To reiterate, there is no substitute for a full election, and the design of polling questions will be litigated forever. But it's still better than a single heartfelt anecdote.
- henryfjordan 6y ago
  You cannot take a poll in isolation like that. It's not like the drivers don't understand the implications involved in the questions. Uber and Lyft have spent a ton of money making it seem as though they have no choice in the matter and will have to fire half the drivers and put the other half on rigid schedules if they become employees. That context will affect the answers. The real nugget of gold in that study is Q13. 83% of drivers support a third class of worker (between employee and IC). CA's Congress failed drivers with AB5. They should have defined that third class. Now Uber/Lyft get to dictate the terms we will vote on instead and drivers lose either way.
  - bhupy 6y ago
    > You cannot take a poll in isolation like that. No more than you can take a single driver's anecdote in a NYT Op-Ed in isolation. The argument is that the aggregate poll is better than the anecdote, not that it's the platonic ideal. > The real nugget of gold in that study is Q13. 83% of drivers support a third class of worker (between employee and IC). CA's Congress failed drivers with AB5. They should have defined that third class. Now Uber/Lyft get to dictate the terms we will vote on instead and drivers lose either way. I'm not sure how that refutes anything, it's strictly additive. One question asks about the status quo, the next question asks about how they feel about a future proposal. Both provide pretty valuable data in analyzing the political popularity. And of course Uber/Lyft get to dictate the terms, until now the legislators dictated it by passing AB5 (the current status quo). From the first set of questions, it's pretty clear that drivers polled feel differently about the status quo. Now Uber/Lyft are proposing an alternative.
    - henryfjordan 6y ago
      A flawed poll is not necessarily better or worse than an anecdote. I believe the poll is polluted by the FUD Uber/Lyft have been propagating (including most recently threatening to shut down with little notice if they didn't get their way in court). Of course someone who wants to work will say they prefer the option that seems more safe/stable, and that's being an IC right now.
      - bhupy 6y ago
        > I believe the poll is polluted by the FUD Uber/Lyft have been propagating (including most recently threatening to shut down with little notice if they didn't get their way in court) Honest question: what would convince you that a poll isn't "polluted by FUD"?

bhupy 6y ago

Did you read the poll? The questions were fairly straightforward: "Thinking about your work driving or delivering with app-based rideshare and food delivery companies, do you prefer to be an independent contractor or an employee?" "Even though you are not sure, if you had to choose would you prefer to be an... Independent contractor 58 Employee 42" "Thinking about your own income, for you is rideshare driving/delivery: Your only personal source of income 19 Your biggest source of personal income, but not the only source 17 A significant source of personal income, but not the biggest 25 Just supplemental income, not a significant source of personal income 38" I recommend reading through the entire thing: https://ac32b1ba-8f5b-411f-91ab-b7ae9a046606.usrfiles.com/ugd/ac32b1_63f0f776a70a4cc5b532f4521ebab453.pdf https://ac32b1ba-8f5b-411f-91ab-b7ae9a046606.usrfiles.com/ug... To reiterate, there is no substitute for a full election, and the design of polling questions will be litigated forever. But it's still better than a single heartfelt anecdote.

henryfjordan 6y ago
You cannot take a poll in isolation like that. It's not like the drivers don't understand the implications involved in the questions. Uber and Lyft have spent a ton of money making it seem as though they have no choice in the matter and will have to fire half the drivers and put the other half on rigid schedules if they become employees. That context will affect the answers. The real nugget of gold in that study is Q13. 83% of drivers support a third class of worker (between employee and IC). CA's Congress failed drivers with AB5. They should have defined that third class. Now Uber/Lyft get to dictate the terms we will vote on instead and drivers lose either way.
- bhupy 6y ago
  > You cannot take a poll in isolation like that. No more than you can take a single driver's anecdote in a NYT Op-Ed in isolation. The argument is that the aggregate poll is better than the anecdote, not that it's the platonic ideal. > The real nugget of gold in that study is Q13. 83% of drivers support a third class of worker (between employee and IC). CA's Congress failed drivers with AB5. They should have defined that third class. Now Uber/Lyft get to dictate the terms we will vote on instead and drivers lose either way. I'm not sure how that refutes anything, it's strictly additive. One question asks about the status quo, the next question asks about how they feel about a future proposal. Both provide pretty valuable data in analyzing the political popularity. And of course Uber/Lyft get to dictate the terms, until now the legislators dictated it by passing AB5 (the current status quo). From the first set of questions, it's pretty clear that drivers polled feel differently about the status quo. Now Uber/Lyft are proposing an alternative.
  - henryfjordan 6y ago
    A flawed poll is not necessarily better or worse than an anecdote. I believe the poll is polluted by the FUD Uber/Lyft have been propagating (including most recently threatening to shut down with little notice if they didn't get their way in court). Of course someone who wants to work will say they prefer the option that seems more safe/stable, and that's being an IC right now.
    - bhupy 6y ago
      > I believe the poll is polluted by the FUD Uber/Lyft have been propagating (including most recently threatening to shut down with little notice if they didn't get their way in court) Honest question: what would convince you that a poll isn't "polluted by FUD"?