3 ms·

80% of Uber/Lyft drivers have other jobs. The vast majority of drivers will be worse off with a floor on earnings that makes many earning periods no longer viab

80% of Uber/Lyft drivers have other jobs. The vast majority of drivers will be worse off with a floor on earnings that makes many earning periods no longer viable. Those are people who have decided to trade their free time for money and if there were better alternatives they wouldn't be driving for Lyft/Uber. Ignoring them because they drive less hours per week doesn't give us a reason why we should ignore their economic interests. If the goal of the law is to make sure that the 20% of full time drivers are better off, they're probably better off by making regulations around that specifically rather than sacrificing 80% of the drivers who have other jobs (that clearly aren't making ends meet on their own - because they're driving extra hours for ride share companies on top of their existing jobs).

lukeschlather 6y ago
The goal is simply that all hours worked are for minimum wage. Under Seattle law, paying someone less than minimum wage is theft. Nobody is ignoring anyone's economic interests. They are simply attempting to stop wage theft.
- viscanti 6y ago
  I'm not sure I've seen a formal definition of wage theft. Certainly I can start a poorly performing business in Seattle and lose money or could make less than minimum wage. It doesn't feel like anyone is stealing money from me there. Some work produces less than minimum wage value. Minimum wage was initially created to price minorities out of the market. Cutting off earning opportunities that people would do (and they're currently doing it) but that fall below that arbitrary earning floor only restricts total earning opportunities. That so many people seem to be willing to drive for ride share companies tells us it's currently better than any other alternatives and that they're willing to accept their current payments.
  - xkjyeah 6y ago
    Doesn't matter what minimum wage was used for if we agree that it works for us today.
    - debian_lover 6y ago
      It doesnt matter what slavery was used for in the past, we use it differently today.

lukeschlather 6y ago

The goal is simply that all hours worked are for minimum wage. Under Seattle law, paying someone less than minimum wage is theft. Nobody is ignoring anyone's economic interests. They are simply attempting to stop wage theft.

viscanti 6y ago
I'm not sure I've seen a formal definition of wage theft. Certainly I can start a poorly performing business in Seattle and lose money or could make less than minimum wage. It doesn't feel like anyone is stealing money from me there. Some work produces less than minimum wage value. Minimum wage was initially created to price minorities out of the market. Cutting off earning opportunities that people would do (and they're currently doing it) but that fall below that arbitrary earning floor only restricts total earning opportunities. That so many people seem to be willing to drive for ride share companies tells us it's currently better than any other alternatives and that they're willing to accept their current payments.
- xkjyeah 6y ago
  Doesn't matter what minimum wage was used for if we agree that it works for us today.
  - debian_lover 6y ago
    It doesnt matter what slavery was used for in the past, we use it differently today.