3 ms·

" And because drivers could reasonably believe they will be deactivated from the platform or denied favorable ride matches if they don’t express explicit suppor

by smabie 6y ago

" And because drivers could reasonably believe they will be deactivated from the platform or denied favorable ride matches if they don’t express explicit support, the data collected about driver support and used for promotion is skewed and misleading." I'm not sure it's reasonable believe that drivers would get kicked off the platform for answering "Ok". In fact, I think if you asked almost anyone, they would say that's a totally unreasonable belief. Sounds like a lawyer is trawling for settlement fees, not that any driver actually wanted to do this.

whimsicalism 6y ago
> I'm not sure it's reasonable believe that drivers would get kicked off the platform for answering "Ok". In fact, I think if you asked almost anyone, they would say that's a totally unreasonable belief. You've clearly never been involved in any sort of union push if you think that employers are so above something like this. Even if they wouldn't do something like this, there are often behind the scenes conversations about how to create the perception that they would - because that is equally as effective. In that context, repeatedly pinging drivers asking if they support the legislation (with yes in bold/highlighted) could definitely be a calculated move to create that environment.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
aqme28 6y ago
I highly disagree. Uber's platform is heavily gamified for drivers to encourage the driver behaviors that Uber wants. It is reasonable to expect them to gamify this piece too.
- LexGray 6y ago
  Well better than reasoning with baseball bats in dark alleys I suppose.
  - munk-a 6y ago
    Oh absolutely - but just because that's more illegal doesn't make this legal... it's just pure whataboutism.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
kelnos 6y ago
Given Uber's existing and past practices, I think it's unreasonable to believe that drivers are safe telling Uber they don't support 22.
bergstromm466 6y ago
I think we should remember that Uber is the same Silicon Valley ‘startup’ that created a ’God mode’ where employees could get access to celebrities’ information and stalk them. Uber is a profit seeking entity that aims to ‘move fast and break things’ as the SV culture promotes, which includes now violating worker’s rights with Prop 22. Aside from that, this isn’t an ‘a few bad apples’ issue, this behaviour originates from deep rooted systemic issues that have to do with (Platform) Monopoly Capitalism, which has the contradictory and exploitative capitalist system as a basis. "Intellectual Property is the oil of the 21st century" — Mark Getty The Intellectual Property/Monopoly system is at the root of it the most recent wave of exploitation. ‘Intellectual Property’ monopolizes possible configurations, and robs people of the ability to learn about the basic building blocks of technologies and useful tools. How can we pretend that one Silicon Valley entity and owner can make the best use of a given discovery? I would even argue that if we would have better access to various technologies we could stop climate change. In other words: if the ‘Intellectual Property’ system didn’t block most humans that are alive from asking questions, and using their curiosity to learn and grow, we’d be closer to a more beautiful world our hearts know is possible.
Thorrez 6y ago
> One such pop-up only provides the opportunity for drivers to select “Yes on Prop. 22" or “OK,” to exit, which pressures drivers to accept Uber’s political stance, the complaint alleges. You're unable to use the app unless you click "OK". You're unable to drive. Being unable to drive is essentially being kicked off the platform.

by smabie 6y ago

whimsicalism 6y ago

> I'm not sure it's reasonable believe that drivers would get kicked off the platform for answering "Ok". In fact, I think if you asked almost anyone, they would say that's a totally unreasonable belief. You've clearly never been involved in any sort of union push if you think that employers are so above something like this. Even if they wouldn't do something like this, there are often behind the scenes conversations about how to create the perception that they would - because that is equally as effective. In that context, repeatedly pinging drivers asking if they support the legislation (with yes in bold/highlighted) could definitely be a calculated move to create that environment.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

aqme28 6y ago

I highly disagree. Uber's platform is heavily gamified for drivers to encourage the driver behaviors that Uber wants. It is reasonable to expect them to gamify this piece too.

LexGray 6y ago
Well better than reasoning with baseball bats in dark alleys I suppose.
- munk-a 6y ago
  Oh absolutely - but just because that's more illegal doesn't make this legal... it's just pure whataboutism.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

kelnos 6y ago

Given Uber's existing and past practices, I think it's unreasonable to believe that drivers are safe telling Uber they don't support 22.

bergstromm466 6y ago

I think we should remember that Uber is the same Silicon Valley ‘startup’ that created a ’God mode’ where employees could get access to celebrities’ information and stalk them. Uber is a profit seeking entity that aims to ‘move fast and break things’ as the SV culture promotes, which includes now violating worker’s rights with Prop 22. Aside from that, this isn’t an ‘a few bad apples’ issue, this behaviour originates from deep rooted systemic issues that have to do with (Platform) Monopoly Capitalism, which has the contradictory and exploitative capitalist system as a basis. "Intellectual Property is the oil of the 21st century" — Mark Getty The Intellectual Property/Monopoly system is at the root of it the most recent wave of exploitation. ‘Intellectual Property’ monopolizes possible configurations, and robs people of the ability to learn about the basic building blocks of technologies and useful tools. How can we pretend that one Silicon Valley entity and owner can make the best use of a given discovery? I would even argue that if we would have better access to various technologies we could stop climate change. In other words: if the ‘Intellectual Property’ system didn’t block most humans that are alive from asking questions, and using their curiosity to learn and grow, we’d be closer to a more beautiful world our hearts know is possible.

Thorrez 6y ago

> One such pop-up only provides the opportunity for drivers to select “Yes on Prop. 22" or “OK,” to exit, which pressures drivers to accept Uber’s political stance, the complaint alleges. You're unable to use the app unless you click "OK". You're unable to drive. Being unable to drive is essentially being kicked off the platform.