5 ms·
The idea is they’ll be an incentive to do the minimum amount of rides to remain employed. I’ve already had drivers accept my ride and then just sit waiting or
by fossuser 6y ago
The idea is they’ll be an incentive to do the minimum amount of rides to remain employed.
I’ve already had drivers accept my ride and then just sit waiting or drive around aimlessly waiting for me to cancel so I’ll be charged for it.
I suspect this will be more common if giving rides is not directly tied to making money.
- jayd16 6y agoAh you're assuming the apps will go the salaried route. My assumption is they'll do the work to classify drivers as proper contractors instead.
- fossuser 6y agoYeah, it’s hard to predict the outcome/knock-on effects without knowing more specifics so it’s definitely possible I’m wrong about that bit. I generally think it’s a bad idea though. I’d like to think I could be persuaded otherwise, but the arguments I heard in favor of AB5 or no on 22 didn’t seem that strong. The sense I got from friends voting no was it was mostly driven by anti-Uber motivated reasoning without much thought about existing incentives and unexpected negative consequences. The sense I took away from reading about AB5 was that it’s a push to get drivers marked as employees so the teamsters could unionize them and collect fees. Basically a political battle behind the scenes is the real fight and this other stuff is just confusing the issue. In that context Yes on 22 seemed like a good option.