10 ms·

I don’t want everyone who drives for Uber to be forced to be classified as an employee. The rules are too rigid for employment in this country. No matter how ma

I don’t want everyone who drives for Uber to be forced to be classified as an employee. The rules are too rigid for employment in this country. No matter how many words are written about this, I simply prefer increased flexibility of employer / employee relationships, for Uber or any company. It’s a philosophical difference of opinion.

wilg 6y ago
LA Times makes a good case that this is simply the wrong solution to that problem https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-09-23/proposition-22-uber-lyft-doordash-wrong-solution https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-09-23/proposition...
- thatswrong0 6y ago
  From the article: > Rather than accepting the bad bargain Proposition 22 presents, voters should demand a better, broader answer from Sacramento. IMO, while that's in principle a decent idea, that's not really a great alternative practically speaking. We're supposed to just hope something different happens in the legislature, and in the mean time, we'll see diminished service and many drivers will be out of work / lose the flexibility of setting their own hours?
- nwallin 6y ago
  I agree that Prop 22 is not a perfect solution. But I think Prop 22 is a better solution than AB5. If independent contractor work is insufficiently protected, then independent contractors should be given better protections. Gig workers need the flexibility to open up the Lyft, Uber, Doordash, and Instacart apps all at the same time. They need the flexibility to refuse a fare for any reason. They need the flexibility to work whatever hours they want. I don't see how to build that flexibility into the rigid structure enforced by the employer-employee relationship. Trying to 9-to-5-ify gig workers doesn't make any sense to me.
rexpop 6y ago
I do not consider "flexibility of relationship" to be at stake, since all employment is "at will," anyway. It's just a question, in my mind, of to what compensation a worker is entitled. Market dynamics demands gig companies shrink compensation as much as possible. Since gig-workers cannot negotiate their wages, they've no recourse but state intervention to balance out these market forces.
- kinkrtyavimoodh 6y ago
  Flexibility will definitely at the stake though. For example, if I want to drive only a few hours every week, I just won't be worth it for Uber to put on its payroll. "At will" is irrelevant because I won't have the job to begin with. I am left strictly worse off. No employer is going to offer me healthcare and insurance and what not for working a few hours every week. I am left strictly worse off. In the present system, I can just switch on my app for the hours I want to drive and that's the end of the story.
  - whamlastxmas 6y ago
    It sounds in this hypothetical that you want the ability to have a job that can't pay its workers enough for basic necessities. I believe these jobs shouldn't exist.
    - kinkrtyavimoodh 6y ago
      I want the ability to convert some of my hours into money by working. I don't expect 4 hours of work a week to convert into a happy life for a family of four.
  - rexpop 6y ago
    Seems like that's a choice Uber's going to make. I, as a voter, am not going to bend to their tantrum-throwing. If a business can't provide adequate compensation, it shouldn't operate. Edit: To be clear, I guarantee Uber/Lyft will not leave. If they did, a clone would eat their lunch.

wilg 6y ago

LA Times makes a good case that this is simply the wrong solution to that problem https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-09-23/proposition-22-uber-lyft-doordash-wrong-solution https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-09-23/proposition...

thatswrong0 6y ago
From the article: > Rather than accepting the bad bargain Proposition 22 presents, voters should demand a better, broader answer from Sacramento. IMO, while that's in principle a decent idea, that's not really a great alternative practically speaking. We're supposed to just hope something different happens in the legislature, and in the mean time, we'll see diminished service and many drivers will be out of work / lose the flexibility of setting their own hours?
nwallin 6y ago
I agree that Prop 22 is not a perfect solution. But I think Prop 22 is a better solution than AB5. If independent contractor work is insufficiently protected, then independent contractors should be given better protections. Gig workers need the flexibility to open up the Lyft, Uber, Doordash, and Instacart apps all at the same time. They need the flexibility to refuse a fare for any reason. They need the flexibility to work whatever hours they want. I don't see how to build that flexibility into the rigid structure enforced by the employer-employee relationship. Trying to 9-to-5-ify gig workers doesn't make any sense to me.

rexpop 6y ago

I do not consider "flexibility of relationship" to be at stake, since all employment is "at will," anyway. It's just a question, in my mind, of to what compensation a worker is entitled. Market dynamics demands gig companies shrink compensation as much as possible. Since gig-workers cannot negotiate their wages, they've no recourse but state intervention to balance out these market forces.

kinkrtyavimoodh 6y ago
Flexibility will definitely at the stake though. For example, if I want to drive only a few hours every week, I just won't be worth it for Uber to put on its payroll. "At will" is irrelevant because I won't have the job to begin with. I am left strictly worse off. No employer is going to offer me healthcare and insurance and what not for working a few hours every week. I am left strictly worse off. In the present system, I can just switch on my app for the hours I want to drive and that's the end of the story.
- whamlastxmas 6y ago
  It sounds in this hypothetical that you want the ability to have a job that can't pay its workers enough for basic necessities. I believe these jobs shouldn't exist.
  - kinkrtyavimoodh 6y ago
    I want the ability to convert some of my hours into money by working. I don't expect 4 hours of work a week to convert into a happy life for a family of four.
- rexpop 6y ago
  Seems like that's a choice Uber's going to make. I, as a voter, am not going to bend to their tantrum-throwing. If a business can't provide adequate compensation, it shouldn't operate. Edit: To be clear, I guarantee Uber/Lyft will not leave. If they did, a clone would eat their lunch.