3 ms·

Maybe I'm too left-leaning, but doesn't it feel wrong to deny people the possibility of seeing a doctor, calling in sick if they don't feel good or earning enou

by x3ro 6y ago

Maybe I'm too left-leaning, but doesn't it feel wrong to deny people the possibility of seeing a doctor, calling in sick if they don't feel good or earning enough money to afford more than Ramen at the end of the month, no matter their line of work? It's great that the HN crowd is primarily privileged from an income point of view, but I find it hard to fathom that people lose sight of the fact that not everyone is this fortunate, and those less fortunate also deserve to live a life without fear of getting sick.

greggyb 6y ago
> Maybe I'm too left-leaning, but doesn't it feel wrong to deny people the possibility of seeing a doctor, calling in sick if they don't feel good or earning enough money to afford more than Ramen at the end of the month, no matter their line of work? It does feel wrong to deny people the possibility of seeing a doctor. It does feel wrong that some people can't afford basic necessities. Why do you insist on drawing a line around people who have found employment and saying that they deserve these things, but if they don't have employment they deserve a second, lesser system? If people don't have healthcare and you think they should - provide healthcare, don't try to make someone else do so. If people don't have money and you think they should - give them money, don't require others to pay more to those people who can get a job. Maybe tying benefits to employment and subsistence levels of cash to employment are a bad way to solve the problems you claim to care about.
- x3ro 6y ago
  I fully agree with you. In a society where people would not have any existential fears, employed or not, Uber would not get away with what they're doing anyway. But I think the argument is orthogonal to what I meant. In context of the system that Uber drivers are living in right now, Prop22 is a step in the wrong direction: it gives affirmation to companies that actively deprives gig workers of the rights we talk about above. Of course it'd be better to solve this problem at a higher level, but I'm happy to argue against proponents of steps in the wrong direction (e.g. Prop22).
  - dannyw 6y ago
    What do you make of the fact that most Uber drivers advocate for prop 22? https://www.reddit.com/r/uberdrivers/comments/i9awkm/my_fellow_drivers_vote_no_on_prop_22/ https://www.reddit.com/r/uberdrivers/comments/i9awkm/my_fell... Sure, reddit comments are anecdotes, but have you asked Uber drivers what they want? Do you think it's fair to deprive someone the right to work? (I drive for Uber part time and I am happy being an IC. I do not want to be an employee. I drive for Uber because of the flexibility).
    - baq 6y ago
      I’m a salaried worker and I don’t want the Uber model to spread further. I like that I can’t be forced to work more than 8h a day, 40h a week. The gig economy sidesteps these laws in a way that could impact what I like in the future should my employer decide it’s fair and make business sense, and if enough people also decide that, they all lose collective bargaining power and instead of people they become resources.
    - ZoomerCretin 6y ago
      > What do you make of the fact that most Uber drivers advocate for prop 22? That Uber was using their apps to shovel huge volumes of pro-Prop 22 propaganda at their drivers. https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/15/21517316/uber-spamming-user-political-push-notifications-prop-22-vote https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/15/21517316/uber-spamming-u...
  - lhorie 6y ago
    My understanding was that both yes and no on prop 22 are net positives compared to the status quo ("yes" providing 120% minimum wage guarantees and some benefits, vs no obligations currently), and I recall reading Uber saying these will indeed incur extra costs that will get passed onto consumers. I feel that prop 22 is often incorrectly characterized as either an attempt at maintaining the status quo or a step backwards, but it's neither. It's easy to say "well I support everyone making more money", but that is an idealistic position that ignores the basic fact that there's a limited amount of money that needs to be distributed among a lot of people. If you were in charge, you might be of the opinion that only some stakeholders should get that money and others get nothing in order to allow at least some people to meet some arbitrary minimum threshold (the "no" in prop 22), or you could choose to distribute evenly across all existing stakeholder even if it doesn't meet the threshold for anyone (the "yes"). I don't think there's necessarily a right/wrong stance here; they're just different philosophies, and it makes sense to then vote on which people prefer. The people voted, and I imagine they did so with understanding of the propositions. I think it's dangerous to insinuate that people can easily be manipulated to vote one way or another. If that were indeed the case, then what exactly is the merit of a democracy over a dictatorship? I'd rather believe that people do indeed take their civic responsibility seriously and vote in an informed manner.
leesalminen 6y ago
~75% of Uber drivers in CA drive < 25 hours per week. If I could drive 25 hours per week and get a better-than-ramen wage plus full health benefits then sigh me up. I’m sure there are millions like me.
- x3ro 6y ago
  This only seems like part of the story, though. What do we know about other work these people do? Is Uber maybe a supplemental job because the primary one doesn't pay the bills? Also please provide sources if you make such claims :)

by x3ro 6y ago

greggyb 6y ago

> Maybe I'm too left-leaning, but doesn't it feel wrong to deny people the possibility of seeing a doctor, calling in sick if they don't feel good or earning enough money to afford more than Ramen at the end of the month, no matter their line of work? It does feel wrong to deny people the possibility of seeing a doctor. It does feel wrong that some people can't afford basic necessities. Why do you insist on drawing a line around people who have found employment and saying that they deserve these things, but if they don't have employment they deserve a second, lesser system? If people don't have healthcare and you think they should - provide healthcare, don't try to make someone else do so. If people don't have money and you think they should - give them money, don't require others to pay more to those people who can get a job. Maybe tying benefits to employment and subsistence levels of cash to employment are a bad way to solve the problems you claim to care about.

x3ro 6y ago
I fully agree with you. In a society where people would not have any existential fears, employed or not, Uber would not get away with what they're doing anyway. But I think the argument is orthogonal to what I meant. In context of the system that Uber drivers are living in right now, Prop22 is a step in the wrong direction: it gives affirmation to companies that actively deprives gig workers of the rights we talk about above. Of course it'd be better to solve this problem at a higher level, but I'm happy to argue against proponents of steps in the wrong direction (e.g. Prop22).
- dannyw 6y ago
  What do you make of the fact that most Uber drivers advocate for prop 22? https://www.reddit.com/r/uberdrivers/comments/i9awkm/my_fellow_drivers_vote_no_on_prop_22/ https://www.reddit.com/r/uberdrivers/comments/i9awkm/my_fell... Sure, reddit comments are anecdotes, but have you asked Uber drivers what they want? Do you think it's fair to deprive someone the right to work? (I drive for Uber part time and I am happy being an IC. I do not want to be an employee. I drive for Uber because of the flexibility).
  - baq 6y ago
    I’m a salaried worker and I don’t want the Uber model to spread further. I like that I can’t be forced to work more than 8h a day, 40h a week. The gig economy sidesteps these laws in a way that could impact what I like in the future should my employer decide it’s fair and make business sense, and if enough people also decide that, they all lose collective bargaining power and instead of people they become resources.
  - ZoomerCretin 6y ago
    > What do you make of the fact that most Uber drivers advocate for prop 22? That Uber was using their apps to shovel huge volumes of pro-Prop 22 propaganda at their drivers. https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/15/21517316/uber-spamming-user-political-push-notifications-prop-22-vote https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/15/21517316/uber-spamming-u...
- lhorie 6y ago
  My understanding was that both yes and no on prop 22 are net positives compared to the status quo ("yes" providing 120% minimum wage guarantees and some benefits, vs no obligations currently), and I recall reading Uber saying these will indeed incur extra costs that will get passed onto consumers. I feel that prop 22 is often incorrectly characterized as either an attempt at maintaining the status quo or a step backwards, but it's neither. It's easy to say "well I support everyone making more money", but that is an idealistic position that ignores the basic fact that there's a limited amount of money that needs to be distributed among a lot of people. If you were in charge, you might be of the opinion that only some stakeholders should get that money and others get nothing in order to allow at least some people to meet some arbitrary minimum threshold (the "no" in prop 22), or you could choose to distribute evenly across all existing stakeholder even if it doesn't meet the threshold for anyone (the "yes"). I don't think there's necessarily a right/wrong stance here; they're just different philosophies, and it makes sense to then vote on which people prefer. The people voted, and I imagine they did so with understanding of the propositions. I think it's dangerous to insinuate that people can easily be manipulated to vote one way or another. If that were indeed the case, then what exactly is the merit of a democracy over a dictatorship? I'd rather believe that people do indeed take their civic responsibility seriously and vote in an informed manner.

leesalminen 6y ago

~75% of Uber drivers in CA drive < 25 hours per week. If I could drive 25 hours per week and get a better-than-ramen wage plus full health benefits then sigh me up. I’m sure there are millions like me.

x3ro 6y ago
This only seems like part of the story, though. What do we know about other work these people do? Is Uber maybe a supplemental job because the primary one doesn't pay the bills? Also please provide sources if you make such claims :)