10 ms·

Vons, Pavilions to Replace Drivers with Independent Contractors

• stevehawk 6y ago
  If only there had been a way for California to protect its workers... but on a serious note- union?
  • Danieru 6y ago
    Did you read the article? It is a union shop dropping all their union workers in exchange for contractors.
  • Mountain_Skies 6y ago
    They have a union but it seems to be passively rolling over and allowing this to happen.
• gliese1337 6y ago
  And that is why you should read the text of the laws that you vote for.
  • toomuchtodo 6y ago
    California voters seem happy to keep voting themselves destructive legislation regardless of long term consequences. Vote with your feet.
    • superflit 6y ago
      But remember when you “vote with your feet” that you are a refugee not a missionary. Dont vote for the same things that made you left on your new place!
      • TulliusCicero 6y ago
        > But remember when you “vote with your feet” that you are a refugee not a missionary. You're actually neither of these things.
      • mc32 6y ago
        Oregon! But yeah, I agree. Don't try to institute the same policies in your new state which lead to your decision to eventually leave your old state.
        • Mountain_Skies 6y ago
          Problem is that many who are moving aren't giving a whole lot of thought as to why California has had such a large reduction in quality of life. They simply know QoL has declined to a level where they want to be somewhere else. They may have different theories as to why QoL tanked, some might even know that some of the policies they voted for had a hand in it while believing that they simply weren't implemented well in California but think "we'll get it right this time" in their new home state.
          • metabagel 6y ago
            Quality of life in California is grand if you don’t factor in the high cost of living, which is primarily due to land being expensive. California is a victim of its own success and of its bad zoning laws and nimbyism.
  • d2v 6y ago
    Or we should make it so companies can't write an unrepealable law and then dump hundreds of millions of dollars into a disinformation campaign to get it passed. Both are probably wishful thinking though.
    • bpodgursky 6y ago
      It's repealable the same way it was passed: by popular vote.
      • bryan_w 6y ago
        Seems like @d2v has fallen for some misinformation. They think this law is "unrepealable" which doesn't even make sense if you take half a second to think about it. Kinda says more about them than anything else I guess.
        • _hyrb 6y ago
          > Kinda says more about them than anything else I guess. Shit that's deep I'ma have to think on this one.
  • Rebelgecko 6y ago
    The game Kingdom of Loathing had (has?) a short literacy test that you had to take before using the ingame chat function. A part of me wishes that there was a similar test that you had to take before making claims about a law online. It wouldn't be practical for things like the latest omnibus COVID stimulus bill, but Prop 22 is only ~15 pages. I've seen so many people spreading FUD about Prop 22. It's obvious when someone is just regurgitating something they saw elsewhere and saying things that are contradicted by the actual text of the proposition.
• slg 6y ago
  For those who maybe clicked through to the comments before reading or didn't make it several paragraphs into the article, this is a direct result of Prop 22 which was passed on the backs of a nearly $200m campaign by Uber, Lyft, and other rideshare companies. This is one of the exact results predicted by opponents of Prop 22. Also there is basically no way for Prop 22 to be amended or repealed through the state legislature. These companies effectively bought a law and are already repeating the benefits at the expense of the workers of California. Expect other industries to follow this path in coming elections.
  • mc32 6y ago
    Wait... how come before AB 5, companies didn't do this, why wait till AB 5 was passed then repealed by Prop 22 before doing this (are they clairvoyant)? In other words, had AB 5 not passed, this would likely have happened anyway as a progression towards off-loading "non-core" competencies to third parties as has continued to happen across industries (an iconic example is janitorial services which used to be handled in-house but were off-loaded starting in earnest in the early 90s?)
    • slg 6y ago
      Companies are unwilling to upend their business based on laws that are highly controversial and the likely subject of future changes. Prop 22 provides the stability that these companies need to drop their full time employees and commit to outsourcing this work to rideshare drivers.
      • Jommi 6y ago
        How on earth can you say prop22 has provided any stability, when we are literally discussing an article bashing it, and with there being multiple ways of it being still repealed? Explain yourself.
        • slg 6y ago
          Prop 22 is much more stable than AB5 because the requirements to change it are much more difficult to reach.
• mullingitover 6y ago
  This of course has led to a lot of 'I told you so!' and finger-wagging that voters were too stupid, and shouldn't be allowed to have the initiative system because they're too easily manipulated. Prop 22 wasn't unclear. The voters knew what they were voting for, which was to keep the status quo with regard to gig economy jobs, and roll back the broad, messy legislation that the state legislature had enacted. Had Prod 22 not passed, jobs would've been lost in other areas. The small fraction of 'full-time' gig workers would've come out ahead. The much larger majority of part-time gig workers would've lost their side job. Overall, in the end Prop 22 was a wash. We can't paper over our lack of viable careers by creating low-skilled jobs that pay the same as jobs requiring a college education. There is no free lunch.
  • ndespres 6y ago
    >>"We can't paper over our lack of viable careers by creating low-skilled jobs that pay the same as jobs requiring a college education." Well, why can't we? If we are saying that these types of jobs need to exist, why can we not agree that the people who do the job deserve to be compensated with a living wage and deserve dignity and stability?
    • julienb_sea 6y ago
      No one is denying that independent contractors deserve dignity and stability. Imposing a forced employment framework violates the dignity of non-full time contractors who want a side income to supplement their normal job. This discussion also should account for the benefit to society of having safe and low cost transportation and delivery options, which raises the dignity of many people who otherwise could not afford the rates of for example taxis. Living wage is a mutable concept and is determined in large part by where you live and how many children you have. Wages for a job are based on a fair market rate within reasonable bounds, like minimum wage. Raising minimum wage too high has adverse effects on job availability.
      • ndespres 6y ago
        This is a story about a grocery store chain replacing their own employees who perform a job at the company, with "independent contractors" from a 3rd-party service. I'm not sure what case you're trying to make, whose dignity are you saying is violated? Who said anything about taxis? Why are you arguing to me against raising minimum wage, when all I said was that people deserve a living wage?
• Melting_Harps 6y ago
  > California voters seem happy to keep voting themselves destructive legislation. Vote with your feet. I did, and I left in the the early 2010's as the writing on the wall could not be ignored. But, this already happened with Kroger (King Soopers), Safeway affiliate chains and CVS in Colorado as I saw several advertisements on the stores for home delivery being done by cars and drivers with Doordash decals, these were seemingly outsourced via partnerships with Doordash, as Ubereats and Grubhub failed to obtain that Maketshare. The logistics capability at the small scale home delivery model is actually very expensive/costly in an already low margin business model, especially when contrasted to its more common large scale volume based counterpart that has decades/centuries of iteration via economies of scale refinement, and this mainly because of last mile hindrances. It's pragmatic, albeit concerning, none the less but I can understand the reasoning behind it. > These companies effectively bought a law and are already repeating the benefits at the expense of the workers of California. Expect other industries to follow this path in coming elections. Agreed. Especially as Doordash has lobbied to not classify its drivers as workers and removed a large amount of the liability and costs associated with the well compensated FT drivers whose associated employment benefits are often seen as liabilities to the an eager bean counter wanting to reduce overhead from operations to justify their own position. Big tech's version of the gig economy is actually pitting itself with people to choose between low, unstable government based benefits that can be precarious at best as they often come too little too late (if at all) or choose a more accessible route at gamble on taking a significant health risk and being in a perpetual underclass with no social mobility: Big tech and VCs are the new Wall Street and Bank predators of the 21st century, and are making full use of Naomi's outlined Disaster Capitalism model. I can only hope those of you who choose to work there have a very deep introspective moment and ask yourself what exactly it is you are bringing into the World. Because Big Tech has made it clear it has aspirations to eventually get rid of its well compensated useful idiots (software developers) model, too. Which is probably why you see Google wanting to unionize while it still can while Amazon and Tesla will openly go to great lengths to quell any and all who even remotely suggest it. Just to be clear, I don't like the notions of collective bargaining, non terminable labour, and ultimately a system that forces someone into what is essentially a legal form of racketeering (unions) with overbearing social peer pressure and ostracization as its main selling point. I was asked to help get involved in creating one its early stages due to my anarchist ideology (perhaps a failure to understand that Anarchism does not necessarily mean syndicalist which is often more in line with socialist/communist/Marxits variants of anarchism), but I couldn't do so in good conscious. I've seen its presence be in tandem with the darkest period of the Automotive Industry in the US in my lifetime, and seen how workers (directly or indirectly because of unions is not entirely clear) become complacent and quality control and quality assurance suffered significantly, as innovation lagged behind all other concerns as everything become a perpetual and existential struggle by the 'proles' against the 'Bourgeois' in respect to most other Countries... but as seen in German Auto manufacturing (which tends to have low wages for non-union, lower skill work) it can 'work' and must be said that in certain circumstances it is the only real deterrent to these kind of heavy handed overreaches in power. But it can also be horrible, as seen in the French Auto Industry. Especially as Unions then get to have far more power which eventually leads to influence in local and national political matters and elections, too: so its a double edged sword. Context: I use the phrase 'useful idiot' in a colloquial way that in no way seeks to undermine the intelligence of any individual software developer fictional or otherwise, but merely as one that illustrates the POV that management, board members and executives are likely to have when evaluating what and where to cut costs next in order to further maximize profits and increase stock price all in the name of efficiency. Sidenote: I wonder what the US' version of Battle Royale (a very acute depiction of the youth in a post bubble era Japan told via allusion in a superficially based gore story telling format) will be, because if it was the Hunger Games franchise, I was woefully dissapointed as it failed to hit the mark. It would have to be something that would do justice to most Rage Against the Machine and Run The Jewels tracks. CDPR's Cyberpunk 2077 franchise was a very attempt (No Save Point by Yankee and the Brave is on point) but sadly due to its rushed release impacted its likelihood. So was the Watchdogs franchise.
• whalesalad 6y ago
  Everyone is so against this move but it I was a grocery store I wouldn’t want this responsibility either. These stores are in the business of groceries, not delivery. They got into delivery because they had to and I’d imagine it was losing a lot of money and not to mention tough for them to accomplish and manage. Everyone else and their brother is moving to doordash white label because it makes the most sense. They focus on their core competency and allow doordash to focus on theirs. People are most upset about the health insurance aspect. The issues need to be decoupled.
  • kbar13 6y ago
    i dont think anyone is arguing that grocery stores should run their own delivery service. the problem is that these delivery drivers / gig workers should be getting benefits and fair wages for essentially working full time jobs.
    • whalesalad 6y ago
      No they shouldn’t. That will perpetuate the issue. Healthcare needs to move in the direction of being provided by the state or at least needs to be decoupled from your profession and affordable. The status quo is what needs to change. Gig economy work is going to take over. People need to insure and protect themselves. And it needs to be possible.
      • toomuchtodo 6y ago
        If the government can get universal healthcare done, it can enforce better labor policies around gig work, even if it makes it unprofitable or substantially destroys demand for it. The gig economy is only going to take over if people keep voting for it. Lots of states and a federal government left to take up the issue.
        • whalesalad 6y ago
          People are voting for it by doing it. The work is absolutely exploding. Shipt cannot hire fast enough. They are handing out thousand dollar bonuses left and right. And I am in Metro Detroit, not a big area by any means.
• kogir 6y ago
  I don’t see how this is a bad thing? Albertson’s, a national grocery chain, goes all in with a single vendor (instacart) of an ancillary service (delivery) for efficiency. It’s frustrating to see this portrayed as some local chain responding to local laws when it’s just natural streamlining after a business sale.
  • ndespres 6y ago
    It's a "bad thing" because there are benefits to being employed with a company that treats you like an employee, which you are not going to get when you're fired and told to go work for Instacart as a contractor if you want to keep getting paid. This is a bad thing for the employee who no longer has their job.
• Jommi 6y ago
  Not surprising. I can imagine there are efficiency gains to be made by using Doordash software and infrastructure, not to mention potential pickup and dropoff route optimization. Very weirded out tho on why the article has a prop22 angle. All prop22 did was amend AB5. This sort of thing happened already all the time before AB5. Now it will just continue. Can someone help me out here? Maybe because its from Knock-LA, a left publication?
  • deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
• whatever1 6y ago
  I will go one step further and say that in the developed nations, we need to abolish the concept of "contractors" at least in obvious cases where the contractors make minimum wage or even less for working fulltime jobs. From my experience in most of the cases, companies (regardless of the country) use this window to circumvent employment regulation & protections. A contract assumes that there is negotiating power from both ends. It is a joke to think that a poor Uber driver has any power to negotiate their "contract" with Uber to drive 14 hours per day for them.
• paxys 6y ago
  Lmao "independent contractors"
• Mountain_Skies 6y ago
  The UFCW sounds really weak in this article. When I worked for Pavilions twenty-five years ago, it was a closed shop and the union was protective of any attempt to change that. Allowing an entire segment of employees to be replaced with independent contractors seems to set the stage for other groups of employees, perhaps cashiers, to also be replaced with contractors. Grocery delivery isn't something new for Pavilions. They offered it at least as far back as the mid 1990s and maybe all the way back to their opening day as a premium-service grocery store.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• paxys 6y ago
  Something I don't understand – everyone online is fuming that these drivers will lose health insurance and other benefits, but wasn't the point of prop 22 that DoorDash (and others) will have to provide these benefits to their drivers regardless? Why would any full time driver lose health coverage due to this?
  • dclaw 6y ago
    They're replacing good paying union jobs with contract workers for a 3rd party company. The original jobs that are being cut are not in any way comparable to what prop 22 offers gig drivers.