2 ms·

The rideshare industry likely couldn't have supported this 5 years ago and it was clear that something like AB5 was going to happen for years. Prop 22 provides

by slg 6y ago

The rideshare industry likely couldn't have supported this 5 years ago and it was clear that something like AB5 was going to happen for years. Prop 22 provides unprecedented clarity on how ridesharing will be legislated in California for the foreseeable future.

mc32 6y ago
Let's suppose you're right, Uber and Lyft and DD all knew this and despite this knowledge thought, you know what, yeah it's uncertain but let's set CA as our HQ and concentrate our efforts there anyway... Vons and Pavilions are not the same as Uber, Lyft, etc. I think they did it because they thought it was time to change their delivery logistics and were not waiting for concretization of the law around this. Put another way, Vons' business model isn't centered around this law. It's incidental.
- slg 6y ago
  You are establishing weird timelines on these decisions. Uber, Lyft, etc set themselves up in California because they consider themselves tech companies. The state of California likely couldn't have cared less about the special class of workers they employed until the group reached a critical mass which obviously didn't happen before these companies were founded. I don't know specifically when they reached critical mass, but it was likely within the last 5 years. At that point it became clear that the state needed to do something. AB5 was one of those attempts. Companies like Albertsons who could benefit from these businesses weren't willing to commit to embracing them until there was stability in the industry. For all the faults of Prop 22, it provides stability through its incredibly high requirements for repeal or amendments. Companies like Albertsons now have the stability they desired and will embrace these rideshare companies to save a few bucks by shifting a greater financial burden onto individual drivers.
  - mc32 6y ago
    Albertson's doesn't need it. They would use a third party AB 5 or not. It may cost more if AB 5 were in effect, but it's still less than having your logistics in-house. Having someone else do your deliveries and such has been a thing for a long time. Companies have gone back and forth depending on who's doing the bean counting and what they think is crucial to business. Sometimes they would split it. Some in-house some hired out.
    - slg 6y ago
      We are just going in circles now with the conversation and clearly I'm not going to change your mind.

by slg 6y ago

mc32 6y ago

Let's suppose you're right, Uber and Lyft and DD all knew this and despite this knowledge thought, you know what, yeah it's uncertain but let's set CA as our HQ and concentrate our efforts there anyway... Vons and Pavilions are not the same as Uber, Lyft, etc. I think they did it because they thought it was time to change their delivery logistics and were not waiting for concretization of the law around this. Put another way, Vons' business model isn't centered around this law. It's incidental.

slg 6y ago
You are establishing weird timelines on these decisions. Uber, Lyft, etc set themselves up in California because they consider themselves tech companies. The state of California likely couldn't have cared less about the special class of workers they employed until the group reached a critical mass which obviously didn't happen before these companies were founded. I don't know specifically when they reached critical mass, but it was likely within the last 5 years. At that point it became clear that the state needed to do something. AB5 was one of those attempts. Companies like Albertsons who could benefit from these businesses weren't willing to commit to embracing them until there was stability in the industry. For all the faults of Prop 22, it provides stability through its incredibly high requirements for repeal or amendments. Companies like Albertsons now have the stability they desired and will embrace these rideshare companies to save a few bucks by shifting a greater financial burden onto individual drivers.
- mc32 6y ago
  Albertson's doesn't need it. They would use a third party AB 5 or not. It may cost more if AB 5 were in effect, but it's still less than having your logistics in-house. Having someone else do your deliveries and such has been a thing for a long time. Companies have gone back and forth depending on who's doing the bean counting and what they think is crucial to business. Sometimes they would split it. Some in-house some hired out.
  - slg 6y ago
    We are just going in circles now with the conversation and clearly I'm not going to change your mind.