5 ms·

A lot of people disliked AB5 - I was happy Prop22 passed. The companies were obviously operating in their own interests, but I also think the legislature was wr

A lot of people disliked AB5 - I was happy Prop22 passed. The companies were obviously operating in their own interests, but I also think the legislature was wrong (and just politically targeting ride share companies).

parineum 5y ago
I don't ride share often but in the more than handful of times I have since this issue has been in the news I've yet to find a single driver who supports it. The support for AB5 doesn't seem come from the people it "protects".
- tsimionescu 5y ago
  The whole business model of companies like Uber and Lyft relies on drivers not realizing how little they are getting out of the deal. The ones who do realize - often after some accident that leaves them injured or their cars too damaged to repair - will simply stop working and regret the past. Gig work usually looks very good when you're starting out and everything is going smoothly. With Uber and Lyft also investing massively in propaganda to ensure their drivers believe AB5 would cause numerous catastophes for their work, it's really not that surprising that most who are actually driving would be against it.
  - parineum 5y ago
    If this is true, I think the responsibility of the people who support AB5 is to first convince the Uber/Lyft drivers themselves. I think it's incredibly arrogant to force those people to do something against their will for their own good.
- ec109685 5y ago
  The companies made it seem like drivers couldn’t work flexible hours if this passed. Nurses and other shift workers are employees, yet have flexible hours. That was completely obfuscated in this messaging.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    This is a bad definition of flexible: "flexible hours means you have different start and end times for your workday than the standard 9 a.m. to 5 p.m." This is a good definition of flexible: "A flexible work schedule is an alternative to the traditional 9 to 5, 40-hour work week. It allows employees to vary their arrival and/or departure times." Also "gives a worker greater latitude in choosing his or her particular hours of work, or freedom to change work schedules from one week to the next depending on the employee's personal needs" The first one applies to nurses and shift workers. But the goal and the appeal of Uber and Lyft is the second one.
    - gbear605 5y ago
      I don’t know about you, but my job as a employee gives me the second one.
      - Dylan16807 5y ago
        Are you paid hourly? We could try salaried uber drivers but I have no idea how that would work.
        ec109685 5y ago
        Paying Uber drivers a salary isn’t necessary. They can be a part-time employees and chose when they work without having a fixed salary. E.g. non-exempt employees as specified here: https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-qa/pages/whatismeantbythetermsexempt,non-exempt,salariedandhourly.aspx https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-... > Nonexempt: An individual who is not exempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA and is therefore entitled to overtime pay for all hours worked beyond 40 in a workweek (as well as any state overtime provisions). Nonexempt employees may be paid on a salary, hourly or other basis.
lhorie 5y ago
Yeah, a lot of people were pointing out how ridiculously large the list of exceptions in AB5 were. I saw a bunch of stories about people in random fields getting screwed in the crossfire. It could just have been marketing-speak, but the arguments I heard from companies around voting time were that contractor status was for the benefit of drivers. IIRC they were arguing that if prop 22 did not pass, they were just going to pass the costs to the riders, and decrease service availability to match a smaller, less flexible driver workforce. In other words, many drivers would just wake up one day and find themselves booted from the platforms. And riders would find themselves unable to summon a ride depending on driver volume in the area, or time of day (basically old school cab availability) Historically, Uber has even pulled out of markets altogether (and in Austin's case, only to come back w/ their shit together later and mop the floor with the competition...) The thing that irks me about this is that I thought ballot initiatives like prop 22 were supposed to give constituents a direct voice, especially considering CA is basically a one-party state. To my understanding, legislation like AB5 gets championed by a politician without much direct input from voters.
- antiterra 5y ago
  > in Austin's case, only to come back w/ their shit together later and mop the floor with the competition… Uber and Lyft played hardball with increased regulations, saying they’d leave if the regulations were voted in place. Their ultimatums and campaigns (easily a dozen mailers to many people) irked residents who wouldn’t have voted against them otherwise. They returned because the state overrode the local requirements. Nothing to do with having their shit together.
  - lhorie 5y ago
    Sorry, I should've worded that better; "with their shit still together" is more in line w/ I what I wanted to say. I meant that rather than struggling to gain marketshare (like happened in China, Russia, etc), they ramped back up from 0% to virtually all of their lost marketshare, eventually causing local competitors to wind down.
- GaryTang 5y ago
ummonk 5y ago
I disliked AB5 but was unhappy Prop 22 passed. AB5 already was designed to create carveouts for politically influential white collar gig workers, and Prop 22 would have just added carveouts but not changed the essential fact of AB5 banning gig work in less politically influential industries.

parineum 5y ago

I don't ride share often but in the more than handful of times I have since this issue has been in the news I've yet to find a single driver who supports it. The support for AB5 doesn't seem come from the people it "protects".

tsimionescu 5y ago
The whole business model of companies like Uber and Lyft relies on drivers not realizing how little they are getting out of the deal. The ones who do realize - often after some accident that leaves them injured or their cars too damaged to repair - will simply stop working and regret the past. Gig work usually looks very good when you're starting out and everything is going smoothly. With Uber and Lyft also investing massively in propaganda to ensure their drivers believe AB5 would cause numerous catastophes for their work, it's really not that surprising that most who are actually driving would be against it.
- parineum 5y ago
  If this is true, I think the responsibility of the people who support AB5 is to first convince the Uber/Lyft drivers themselves. I think it's incredibly arrogant to force those people to do something against their will for their own good.
ec109685 5y ago
The companies made it seem like drivers couldn’t work flexible hours if this passed. Nurses and other shift workers are employees, yet have flexible hours. That was completely obfuscated in this messaging.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  This is a bad definition of flexible: "flexible hours means you have different start and end times for your workday than the standard 9 a.m. to 5 p.m." This is a good definition of flexible: "A flexible work schedule is an alternative to the traditional 9 to 5, 40-hour work week. It allows employees to vary their arrival and/or departure times." Also "gives a worker greater latitude in choosing his or her particular hours of work, or freedom to change work schedules from one week to the next depending on the employee's personal needs" The first one applies to nurses and shift workers. But the goal and the appeal of Uber and Lyft is the second one.
  - gbear605 5y ago
    I don’t know about you, but my job as a employee gives me the second one.
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      Are you paid hourly? We could try salaried uber drivers but I have no idea how that would work.
      - ec109685 5y ago
        Paying Uber drivers a salary isn’t necessary. They can be a part-time employees and chose when they work without having a fixed salary. E.g. non-exempt employees as specified here: https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-qa/pages/whatismeantbythetermsexempt,non-exempt,salariedandhourly.aspx https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-... > Nonexempt: An individual who is not exempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA and is therefore entitled to overtime pay for all hours worked beyond 40 in a workweek (as well as any state overtime provisions). Nonexempt employees may be paid on a salary, hourly or other basis.

lhorie 5y ago

Yeah, a lot of people were pointing out how ridiculously large the list of exceptions in AB5 were. I saw a bunch of stories about people in random fields getting screwed in the crossfire. It could just have been marketing-speak, but the arguments I heard from companies around voting time were that contractor status was for the benefit of drivers. IIRC they were arguing that if prop 22 did not pass, they were just going to pass the costs to the riders, and decrease service availability to match a smaller, less flexible driver workforce. In other words, many drivers would just wake up one day and find themselves booted from the platforms. And riders would find themselves unable to summon a ride depending on driver volume in the area, or time of day (basically old school cab availability) Historically, Uber has even pulled out of markets altogether (and in Austin's case, only to come back w/ their shit together later and mop the floor with the competition...) The thing that irks me about this is that I thought ballot initiatives like prop 22 were supposed to give constituents a direct voice, especially considering CA is basically a one-party state. To my understanding, legislation like AB5 gets championed by a politician without much direct input from voters.

antiterra 5y ago
> in Austin's case, only to come back w/ their shit together later and mop the floor with the competition… Uber and Lyft played hardball with increased regulations, saying they’d leave if the regulations were voted in place. Their ultimatums and campaigns (easily a dozen mailers to many people) irked residents who wouldn’t have voted against them otherwise. They returned because the state overrode the local requirements. Nothing to do with having their shit together.
- lhorie 5y ago
  Sorry, I should've worded that better; "with their shit still together" is more in line w/ I what I wanted to say. I meant that rather than struggling to gain marketshare (like happened in China, Russia, etc), they ramped back up from 0% to virtually all of their lost marketshare, eventually causing local competitors to wind down.
GaryTang 5y ago

ummonk 5y ago

I disliked AB5 but was unhappy Prop 22 passed. AB5 already was designed to create carveouts for politically influential white collar gig workers, and Prop 22 would have just added carveouts but not changed the essential fact of AB5 banning gig work in less politically influential industries.