5 ms·

> but outright exploited workers/drivers Out of curiosity, what coercive power does Uber wield that allows them to exploit workers all while non-exploitative e

> but outright exploited workers/drivers Out of curiosity, what coercive power does Uber wield that allows them to exploit workers all while non-exploitative employers have struggled to find anyone to hire? We've been living through what has been possibly the best job market in history for most of Uber's existence. Locally, we've been at full employment for nearly a decade now (less a few months during the height of COVID). It's certainly not a matter of "They have no other choice".

kennywinker 4y ago
Uber was founded in the wake of a global financial meltdown. The same crisis that begat amazon’s mobile retiree workforce (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/02/nomadland-living-in-cars-working-amazon https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/02/nomadl...) and in general the concept of the “gig economy”. The recession created a backlog of job-seekers, so competition for the good jobs was tight - the end result was having to settle for lower paying jobs with less prospects - i.e. gig economy work (https://www.npr.org/2022/07/08/1110610504/jobs-friday-gen-z-and-the-scars-of-recessions-past https://www.npr.org/2022/07/08/1110610504/jobs-friday-gen-z-...) “Full employment” doesn’t accurately describe the last decade. Worker power was maybe never lower than it was between 2008 and 2020.
- menzoic 4y ago
  Uber started out as a black cab service for high end customers with high end workers. UberX came out in 2012 well into the recovery of the global financial meltdown, at a time when Facebook IPO'd for $100 Billion
- randomdata 4y ago
  > Worker power was maybe never lower than it was between 2008 and 2020. Wages blew inflation out of the water through the later half of that period, so I'm not sure that tracks. Wages struggle to keep up with inflation, let alone beat it, when workers don't have much power. The reality is that the job market was very strong from the mid-2010s onward, save the COVID shutdown period. Although, obviously, not uniformly so. It is true that the job market was difficult at the beginning of Uber's existence, which is why I said "most of" not "all of". I suppose what you're saying is that the exploitation was short-lived during their early days or limited to certain local markets?
  - kennywinker 4y ago
    > I suppose what you're saying is that the exploitation was short-lived during their early days? Not at all what I’m saying. I’m saying 2008-2020 was a bi-modal situation. Just like the COVID shutdown was: recall how for many workers, it meant working from home and a buildup of funds because there was nowhere to spend it. For another group it meant struggling, gig work, moving back in with parents, and draining your savings - because their entire industry was just GONE. Depending on what numbers you look at, and at what resolution, you see the first group, the second group, or both. So wages went up during the 2010-2020 period, but for who? Minimum wage didn’t keep up with inflation in most places during that period. More lower paying jobs, less overall power. What are you going to do, quit this $10/hour job and go work at another $10/hour job? Why bother
    - randomdata 4y ago
      > Minimum wage didn’t keep up with inflation in most places during that period. Locally, minimum wage increased 50% over that period. Inflation was 17% over the same period. Like I asked before, maybe they only exploited workers in certain markets? There is no evidence of the bi-modal situation that you refer to locally. Obviously not all locales are equal, but the remark is presented without local information, hence wanting to know more about what it means. Does Uber treat workers like gold in some markets? > What are you going to do, quit this $10/hour job and go work at another $10/hour job? Why bother The reason you'd go to the other $10/hr job is to not face the same exploitation found at Uber. If all jobs on the market are seen as being equally fair, you're not being exploited... You might not be worth what you wish you were, but that's not what exploitation is.
      - kennywinker 4y ago
        I’m glad in your area minimum wage has beaten inflation - I’d argue it actually hasn’t, because to my knowledge minimum wage hasn’t kept up with inflation anywhere. It may have gone up 50% in the past ten years, but it languished for decades before that. But that’s a side point. On the main point - first in most US states minimum wage has not kept up with inflation. Second - does minimum wage apply to gig workers in your location? Because in most places they have successfully classified their employees as “contractors”. As to your point, uber is in many many places in the world - and the degree at which they have exploited their workers is variable. Where I am, uber costs about the same as a regular taxi did before uber arrived. But taxis drivers made and do make more than uber drivers. That sounds like a middle man got in and lowered wages. The same work, less money for workers, more for middle men? That is exploitation.
- daenz 4y ago
  Is the implication here that founding a company during hard financial times is exploitative because workers are willing to work for less?
  - JamesBarney 4y ago
    It does seem in many people's world view the only way to not exploit workers is to not hire them in the first place.
    - kennywinker 4y ago
      You think you’re caricaturing my view but yes - that’s true. Employment is exploitation, and we all know that. Why else would we all seek situations where we are shareholders or partner in a business? Because ownership is power, and using your power to profit off someone else’s labor is exploitation.
      - daenz 4y ago
        >You think you’re caricaturing my view but yes - that’s true. That doesn't make sense though. A worker can choose not to work and do nothing, same as if the "exploitative" job wasn't offered at all. Are you saying the existence of the choice is immoral, and that someone else should decide whether or not a job is a good use of their time?
        kennywinker 4y ago
        First off, Uber existing and me choosing not to work for them isn’t the same thing as uber NOT existing. They’re taking up space, driving labor markets, altering our basic perception of what work is. They’re not some garage startup providing another option - they’re leveraging billions and billions of dollars of capital and shaping the world around them. Second, the logic you just used could easily justify feudal serfdom. Does the existence of the choice to become a serf make the lord immoral? If your line of reasoning can be used to justify modes of living that we all agree are bad, perhaps it’s a flawed line of reasoning?

kennywinker 4y ago

Uber was founded in the wake of a global financial meltdown. The same crisis that begat amazon’s mobile retiree workforce (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/02/nomadland-living-in-cars-working-amazon https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/02/nomadl...) and in general the concept of the “gig economy”. The recession created a backlog of job-seekers, so competition for the good jobs was tight - the end result was having to settle for lower paying jobs with less prospects - i.e. gig economy work (https://www.npr.org/2022/07/08/1110610504/jobs-friday-gen-z-and-the-scars-of-recessions-past https://www.npr.org/2022/07/08/1110610504/jobs-friday-gen-z-...) “Full employment” doesn’t accurately describe the last decade. Worker power was maybe never lower than it was between 2008 and 2020.

menzoic 4y ago
Uber started out as a black cab service for high end customers with high end workers. UberX came out in 2012 well into the recovery of the global financial meltdown, at a time when Facebook IPO'd for $100 Billion
randomdata 4y ago
> Worker power was maybe never lower than it was between 2008 and 2020. Wages blew inflation out of the water through the later half of that period, so I'm not sure that tracks. Wages struggle to keep up with inflation, let alone beat it, when workers don't have much power. The reality is that the job market was very strong from the mid-2010s onward, save the COVID shutdown period. Although, obviously, not uniformly so. It is true that the job market was difficult at the beginning of Uber's existence, which is why I said "most of" not "all of". I suppose what you're saying is that the exploitation was short-lived during their early days or limited to certain local markets?
- kennywinker 4y ago
  > I suppose what you're saying is that the exploitation was short-lived during their early days? Not at all what I’m saying. I’m saying 2008-2020 was a bi-modal situation. Just like the COVID shutdown was: recall how for many workers, it meant working from home and a buildup of funds because there was nowhere to spend it. For another group it meant struggling, gig work, moving back in with parents, and draining your savings - because their entire industry was just GONE. Depending on what numbers you look at, and at what resolution, you see the first group, the second group, or both. So wages went up during the 2010-2020 period, but for who? Minimum wage didn’t keep up with inflation in most places during that period. More lower paying jobs, less overall power. What are you going to do, quit this $10/hour job and go work at another $10/hour job? Why bother
  - randomdata 4y ago
    > Minimum wage didn’t keep up with inflation in most places during that period. Locally, minimum wage increased 50% over that period. Inflation was 17% over the same period. Like I asked before, maybe they only exploited workers in certain markets? There is no evidence of the bi-modal situation that you refer to locally. Obviously not all locales are equal, but the remark is presented without local information, hence wanting to know more about what it means. Does Uber treat workers like gold in some markets? > What are you going to do, quit this $10/hour job and go work at another $10/hour job? Why bother The reason you'd go to the other $10/hr job is to not face the same exploitation found at Uber. If all jobs on the market are seen as being equally fair, you're not being exploited... You might not be worth what you wish you were, but that's not what exploitation is.
    - kennywinker 4y ago
      I’m glad in your area minimum wage has beaten inflation - I’d argue it actually hasn’t, because to my knowledge minimum wage hasn’t kept up with inflation anywhere. It may have gone up 50% in the past ten years, but it languished for decades before that. But that’s a side point. On the main point - first in most US states minimum wage has not kept up with inflation. Second - does minimum wage apply to gig workers in your location? Because in most places they have successfully classified their employees as “contractors”. As to your point, uber is in many many places in the world - and the degree at which they have exploited their workers is variable. Where I am, uber costs about the same as a regular taxi did before uber arrived. But taxis drivers made and do make more than uber drivers. That sounds like a middle man got in and lowered wages. The same work, less money for workers, more for middle men? That is exploitation.
daenz 4y ago
Is the implication here that founding a company during hard financial times is exploitative because workers are willing to work for less?
- JamesBarney 4y ago
  It does seem in many people's world view the only way to not exploit workers is to not hire them in the first place.
  - kennywinker 4y ago
    You think you’re caricaturing my view but yes - that’s true. Employment is exploitation, and we all know that. Why else would we all seek situations where we are shareholders or partner in a business? Because ownership is power, and using your power to profit off someone else’s labor is exploitation.
    - daenz 4y ago
      >You think you’re caricaturing my view but yes - that’s true. That doesn't make sense though. A worker can choose not to work and do nothing, same as if the "exploitative" job wasn't offered at all. Are you saying the existence of the choice is immoral, and that someone else should decide whether or not a job is a good use of their time?
      - kennywinker 4y ago
        First off, Uber existing and me choosing not to work for them isn’t the same thing as uber NOT existing. They’re taking up space, driving labor markets, altering our basic perception of what work is. They’re not some garage startup providing another option - they’re leveraging billions and billions of dollars of capital and shaping the world around them. Second, the logic you just used could easily justify feudal serfdom. Does the existence of the choice to become a serf make the lord immoral? If your line of reasoning can be used to justify modes of living that we all agree are bad, perhaps it’s a flawed line of reasoning?