5 ms·
They shouldn't because the government is mandating equity, not equality.
by wolpoli 4y ago
They shouldn't because the government is mandating equity, not equality.
- Ekaros 4y agoIsn't paying same for same work(in this case time spend servicing them) exactly equity? And not being forced to pay is not equity?
- HWR_14 4y agoNo. You don't pay Uber for someone's time, you pay Uber for rides. You're confusing equity and equality.
- Ekaros 4y agoAren't you paying for person to provide you a time slot in their vehicle plus distance travelled? So equity would be to pay for both for same rate as anyone else.
- frumper 4y agoNo, you're paying Uber to go from point A to B. Uber decides what to pay drivers.
- Ekaros 4y agoWhich is billed by time and distance. Thus having to pay the same for both is equity.
- frumper 4y agoThe customer doesn't set any of that. That is between Uber and their drivers. Uber has a legal obligation to not charge different prices with reasonable accommodations to someone because they're disabled. They can of course pay the driver more, but that is between the driver and Uber.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- HWR_14 4y agoGoogle "equity vs equality". There are people out there explaining the difference you're missing better than I could. Charging the same per minute/mile is equality. Charging the same per ride is equity.
- Ekaros 4y agoDictionary definition is: "the quality of being fair and impartial." To me paying same for the same resources is fair and impartial. Paying less is unfair and exploitative. Exploitative and being partial toward the possibly rich party that is the service buyer.