4 ms·

> flexible labor market By and large, this only benefits the employer. Why would you support anti-human markets?

phpisthebest 4y ago
This is not a compelling statement or argument, it is simply an assertion based on an appeal to emotion. There are lots of reasons, and people that do not want to be considered an employee, with all the limits that come with that, mainly people who are using the apps as "side hustle" not full time employment
- ok_dad 4y ago
  I’ve never gotten into an Uber or Lyft that wasn’t clearly a full time hustle. I started asking at some point, and literally everyone told me they do it full time. Sure that’s not an accurate poll, but I keep hearing this “side hustle” stuff as if it’s okay to let Uber fuck people over as faux contractors just because a few of the drivers want to make some extra scratch.
  - itake 4y ago
    That stance goes both ways: “It’s not ok for Uber to fuck people over as full time employees just because a few drivers want to treat Uber like a full time job.”
    - ok_dad 4y ago
      Yes, until we know how many people are doing it for what reasons, we both can’t say either with authority. I’m arguing that I’ve never seen a part timer, though I don’t use those services anymore. I do see a lot of appeal to that particular point by proponents of prop 22, but never seen hard numbers to trust.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    My anecdote beats your anecdote. I’ve ridden in Ubers all across the country. I know many who are doing this part time.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    I am sure your definition of "fuck people over" is vastly different than mine. Fraud, or lying would be things I consider "fucking people over". Presenting a work for hire situation where adults agree to the terms is not "fucking people over" >I’ve never gotten into an Uber or Lyft that wasn’t clearly a full time hustle. My guess that is very regional.
scarface74 4y ago
My wife and I don’t have care and we use Uber everywhere - we spend seven months out of the year flying around the US. I’ve met plenty of Uber drivers who love the part time flexible nature of the job because they have other stuff going on - other businesses, grandparents who want to be able to take care of their grandkids etc. People have this thing called “agency”. If you have an issue with Uber not providing benefits like health insurance, blame it on the ass backwards American health care system where your health insurance is tied to your job. Jason Snell, a former editor in chief for Macworld who went independent a few years ago but still writes for Macworld and a few other places independently and he is a podcaster and a blogger said that the laws they were initially trying to past in California were going to make it harder for him to stay independent. I assure you that he isn’t a big business conservative by any stretch of the imagination. You heard the same from truck drivers that said they would move from California so they could stay independent. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/ab5-independent-california-truckers-scramble-scotus-refuses-to-hear-challenge/ https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/ab5-independent-ca...
- twblalock 4y ago
  I also know freelance photographers who were impacted by AB5. AB5 is a stupid law that was clearly designed to target Uber, and even though lawmakers tried to pack in a bunch of exemptions, it impacted a ton of other people. Prop 22 was largely driven by the backlash against it.
csa 4y ago
> By and large, this only benefits the employer. Why would you support anti-human markets? Have you participated in this part of the labor market? Or have you talked extensively with folks who have? Before voting on prop 22, I made an effort to talk to “gig workers”. A few observations: 1. Guaranteeing a minimum pay rate when working with prop 22 was something that they welcomed. Apparently some of the apps made offers that were basically noob traps — probably not out of malice by the company, rather incompetence. 2. They almost universally did not want to have scheduled hours and/or be a full-time employee. There were a number of reasons for this, but the desired state was the same — flexible schedule. 3. Some of the folks who would likely be full-time candidates were not well-educated or skilled, but they knew how to work hard. They felt like they were rewarded fairly for their labor, often times at better net pay than they could get elsewhere. 4. Uber/Lyft seemed to be the most liked. Folks who didn’t want much human interaction and/or had an older car preferred uber eats / door dash. Instacart seemed ok, but it didn’t seem to have as many fans as the others. I talked to about 20-25 people. Everyone seemed to like the current system. When asked specifically about full time work, the only support I heard for that was from a couple of people who said something like “it would be nice, as long as the schedule was flexible” — which is not how full time would likely work. I think that many of these gig apps hit product-market fit both with workers as well as customers, and that’s why they are successful in this two-sided market. EDIT: Fwiw, I also heard a lot of kvetching about AB5 from both employers and employees. That legislation may have won some political points from certain voter bases, but I don’t think I have ever heard anyone praise it (although I’m sure they exist).

This is not a compelling statement or argument, it is simply an assertion based on an appeal to emotion. There are lots of reasons, and people that do not want to be considered an employee, with all the limits that come with that, mainly people who are using the apps as "side hustle" not full time employment

ok_dad 4y ago
I’ve never gotten into an Uber or Lyft that wasn’t clearly a full time hustle. I started asking at some point, and literally everyone told me they do it full time. Sure that’s not an accurate poll, but I keep hearing this “side hustle” stuff as if it’s okay to let Uber fuck people over as faux contractors just because a few of the drivers want to make some extra scratch.
- itake 4y ago
  That stance goes both ways: “It’s not ok for Uber to fuck people over as full time employees just because a few drivers want to treat Uber like a full time job.”
  - ok_dad 4y ago
    Yes, until we know how many people are doing it for what reasons, we both can’t say either with authority. I’m arguing that I’ve never seen a part timer, though I don’t use those services anymore. I do see a lot of appeal to that particular point by proponents of prop 22, but never seen hard numbers to trust.
- scarface74 4y ago
  My anecdote beats your anecdote. I’ve ridden in Ubers all across the country. I know many who are doing this part time.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  I am sure your definition of "fuck people over" is vastly different than mine. Fraud, or lying would be things I consider "fucking people over". Presenting a work for hire situation where adults agree to the terms is not "fucking people over" >I’ve never gotten into an Uber or Lyft that wasn’t clearly a full time hustle. My guess that is very regional.

scarface74 4y ago

My wife and I don’t have care and we use Uber everywhere - we spend seven months out of the year flying around the US. I’ve met plenty of Uber drivers who love the part time flexible nature of the job because they have other stuff going on - other businesses, grandparents who want to be able to take care of their grandkids etc. People have this thing called “agency”. If you have an issue with Uber not providing benefits like health insurance, blame it on the ass backwards American health care system where your health insurance is tied to your job. Jason Snell, a former editor in chief for Macworld who went independent a few years ago but still writes for Macworld and a few other places independently and he is a podcaster and a blogger said that the laws they were initially trying to past in California were going to make it harder for him to stay independent. I assure you that he isn’t a big business conservative by any stretch of the imagination. You heard the same from truck drivers that said they would move from California so they could stay independent. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/ab5-independent-california-truckers-scramble-scotus-refuses-to-hear-challenge/ https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/ab5-independent-ca...

twblalock 4y ago
I also know freelance photographers who were impacted by AB5. AB5 is a stupid law that was clearly designed to target Uber, and even though lawmakers tried to pack in a bunch of exemptions, it impacted a ton of other people. Prop 22 was largely driven by the backlash against it.

csa 4y ago

> By and large, this only benefits the employer. Why would you support anti-human markets? Have you participated in this part of the labor market? Or have you talked extensively with folks who have? Before voting on prop 22, I made an effort to talk to “gig workers”. A few observations: 1. Guaranteeing a minimum pay rate when working with prop 22 was something that they welcomed. Apparently some of the apps made offers that were basically noob traps — probably not out of malice by the company, rather incompetence. 2. They almost universally did not want to have scheduled hours and/or be a full-time employee. There were a number of reasons for this, but the desired state was the same — flexible schedule. 3. Some of the folks who would likely be full-time candidates were not well-educated or skilled, but they knew how to work hard. They felt like they were rewarded fairly for their labor, often times at better net pay than they could get elsewhere. 4. Uber/Lyft seemed to be the most liked. Folks who didn’t want much human interaction and/or had an older car preferred uber eats / door dash. Instacart seemed ok, but it didn’t seem to have as many fans as the others. I talked to about 20-25 people. Everyone seemed to like the current system. When asked specifically about full time work, the only support I heard for that was from a couple of people who said something like “it would be nice, as long as the schedule was flexible” — which is not how full time would likely work. I think that many of these gig apps hit product-market fit both with workers as well as customers, and that’s why they are successful in this two-sided market. EDIT: Fwiw, I also heard a lot of kvetching about AB5 from both employers and employees. That legislation may have won some political points from certain voter bases, but I don’t think I have ever heard anyone praise it (although I’m sure they exist).