4 ms·
It was indeed very provocative of me, I admit it. However my point stands; very basic labor rights, and contributions to social security are human rights. Fun
by derelicta 3y ago
It was indeed very provocative of me, I admit it.
However my point stands; very basic labor rights, and contributions to social security are human rights.
Fundamentally, a lot of those companies haven't created anything new; their incredible ability to circumvent workers rights as to be able to extract more from them, and thus offer lower prices than their competitors was their main "innovation". That's how they also got to attract so much capital!
- RamblingCTO 3y agoBut again, does this apply to Germany? If so, where? I'm very explicit about my argument but every response so far made a general one. I would even agree that the US could use better worker protection in some areas. But in Germany everything is regulated to the max. We even have to track time by law. /e: and to make it even more explicit. In Frankfurt, where I live, they aren't allowed to use their own vehicles and need to be employed. So uber can only work with companies. They need to be licensed as well. That lost a lot of people a lot of money, because now you're either bolt or uber, not both. There's no competition anymore. You're directly dependent on one of the companies/the company you work with. Making a quick buck on the side? Nope. Letting uber/bolt compete for drivers? Nope. And that sucks imho.