6 ms·

Do the worker's even see how much they'll make up front? If not, how is this fair, or even legal? I'm doubtful anyone here would go and work for McDonald's with

Do the worker's even see how much they'll make up front? If not, how is this fair, or even legal? I'm doubtful anyone here would go and work for McDonald's with the agreement being that they pay you what they think you're worth, after the job's done. We all see the asymmetry at play, and how it'd be abused at a moments notice.

ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
IANAL, but I suspect that there's US law, specifying that there needs to be a clear, transparent formula for pay. Even convoluted ones, like commissions for sales, or shared tips, are covered by law. I do know this, as I know a number of salespeople and servers. I suspect that the government needs to know what to tax, and obfuscated pay, means obfuscated taxes.
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  > I suspect that the government needs to know what to tax, and obfuscated pay, means obfuscated taxes. You're taxed on what you're paid. The government doesn't do a parallel calculation and tax you on that.
  - ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
    But what you don’t get paid, the company keeps, and it may come under different tax rules. My experience is that governments are quite interested in where the money goes.
    - lotsofpulp 2y ago
      What you don’t get paid is not pay. That is money that leaves the employer’s account and goes into the employee’s account (or government’s account for tax withholding). I don’t see how this can be obfuscated.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      Yes, but how is this relevant. That is also not calculated based on a pay formula. It's reported.
    - ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
      Eh. Not worth arguing about. Not my area of expertise. That's why I pay an accountant.
      - woah 2y ago
        Thank you for contributing your wisdom
jt2190 2y ago
Having never used Shipt, I also find that part unclear: > Target… offered same-day delivery from local stores. Those deliveries were made by Shipt workers, who shopped for the items and drove them to customers’ doorsteps. Business was booming… and yet workers found that their paychecks had become… unpredictable. They were doing the same work they’d always done, yet their paychecks were often less than they expected. Edit: > On Facebook and Reddit, workers compared notes. Previously, they’d known what to expect from their pay because Shipt had a formula: It gave workers a base pay of $5 per delivery plus 7.5 percent of the total amount of the customer’s order through the app. That formula allowed workers to look at order amounts and choose jobs that were worth their time. But Shipt had changed the payment rules without alerting workers. When the company finally issued a press release about the change, it revealed only that the new pay algorithm paid workers based on “effort,” which included factors like the order amount, the estimated amount of time required for shopping, and the mileage driven.
gabesullice 2y ago
This is the question. All the ethical concerns are almost superfluous if the provider knows how much they're gonna earn, at a minimum, before they accept the gig. It's either worth it to them or it isn't. If anything shoud be a regulation, this feels like the one to add: platform opportunities must estimate and prominently display the estimated time to complete the task and the minimum payout after platform fees.
- astrange 2y ago
  Uber doesn't do that because the drivers wouldn't take ones they don't like. Remember, consumers are using platform apps like Uber because they don't trust the drivers on the other side.
  - tbrownaw 2y ago
    > Remember, consumers are using platform apps like Uber because they don't trust the drivers on the other side. Oh, I thought it was because "push button to summon car" is, like, super convenient.
    - EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
      That too, but taxi drivers are indeed among the most notorious for scams.
    - astrange 2y ago
      There were taxi apps before Uber and they didn't work because the taxi drivers wouldn't reliably come.
  - imtringued 2y ago
    People use platforms because it would be very silly to have an app on the play store for each driver.
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 2y ago
      And yet, I almost wonder if that would not be a better system overall.
SkyPuncher 2y ago
I think they do. We use Shipt regularly and it’s a bit different than the other delivery apps. I now have a collection of favorite shoppers. While jobs still go to the pool, these people have a first shot at my order. I’ve learned the general availability of my favorites and tend to place orders when I think there’s a high chance they’ll be available to shop the order. While it’s still not me selecting an individual contractor, it’s not the randomness of other apps.
- dsr_ 2y ago
  So... they've turned it from "we provide a good quality service at a fair price" to "over time you will have a chance to pick favorites, but not consistently". That's enshittification for your use of the service, and enshittification for the workers, too.
  - sweezyjeezy 2y ago
    Not sure I understand your argument - from a customer perspective why is the service worse, and why do you believe that it has BECOME worse?
    - dsr_ 2y ago
      If it were as good or better than before, nobody would want to pay attention to when to schedule deliveries based on the deliverator. Since this person specifically wants some deliverators over others, that means that the quality of the service is less good. They need to spend time considering scheduling, where they did not before. I don't worry about which USPS mail carrier delivers my mail -- I know it will be consistent and good enough. I happen to know who my usual carrier is, because I work from home and she likes to say hi to cats if they are in the front window. I also know the face of the usual UPS driver and the usual FedEx driver; they aren't here 6 days a week, but often enough that I recognize them. In none of those cases do I expect a quality change based on the driver. I expect competence, and I get it so often that the exceptions really stand out. From the Shipt workers' perspective, they now need to worry about customers discriminating among them rather than just getting the job done.

ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago

IANAL, but I suspect that there's US law, specifying that there needs to be a clear, transparent formula for pay. Even convoluted ones, like commissions for sales, or shared tips, are covered by law. I do know this, as I know a number of salespeople and servers. I suspect that the government needs to know what to tax, and obfuscated pay, means obfuscated taxes.

robertlagrant 2y ago
> I suspect that the government needs to know what to tax, and obfuscated pay, means obfuscated taxes. You're taxed on what you're paid. The government doesn't do a parallel calculation and tax you on that.
- ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
  But what you don’t get paid, the company keeps, and it may come under different tax rules. My experience is that governments are quite interested in where the money goes.
  - lotsofpulp 2y ago
    What you don’t get paid is not pay. That is money that leaves the employer’s account and goes into the employee’s account (or government’s account for tax withholding). I don’t see how this can be obfuscated.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    Yes, but how is this relevant. That is also not calculated based on a pay formula. It's reported.
  - ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
    Eh. Not worth arguing about. Not my area of expertise. That's why I pay an accountant.
    - woah 2y ago
      Thank you for contributing your wisdom

jt2190 2y ago

Having never used Shipt, I also find that part unclear: > Target… offered same-day delivery from local stores. Those deliveries were made by Shipt workers, who shopped for the items and drove them to customers’ doorsteps. Business was booming… and yet workers found that their paychecks had become… unpredictable. They were doing the same work they’d always done, yet their paychecks were often less than they expected. Edit: > On Facebook and Reddit, workers compared notes. Previously, they’d known what to expect from their pay because Shipt had a formula: It gave workers a base pay of $5 per delivery plus 7.5 percent of the total amount of the customer’s order through the app. That formula allowed workers to look at order amounts and choose jobs that were worth their time. But Shipt had changed the payment rules without alerting workers. When the company finally issued a press release about the change, it revealed only that the new pay algorithm paid workers based on “effort,” which included factors like the order amount, the estimated amount of time required for shopping, and the mileage driven.

gabesullice 2y ago

This is the question. All the ethical concerns are almost superfluous if the provider knows how much they're gonna earn, at a minimum, before they accept the gig. It's either worth it to them or it isn't. If anything shoud be a regulation, this feels like the one to add: platform opportunities must estimate and prominently display the estimated time to complete the task and the minimum payout after platform fees.

astrange 2y ago
Uber doesn't do that because the drivers wouldn't take ones they don't like. Remember, consumers are using platform apps like Uber because they don't trust the drivers on the other side.
- tbrownaw 2y ago
  > Remember, consumers are using platform apps like Uber because they don't trust the drivers on the other side. Oh, I thought it was because "push button to summon car" is, like, super convenient.
  - EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y ago
    That too, but taxi drivers are indeed among the most notorious for scams.
  - astrange 2y ago
    There were taxi apps before Uber and they didn't work because the taxi drivers wouldn't reliably come.
- imtringued 2y ago
  People use platforms because it would be very silly to have an app on the play store for each driver.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 2y ago
    And yet, I almost wonder if that would not be a better system overall.

SkyPuncher 2y ago

I think they do. We use Shipt regularly and it’s a bit different than the other delivery apps. I now have a collection of favorite shoppers. While jobs still go to the pool, these people have a first shot at my order. I’ve learned the general availability of my favorites and tend to place orders when I think there’s a high chance they’ll be available to shop the order. While it’s still not me selecting an individual contractor, it’s not the randomness of other apps.

dsr_ 2y ago
So... they've turned it from "we provide a good quality service at a fair price" to "over time you will have a chance to pick favorites, but not consistently". That's enshittification for your use of the service, and enshittification for the workers, too.
- sweezyjeezy 2y ago
  Not sure I understand your argument - from a customer perspective why is the service worse, and why do you believe that it has BECOME worse?
  - dsr_ 2y ago
    If it were as good or better than before, nobody would want to pay attention to when to schedule deliveries based on the deliverator. Since this person specifically wants some deliverators over others, that means that the quality of the service is less good. They need to spend time considering scheduling, where they did not before. I don't worry about which USPS mail carrier delivers my mail -- I know it will be consistent and good enough. I happen to know who my usual carrier is, because I work from home and she likes to say hi to cats if they are in the front window. I also know the face of the usual UPS driver and the usual FedEx driver; they aren't here 6 days a week, but often enough that I recognize them. In none of those cases do I expect a quality change based on the driver. I expect competence, and I get it so often that the exceptions really stand out. From the Shipt workers' perspective, they now need to worry about customers discriminating among them rather than just getting the job done.