General Goodbye Uber and Lyft.

[ThatOneDude]

Or at a minimum a pretty hefty price increase, imo

Uber and Lyft must reclassify drivers as employees, appeals court finds

In a blow to Uber and Lyft, a California appeals court said Thursday that the companies must reclassify their drivers as employees rather than independent contractors, affirming an earlier court decision.

amp.cnn.com

 

[The Pendulum]

And (they) said forcibly increasing the minimum wage wouldn't do anything.

It's the minimum someone can be paid, for their time. Not a living wage, you want that, work for it.

I look forward to the day in the near future we're all paying for loaves of bread with wheelbarrows full of cash.

 

[ThatOneDude]

And (they) said forcibly increasing the minimum wage wouldn't do anything.

It's the minimum someone can be paid, for their time. Not a living wage, you want that, work for it.

I look forward to the day in the near future we're all paying for loaves of bread with wheelbarrows full of cash.

Way cheaper to make your own.

 

[Filthy]

Way cheaper to make your own.

counterfeiting is a serious crime

 

[SongExotic2]

I made a shitload selling chop shop wheelbarrows in the early nineties

 

[ThatOneDude]

I made a shitload selling chop shop wheelbarrows in the early nineties

Please go be drunk somewhere else.

 

[SongExotic2]

Please go be drunk somewhere else.

Fuck u goof

 

[ThatOneDude]

Fuck u goof

 

[SongExotic2]

 

[MMAPlaywright]

Spoiler

 

[Thuglife13]

It all depends on Prop 22 on election day...

California Proposition 22, App-Based Drivers as Contractors and Labor Policies Initiative (2020)

A "yes" vote supports this ballot initiative to define app-based transportation (rideshare) and delivery drivers as independent contractors and adopt labor and wage policies specific to app-based drivers and companies.

A "no" vote opposes this ballot initiative, meaning California Assembly Bill 5 (2019) could be used to decide whether app-based drivers are employees or independent contractors.

 

[Robbie Hart]

Spoiler

View attachment 18339

Yep

 

[Robbie Hart]

It all depends on Prop 22 on election day...

California Proposition 22, App-Based Drivers as Contractors and Labor Policies Initiative (2020)

A "yes" vote supports this ballot initiative to define app-based transportation (rideshare) and delivery drivers as independent contractors and adopt labor and wage policies specific to app-based drivers and companies.

A "no" vote opposes this ballot initiative, meaning California Assembly Bill 5 (2019) could be used to decide whether app-based drivers are employees or independent contractors.

Best case scenario
“Could be used to decide whether app-based drivers are employees or independent contractors”

 

[kneeblock]

Pretty weird that anyone would want to vote against someone being considered an employee. Uber and Lyft et al have spent millions on the marketing campaign against this prop, but it looks like it's going to make it.

 

[Rambo John J]

have never used either

 

[Tiiimmmaaayyy]

I wonder if they can reclassify the drivers as employees in California and keep them as contractors everywhere else? Either that or just close shop in California. Making that type of change won’t be good for the company or the passengers.

 

[Tiiimmmaaayyy]

Pretty weird that anyone would want to vote against someone being considered an employee. Uber and Lyft et al have spent millions on the marketing campaign against this prop, but it looks like it's going to make it.

I would vote against it. Having them as employees will change the whole business model and would mean huge increase in fees for passengers.

When i was in NY i talked to a couple of drivers that did it for a living, but everyone I’ve talked to where i live does it as a side gig for some extra cash.

 

[Robbie Hart]

I wonder if they can reclassify the drivers as employees in California and keep them as contractors everywhere else? Either that or just close shop in California. Making that type of change won’t be good for the company or the passengers.

Will set a precedent that other state contractors will ask for and with this being the ambulance chaser capital of the world and frivolous lawsuit capital of the world, they will be challenged everywhere

 

[Tiiimmmaaayyy]

Will set a precedent that other state contractors will ask for and with this being the ambulance chaser capital of the world and frivolous lawsuit capital of the world, they will be challenged everywhere

Unfortunately, i agree. Such a move will cost companies lots of extra money. Some small companies that use contractors will not be able to keep the doors open.

 

[sparkuri]

I look forward to the day in the near future we're all paying for loaves of bread with wheelbarrows full of cash.

I call that "January"

 

[ThatOneDude]

I call that "January"

@Splinty @Wild @Leigh @Nuk Soo Kow can one of y'all add this to the calendar for the month of January?
" @sparkuri states we will be paying for bread with wheelbarrows full of cash."
Maybe make it for the entire month?

 

[Filthy]

Will set a precedent that other state contractors will ask for and with this being the ambulance chaser capital of the world and frivolous lawsuit capital of the world, they will be challenged everywhere

if there's different interpretations in different federal districts, it could land at the SCOTUS.

 

[kneeblock]

I would vote against it. Having them as employees will change the whole business model and would mean huge increase in fees for passengers.

When i was in NY i talked to a couple of drivers that did it for a living, but everyone I’ve talked to where i live does it as a side gig for some extra cash.

Whether gig work is a side job or a main job is very context dependent. It depends on the availability of work in the region, the cost of living and a whole host of other factors, including the personal circumstances of the driver. One of the reasons ride-sharing companies ended up at this point with their workforce was because there are many drivers in California putting in excess of 40 hours a week on the road. Further, Uber in particular has regularly manipulated the percentage they take off the top as you have more rides or longer rides so drivers have seen less of a cut, making driving for them less competitive than it used to be to just join an actual taxi company, which seems crazy for those drivers (the majority) using their own vehicle. Uber and Lyft have pocketed vast sums of profits with only a small percentage going to drivers because of the independent contractor designation, very similar to the UFC. This has been exacerbated by the move away from rideshare only to different types of transportation and lately delivery of goods or food.

The business model will change, but you can argue it should've never existed in the way it does to begin with. A useful alternative structure would be for cities or whole states subsidize development of their own apps and move to a cooperative structure where the drivers received all of the revenue then devoted a small percentage collectively to (~5%) to licensing use of the app, which the cooperative or local government would own. In this model, workers would also be owners and could pay into healthcare, pension, etc. This model isn't unprecedented and had already been implemented in a number of places around the world. They're called platform cooperatives.

 

[ThatOneDude]

Whether gig work is a side job or a main job is very context dependent. It depends on the availability of work in the region, the cost of living and a whole host of other factors, including the personal circumstances of the driver. One of the reasons ride-sharing companies ended up at this point with their workforce was because there are many drivers in California putting in excess of 40 hours a week on the road. Further, Uber in particular has regularly manipulated the percentage they take off the top as you have more rides or longer rides so drivers have seen less of a cut, making driving for them less competitive than it used to be to just join an actual taxi company, which seems crazy for those drivers (the majority) using their own vehicle. Uber and Lyft have pocketed vast sums of profits with only a small percentage going to drivers because of the independent contractor designation, very similar to the UFC. This has been exacerbated by the move away from rideshare only to different types of transportation and lately delivery of goods or food.

The business model will change, but you can argue it should've never existed in the way it does to begin with. A useful alternative structure would be for cities or whole states subsidize development of their own apps and move to a cooperative structure where the drivers received all of the revenue then devoted a small percentage collectively to (~5%) to licensing use of the app, which the cooperative or local government would own. In this model, workers would also be owners and could pay into healthcare, pension, etc. This model isn't unprecedented and had already been implemented in a number of places around the world. They're called platform cooperatives.

I like this idea except for the part when the government runs it.

 

[Wild]

If Lyft and Uber drivers are now classified as employees, shouldn't UFC fighters be as well?