> California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Pages: 1 2

........................................................................

Original_Lonely_Guy
#1 2019-09-11 16:53:11

California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"



California is one of only a couple grown up states in the room. Once again we lead the rest of the USA kicking and screaming to where things should be.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/11/tech … -bill.html


California Bill Makes App-Based Companies Treat Workers as Employees

By Paul Krugman


SACRAMENTO — California legislators approved a landmark bill on Tuesday that requires companies like Uber and Lyft to treat contract workers as employees, a move that could reshape the gig economy and that adds fuel to a yearslong debate over whether the nature of work has become too insecure.

The bill passed in a 29 to 11 vote in the State Senate and will apply to app-based companies, despite their efforts to negotiate an exemption. California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, endorsed the bill this month and is expected to sign it after it goes through the State Assembly, in what is expected to be a formality. Under the measure, which would go into effect Jan. 1, workers must be designated as employees instead of contractors if a company exerts control over how they perform their tasks or if their work is part of a company’s regular business.

The bill may influence other states. A coalition of labor groups is pushing similar legislation in New York, and bills in Washington State and Oregon that were similar to California’s but failed to advance could see renewed momentum. New York City passed a minimum wage for ride-hailing drivers last year but did not try to classify them as employees.

In California, the legislation will affect at least one million workers who have been on the receiving end of a decades-long trend of outsourcing and franchising work, making employer-worker relationships more arm’s-length. Many people have been pushed into contractor status with no access to basic protections like a minimum wage and unemployment insurance. Ride-hailing drivers, food-delivery couriers, janitors, nail salon workers, construction workers and franchise owners could now all be reclassified as employees.
Interested in All Things Tech?

The Bits newsletter will keep you updated on the latest from Silicon Valley and the technology industry.

But the bill’s passage, which codifies and extends a 2018 California Supreme Court ruling, threatens gig economy companies like Uber and Lyft. The ride-hailing firms — along with app-based services that offer food delivery, home repairs and dog-walking services — have built their businesses on inexpensive, independent labor. Uber and Lyft, which have hundreds of thousands of drivers in California, have said contract work provides people with flexibility. They have warned that recognizing drivers as employees could destroy their businesses.

“It will have major reverberations around the country,” said David Weil, a top Labor Department official during the Obama administration and the author of a book on the so-called fissuring of the workplace. He argued that the bill could set a new bar for worker protections and force business owners to rethink their reliance on contractors.

California legislators said the bill, known as Assembly Bill 5 and proposed by State Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, a Democrat, would set the tone for the future of work.

“Today the so-called gig companies present themselves as the innovative future of tomorrow, a future where companies don’t pay Social Security or Medicare,” said State Senator Maria Elena Durazo, a Democrat. “Let’s be clear: there is nothing innovative about underpaying someone for their labor.”

She added, ”Today we are determining the future of the California economy.”

Ride-hailing drivers hailed the bill’s passage. “I am so proud of rideshare drivers who took time out of their lives to share their stories, stand up, speak to legislators and hope they take a moment to bask in a victory,” said Rebecca Stack-Martinez, a driver and an organizer with the group Gig Workers Rising.


Uber did not immediately have a comment. Earlier on Tuesday, it laid off 435 workers in its product and engineering teams, the company’s second round of cuts in recent months.

Lyft said it was disappointed. “Today, our state’s political leadership missed an important opportunity to support the overwhelming majority of rideshare drivers who want a thoughtful solution that balances flexibility with an earnings standard and benefits,” said Adrian Durbin, a Lyft spokesman.

Gig-type work has been under the spotlight for years as companies like Uber, Lyft and DoorDash in the United States — as well as Didi Chuxing in China and Ola in India — have grown into behemoths even as the contractors they relied on did not receive the benefits or minimum pay guaranteed to employees. Many of the companies have worked assiduously to beat back efforts to classify their workers as employees, settling class-action lawsuits from drivers and securing exemptions from rules that might have threatened the drivers’ freelancer status.

While regulators in California and at least three other states — New York, Alaska and Oregon — had found that ride-hailing drivers were employees under state laws for narrow purposes, like eligibility for unemployment insurance, those findings could be overridden by state laws explicitly deeming the drivers as contractors. About half the states in the nation had passed such provisions.

But more recently, the tide began changing. Two federal proposals introduced since 2018 have sought to redefine the way workers are classified to allow more of them to unionize. Those proposals have received support from candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination, including Senators Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. The presidential hopefuls also lent their endorsement to the California bill.

In Britain, Uber has appealed a decision by a labor tribunal that drivers must be classified as workers entitled to minimum wage and vacation. The country’s Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in the case next year.

“Some form of benefits to some population of drivers seems inevitable,” said Lloyd Walmsley, an equity research analyst at Deutsche Bank who follows the ride-hailing industry.

A critical question is how gig economy companies will react to California’s new law. Industry officials have estimated that having to rely on employees rather than contractors raises costs by 20 to 30 percent.

Uber and Lyft have repeatedly warned that they will have to start scheduling drivers in advance if they are employees, reducing drivers’ ability to work when and where they want.

Experts said that there is nothing in the bill that requires employees to work set shifts, and that Uber and Lyft are legally entitled to continue allowing drivers to make their own scheduling decisions.

In practice, Uber and Lyft might choose to limit the number of drivers who can work during slow hours or in less busy markets, where drivers may not generate enough in fares to justify their payroll costs as employees. That could lead to a reduced need for drivers over all.

But Veena Dubal, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law, said it would still generally be advantageous for Uber and Lyft to rely on incentives like bonus pay to ensure they had enough drivers on the road to adjust to customer demand much more nimbly than if they scheduled drivers in advance.

“It doesn’t make sense for them” to drastically limit flexibility, she said.

Some of the companies are not done fighting the bill. Uber, Lyft and DoorDash have pledged to spend $90 million to support a ballot initiative that would essentially exempt them from the legislation. Uber has also said it will litigate misclassification claims from drivers in arbitration and press lawmakers to consider a separate bill that could exempt them from A.B. 5’s impact when the legislative session begins in January.

California cities will have ways to enforce the new law. In last-minute amendments to the measure, legislators gave large cities the right to sue companies that don’t comply.

The bill was not universally supported by drivers. Some opposed it because they worried it would make it hard to keep a flexible schedule. After Uber and Lyft sent messages to drivers and riders in California in August asking them to contact legislators on the companies’ behalf, legislative aides said they had noticed a spike in calls.

As the bill wound its way through the Legislature, the ride-hailing companies sought an agreement that would create a new category of workers between contractor and employee. They met with labor groups and Governor Newsom’s office to negotiate a deal to give drivers a minimum wage and the right to organize, while stopping short of classifying them as employees.

But in July and August, labor groups balked, and the proposed deal disintegrated. Some company officials have expressed cautious optimism in recent days about striking a deal with labor after the bill’s passage.

........................................................................

Phillip_McCavity
#2 2019-09-11 16:59:49

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

I don't think this is a very good idea.

........................................................................

Original_Lonely_Guy
#3 2019-09-11 17:01:40

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

I don't think this is a very good idea.

Take a taxi instead of saving money on the back of Labor, Phil. 

........................................................................

.
#4 2019-09-11 17:11:30

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Original_Lonely_Guy wrote:

Take a taxi instead of saving money on the back of Labor, Phil. 

I got mine, fuq you
\

........................................................................

Ron_Santo_Redux
#5 2019-09-11 17:12:25

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

I don't think this is a very good idea.

I agree.

........................................................................

Phillip_McCavity
#6 2019-09-11 17:23:54

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Original_Lonely_Guy wrote:

Take a taxi instead of saving money on the back of Labor, Phil. 

What have they done for me?

They had a crappy service, and the people voted with their feet.

........................................................................

anon user #2.1
#7 2019-09-11 18:23:55

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

I heard Lyft is lowering their driver pay in some areas to 30 cents a mile.  That's pretty crazy.  I'm not sure THIS was the law change needed but it was certain some sort of change was necessary.

........................................................................

anon user #2.1
#8 2019-09-11 18:27:34

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

I don't think this is a very good idea.

These kind of changes weren't necessary when the companies were playing fair with drivers and giving them 80% of what the customer paid.  But now things are different due to extreme greed by the companies.  They are often taking 50-60% of what you pay and leaving their drivers with the scraps.  That would be OK I guess if the company were paying for the vehicle and the gas but they aren't.

I say "FUQ 'EM!" they deserve to be destroyed for trying to exploit their workers.  There is no reason for the company to take more than 20-30% of what the customer pays.  It is just a app and the drivers are supplying the vehicles and most expenses.  The leadership at these companies ought to be ashamed of themselves.  Their greed has reached ridiculous levels and even with that they still cannot make a fuqing profit!

........................................................................

BritneySpearsPussy
#9 2019-09-11 19:05:31

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

A lot of people don't see Uber and Lyft surviving for the next five years.  Wall Street certainly doesn't like Lyft.  It has dropped almost in half since it was issued at 88 at the beginning of April.

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp … nv29L7Hcu8

........................................................................

Original_Lonely_Guy
#10 2019-09-11 20:57:37

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

What have they done for me?

They had a crappy service, and the people voted with their feet.



You don't get to exploit Labor just because you were mad at taxis.

Progressive regulation has finally caught up with tech "disruption" in CA and is putting an end to it.

........................................................................

Phillip_McCavity
#11 2019-09-11 21:43:53

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

anon user #2.1 wrote:

I say "FUQ 'EM!" they deserve to be destroyed for trying to exploit their workers.  There is no reason for the company to take more than 20-30% of what the customer pays.  It is just a app and the drivers are supplying the vehicles and most expenses.  The leadership at these companies ought to be ashamed of themselves.  Their greed has reached ridiculous levels and even with that they still cannot make a fuqing profit!

I talk to a lot of Uber drivers (don't use Lyft so I don't know if they are appreciably different).

Here is what Uber does for them. When someone is laid off and must make expenses immediately, if they like driving and they have a car they start. Uber lets them start almost at once, and make some money.

One of my drivers was a prep cook at Google. He made a reasonable wage there, but he wanted extra money on weekends, so when he had nothing to do he would turn on the app and see where it took him.

I've had occasional drivers who make a living driving Uber, but they tend to live further afield like Sacramento and don't pay the rents here.

I've had some people who are new immigrants. They have just arrived in the US, and they need some immediate cash. These jobs work for them.

I have met people who complain about the wages and conditions on Uber. These tend to be former cabbies who now work Uber, or black car drivers who are driving for Uber X (not a great fit, IMHO).

........................................................................

time is the master
#12 2019-09-11 21:57:02

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Another reason to leave California.

........................................................................

#13 2019-09-11 21:58:04

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

I talk to a lot of Uber drivers (don't use Lyft so I don't know if they are appreciably different).

Here is what Uber does for them. When someone is laid off and must make expenses immediately, if they like driving and they have a car they start. Uber lets them start almost at once, and make some money.

One of my drivers was a prep cook at Google. He made a reasonable wage there, but he wanted extra money on weekends, so when he had nothing to do he would turn on the app and see where it took him.

I've had occasional drivers who make a living driving Uber, but they tend to live further afield like Sacramento and don't pay the rents here.

I've had some people who are new immigrants. They have just arrived in the US, and they need some immediate cash. These jobs work for them.

I have met people who complain about the wages and conditions on Uber. These tend to be former cabbies who now work Uber, or black car drivers who are driving for Uber X (not a great fit, IMHO).

You can see the slaves are happy by the way the rhythmically rattle their chains every once in a while.
\

........................................................................

#14 2019-09-11 22:00:23

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

wrote:

You can see the slaves are happy by the way the rhythmically rattle their chains every once in a while.
\

good one!
\

........................................................................

#15 2019-09-11 22:01:52

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

or black car drivers who are driving for Uber X (not a great fit, IMHO).

.jesusphil.

........................................................................

anon user #2.1
#16 2019-09-11 23:05:10

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

I talk to a lot of Uber drivers (don't use Lyft so I don't know if they are appreciably different).

Here is what Uber does for them. When someone is laid off and must make expenses immediately, if they like driving and they have a car they start. Uber lets them start almost at once, and make some money.

One of my drivers was a prep cook at Google. He made a reasonable wage there, but he wanted extra money on weekends, so when he had nothing to do he would turn on the app and see where it took him.

I've had occasional drivers who make a living driving Uber, but they tend to live further afield like Sacramento and don't pay the rents here.

I've had some people who are new immigrants. They have just arrived in the US, and they need some immediate cash. These jobs work for them.

I have met people who complain about the wages and conditions on Uber. These tend to be former cabbies who now work Uber, or black car drivers who are driving for Uber X (not a great fit, IMHO).

It doesn't take a genius to see that driving for 40 cents a mile isn't going to be profitable.  That's the problem though with the so-called "Free market" -- information dsymmetry. People don't understand that really they aren't making any money at all and are instead losing it.  At such low pay rates you may as well just get a loan because basically it is the same thing.  DEpreciation of assets isn't just bullshyt.  Putting another 100 miles on your car per day does indeed have a non-zero additional cost.

It never used to be like this.  When Uber started in my area drivers would get over $1.30 a mile.  That was sustainable.  40 or 50 cents a mile isn't and they are preying on the ignorance of their drivers to not know better.

........................................................................

.
#17 2019-09-11 23:59:58

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

anon user #2.1 wrote:

It doesn't take a genius to see that driving for 40 cents a mile isn't going to be profitable.  That's the problem though with the so-called "Free market" -- information dsymmetry. People don't understand that really they aren't making any money at all and are instead losing it.  At such low pay rates you may as well just get a loan because basically it is the same thing.  DEpreciation of assets isn't just bullshyt.  Putting another 100 miles on your car per day does indeed have a non-zero additional cost.

It never used to be like this.  When Uber started in my area drivers would get over $1.30 a mile.  That was sustainable.  40 or 50 cents a mile isn't and they are preying on the ignorance of their drivers to not know better.

not according to Phildonomics

........................................................................

#18 2019-09-12 00:13:02

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

anon user #2.1 wrote:

It never used to be like this.  When Uber started in my area drivers would get over $1.30 a mile.  That was sustainable.  40 or 50 cents a mile isn't and they are preying on the ignorance of their drivers to not know better.

Who gives a shyt?  Most of them are immigrants now anyway.  That's what they're for.

........................................................................

Fredo
#19 2019-09-12 00:49:54

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

anon user #2.1 wrote:

It doesn't take a genius to see that driving for 40 cents a mile isn't going to be profitable.  That's the problem though with the so-called "Free market" -- information dsymmetry. People don't understand that really they aren't making any money at all and are instead losing it.  At such low pay rates you may as well just get a loan because basically it is the same thing.  DEpreciation of assets isn't just bullshyt.  Putting another 100 miles on your car per day does indeed have a non-zero additional cost.

It never used to be like this.  When Uber started in my area drivers would get over $1.30 a mile.  That was sustainable.  40 or 50 cents a mile isn't and they are preying on the ignorance of their drivers to not know better.

GED hard at work here.

dysmmetry!!!
/

........................................................................

#20 2019-09-12 00:57:57

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

anon user #2.1 wrote:

It doesn't take a genius to see that driving for 40 cents a mile isn't going to be profitable.  That's the problem though with the so-called "Free market" -- information dsymmetry. People don't understand that really they aren't making any money at all and are instead losing it.  At such low pay rates you may as well just get a loan because basically it is the same thing.  DEpreciation of assets isn't just bullshyt.  Putting another 100 miles on your car per day does indeed have a non-zero additional cost.

It never used to be like this.  When Uber started in my area drivers would get over $1.30 a mile.  That was sustainable.  40 or 50 cents a mile isn't and they are preying on the ignorance of their drivers to not know better.

For once, I agree with you. Most people don't understand the maths of running a vehicle.The US government figures at like +:.50 a mile.

Uber has Blown through $5B of it's $9B of IPO a few months ago. Never had a profitable quarter.

((())) smells like Bartlett, only different.

........................................................................

Phillip_McCavity
#21 2019-09-12 01:42:05

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

anon user #2.1 wrote:

It doesn't take a genius to see that driving for 40 cents a mile isn't going to be profitable.  That's the problem though with the so-called "Free market" -- information dsymmetry. People don't understand that really they aren't making any money at all and are instead losing it.

If it isn't profitable why are people doing it?

........................................................................

Original_Lonely_Guy
#22 2019-09-12 01:50:12

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

If it isn't profitable why are people doing it?

Desperation. They are pulling money out of their car.

It's the same kind of motivation that led to parents putting their kids to work at age 9 with dangerous machinery so that they could eat food. Then the socialzt libz put an end to that and made food free. Fuqin commies.

HO HO HO, ATTABOY PHIL! BOOTSTRAPS AND ALL THAT!
\

........................................................................

Phillip_McCavity
#23 2019-09-12 02:08:12

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Original_Lonely_Guy wrote:

Desperation. They are pulling money out of their car.

It's the same kind of motivation that led to parents putting their kids to work at age 9 with dangerous machinery so that they could eat food. Then the socialzt libz put an end to that and made food free. Fuqin commies.

I trust people to do what is in their self interest.

Nobody is forcing them. The world is full of jobs that simply became unprofitable to do.

........................................................................

Original_Lonely_Guy
#24 2019-09-12 02:17:55

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

I trust people to do what is in their self interest.

Nobody is forcing them. The world is full of jobs that simply became unprofitable to do.

It doesn't work that way Phil,. When there was little regulation, terrible things happened to dumb/poor/young people.

........................................................................

Phillip_McCavity
#25 2019-09-12 02:29:09

Re: California puts an end to the Labor toxic "gig economy"

Original_Lonely_Guy wrote:

It doesn't work that way Phil,. When there was little regulation, terrible things happened to dumb/poor/young people.

I'm not opposed to pure safety regulation.

However, just like I don't guarantee that a stock is profitable, I don't guarantee that of a job.

Everyone individually has jobs they would do and the price they would do them for. I wouldn't be a Muni bus driver, for instance. That job just sucks. Other people would do jobs even for a low wage. Many people, for instance, volunteer for political campaigns because they believe in the candidate.

Its just their freedom.

........................................................................

Pages: 1 2