# The gig is up on 21st-century exploitation



## warsaw (Apr 8, 2017)

*Today’s app-based or “gig” economy is frequently dressed up in talk about “modern innovation” and the “21st century of work.” This facade is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.*
_*Precarious, contingent work is nothing new — we’ve always had jobs that are low-paying, insecure and dismissed as “unskilled.” Due to systemic racism and a historically exploitative economy, workers of color have always been, and continue to be, heavily concentrated in the most exploitative industries.*_
*The only difference is that today, companies like Uber, DoorDash and Instacart claim they don’t have to play by the rules because they use digital apps to manage their workforce. Even as many of these tech giants remain unprofitable, they have been allowed for far too long to shirk responsibility for providing safe and just working conditions where workers can thrive on and off the job.


















The gig is up on 21st-century exploitation – TechCrunch


Today’s app-based or “gig” economy is frequently dressed up in talk about “modern innovation” and the “21st century of work.” This facade is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.




techcrunch.com




*


----------



## warsaw (Apr 8, 2017)

*Workers’ rights in the so-called gig economy are often positioned as a modern problem. But when we think about the problems faced by gig and app-based workers, who are predominantly people of color, we must learn from the past in order to move forward to a just economy.
The federal government has long failed to address widespread worker exploitation. Since the passage of the National Labor Relations Act, jobs like agricultural and domestic work, which were largely performed by workers of color, were carved out of labor rights and protections. The “independent contractors” of today, who are largely workers of color, fall into this same category of workers who have been excluded from labor laws. Combined, Black and Latinx workers make up less than 29% of the nation’s total workforce, but they comprise almost 42% of workers for app-based companies.
Gig companies argue that the drivers, delivery people, independent contractors and other workers who build their businesses, take direction from them and whose pay they set are millions of tiny businesses that do not need baseline benefits and protections. They do this in order to shield themselves from taking responsibility for their frontline workforce. Corporations then avoid paying basic costs like a minimum wage, healthcare, paid sick leave, compensation coverage and a litany of other essential benefits for their employees. For many workers, these conditions only serve to proliferate inequality nationwide and ultimately uphold a deeply flawed economy built upon worker exploitation and suffering.*


----------



## SpinalCabbage (Feb 5, 2020)

Gig economy workers are the new Dalits.


----------



## warsaw (Apr 8, 2017)

Workers should be protected, regardless of work status! *The PRO ACT needs to be passed and signed into law!*
Independent contractors are not exactly all business owners. many Gig workers can't even read and write
simple English, so navigating all these rules and regulations is a major hurdle for most.

Just because you make it easier for someone to work independently, does not mean that they're actually better off
financially. The math can be fuzzy, when people are unaware of the true operating cost of being a Gig driver or delivery
person.

*"The PRO Act would protect and empower workers to exercise our freedom to organize a bargain," Richard Trumka, the president of the AFL-CIO, told NPR in a recent interview. "It's a game changer. If you really want to correct inequality in this country — wages and wealth inequality, opportunity and inequality of power — passing the PRO Act is absolutely essential to doing that." *


----------



## Bojingles (Sep 18, 2015)

Everyone knows but the chase, the chase, the chase is so compelling and resistance is futile


----------



## ANT 7 (Oct 14, 2018)

I'm a caucasian gig worker and _*I have no problem with it.*_

I've met many of my fellow buber's here on the street, and in the airport shitter lot, and they've figured out this game just as well as I have for the most part.

This article is more race hustling......that's all.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

so the answer is to make us all employees?

Those here who have been employees know that isn't the answer. 🤷‍♂️


----------



## UberChiefPIT (Apr 13, 2020)

warsaw said:


> *Today’s app-based or “gig” economy is frequently dressed up in talk about “modern innovation” and the “21st century of work.” This facade is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.*
> _*Precarious, contingent work is nothing new — we’ve always had jobs that are low-paying, insecure and dismissed as “unskilled.” Due to systemic racism and a historically exploitative economy, workers of color have always been, and continue to be, heavily concentrated in the most exploitative industries.*_
> *The only difference is that today, companies like Uber, DoorDash and Instacart claim they don’t have to play by the rules because they use digital apps to manage their workforce. Even as many of these tech giants remain unprofitable, they have been allowed for far too long to shirk responsibility for providing safe and just working conditions where workers can thrive on and off the job.
> 
> ...


I stopped reading at the point where they claimed it was a racial problem.

We've had a black POTUS.

Black people make insane amounts of millions doing things they are uniquely talented in. They earned it.

If you're good at something, work hard to be the best you can be at it, and you will be successful. Work harder than your peers, and you'll be more successful than they are. This is the simplest formula for which ANYONE can "get ahead" in life. Black, Red, Yellow, White, Brown, etc.


----------



## warsaw (Apr 8, 2017)

SHalester said:


> so the answer is to make us all employees?
> 
> Those here who have been employees know that isn't the answer. 🤷‍♂️


I don't want to be an employee, but the need to change the rules, so that we can negotiate as a group.
Currently, the rules do not allow gig workers to do any collective action or organize.

The article is racially tilted but it does point out that historically, many people classified as outside the mainstream
group are taken advantage of.


----------



## UberChiefPIT (Apr 13, 2020)

warsaw said:


> I don't want to be an employee, but the need to change the rules, so that we can negotiate as a group.
> Currently, the rules do not allow gig workers to do any collective action or organize.
> 
> The article is racially tilted but it does point out that historically, many people classified as outside the mainstream
> group are taken advantage of.


It's racially titled and aggravated to attract liberal reader support.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

warsaw said:


> gig and app-based workers, who are predominantly people of color,


bullshit


----------



## Beninmankato (Apr 26, 2017)

They never asked my color when I signed for any of the six gigs I've gotten.


----------



## warsaw (Apr 8, 2017)

The issue for me personally is not about color or racial groups as stated, but rather the message of helping the working class gig workers to get ahead and have the same rights and protections as other workers.

People need to focus on the aim of the message, rather than get bogged down by description that meant to attract certain readers.


----------



## jjminor82 (Oct 25, 2019)

warsaw said:


> Workers should be protected, regardless of work status! *The PRO ACT needs to be passed and signed into law!*
> Independent contractors are not exactly all business owners. many Gig workers can't even read and write
> simple English, so navigating all these rules and regulations is a major hurdle for most.
> 
> ...


Just reading through what you posted it sounds like it’s more of an education problem than a gig economy problem. People are uneducated with regards to financial responsibility and a basic understanding of accounting. People are doing a job and think they are profitable when they may or may not be. Apparently people don’t do enough research before jumping in.

I did this part time while working for a public accounting firm. I only quit my accounting position once I knew I could support my family and all of our expense needs in the gig economy.

Before going into accounting I was an educator and I am honestly confused if people do not understand the difference between a need and want. Government teachers are always fighting for higher salaries, and after reviewing their salary information in addition to making some inquiries from other teachers, I think it would be better just to educate them on how to take advantage of their finances. That would serve them a whole lot better and would probably serve the public better as well.


----------



## jjminor82 (Oct 25, 2019)

warsaw said:


> I don't want to be an employee, but the need to change the rules, so that we can negotiate as a group.
> Currently, the rules do not allow gig workers to do any collective action or organize.
> 
> The article is racially tilted but it does point out that historically, many people classified as outside the mainstream
> group are taken advantage of.


You mean unionize?

Personally I believe I have already negotiated. I’m using their apps to get my work done.


----------



## Tom Ford Bifocals (Aug 16, 2021)

SpinalCabbage said:


> Gig economy workers are the new Dalits.


Yes and they are to remain such until their death and/or deactivation.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Tom Ford Bifocals said:


> Yes and they are to remain such until their death and/or deactivation.


Oh come on.
I drove for two years, and quit three years ago because I found a better job.

Do you live in America?

.


----------



## Tom Ford Bifocals (Aug 16, 2021)

UberBastid said:


> Oh come on.
> I drove for two years, and quit three years ago because I found a better job.
> 
> Do you live in America?
> ...


I live in Los Angeles. I did Uber for one year, have a real job and career. Make six figures annually. Not everyone can do that, all societies must have their servants and low skilled laborers in one fashion or another. How will dirty floors be moped, groceries be checked out, or rides given from the strip club to the pizza joint without them?


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

Uber can't survive the transition to employee status.

It's too big of an administrative burden to switch everyone over.

That's also not counting the fact that it will save them billions a year if they owned their own cars rather than paying the per mile rate to drivers (legally these are the 2 best/only options for uber)

Fundamentally... their best hope of survival is to team up with taxi/black car services and let them own the cars and manage the drivers, at which point they would be lucky to get 10% of the vastly reduced revenue...

If the feds bring down the hammer on them and give them less than 10 years to get their ducks in a row they are doomed.

But if uber was hiring drivers and they paid min wage plus tips plus handed me the keys to a minivan or camry or something free to use while working i'd jump on that.

But the cost of getting that together is just too high.


But if the cab company instead said "hey everyone, you need to go to HR and interview and then you'll be an employee and make min wage plus tips"..

Well then i'd happily do that and work full time, whatever hours they want and accept every ping they send me and be a good boy for the cab company. Knowing a lot of drivers don't like working nights I'd happily do that. Or days... I wouldn't really care at that point i'd just do what I'm told and walk away with min wage + tips.

But for uber to get a local office put up to handle HR, buy a fleet of cars, and then get a manager in india working remotely to manage schedules ect.... 


That's never going to happen.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

UberChiefPIT said:


> It's racially titled and aggravated to attract liberal reader support.



I think you are right that liberals recognize racial problems and want to address them and solve them. We can argue about the solutions. but If you dont even see the problem, the problem is you


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Fedex faced this problem (I dont know about the racial aspect) but each of their drivers were independent contractors operating their own businesses. As I understand it a series of court decisions convinced FedEx to make a big change

Now FedEx contracts with delivery companies, not individuals and its the flee owner that higesthe drivers, according to all the various labor laws. 

I can see Uber moving to a similar organization contracting with fleet owners not individuals


----------



## Dammit Mazzacane (Dec 31, 2015)

I agree with oldfart on foreseeing this Indy Fleet Owners scenario if the hammer falls.

didn’t Uber try this w/UberFleet? Or am I mistaken?
Lyft, meanwhile, is further behind.


----------



## Dammit Mazzacane (Dec 31, 2015)

Dammit Mazzacane said:


> I agree with oldfart on foreseeing this Indy Fleet Owners scenario if the hammer falls.
> 
> didn’t Uber try this w/UberFleet? Or am I mistaken?
> Lyft, meanwhile, is further behind.


The framework exists



https://www.uber.com/us/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

warsaw said:


> so that we can negotiate as a group.


that would be a union. to be a union you need to be an employee. there needs to be a vote. We ain't employees and that vote would fail once the 'drivers' figured out they would need to PAY to be in the union.


----------



## Pashaster (Nov 3, 2015)

warsaw said:


> _*Due to systemic racism and a historically exploitative economy, workers of color have always been, and continue to be, heavily concentrated in the most exploitative industries.*_


Bro... this exploitation gig is complete bullshit even for a white guy. Trust me (I'm white with lots of hours driving for Uber/Lyft) - it has nothing to do with your skin color. 

However, what I noticed, is whenever I drove in survival mode (have to work long hours to pay the bills, etc), it really reflected on my rating. It seems they designed the system for casual Ubering only. And I wish I knew that before signing up for their $1000/mo lease contract. I was stressed the **** out of my mind, day and night, trying to keep up with the car payments, insurance, rent, etc, thinking it would be an easy way to make money. This eventually got me de-platformed. You'll NEVER make proper income working this gig, no matter your location, time of the day, season, or race. I tried every possible permutation, starting with Uber black in 2014, eventually working my way down to UberX, with several cars. Go find something else to take care of yourself.

**** those scumbags! But please don't turn this into a race problem. It's not!


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

UberBastid said:


> bullshit


Most drivers are "people of color", meaning they're not Caucasion as far as being of European descent.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

ANT 7 said:


> I'm a caucasian gig worker and _*I have no problem with it.*_
> 
> I've met many of my fellow buber's here on the street, and in the airport shitter lot, and they've figured out this game just as well as I have for the most part.
> 
> This article is more race hustling......that's all.


To the hundreds of thousands and possibly a million or more drivers who support their families with this job, it's not a "game".

Second, the only way you and the others can succeed at this "game" is for the vast majority of drivers NOT to be able to succeed at it.

The garbage base pay/reliance on surge and promos business model used by these gig companies is exclusionary, which means that for the small minority to succeed the vast majority have to fail, similar to how slot machines work.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

SHalester said:


> so the answer is to make us all employees?


Preferably not, but major reforms are very long overdue.

Implementing ALL of the previous CA features nationwide and making them IRREVOCABLE would be a start, but more reforms beyond those are needed, including FULL TRANSPARENCY in ALL of their dealings with the drivers. 

These gig companies should be given an ultimatum... give up some of their control over the drivers or put the drivers on the payroll as employees. They can't be allowed to have it both ways any longer.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

oldfart said:


> Fedex faced this problem (I dont know about the racial aspect) but each of their drivers were independent contractors operating their own businesses. As I understand it a series of court decisions convinced FedEx to make a big change


The reason Fedex faced this problem was that they exercised too much control over their supposed IC drivers. 

They interfered with the operation of the drivers' businesses by doing things such as taking away customer bases (routes) that drivers had built up. The court ruled that Fedex treated their drivers like employees.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Pashaster said:


> It seems they designed the system for casual Ubering only.


None of these gig companies could survive without a solid core of full timers.

You can't deliver reliable and convenient service with just casual drivers.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> give up some of their control over the drivers or put the drivers on the payroll as employees.


or create a special new group for drivers.

or make them all employees and watch the screaming begin. Being an employee is not honey and sugar as a many here believe it is.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> The reason Fedex faced this problem was that they exercised too much control over their supposed IC drivers.
> 
> They interfered with the operation of the drivers' businesses by doing things such as taking away customer bases (routes) that drivers had built up. The court ruled that Fedex treated their drivers like employees.



Pretty sure thats what I said,or at least thats what I meant, 

FedEx treated their ICs like they were employees, and the courts agreed, The solution was to contract with larger ICs who now employ the drivers who are true employees. FedEx still doesnt employ drivers


My point isnt so much to report on how thigs work at FedEx, or even Amazon, who does the same thing. But rather present an example of something that Uber could do, to continue dealing only with Independent contractors


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

warsaw said:


> Workers should be protected, regardless of work status! *The PRO ACT needs to be passed and signed into law!*
> Independent contractors are not exactly all business owners. many Gig workers can't even read and write
> simple English, so navigating all these rules and regulations is a major hurdle for most.
> 
> ...


Strike, Strike, Strike!

Seems unprofitable contractors are always looking for government intervention.

Experiment, learn and adapt.

Or move on.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> Most drivers are "people of color", meaning they're not Caucasion as far as being of European descent.


And this assertion is based on what data set?

As usual, you're stating as facts your opinion.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

Yeah you guys are right about the fleet thing.

I should have come up with that considering the number #1 fleet for black cars In Orlando operates out of the same yard as the only UberTaxi Fleet in Orlando..

Ya know.. the one I drive for..


So yes it's possible, it's also VERY possible that if uber goes that route all part time opportunities will suddenly dry up.

They may not want to dick around keeping folks who don't want to work 40+ hours a week.

But the other thing you guys also need to keep in mind is that most of these fleets operate as indepedentent contractors currently. So if they get cracked down on they might go all topsy turvey screwy as well.


Regardless of what happens.. The Day any sort of IC crack starts i wouldn't want to be depending on uber/taxis/whatever to get around. It could take months them to pick up the pieces and get all their ducks in a row.


----------



## warsaw (Apr 8, 2017)

SHalester said:


> that would be a union. to be a union you need to be an employee. there needs to be a vote. We ain't employees and that vote would fail once the 'drivers' figured out they would need to PAY to be in the union.


Union dues are actually very low compared to what you get out of the membership.
I have had union jobs, where the dues were $50 a month and the benefits added up to over
$2300/month in premium health care coverage, fully funded by the employer, plus a private pension.
Also, the union wages were usually at least 50% higher than the same job at a non-union location.

The PRO ACT has the intention of making it easier for non-traditional workers to be able to organize.
*The fact still remains That U/L Is 100% Dependent on the Drivers, Without Them There's NO Uber/LYFT.*


----------



## warsaw (Apr 8, 2017)

*Apps Are Easy To Make!*
_*Workers Are Hard To Get!*_
*And Harder To Keep!*


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Judge and Jury said:


> As usual, you're stating as facts your opinion.


You've made many many posts on this website and have made many many definitive statements, and few if any of them are prefaced or followed by the phrase "in my opinion..." And few if any include corroboration for your statements.

Yet so often when I post comments you don't like, you and/or your fellow travelers demand data or other types of corroboration. You're a flatout hypocrite.

This is blog, not a master's thesis. If a reader deems a comment is incorrect, the reader can provide the proof that the comment is wrong.

This screenshot is one of many articles that state that most rideshare drivers are non-white. Uber themselves has stated this is the case.

The taxi business has been this way for years. I've visited several states up and down the East Coast in the last 8 years and it's obvious that most RS drivers are non-white. Yet here you are arguing against it.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

oldfart said:


> My point isnt so much to report on how thigs work at FedEx, or even Amazon, who does the same thing. But rather present an example of something that Uber could do, to continue dealing only with Independent contractors


How do you propose Uber could that without incurring much higher labor costs?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

SHalester said:


> or make them all employees and watch the screaming begin


Who's gonna do the screaming?



SHalester said:


> Being an employee is not honey and sugar as a many here believe it is.


There's good employers, bad employers, and so-so ones.

The defenders of the status quo try to use scare tactics by saying that Uber would be even worse to work for as an employer. This is false. They'd be better as an employer than they are now because the various employee protection laws would force them to be.


----------



## jaxbeachrides (May 27, 2015)

I don't see the correlation between gig jobs and racism.

Shitty jobs however, are easy to get and usually dont support the cost of going to work. Whether it be McDonald's or uber, you'll have to work 60-70 hours a week to pay your bills.

Really any job that pays much less than $20 these days is questionable after expenses. If you can keep your expenses extremely low somehow, that's about the only way to have any money leftover.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> How do you propose Uber could that without incurring much higher labor costs?


not my job to judge the merits of one plan or another for Uber. All I can do or want to do is have enough information to understand my costs 
I don’t see that they would have to incur any labor costs. That’s the point (for Uber) isn’t it
Using UPS and FeEx as examples: one does well and so do their drivers 
One owns the trucks employs the drivers and does quite well and so do the drivers the other does not own the trucks and does not employ the drivers FedEx does we all but the drivers, not so much

Again just examples that could serve as models for uber


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> Who's gonna do the screaming?


are we extra slow today? How many drivers here could go through an interview for a 'job'? Or do you think U/L would just, via magic, make all drivers employees and by more magic said employees would vote for a union?

Really, do you expect if you were an employee there would be no changes? Really? Defend that.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

warsaw said:


> Union dues are actually very low compared to what you get out of the membership.


Not sure how one would prove that?A union I have access to now is a few bucks a month PLUS 3%. What they offer discount wise and maybe free legal advice is certainly not worth it, so I'm not joining. 

Went my entire working life with no union, think I'll be aok.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

SHalester said:


> are we extra slow today? How many drivers here could go through an interview for a 'job'? Or do you think U/L would just, via magic, make all drivers employees and by more magic said employees would vote for a union?


For more than 9 years Uber's signed up millions of drivers without interviews, so it wouldn't be a stretch to assume Uber would continue to do the same thing with employee drivers, especially given the likelihood that many if not most of the "new" employee drivers would already be working for Uber. Uber would also continue to run background checks.

As far as a union is concerned, it would depend on what the union has to offer, but most likely the majority of drivers would support a union.



SHalester said:


> Really, do you expect if you were an employee there would be no changes? Really? Defend that.


There'd be changes, for better and for worse. The upside would be better pay for most drivers as well as all the protections and benefits that come with being an employee. There'd also be compensation for the use of their vehicles.

Another positive change would be new companies entering the market, which would be good for the drivers.

The downsides would be possible layoffs and workhour restrictions, but both would depend on Uber's ability to recruit and maintain the required number of drivers. Competition from new companies could provide more leverage for the drivers.

Drivers would lose at least some of their tax deductions as well.

Drivers would also most likely lose at least some schedule flexibility, but given the variable demand of this business, Uber would need to be flexible for their bottom line. And if enough drivers make flexibility a job requirement, Uber would have an additional reason to be flexible. Again, competition from new companies could provide more leverage for the drivers.

Drivers may have to sacrifice being allowed to work where they want and which rides they want, but again, driver demand as well as competition from new companies could require Uber to be flexible about those things as well.

The bottom line is there's plusses and minuses, and depending on who you are, one or the other would be more.

I believe at least some of the anti-employee folks would eventually come over to the "dark side" of employee status.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> Who's gonna do the screaming?
> 
> 
> 
> ...





SHalester said:


> Not sure how one would prove that?A union I have access to now is a few bucks a month PLUS 3%. What they offer discount wise and maybe free legal advice is certainly not worth it, so I'm not joining.
> 
> Went my entire working life with no union, think I'll be aok.


 My brother drove for UPS for 33 years, first in the package cars, then pulling doubles up and down I-95. He was/is a Teamster. He he retired at 55 (15 years ago)

Heres something I pulled from the internet

On average every UPS driver earns $30 per hour. According to a report given to mentalfloss.com by NPR and Teamster union which represents UPS, the payment received by the drivers is double what they got in the mid ’90s. On average these drivers could earn more than $75,000. This compares offers very favourable compensation compared to what there is at both competitors. Its competitor FedEx delivery drivers are said to be earning an average of $34,340


----------



## warsaw (Apr 8, 2017)

Lots of of workers are anti union, because of bad PR and intentional misinformation given out by biased sources.
The truth is that some Unions had bad reputation in the past and a few in the present, but overall being a union member is usually much better than not!

Better pay
Job protections
Grieving Process
Union Pensions
Discounts
Better Medical Dental & Vision Insurance
Also, many Unionized Public Sector Jobs come extras and early retirement.

good luck with your new job!


----------



## SpinalCabbage (Feb 5, 2020)

We lost dominance in the the steel industry due to union demands. We lost dominance in the automotive industry due to union demands. Both industries were outsourced due to corporate greed and rising union demands. Both unions and corporations put profit over American jobs. Unions are great until they aren't. We glorify men like Jimmy Hoffa who really was a genuine hero to the working class, but the dude went bad and should have been put down far earlier than he was.


----------



## jfinks (Nov 24, 2016)

SHalester said:


> so the answer is to make us all employees?
> 
> Those here who have been employees know that isn't the answer. 🤷‍♂️


The answer is to treat contractors as contractors. Give all trip information to every driver. Start and end point, $ amount and esitmated total time. Just like Uber eats. I have no idea why they give this info for food and not riders. Just stupid. There are so many long pickups I'd probably do if i just knew how much i'd make on it.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

oldfart said:


> I think you are right that liberals recognize racial problems and want to address them and solve them. We can argue about the solutions. but If you dont even see the problem, the problem is you
> 
> View attachment 610439


Do I as a white guy make more money driving Uber than the minorities? 

What is the solution? Should minority drivers get an extra 20% on each fare to make up for their lack of white privilege?


----------



## Uberdriver2710 (Jul 15, 2015)

Vote with your reject button.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Trafficat said:


> Do I as a white guy make more money driving Uber than the minorities?
> 
> What is the solution? Should minority drivers get an extra 20% on each fare to make up for their lack of white privilege?


That you expect to make more than minorities is probably something, to think about.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

oldfart said:


> That you expect to make more than minorities is probably something, to think about.


I don't make more than minorities. I fully expect to be passed over for nearly every opportunity if there is someone more diverse that can do the same thing.

This is the penalty I must face for being related to the slave master George Washington. Current whites hold a disproportionate number of high paid jobs on average but the currently privileged will give up nothing. They keep their privilege and secure jobs for their kin, and to reach racial balance, white trashicans are discouraged from the corporate ladders by de facto racial quotas. Do you expect to make more for being white? Perhaps you are projecting?

I always wonder why at both universities I attend the University president is always a succession of old white guys preaching social justice and systemic racism. If social justice was really important why did he not step down and let a black woman take over?


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Trafficat said:


> Do I as a white guy make more money driving Uber than the minorities?
> 
> What is the solution? Should minority drivers get an extra 20% on each fare to make up for their lack of white privilege?





oldfart said:


> That you expect to make more than minorities is probably something, to think about.


You might want to read what Traffic wrote.
First .. I didn't see ANY expectations. There's only three sentences there and all both in a question mark.
He asked some questions. 
Do you have an answer, to any of them?

Do you believe that he should be held responsible for the sins of his father?

.



.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

UberBastid said:


> You might want to read what Traffic wrote.
> First .. I didn't see ANY expectations. There's only three sentences there and all both in a question mark.
> He asked some questions.
> Do you have an answer, to any of them?
> ...


The three questions are a set up I’m not falling for. You want to talk about race, I don’t but yea I think trafficat’s reaction has racist undertones 

But my answers are 

1) Do I as a white guy make more than minorities ?
I don’t know what you make, nor do I know what individual minorities make I don’t even know if you are white or what that has to do with anything

2) what is the solution?
I have to answere that with an “I don’t know” I don’t even know what problem you are talking about. I suspect it in the the same problem the author of the study is talking about 

3) should certain drivers get a 20% bonus?
Ans (with tong firmly planted in cheek) Only if I get one too

I think that where you and Trafficat go wrong here is that you read the article as having something to do with race. It doesn’t, at least the way I read if

The study starts with the fact that there have always been jobs that exploit their workers and that minorities have always been the majority stuck doing these jobs 


That there have always been folks available to be exploited and that we allow others to exploit them is the problem that need addressed, not that minorities are being exploited . The point is that no one should be exploited. 

The gig economy is today’s exploitive work place and like exploitive work places of the past the folks exploited are largely the minorities. Your suggestion to give minorities a bonus doesn’t solve the problem that we allow some folks to exploit others

And your question regarding the sins of our fathers is irrelevant. Is completely off topic. Not that it’s not a question worth talking about. It’s just the that’s talking about sins of the past. We have a lot of sins of the present to deal with first

But if I have to answer your simple minded question regarding sins of our fathers I’d say my father is dead. And my daughters father is dame near dead But if his sins and mine continue to benefit me at the expense of my kids contemporaries. I’d say yea I owe someone something (and so does my daughter)


----------



## Dripping Gold Baby (Aug 20, 2021)

This is not an exploitation, it is paying you what you are worth. Get a skill or an education or shut up and serve as an underling.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Dripping Gold Baby said:


> This is not an exploitation, it is paying you what you are worth. Get a skill or an education or shut up and serve as an underling.


others on this forum would argue that Uber and Lyft dont pay a fair wage

I dont mind serving as an underling but you need to pay me a living wage Lewis Black even covers health insurance for his ball washer


----------



## Dripping Gold Baby (Aug 20, 2021)

oldfart said:


> others on this forum would argue that Uber and Lyft dont pay a fair wage
> 
> I dont mind serving as an underling but you need to pay me a living wage Lewis Black even covers health insurance for his ball washer


They would also argue that they should get paid just for breathing. Nobody owes a living wage to anybody. This is underling talk. Want someone to take care of your housing, food and clothing and transportation, then sell yourself into slavery. Otherwise compete in the free market.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Dripping Gold Baby said:


> This is not an exploitation, it is paying you what you are worth. Get a skill or an education or shut up and serve as an underling.



We can talk about whether uber exploits their workers or not. But please dont argue that we unskilled, uneducated underlings are not entitled to a living wage


----------



## Dripping Gold Baby (Aug 20, 2021)

oldfart said:


> We can talk about whether uber exploits their workers or not. But please dont argue that we unskilled, uneducated underlings are not entitled to a living wage


Explain me something. If you are paid 130 percent the minimum wage, is that not enough to feed, cloth and house you? Uber even give health care now for full-time workers. It is not that you will live on the street or starve or go naked, it is that you want a living of quality above your current pay. Want a better living, then get an education or learn a skill.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Dripping Gold Baby said:


> They would also argue that they should get paid just for breathing. Nobody owes a living wage to anybody. This is underling talk. Want someone to take care of your housing, food and clothing and transportation, then sell yourself into slavery. Otherwise compete in the free market.



You are wrong there.. 
we start with the understanding that food shelter and clothing, health care and water are necessities of life and if we can provide a path for everyone to get those basics taken care of, we must And we can


----------



## Dripping Gold Baby (Aug 20, 2021)

oldfart said:


> You are wrong there..
> we start with the understanding that food shelter and clothing, health care and water are understood necessities of life and if we can provide a path for everyone to get those basics taken care of, we must And we can


Ok how am I wrong? At 130 percent minimum wage, you can afford food, clothing, and water. You also get healthcare from Uber. Exactly what are you being depraved of from Uber?


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

Dripping Gold Baby said:


> Ok how am I wrong? At 130 percent minimum wage, you can afford food, clothing, and water. You also get healthcare from Uber. Exactly what are you being depraved of from Uber?


Drivers don't get healthcare, but I agree I make a fair amount from Uber.


----------



## oyeah (Aug 21, 2021)

Dripping Gold Baby said:


> They would also argue that they should get paid just for breathing. Nobody owes a living wage to anybody. This is underling talk. Want someone to take care of your housing, food and clothing and transportation, then sell yourself into slavery. Otherwise compete in the free market.


Well technically anything less than minimum wage is modern day slavery it's illegal and a human cant agree or "choose" to work for that and no employer can pay less than that, & since 95+% of uber request pay less than minimum wage after a 3rd grader calculates actual costs uber is modern slavery.

1960s -70s cab rates don't lie.
Over 1 billion rides or 250+ million hours of labor were funneled to Dara / Travis K and the other cofounder so THREE humans, I'd say they do owe people a living wage.

It's illegal/predatory to sell things under costs at such a large scale, sure a few loss leaders to get people in the door are tolerated but ubers burned 60+ BILLION over the last decade or about 1 million per hour selling $5 foot longs for $2 it's anti competitive and no where near a "free" market.

Yogi Bear cartoons from the 60s showed scooter rental companies its not new, wanted to start something similar now you need a billion dollars lol hows that a "free" market used to cost a couple hundred bucks in permits and maybe a grand on scooters/bikes, same with a courier service own a bike got $100 fee for the city boom your in business, not now you need a billion in VC and a global network for your app, a cab company outside new york cost ya maybe a hunderd grand for a few cabs and a few thousand to the city, not anymore time to hire some MIT neuroscientists and game developers, then some software engineeres, then again get a billion in VC and boom you can own your own cab company

theses apps are so beyond illegal at this point its ridiculous, cant even take people who defend them serious


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

jfinks said:


> Give all trip information to every driver.


amen, In Calif we have that. But now with conditions. Very glad I retired from gig driving work because not sure I could meet the 5/10 requirement and if I lose full info ping, I wouldn't drive. Now I don't need to consern myself. Got mahself a full time real job.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

oldfart said:


> My brother drove for UPS for 33 years,


well, that's great. In my case, I'm not required to 'join' the union, but i get all the benefits of the contract negotiations ie any of the agreed to contract details. 

That means joining and paying I'd get to vote and few 'free' or discounted services. Kinda makes it an easy decision. I'm passing; don't see any value to it.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> or more than 9 years Uber's signed up millions of drivers without interviews, so it wouldn't be a stretch to assume Uber would continue to do the same thing


you must be drinking something or didn't pay much attention to AB5. Both Uber and Lyft said they would not hire all drivers. They both said drivers would 'apply'. Unless you think that would all be via electronics? Um, big assumption there.

If anybody believes if you guys were to become employees it would cover 100% of active drivers, they are living in an alternative reality. Period. 

And as noted many times most aren't really even sure what being an employee means beyond their dream of benefits, protections, more money etc etc. That balloon meet the sharp pin. 🤦‍♂️


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

SHalester said:


> you must be drinking something or didn't pay much attention to AB5. Both Uber and Lyft said they would not hire all drivers.


You must be drinking something or didn't pay attention to my post because no where in my post did I say "all" drivers would be hired. Please post a screenshot that shows I said that.

I said many if not most of the newly hired employee-drivers would already be working for Uber. 

I still say that it wouldn't be a stretch to assume that Uber would hire drivers without interviews.


SHalester said:


> If anybody believes if you guys were to become employees it would cover 100% of active drivers, they are living in an alternative reality. Period.


Again, I never said such a thing. In fact I stated that there could be layoffs. 



SHalester said:


> And as noted many times most aren't really even sure what being an employee means beyond their dream of benefits, protections, more money etc etc. That balloon meet the sharp pin.


You've assigned this strawman fantasy of employee-status utopia to drivers who favor employee status. They're not talking about utopia, they're talking about getting better pay and receiving the protections and benefits that come with being an employee in this country.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> I still say that it wouldn't be a stretch to assume that Uber would hire drivers without interviews.


don't pay much attn to what you post, aye? THAT statement produced my statement. I guess I should be more clear with you: I don't agree with your silly opinion if AB5 becomes unshackled from Prop 22 that U/L will 'hire' drivers wo an interview. There would be a FULL and real onboarding and prior there WOULD be an electronic look at one's transactions and an interview. Guaranteed.

Is that clear enough for you now to get it? 

Plus, we haven't even remind everyone what being an employee would mean to the 'freedoms' so enjoyed. They would be gone. Period.

Debate that. I'd think you of all people would enjoy being supervised. hahahahahaahaha


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

SHalester said:


> don't pay much attn to what you post, aye? THAT statement produced my statement. I guess I should be more clear with you: I don't agree with your silly opinion if AB5 becomes unshackled from Prop 22 that U/L will 'hire' drivers wo an interview.


As you do so often, you get fixated and argue about minutiae. This time it's about job interviews.

I've don't recall ever having a formal interview for any of the delivery jobs I've had as an employee or alleged IC, including pizza, restaurant, and package delivery.



SHalester said:


> There would be a FULL and real onboarding and prior there WOULD be an electronic look at one's transactions and an interview. Guaranteed.


Does your "guarantee" include Eats and Doordash? Head over to your nearest pizza shop and find out how full their "onboarding" process is for new drivers.

Let's say that Uber does interviews. Big deal. The job position is that of a driver, not CFO of Uber.



SHalester said:


> Plus, we haven't even remind everyone what being an employee would mean to the 'freedoms' so enjoyed. They would be gone. Period.


Just as you have on several previous occasions, you're once again saying that Uber drivers don't know what it's like to be an employee. That's a curious statement coming from someone who on many occasions has insisted that the vast majority of drivers are part timers doing it as a "side hustle". You can't support a family on side hustle money, especially one with such crappy pay. This means that most Uber drivers have a full time job, and most likely that full time job is a W2 job. 

Thus, most drivers are well aware of what it means to be an employee.



SHalester said:


> Debate that. I'd think you of all people would enjoy being supervised. hahahahahaahaha


I've been a "supervised" W2 employee since I got my first job as a dishwasher at 16 years old.



SHalester said:


> Plus, we haven't even remind everyone what being an employee would mean to the 'freedoms' so enjoyed. They would be gone. Period.


In all my experience as a shackled W2 worker, I have never seen anywhere near the level of fear and intimidation that I've seen among so many people who have all these "freedoms" and are their "own bosses"...

All of the angst over ratings, all of the worries about being accused of violating the rules, all of the times saying "yes" to unreasonable and costly demands from pax lest they get a bad rating or a false accusation, etc.


----------

