# This Pandemic Exposes the Downsides of Cheap Uber Rides



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/21/technology/coronavirus-uber-workers.html
Many of us have benefited from the convenience of services like Uber and Instacart. But now in an economic and health crisis, their workers are highly vulnerable, and no one has their backs.

Here's how this happened, and who is to blame. Short version: Blame everyone, including ourselves.

How we got here:
In the United States, people who drive or deliver for Uber - and for companies like Lyft, Postmates, DoorDash and more - are hired as contractors not employees. That means the companies aren't required to provide them benefits and protections like health insurance and a minimum wage.

Some people who work for these companies like the flexibility of contract work. But the lack of health insurance, sick pay and other protections for many Americans, including Uber contractors, is stark now.

More people are skipping Uber rides altogether, leaving drivers with little income. And contractors are exposed to health risks when they do drive for Uber or go grocery shopping for Instacart.

Blame Uber:
For years, Uber and its peers delayed a reckoning about its contract work force, which numbers in the millions.

Only recently, as lawsuits and laws questioned whether Uber workers are actually conventional employees, the company and others have stepped up their push for a "third way" to give workers some flexibility of contractor life with some employee-like protections.

Uber, Lyft and other companies are also using this crisis as an opportunity. They helped persuade the U.S. government to extend unemployment benefits to freelancers. That's good for millions of people in financial difficulty, but it also sticks American taxpayers with the bill for worker protections Uber could have provided all along.

Uber also is paying drivers and delivery couriers who can prove they're probably sick and are ordered to isolate themselves. It's not clear how many people are eligible for a payment or have received one.
ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story

The company also asked for a temporary legal break so it could offer some worker benefits, without those facts being used against it in court cases seeking to reclassify Uber workers as employees. That's an understandable step to protect Uber's business. It's also gross.

Blame ourselves, and our government:
I started writing this pointing the finger at Uber and other companies that summon contract workers at the tap of a smartphone app. It's not that simple, though.

We have to admit that when Uber, Instacart and Postmates rely on contractors, it benefits us as well as those companies' bottom lines. If these companies instead hired masses of employees with benefits, the services they provide probably wouldn't be as ubiquitous or affordable. Uber might not exist at all outside big cities.

And Uber is far from the only company relying on non-employee workers, in part because it's cheaper to hire and fire them. That exposes the downsides of government decisions in the United States to tie many basic protections to our employer.
ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story

I'm not sure companies like Uber can continue to rely on an all-contract work force. That's going to be a huge challenge for Uber. It's also a problem for all of us who enjoyed cheap, handy services that leave workers exposed.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

So, if people had to pay more for an Uber ride, we wouldn't have this epidemic?
I thought it was Trumps fault.
It's actually Ubers?

Wow. Learn something new every day.


----------



## AveragePerson (May 18, 2018)

Here's a dose of reality for the economically challenged:

If Uber are responsible for the wage, health coverage and EI of it's millions of drivers, the company does not have the financial resource to do so. So it would go bankrupt and you won't have a job to complain about. This is like chewing off the hand that feeds you (but less than you liked) so you can have a larger meal for that one lunch.


----------



## IthurstwhenIP (Jan 12, 2018)

That’s why capitalism and Republicans need to fail. You should not need to have a job to get the basics, own a home, have a modest Apple phone etc. Basic income is not enough...we need one income for all regardless of what you choose to do with your day


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

AveragePerson said:


> If Uber are responsible





AveragePerson said:


> it would go bankrupt


Tough dilemma. Ethics or profitability? Well, they're losing billions of dollars per year so they better double down on being unethical.


----------



## IthurstwhenIP (Jan 12, 2018)

We need to hold these companies accountable! Until we are eighteen we have mom and dad, but after that it’s up to government and your employer to take over. They need a child welfare department for employers


----------



## AveragePerson (May 18, 2018)

IthurstwhenIP said:


> That's why capitalism and Republicans need to fail. You should not need to have a job to get the basics, own a home, have a modest Apple phone etc. Basic income is not enough...we need one income for all regardless of what you choose to do with your day


Sounds great, but can I be the one to have a free home, free food, while attending parties snapping photos on my free iPhone while you be the one to build my home, grow my food, and build my goods?


----------



## IthurstwhenIP (Jan 12, 2018)

AveragePerson said:


> Sounds great, but can I be the one to have a free home, free food, while attending parties snapping photos on my free iPhone while you be the one to build my home, grow my food, and build my goods?


You need to follow your heart and values in your endeavors, not a slave to their dreams of others. I love to build, so I would gladly build for you

❤ Sanders


----------



## AveragePerson (May 18, 2018)

TemptingFate said:


> Tough dilemma. Ethics or profitability? Well, they're losing billions of dollars per year so they better double down on being unethical.


There is no dilemma. There is no problem with ethics for Uber. Let's be rational here.

The choices were:

1) Uber or
2) Unemployment or job worst than Uber

Or you wouldn't be reliant upon Uber to begin with. Uber does not force you to work with them with a gun to your head.

The only thing Uber did is offer people more employment options. Health, EI, or Wage guarantee in a pandemic was NEVER promised by Uber. It was never part of the agreement. You knew that.

If offering people more choice in employment options is unethical then Uber is guilty as charged.



IthurstwhenIP said:


> You need to follow your heart and values in your endeavors, not a slave to their dreams of others. I love to build, so I would gladly build for you
> 
> ❤ Sanders


Fantastic that you have such passion for building for others. You certainly qualify to help build Uber's business, you won't even need a resume! You followed your heart and helped achieve lower cost of transportation for many in need of such service.


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

AveragePerson said:


> There is no dilemma. There is no problem with ethics for Uber. Let's be rational here.
> 
> The choices were:
> 
> ...


That's the argument used by sweatshops before labor laws were passed and by slave owners before slavery was abolished. Doesn't make it ethical.

Let me quote you again:


AveragePerson said:


> If Uber are responsible for the wage, health coverage and EI of it's millions of drivers, the company does not have the financial resource to do so.


So you think Uber should not pay fair wages, health coverage, or unemployment insurance because it cannot afford to do so. That's admitting that Uber is forced to be unethical or go bankrupt. That's the dilemma as you yourself expressed it.


----------



## AveragePerson (May 18, 2018)

TemptingFate said:


> That's the argument used by sweatshops before labor laws were passed and by slave owners before slavery was abolished. Doesn't make it ethical.


Uber isnt sweatshops. But let's use your example of sweatshop.

what happened to such jobs? Were the jobs retained, higher standard of employment achieved and consumers happy to absorb the higher cost of goods and chose the much more expensive domestic goods over the cheaper alternative? Yes, in fairlyland but in reality those jobs (employment options) simply moved to China, Mexico, and Asia. People still buy the cheaper goods, and those jobs are now permanently lost in your country.

Which is preferable? A starting job that is available for those that need it there is no better option right now since they currently lacks the skillset the better paying jobs that the market wants and therefore the pay is a reflection of that or forcibly shut those employment options (their best available option) down and force people into poverty and destitute because their job is relocated on the other side of the globe?

So tell, should the people who are in such unfortunate position be the one to make the choice of sticking with the job for now or should government be the one to decide for them and forcibly remove their job from the market?

Fighting the laws of global economic is like trying to defy gravity with willpower.



TemptingFate said:


> Let me quote you again:
> 
> So you think Uber should not pay fair wages, health coverage, or unemployment insurance because it cannot afford to do so. That's admitting that Uber is forced to be unethical or go bankrupt. That's the dilemma as you yourself expressed it.


Who decides what's a "fair wage"? If it was up to the individual, everyone and their mother thinks their underpaid and wants a raise.

The truth is, fair wage is determined by the market. In your case, the gig labor market. Uber is offering the BEST rate in the market for ridesharing. That's why drivers are with them. If you or someone else disagree with the pay, you and anyone else are welcome to start a venture, pitch to investors to pay drivers higher to steal Uber's marketshare, then Drivers will flock to your business but if customers aren't willing to absorb the higher premium then it'll probably fail.

Uber offers the best rate of pay for their niche. You (or anyone else that thinks there is an opportunity) are welcome to outbid uber on driver pay and show the world how "ethical" you are.

If even the highest bidder of the labor in question is unethical in your opinion, what does that make the rest? Who is the most ethical entity or person you know? Why did they not bid higher?


----------



## TemptingFate (May 2, 2019)

AveragePerson said:


> Uber isnt sweatshops. But let's use your example of sweatshop.
> 
> what happened to such jobs? Were the jobs retained, higher standard of employment achieved and consumers happy to absorb the higher cost of goods and chose the much more expensive domestic goods over the cheaper alternative? Yes, in fairlyland but in reality those jobs (employment options) simply moved to China, Mexico, and Asia. People still buy the cheaper goods, and those jobs are now permanently lost in your country.
> 
> ...


Your Ayn Rand brand of unfettered capitalism is tired and discredited. That's why America has labor laws to protect against exploitation like you describe. By your logic, why have a minimum wage? Why have OSHA? Why have laws against discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace? Why have laws against stock market fraud? Etc etc etc. Just let the market decide! 
You are true to your username at least.


----------



## AveragePerson (May 18, 2018)

TemptingFate said:


> Your Ayn Rand brand of unfettered capitalism is tired and discredited. That's why America has labor laws to protect against exploitation like you describe. By your logic, why have a minimum wage? Why have OSHA? Why have laws against discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace? Why have laws against stock market fraud? Etc etc etc. Just let the market decide!
> You are true to your username at least.


I simply replied to your points with logic. Like 1 + 1 = 2. It's not pretty, I agree, but does logic care about our emotions? If you have logical points or credible sources to counter what I said, I am happy to hear it or read your sources.

To answer more of your questions...

Why have minimum wage? Economically, there shouldn't be a minimum wage. But there is one not because it's the logical thing to do but because it is politically popular to do so and politicians are the one to make decision. Their decision is often determined by popularity rating rather than the best logical decision.

Now you might think: "what?! No minimum wage?! This guy must support slavery!". Far from it. In fact, removing minimum brings greater labor and economic efficiency and greater prosperity and opportunity to the people of that country.

How? Well, think about it. There is two apples of equal quality in front of you. One is $0.5/apple, while the other is $2/apple. As a consumer, which would you buy from in the supermarket? Logically, it would be $0.5/apple. But the $2/apple is farmed by the people of your country with their higher standard of pay and benefits but most consumers don't consider that nor care enough. With the $2/apple not selling well compared to the imported $0.5/apple, the $2/apple producers are forced to close down due to uncompetitiveness or move their jobs to cheaper, less regulatory market as well. So the jobs and the industry ultimately gets imported overtime. The higher standard of employment doesnt mean much if the job no longer exist because its slowly being imported to other countries. Remember we are in a global economy now.

Let me ask you something...

Do you think people of China,Mexico,Asia are better off or worst off with "exploitation jobs" being imported to their country due to their lack of minimum wage standard? Keep in mind these countries were in great poverty and now is some of the FASTEST growing GDP in the WORLD. They have little to no minimum wage or working standards. Yet their country and it's people are largely lifting themselves out of poverty and climbing the economic ladder.

Also, why is there so much cries to bring jobs back to America if the exportation of these "exploitation jobs" is such a good thing?

I'm interested to hear your answers to these questions.

I'm not going to discuss other unrelated aspects like sexual harassment, discriminations or stock market frauds, etc because those are outside the realm of economical principles and not something in dispute.


----------



## AveragePerson (May 18, 2018)

sellkatsell44 said:


> You might have been right at some point but people are starting to be more social conscious and that's why blackrock and Ishare released their white paper recently.
> 
> historically at some point, with your example, a revolution or uprising will occur.
> 
> _that_ is why things like minimum wage or osha exists.


If there is going to be a revolution or uprising, Would a revolution or uprising be averted by exporting (thus eliminating the job domestically) elsewhere due to uncompetitive regulations like high minimum wages, benefits, etc? Or would it be more likely to be averted by letting people have foundational jobs (stepping stones) even if the pay is not great, while they master a skill or create something that is in higher market demand? The consumers (as a majority collective) do not care about low pay or what comes from other people's wallet, they care what's coming from their wallet so they buy cheap. It has been proven over and over again, to the point where pretty much everything is made in China now.

Let's take a popular example. Walmart workers. People complain they are paid too low despite their artificially higher rate of pay due to minimum wage. Are consumers willing to pay more for goods so workers get pay higher? What people say and what people do are completely different. Take a few minute to watch the video below to observe this.


----------



## AveragePerson (May 18, 2018)

sellkatsell44 said:


> Walmart are still paid minimum wage and the Us government picks up the rest of that tab with their social programs.
> 
> that's a horrible example as those pple are making minimum wage so thus no uprising as of yet.
> 
> ...


Why would they only be allowed to hire at $2 or less? Walmart will compete with other business for labor resource. So they will all try to outbid each other until the market price of the labor is in balance. That's the true market value of their work. Also, if the wage of the people go down, the value of $ also increases. You can buy more with less. Right now, it's essentially the government coming in and putting a $2 minimum on Apples when they can be sold for $0.5 elsewhere because production is cheaper.

Sigh... let me put it this way. If minimum wage is $10, why not $15? If minimum wage is $15, why not $30? Why stop at 30? We can just solve world hunger and poverty by mandating $1million/hr minimum wage right?


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)

AveragePerson said:


> How? Well, think about it. There is two apples of equal quality in front of you. One is $0.5/apple, while the other is $2/apple. As a consumer, which would you buy from in the supermarket? Logically, it would be $0.5/apple. But the $2/apple is farmed by the people of your country with their higher standard of pay and benefits but most consumers don't consider that nor care enough. With the $2/apple not selling well compared to the imported $0.5/apple, the $2/apple producers are forced to close down due to uncompetitiveness or move their jobs to cheaper, less regulatory market as well. So the jobs and the industry ultimately gets imported overtime. The higher standard of employment doesnt mean much if the job no longer exist because its slowly being imported to other countries. Remember we are in a global economy now.


You might have been right at some point but people are starting to be more social conscious and that's why blackrock and Ishare released their white paper recently.

historically at some point, with your example, a revolution or uprising will occur.

_that_ is why things like minimum wage or osha exists.


AveragePerson said:


> Why would they only be allowed to hire at $2 or less? Walmart will compete with other business for labor resource. So they will all try to outbid each other until the market price of the labor is in balance. That's the true market value of their work. Also, if the wage of the people go down, the value of $ also increases. You can buy more with less. Right now, it's essentially the government coming in and putting a $2 minimum on Apples when they can be sold for $0.5 elsewhere because production is cheaper.
> 
> Sigh... let me put it this way. If minimum wage is $10, why not $15? If minimum wage is $15, why not $30? Why stop at 30? We can just solve world hunger and poverty by mandating $1million/hr minimum wage right?


Because other companies will hire at that little or less too.

if there is no incentive or rule to hire at x, then companies will just hire lower... why need to pay higher? It's like why would any bank need to pay over 1% if no one else is and the fed rate has been cut?


----------



## AveragePerson (May 18, 2018)

sellkatsell44 said:


> Because other companies will hire at that little or less too.
> 
> if there is no incentive or rule to hire at x, then companies will just hire lower... why need to pay higher? It's like why would any bank need to pay over 1% if no one else is and the fed rate has been cut?


As I said before, the pay is determined by the market. No one wakes up one day and say "I'm gonna set doctor pay at $300,000/year while cashiers get $25,000/year". Its completely market driven by supply and demand. If you pay doctors $50k, they'll be like "ok, I'm out, someone else will pay me $300,000 for my skillset and ability, good luck to you.".

If the pay goes to $2 or less, it is the market's way of saying there is too much supply of unskilled labor but not enough demand for them, do something else, convert resources to something that are in higher demand.

If there is no oversupply of unskilled labor where it overwhelms the demand, what's stopping me from outbidding walmart and taking the best from walmart while the lower cost of labor still allows me to be profitable to compete with Walmart? They'll be forced to concede or outbid.

If you think we can regulate our way out of poverty then just set the minimum wage to $1million/hr that'll surely do the trick right? Then we dont need to worry about money because it wouldn't be worth the paper its printed on or the ink to print it with.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

AveragePerson said:


> I simply replied to your points with logic. Like 1 + 1 = 2. It's not pretty, I agree, but does logic care about our emotions? If you have logical points or credible sources to counter what I said, I am happy to hear it or read your sources.
> 
> To answer more of your questions...
> 
> ...


You are reading right from the Little Red Book, aren't ya comrade?


----------



## AveragePerson (May 18, 2018)

UberBastid said:


> You are reading right from the Little Red Book, aren't ya comrade?


never even heard of the book. You don't need to when speaking simple rational truths. I'm still waiting for a counter point founded in rational logic.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

AveragePerson said:


> never even heard of the book. You don't need to when speaking simple rational truths.


LoL. You never heard of The Little Red Book?
You should get a copy. I'm sure you'd love it.

From Wikki:
_Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung (simplified Chinese: 毛主席语录; traditional Chinese: 毛主席語錄; pinyin: Máo Zhǔxí Yǔlù) is a book of statements from speeches and writings by Mao Zedong (formerly romanized as Mao Tse-tung), the former Chairman of the Communist Party of China, published from 1964 to about 1976 and widely distributed during the Cultural Revolution.
The most popular versions were printed in small sizes that could be easily carried and were bound in bright red covers, becoming commonly known internationally as the Little Red Book._










Check out "Mein Kamph" too ... it's exactly the opposite of Mao ... but, interesting reading.



AveragePerson said:


> I'm still waiting for a counter point founded in rational logic.


NO you're not comrade.
You are waiting for ANY response so that you can continue to spew your communist propaganda.
If you wish, you can consider mine as a response ... preach on comrade.
Tell me the plight of the working man, and how you can solve all our problems with lotsa free stuff.

I'd like a bedtime story. Goforit.

It is very common that commies are also uneducated.
People like Stalin and Mao and Pol Pot depended on it.
Pol Pot did the best he could to irradiate educated people from his Cambodia. He murdered millions of people simple because they were educated.
Doctors, lawyers, teachers, scientists ... shot. Why? Because they could think. They could reason. They could (and did) ask the questions.

Communists are known to be under educated; even though they make fun of capitalists as being 'mouth breathing Trumpsters'.

Watch this guy, ya'll. 
He will be fun for a while - then he will fade away to more fertile grounds where some will agree.
THIS site is full of capitalists.
We work.
We _want_ to work.

Most of us know that we can't afford free.


----------



## AveragePerson (May 18, 2018)

UberBastid said:


> LoL. You never heard of The Little Red Book?
> You should get a copy. I'm sure you'd love it.
> 
> From Wikki:
> ...


what are you smoking? what i'm saying is the opposite of communism and based entirely on free market principles.


----------



## deplorable1 (Apr 14, 2018)

IthurstwhenIP said:


> That's why capitalism and Republicans need to fail. You should not need to have a job to get the basics, own a home, have a modest Apple phone etc. Basic income is not enough...we need one income for all regardless of what you choose to do with your day


Then we can finally build a wall on the border. To keep people from leaving.


----------



## REX HAVOC (Jul 4, 2016)

AveragePerson said:


> Here's a dose of reality for the economically challenged:
> 
> If Uber are responsible for the wage, health coverage and EI of it's millions of drivers, the company does not have the financial resource to do so. So it would go bankrupt and you won't have a job to complain about. This is like chewing off the hand that feeds you (but less than you liked) so you can have a larger meal for that one lunch.


I doubt Uber will go bankrupt even if they burn all their cash. The worst senerio is they get bought out. I would imagine they're now on the governments "Too Big To Fail" list. They've destroyed the taxi industry and they're now a major transportation player that many Americans rely on for fast, reliable, cheap rides. They employ over 19,000 world wide and over 750,000 drivers in the USA as of 2018. Even with the pandemic and the loss of jobs there are still people driving for them and many will come back once this is all over.


----------



## ANT 7 (Oct 14, 2018)

I experienced watching the elastic band of labor demand in action first hand, only a few years ago.

Drove by this massive Safeway warehouse daily (see below) which had a neon reader board in the corner of the parking lot, that was easily visible from the major street it was on. For years it always said........JOBS $12 HR @ DOOR #17........basically, you'd walk in, and if you had a pulse, could start working tomorrow.

Suddenly it's $13 though.......then $14.......finally, it stopped all the way up at $17 almost a year later, just due to the government mandated $15 minimum wage increase that took place. Apparently, people don't want to actually "work" either..........burgers or boxes..........hmmmmm.........for $2 less per hour I'll take burgers Alex.


----------

