Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.
-
wrote on 11 Oct 2022, 02:07 last edited by
I believe it is because that's what the White house wants.
-
wrote on 11 Oct 2022, 02:12 last edited by
CA tried this but got overruled by voters.
-
wrote on 11 Oct 2022, 02:21 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
CA tried this but got overruled by voters.
I remember that. However, this isn’t subject to a vote, is it? It’s a decree.
-
wrote on 11 Oct 2022, 15:05 last edited by
So golfers on the PGA Tour will become employees.
That is a big change.
-
@jon-nyc said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
CA tried this but got overruled by voters.
I remember that. However, this isn’t subject to a vote, is it? It’s a decree.
wrote on 11 Oct 2022, 15:13 last edited by@George-K said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
@jon-nyc said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
CA tried this but got overruled by voters.
I remember that. However, this isn’t subject to a vote, is it? It’s a decree.
Well it’s not an executive order, it’s agency rule-making. As a remedy, Lawsuits are a possibility but I don’t know enough to know what case they’d make. I mean, I do conceptually, they’d argue that the agency overstepped its enabling legislation. And this scotus is open to those arguments generally. But I don’t know enough about the enabling legislation to know how good a case they have.
-
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 11:46 last edited by
The stock prices of Uber, Lyft and DoorDash slid on Tuesday after the Department of Labor announced proposed changes to how workers should be classified. The prospective guidance is intended to “combat employee misclassification,” the federal agency said in a statement.
Soon after, Uber’s share price dropped by more than 10% to $24.61, while Lyft’s tanked more than 12% to $11.22 and DoorDash’s fell more than 5% to $44.98 at the time of writing.
-
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 12:03 last edited by
The Biden Boys doing what they do best...
-
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 12:05 last edited by
You can't protect workers if the company folds. Another hit to the economy.
-
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 12:28 last edited by
Uber seems pretty chill about it.
Uber also mentioned flexibility in an email to TechCrunch, and said the “proposed rule takes a measured approach, essentially returning us to the Obama era, during which our industry grew exponentially.”
-
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 12:30 last edited by
I’d be curious to know the practical effect. There are a lot of full time Uber drivers out there, I wouldn’t begrudge them the employee status so they get social security etc. But hopefully this doesn’t affect their ability to set their own hours. Some of them really are more like contractors, driving for more than one app service.
“Don’t make me repeat myself”
- history
-
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 12:33 last edited by
See, that's the thing. A lot of these people - my daughter included a couple years ago, drove for several different outfits, Lyft, Uber, Grubhub, Doordash, Instacart, etc. and had the ability to accept or pass on engagements. If that's not a contractor I don't know what is. Sticking with only Uber is their choice. It's not enforced.
-
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 12:33 last edited by
@Mik said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
You can't protect workers if the company folds. Another hit to the economy.
With that line of argument, one could have argued similar variants:
-
"You can't protect the slaves if the plantation folds. Another hit to the economy."
-
"You can't protect the prostitutes if the brothel closes. Another hit to the economy."
Neither argument is adequate to abolish slavery or to deregulate sex work. Similar argument would also not be adequate to deter regulation of gig work.
-
-
I’d be curious to know the practical effect. There are a lot of full time Uber drivers out there, I wouldn’t begrudge them the employee status so they get social security etc. But hopefully this doesn’t affect their ability to set their own hours. Some of them really are more like contractors, driving for more than one app service.
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 12:41 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
I’d be curious to know the practical effect. There are a lot of full time Uber drivers out there, I wouldn’t begrudge them the employee status so they get social security etc.
They do get Social Security etc…The only difference is that the employer takes care of the accounting for them…
-
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 12:43 last edited by jon-nyc 10 Dec 2022, 12:44
@Mik said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
You can't protect workers if the company folds. Another hit to the economy.
Uber is still operating at a loss, AFAIK. It was already unclear whether their business model was sustainable.
We saw their prices go up last year to reduce the burn, and we’ll see them go up again. But we’d have seen them go up more even without this.
-
@Mik said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
You can't protect workers if the company folds. Another hit to the economy.
With that line of argument, one could have argued similar variants:
-
"You can't protect the slaves if the plantation folds. Another hit to the economy."
-
"You can't protect the prostitutes if the brothel closes. Another hit to the economy."
Neither argument is adequate to abolish slavery or to deregulate sex work. Similar argument would also not be adequate to deter regulation of gig work.
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 12:50 last edited by@Axtremus said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
@Mik said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
You can't protect workers if the company folds. Another hit to the economy.
With that line of argument, one could have argued similar variants:
-
"You can't protect the slaves if the plantation folds. Another hit to the economy."
-
"You can't protect the prostitutes if the brothel closes. Another hit to the economy."
Neither argument is adequate to abolish slavery or to deregulate sex work. Similar argument would also not be adequate to deter regulation of gig work.
Jesus.
-
-
@Axtremus said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
@Mik said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
You can't protect workers if the company folds. Another hit to the economy.
With that line of argument, one could have argued similar variants:
-
"You can't protect the slaves if the plantation folds. Another hit to the economy."
-
"You can't protect the prostitutes if the brothel closes. Another hit to the economy."
Neither argument is adequate to abolish slavery or to deregulate sex work. Similar argument would also not be adequate to deter regulation of gig work.
Jesus.
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 13:05 last edited by@Mik said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
@Axtremus said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
@Mik said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
You can't protect workers if the company folds. Another hit to the economy.
With that line of argument, one could have argued similar variants:
-
"You can't protect the slaves if the plantation folds. Another hit to the economy."
-
"You can't protect the prostitutes if the brothel closes. Another hit to the economy."
Neither argument is adequate to abolish slavery or to deregulate sex work. Similar argument would also not be adequate to deter regulation of gig work.
Jesus.
Lad descends more into irrelevant every day, doesn't he?
-
-
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 13:06 last edited by
Meanwhile, he's worried about the slaves on the plantation, when he has no problem killing them in the womb.
-
Meanwhile, he's worried about the slaves on the plantation, when he has no problem killing them in the womb.
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 13:08 last edited by@Jolly said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
Meanwhile, he's worried about the slaves on the plantation, when he has no problem killing them in the womb.
Did you just assume gender? Shame on you!
-
@Mik said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
You can't protect workers if the company folds. Another hit to the economy.
With that line of argument, one could have argued similar variants:
-
"You can't protect the slaves if the plantation folds. Another hit to the economy."
-
"You can't protect the prostitutes if the brothel closes. Another hit to the economy."
Neither argument is adequate to abolish slavery or to deregulate sex work. Similar argument would also not be adequate to deter regulation of gig work.
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 16:42 last edited by Copper 10 Dec 2022, 22:53@Axtremus said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
You can't protect
Protect?
You and your government are going to protect me?
That's a laugh.
Keep your protection and let me keep my freedom and my money.
-
-
@Jolly said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
Meanwhile, he's worried about the slaves on the plantation, when he has no problem killing them in the womb.
Did you just assume gender? Shame on you!
wrote on 12 Oct 2022, 22:43 last edited by@LuFins-Dad said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
@Jolly said in Department of Labor about to kill off Uber, Instacart, Lyft, etc.:
Meanwhile, he's worried about the slaves on the plantation, when he has no problem killing them in the womb.
Did you just assume gender? Shame on you!
I'm still getting used to this Brave New World...
