https://www.businessinsider.com/doordash-uber-eats-grubhub-sue-new-york-city-minimum-wage-2023-7
Some drivers at DoorDash and Grubhub supported the New York City pay bump, but others say it will actually mean less pay and freedom.
Uber shaking in their boots now that they have to pay minimum wage, on top of already having a business model thay actually makes no sense and makes profitabilty impossible.
Tech bros big mad when they can't continue to exploit a workforce and have to play by the rules. "How can we disrupt if we can't cheat and steal from our workers and customers?"
Those shit acre silicon carpetbaggers can get infini-fucked.
How does this change flexibility? If you’re online to drive, you get paid. If you don’t, you won’t get paid.
Am I missing something?
From the article:
"They shouldn't have done this," Mendes told Insider. "Now they'll make us work whenever they want. Even though we're not employees, they're going to schedule us."
But also from the article:
Yet, many drivers pushed for the minimum wage, including the worker collective Los Deliveristas Unidos, who also advocated for recent laws that allow drivers to use restaurant restrooms and set delivery perimeters. One reason they advocate for higher wages is to cover the costs of gig work, such as vehicle repair, gas, tolls, and injuries. A 2022 report by the city found that delivery workers have high rates of injury while on the job.
As I recall, the basic differences between employee and contractor are whether the employer can dictate time, place, and manner. The problem for gig "contractors" is that they're in a much tougher spot on exercising their rights, since not many people who can afford a lawyer deliver food. And they aren't exactly in short supply, so if Uber oversteps and individual "contractors" try to push back, they'll just be fired. Which gets back to the lawyer issue.
Uber, etc are very much a large enough targets for a class action lawsuit to force a behavior change.
(As an aside, I just got $137 back from the Yahoo class action suit, most I've ever seen from one)
My understanding is that they are only getting paid the minimum wage while they are actively servicing an order. If they are online but waiting for something to come in they don't get anything.
Thats how it works today. The article discusses a law change where they are paid hourly for just being online to accept orders. So if you are waiting for an hour, even without an order, you need to be paid
What happens if a driver chooses to be online for all 3 delivery services simultaneously? Is there some sort of SLA for deliveries per hour? Seems like it might be a pretty decent gig if not.
Good fuckin' luck trying to convince a judge or jury that a city isn't allowed to set a minimum wage.
It's only unflexable because the companies want endless growth. Obviously this would get in the way of endless growth. So they will push it on to the employees to keep trying to achieve endless growth. I think I'm noticing the real problem here.