# The 'gig economy' takes a hit



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Uber has now been ordered by a California court to reclassify drivers as employees.









Court orders Uber, Lyft to reclassify drivers as employees in California | CNN Business


Uber and Lyft are being ordered by a California judge to reclassify their drivers in the state as employees -- the latest development in an escalating legal battle over a new law impacting much of the on-demand economy.




www.cnn.com





What started as a seemingly good idea for people to make a few extra dollars in their spare time using their car as a taxi quickly morphed into something much different, full time jobs but without full time job benefits. Who would have thought. 

Then the drivers started complaining about low pay and lack of benefits. Who would have thought.



https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/17/uber-drivers-are-protesting-again-heres-what-the-job-is-really-like.html



This just points out one of the shortcomings of the 'gig economy' in general, lack of constancy in many areas. It may suit companies and their bottom line profits but just how beneficial or not it is for the workers is a whole other story.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Longtimeago said:


> Uber has now been ordered by a California court to reclassify drivers as employees.


It only applies to California though. At any case, the whole Gig economy worked on the basis that the company off-loaded normal work expenses on the people doing the gigs, i.e. insurance, fuel, operating costs. Obviously things can be cheaper if you omit a few things.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

What is the net benefit to society of these "gig" jobs, is also a question that should be asked.

Are taxpayers subsidizing these businesses so they can be profitable ?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> What is the net benefit to society of these "gig" jobs, is also a question that should be asked.
> 
> Are taxpayers subsidizing these businesses so they can be profitable ?


The net benefit?
A person can provide value by providing a product or service that another person wants, and the arrangement is mutually agreed by both parties.
The net benefit is 2 individuals both get what they want from a transaction.


The question that needs to be asked is.
"Given that two people come to mutual agreement, why is it anyone elses businesses?"
What right do you, or any other third party, have to question a private arrangement between two people?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

All they are doing is replacing other employees........taxi drivers, delivery drivers, hotel workers etc.

It isn't what the "gig" employers tell people. It is what they don't say that makes them questionable.

Amazon can say they pay drivers an average of $18 an hour, but when you break it down it simply isn't true.

They base that on 18 X 8 = $144. That sounds okay for a job driving around delivering parcels.

What they don't say it the person must complete their route to earn that $144 and they could deliver over 100 packages. It may take them 12 hours to do so.

They also pay their own vehicle costs, gas, insurance, and cellphone costs. They "should" pay their own CPP and EI contributions as well, but I bet most don't.

At the end of the day the drivers earn about $1 a package delivered and their "net" is below the minimum wage.

We don't need those kinds of jobs.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> All they are doing is replacing other employees........taxi drivers, delivery drivers, hotel workers etc.
> 
> It isn't what the "gig" employers tell people. It is what they don't say that makes them questionable.
> 
> ...


What makes you the arbiter of what work other people should be allowed to do?
Your buddy Trudeau doesn't think students should be paid minimum wage either.

You're offside with Liberal policy.

The primary reason Uber took off is they avoided up the exploitative monopoly held by taxis in many jurisdictions.
The taxi scheme operated by most cities runs afoul of almost every anti monopoly law we have.
Price collusion and artificially limiting supply to the detriment of the public.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags said:


> What is the net benefit to society of these "gig" jobs, is also a question that should be asked.
> 
> Are taxpayers subsidizing these businesses so they can be profitable ?


Consumers benefit. Taxis are typically more expensive with worse customer service. Taxi drivers are often significantly disadvantaged, too, working under a license system that benefits incumbent insiders.

Workers get the benefit of flexible work arrangements. Many people who do these jobs have various reasons why they cannot hold regular employment (family commitments, new in an area, between jobs, earning extra income on the side, etc.).


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

One point I agree on is that the tech companies can be overly capricious with changing rules, decreasing pay, and suspending accounts without explanation (effectively terminating).


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> Workers get the benefit of flexible work arrangements. Many people who do these jobs have various reasons why they cannot hold regular employment (family commitments, new in an area, between jobs, earning extra income on the side, etc.).


I'm sure some people take these jobs because they want, or like, the arrangement. But I suspect that many others have no choice.

There are not many permanent, full time employment jobs any more outside of specific sectors. For many people, this is all they can get. Other jobs they have are probably only part time, or only give partial hours.

Corporations also like the "gig" model because they don't have to pay benefits, don't supply offices or capital equipment. The workers are quite literally disposable, and they are hired & fired by software -- which is extremely efficient and cold. Really this is much more like old fashioned capitalism than people realize and it just runs around all the rules and regulations of normal employment.

A never ending parade of desperate, disposable workers, who don't demand benefits, and who supply their own equipment! If they work too slowly, or if enough customers give them a low rating then BZZZZZ they're fired! No severance pay, of course.

I give it about 10-15 years before people get wise to how badly they're being screwed by all of this.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

sags said:


> All they are doing is replacing other employees........taxi drivers, delivery drivers, hotel workers etc.
> 
> It isn't what the "gig" employers tell people. It is what they don't say that makes them questionable.
> 
> ...


In principle, I am fine with the 'gig' economy or contractor economy. Of course there are areas for improvement, but a person can make some extra money with what they have, the employer cuts overhead expenses, and customers gets a better deal. 

If the gig employee isn't making enough, they have to evaluate how they do things and see if there is a way to make it more efficient in order to be profitable. This is what the employer has essentially outsourced. I have done 'gig' work and still do it on occasion. It took time, and more important some effort. I used do a lot of mystery shopping. At $5-15 a job, it wasn't very much, and definitely not enough to make a living off of when you factor in expenses. I did it when my spouse was laid off, and I was on mat leave with no income. I only took shops which I could bundle together and would plan my routes and errands for the day while managing a baby. I would bundle 6-10 small jobs in a short area and get my stuff done so it wouldn't cost me more in gas. It would probably take me a few hours. I had a system for uploading my results, and I always thru in a shop which involved a free lunch in the area. It's the same for any of these systems whether you are a gig employee therefor in business for yourself, or a business, to survive you have to be find ways to be efficient and reduce costs.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Last time I got a Lyft the driver mentioned he does a few every morning after dropping his daughter off or something. So he already owns/needs the car, he's already up and dressed for another reason and he has a few hours to spare. Why not? I've had better experiences using the sharing economy than the stale old corporate systems myself

The people using gig economy for their full time job is different. That is like a gateway to the UBI system where they may be collecting low income benefits and not claiming their gig income. They probably aren't claiming their expenses either and are just bad at math or in a very bad situation in general


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Governments should force the gig employer to submit all the appropriate contributions to the government....income tax, CPP, EI, WSIB, just like any other employer does. If the employees are deemed "contractors" the employers should forward employee earnings records to the government.

That would cut down on the fraud.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> I'm sure some people take these jobs because they want, or like, the arrangement. But I suspect that many others have no choice.
> 
> There are not many permanent, full time employment jobs any more outside of specific sectors. For many people, this is all they can get. Other jobs they have are probably only part time, or only give partial hours.
> 
> ...


Corporations don't have to pay benefits, supply offices or capital equipment either, they choose to.

As far as treating suppliers who don't deliver value, why would you hire them?
When's the last time you gave "severance" to the store you stopped shopping at, or the farm who's produce you stopped buying?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Governments should force the gig employer to submit all the appropriate contributions to the government....income tax, CPP, EI, WSIB, just like any other employer does. If the employees are deemed "contractors" the employers should forward employee earnings records to the government.
> 
> That would cut down on the fraud.


When you hire a contractor to do work, you don't file their income taxes for them.

Could you imagine if you had to file a form for every purchase and every service you recieved? That would be a disaster.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> I give it about 10-15 years before people get wise to how badly they're being screwed by all of this.


Nope.
The issue is that when you go to Amazon and buy something, you sort by price.
You knock your price down by $0.01, you win the sale. 

The commodity market is a race to the bottom.
The problem with a race to the bottom is that you might win. The only thing worse is placing second.

Don't compete in a commodity market. Unions are the monopolists answer to a commodity market. Don't play that game.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

m3s said:


> Last time I got a Lyft the driver mentioned he does a few every morning after dropping his daughter off or something. So he already owns/needs the car, he's already up and dressed for another reason and he has a few hours to spare. Why not? I've had better experiences using the sharing economy than the stale old corporate systems myself
> 
> The people using gig economy for their full time job is different. That is like a gateway to the UBI system where they may be collecting low income benefits and not claiming their gig income. They probably aren't claiming their expenses either and are just bad at math or in a very bad situation in general


The math is bad for all drivers, including those who "have a few hours to spare". The only difference is that those with a few hours to spare never seem to include maintenance and depreciation in their math so they mistakenly think they're doing okay.

It's no different than a contractor that averages $50 or $60 an hour who picks 2 extra hours of side work on the way home for $40 and thinks they did okay.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Prairie Guy said:


> The math is bad for all drivers, including those who "have a few hours to spare". The only difference is that those with a few hours to spare never seem to include maintenance and depreciation in their math so they mistakenly think they're doing okay.


And that's not even the end of it. They are also not factoring in the risk to themselves (bodily injury) for each hour driving, nor the insurance and liability problems of the rare, but serious, event such as an accident that kills a bystander or passenger.

I'll say it again. This is just old fashioned capitalism: large corporations have found a novel way to trick workers into doing work at substandard pay. It's insufficient total compensation and insufficient worker protection, and it's all a mechanism to *trick workers into working at less than fair rates*. That's why it's profitable.

The "apps" are just the distracting bells & whistles that the "gig economy" blinds everyone with. In reality, they are old fashioned capitalists that have found a new way to circumvent labour standards, worker protections, and regulations.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> And that's not even the end of it. They are also not factoring in the risk to themselves (bodily injury) for each hour driving, nor the insurance and liability problems of the rare, but serious, event such as an accident that kills a bystander or passenger.
> 
> I'll say it again. This is just old fashioned capitalism: large corporations have found a novel way to trick workers into doing work at substandard pay. It's insufficient total compensation and insufficient worker protection, and it's all a mechanism to *trick workers into working at less than fair rates*. That's why it's profitable.
> 
> The "apps" are just the distracting bells & whistles that the "gig economy" blinds everyone with. In reality, they are old fashioned capitalists that have found a new way to circumvent labour standards, worker protections, and regulations.


Yes, but the person buying the service choses the cheaper option.
Really if someone is willing to drive me to the grocery store for $10, why should I be forced to wait longer and pay a someone else $20.
Or if I want a ride now, and I'm willing to pay $40, why am i stuck waiting to pay $20?\

Thats the problem the government has added so much overhead and regulation that it make the taxi providers less competative.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> The net benefit?
> A person can provide value by providing a product or service that another person wants, and the arrangement is mutually agreed by both parties.
> The net benefit is 2 individuals both get what they want from a transaction.
> 
> ...


Umm, that is fine if there are only TWO parties involved MrMatt. In some gig work, that is the case. A consultant sells his time to a company for example. But Uber is not about two parties, it is about THREE parties with Uber being the third party who does nothing but provide an app and make money off the transaction between the TWO parties who are actually involved in the service being provided.

To keep it to two parties you have to look at it as two separate transactions with Uber. First the driver agrees to do a job for Uber, ie. pick up Uber's customer and deliver them to their destination. Then there is another transaction between Uber and the end user. ie. Uber agrees to have the customer picked up and delivered to their destination.

But that is EXACTLY what Uber wants to avoid. They say that they are NOT part of the transaction, they are only providing a platform where A contacts B for a service. That legally lets Uber out of any responsibility to either party for anything. 

Uber works well for Uber. How it works for the drivers and the consumers is an entirely different story. The drivers seem to be figuring that out but so far I see no indication the consumers are.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

james4beach said:


> And that's not even the end of it. They are also not factoring in the risk to themselves (bodily injury) for each hour driving, nor the insurance and liability problems of the rare, but serious, event such as an accident that kills a bystander or passenger.
> 
> I'll say it again. This is just old fashioned capitalism: large corporations have found a novel way to trick workers into doing work at substandard pay. It's insufficient total compensation and insufficient worker protection, and it's all a mechanism to *trick workers into working at less than fair rates*. That's why it's profitable.
> 
> The "apps" are just the distracting bells & whistles that the "gig economy" blinds everyone with. In reality, they are old fashioned capitalists that have found a new way to circumvent labour standards, worker protections, and regulations.


They also have no liability to the consumer james4beach, it is not just the workers that are being suckered.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> Umm, that is fine if there are only TWO parties involved MrMatt. In some gig work, that is the case. A consultant sells his time to a company for example. But Uber is not about two parties, it is about THREE parties with Uber being the third party who does nothing but provide an app and make money off the transaction between the TWO parties who are actually involved in the service being provided.
> 
> To keep it to two parties you have to look at it as two separate transactions with Uber. First the driver agrees to do a job for Uber, ie. pick up Uber's customer and deliver them to their destination. Then there is another transaction between Uber and the end user. ie. Uber agrees to have the customer picked up and delivered to their destination.
> 
> ...


Uber is simply a matchmaker, just like ebay or aliexpress.

I go on ebay, search and sort by price, if we come to an agreement, the transaction happens.

uber drivers are free to refuse if they don't want to.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

bgc_fan said:


> It only applies to California though. At any case, the whole Gig economy worked on the basis that the company off-loaded normal work expenses on the people doing the gigs, i.e. insurance, fuel, operating costs. Obviously things can be cheaper if you omit a few things.





https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stefanovich-supreme-court-uber-class-action-decision-1.5626853



If you Google, 'Uber being sued', you will find numerous cases bgc_fan. It is not just California where they are being challenged.

And here is one that is a good example of how Uber denies responsibility because a driver was, "_never an employee, agent, joint venture or partner of Uber."









Uber denies fault in S.F. crash that killed girl







www.sfgate.com




_


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Insurance companies have also informed their clients that driving for Uber or any other kind of delivery business voids their insurance.

To protect themselves, people using their own vehicle for employment need to have commercial auto insurance.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

james4beach said:


> .....................
> I give it about 10-15 years before people get wise to how badly they're being screwed by all of this.


Unfortunately, I think you are being generous in thinking that the average person will ever figure it out james4beach.

Third party apps whether they be Uber, Airbnb or any of the other third party apps that are simply parasites (pun intended) that make money off a transaction that should be done between two parties are I think, here to stay.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Insurance companies have also informed their clients that driving for Uber or any other kind of delivery business voids their insurance.
> 
> To protect themselves, people using their own vehicle for employment need to have commercial auto insurance.


It depends what insurance you have.

Uber has insurance
https://www.uber.com/ca/en/drive/insurance/


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

City of Toronto and Uber facing $7-million lawsuit over fatal crash - NOW Magazine

Here's another example (surprising more recently) of an accident involving an Uber driver. I'm sure a google would pull up numerous examples.

It's beyond me as to why would anyone take a chance to ride on these questionable drivers/unlicensed vehicles, just to save a few bucks ($10/20/50?).

At the end of the day, the only party benefiting from this would be the ambulance chasers ... while the dead passenger's family plus the dumb-assed driver can deal with the grief & keep busy with the aftermath. Meanwhile these "apps" companies will go IPO to further suck-in the dough, bacon, et al.

PS: I've seen firsthand that Uber/Lyft/unlicensed taxi drivers do NOT watch where they're going.... they're too busy scouting for their passenger. An innocent "*pedestrian"* waiting to be killed by these reckless drivers.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> City of Toronto and Uber facing $7-million lawsuit over fatal crash - NOW Magazine
> 
> Here's another example (surprising more recently) of an accident involving an Uber driver. I'm sure a google would pull up numerous examples.
> 
> ...


Have you taken a taxi lately? They're not much better.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> Uber is simply a matchmaker, just like ebay or aliexpress.
> 
> I go on ebay, search and sort by price, if we come to an agreement, the transaction happens.
> 
> uber drivers are free to refuse if they don't want to.


Yes of course, anyone is free to refuse anything at all. However, in the real world, if the only work someone can find is a 'gig economy' job, what do you suggest they do?

This thread is not just about Uber, it is about the entire gig economy model of how to do business and what it results in. 'Gig' work is just a new way to say 'part-time' work. To that you should add 'involuntary part-time' work. The rise in this is not new at all.


http://www.csls.ca/reports/ptemp.pdf



Part time or 'gig' jobs continue to accelerate while full time jobs decline. Good for business, bad for anyone looking for a full time job.

Last week, Ontario reported having added 151,000 jobs back as we continue to re-open. Sounds good until you realize that 145,000 of them were part time jobs, meaning only 6,000 full time jobs were added.








Ontario adds 151K new jobs in July, majority are part-time positions


Ontario added 151,000 new jobs in July, the country’s national statistics agency said, but the majority of them were part-time positions.



toronto.ctvnews.ca





The 'gig economy' will not benefit either the worker or the consumer in the long run, the benefit goes to the 'I don't employ you' companies whether it be a supermarket or a ride sharing app or any other business using this model.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> Have you taken a taxi lately? They're not much better.


 ... at least they're "licensed". 

No, I rather take a limo (for distance like to the airport)... well worth the $$$.

For short/moderate distance, the public transit or walk. I can always bike but then far too many crazy drivers out there, when you have Uber/Lyfts and the likes all thrown in now.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Longtimeago said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stefanovich-supreme-court-uber-class-action-decision-1.5626853
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And that's the point, this has to be repeated in every separate jurisdiction. Even in the States, the ruling in California will only affect people in California. Likewise if the Supreme Court in Canada rules the same way, it will only apply to Canada, which will have an interesting impact, as Uber can simply decide to pick up and leave Canada, rather than treat drivers as employees. I'm sure there are other countries where Uber doesn't exist because they don't want to comply with the local laws.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> And that's the point, this has to be repeated in every separate jurisdiction. Even in the States, the ruling in California will only affect people in California. Likewise if the Supreme Court in Canada rules the same way, it will only apply to Canada, which will have an interesting impact, as Uber can simply decide to pick up and leave Canada, rather than treat drivers as employees. I'm sure there are other countries where Uber doesn't exist because they don't want to comply with the local laws.


Yup, Uber leaves, and then we're stuck with inflated taxi prices.

The problem with monopolies and oligopolies is that the public and society at large ends up paying the price. 
But again, lefties don't care about people, they care about their rich connected friends.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

And there it is: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/12/uber-may-shut-down-temporarily-in-california.html


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Where I was living in the US, I found that once the city added sufficient licensing, permit and other costs (the things Uber started by avoiding) the cost of the Uber ride started getting pretty close to a regular taxi.

I just think these things are unlicensed, under-regulated taxis. Once the regulations catch up with them, they will cost the same as taxis.

Their only significant contribution is really the mobile device application programs which gives more reliable access to the ride.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

The only time I can see Uber worthwhile financially is if you're already going that way. So if you give someone a ride home from work and they're a block or two from your workplace and live near you, or give someone a ride home from an event you both attended and they live near you. Any other time it's a loser's bet.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The bigger question is how too large of a "gig" work concept would effect the economy and society in general.

I was watching a news story on the construction industry in Texas. They have gone to a "gig" type of economy in the construction business sector.

Everyone works as a self employed contractor. The result is minimum wage pay and no benefits. They don't even have health care coverage.

Their construction industry is the lowest paid in the US as a result. A formerly well paid industry turned into another low wage industry.

Expand that scenario over other major business sectors and what is the future of consumer spending driven economies ?

I suspect..........not good.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It is your job that is affected or eliminated today. It will be my job that is affected or eliminated tomorrow. I don't think it is a well thought out concept.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> Yup, Uber leaves, and then we're stuck with inflated taxi prices.
> 
> The problem with monopolies and oligopolies is that the public and society at large ends up paying the price.
> But again, lefties don't care about people, they care about their rich connected friends.


How do you define an 'inflated taxi price' MrMatt? Is it just a price that YOU don't want to pay?

We can call any price we don't like, inflated but that is meaningless. Should the person who drives you from A to B for a living, be able to make a living above minimum wage? Should they get sick pay, vacation days, etc. just as you do? 

Part time workers suits employers because it keeps their costs lower. There is no argument about that. But it also means it keeps the workers income lower as well obviously. I would also argue it keeps the quality of service we the consumer receive lower at the same time. 

We had a buy a new in-wall oven a while ago. We went to a local Home Depot and the person we spoke to obviously knew next to nothing about wall ovens. We told the person what we currently had and how we used it and asked what would be suggested to replace it. 

All wall ovens have slightly different dimensions. Did you know that? The person we spoke with at HD did not. So when I asked the dimensions of the first suggestion, the salesperson had to dig around to find them and quite obviously didn't know why I was asking. 'It fits a standard 30" cutout' is in fact an incorrect answer because one may be 29.75" while another is 29.5" and believe me, if your cut out is sized for 29.5", there is no way a 29.75" oven is going in without major surgery to your cabinetry.

We then went to a local family owned appliance store and the first thing we were asked for were the dimensions of our existing cut-out. What's more, the person we dealt with could reel off the dimensions of the various makes from memory.

Part time experience is never going to be as good as full time experience in anything. Imagine going for an operation on your body and the doctor says s/he works part time. Happy with that? Would you want to talk about how you have to pay 'inflated prices' for a full time doctor vs. a part time doctor?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

As I understand it, Uber rides become very expensive during periods of high "demand". Rates rise as demand increases.

Why is it more expensive at some time periods ? Because they can......

If there were no competing taxi or limo services, Uber would be a lot more expensive all the time.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> How do you define an 'inflated taxi price' MrMatt? Is
> 
> it just a price that YOU don't want to pay?
> 
> ...





sags said:


> As I understand it, Uber rides become very expensive during periods of high "demand". Rates rise as demand increases.
> 
> Why is it more expensive at some time periods ? Because they can......
> 
> If there were no competing taxi or limo services, Uber would be a lot more expensive all the time.


Inflated as in higher than it needs to be. Uber does it for less because they're not pricing per the monopoly.

That's funny, as my Family Doctor works part time.

Uber increases the price during periods of high demand, which pulls in more drivers.
There are lots of drivers who just jump in for an hour or two when demand, and pay, is higher.

It's called Supply and Demand, it's a basic economic theory.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Yes, lots of Uber drivers don't find it worth it at regular rates, and only work when and where they expect so-called 'surge pricing'. The nice thing about surge pricing is that if you are willing to pay, you can get a ride. With taxis you are SOL. Walking in the rain or taking the vomit comet.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Longtimeago said:


> How do you define an 'inflated taxi price' MrMatt? Is it just a price that YOU don't want to pay?
> 
> We can call any price we don't like, inflated but that is meaningless. Should the person who drives you from A to B for a living, be able to make a living above minimum wage? Should they get sick pay, vacation days, etc. just as you do?
> 
> ...


Taxi prices are explicitly inflated because the supply is restricted. If it were not inflated, there would be no need to restrict supply.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Airbnb bans house parties worldwide, citing virus mandates

Only now? Just imagine those-want-ta-save-$$$ travellers participating in one of these things getting exposed and then there're those legit house/room-sharing arrangements. What recourse do these tenants get when they do get C19? I guess a bonus of a free stay at the C19 ward.
<<< Shudder >>>

Of course, the principals of an AirBnB will do a "deep" sanitization of the unit before renting it out other guests ... right ... after the freebie exposure. And the lawsuit(s).


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> Welcome back, even if you don't have anything new worth saying.


Yeah, it's kind of sad when people ask
"Why would you want to address a supply/demand imbalance"?

These are basic long standing things.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Another indication of desperation of lowly paid "gig" workers. They are now hanging smart phones in trees to try and pick up orders ahead of other delivery people due to close proximity to the delivery origins

Amazon Drivers Are Hanging Smartphones in Trees to Get More Work

This is not a good lifestyle. These are desperate, low paid workers with no job security and no benefits. Struggling to make a few bucks before the robot master fires them or down-ranks them.

Welcome to your new economy.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

^ Amazon seems especially abusive toward their delivery drivers. It could make simple changes to the app that would make the gig-drivers' lives much better and still accomplish all their goals. One example is that Amazon puts up 3 or 4 hour routes of packages for people to deliver in their car. They actually pay reasonably well for this as gig jobs go (maybe $20-25/hr if you are efficient). But, there are many people vying for these jobs, so users have to sit and constantly refresh the app so that if a job is offered, they can be first to claim it. They could easily just ask people to register as willing to be able to work a given window shortly before it begins, and then randomly assign the tasks to those who express interest. You get notified either way. Maybe some people are selected as 'stand-bys' and asked to remain available if some of the winners renege on their task, but only if they are willing. If I were Amazon, I would also try and understand how many hours each person is looking to have per week and which shifts they prefer, to make the assignment algorithm more driver-friendly. Unfortunately, what makes Amazon great (and successful) is its single-minded focus on the customer. Every other stakeholder can go to hell, particularly contract workers.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

james4beach said:


> Another indication of desperation of lowly paid "gig" workers. They are now hanging smart phones in trees to try and pick up orders ahead of other delivery people due to close proximity to the delivery origins
> 
> Amazon Drivers Are Hanging Smartphones in Trees to Get More Work
> 
> ...


Amazon is owned by Jeff Bezos, the richest (2nd richest?) man in the world and is a diehard Democrat.

Vote Democrat for more underpaid gig economy and a richer Jeff Bezos.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> Unfortunately, what makes Amazon great (and successful) is its single-minded focus on the customer. Every other stakeholder can go to hell, particularly contract workers.


I disagree that Amazon is so great for the customer. Lately (last few months) I'm not really finding amazing deals that are any better than in-store purchases. It's good for lazy shopping, certainly, but is not cheap for everything. Plus you can get some very bad quality items due the way Amazon lists items, because you often don't know which seller they are coming from.

One listing on Amazon can refer to many different items from many sellers, but you can't tell. Sometimes, one variant/colour can ship from a local seller whereas the other colour ships all the way from China!

I recently bought some kitchenware on Amazon. But then I was browsing my *local* Safeway and found a section with similar gadgets. And even more at Canadian Tire. To my surprise, they were actually cheaper at these local stores. I was really dumb to buy them on Amazon when I could have supported my local store and saved money.

I've also been gradually discovering more of the Canadian options, London Drugs being a notable one. Again, I got a better deal on appliances than what I could find at Amazon.

It definitely pays to shop around. If you look around your local stores, Canadian Tire, Superstore, London Drugs, you will likely find items that are competitive with Amazon plus you know the seller they are coming from. Not just some random Joe.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I happen to know quite a bit about how Amazon marketplace works. Low ticket items from third party sellers will tend to be more expensive because Amazon charges 15% of sale plus about $5.57 (minimum for light items) for fulfillment. So for a cheap kitchen gadget that would be $10 in store, almost has to be $15 from Amazon for those third party seller to make money. Higher ticket items are more likely to be competitively priced.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> I happen to know quite a bit about how Amazon marketplace works. Low ticket items from third party sellers will tend to be more expensive because Amazon charges 15% of sale plus about $5.57 (minimum for light items) for fulfillment. So for a cheap kitchen gadget that would be $10 in store, almost has to be $15 from Amazon for those third party seller to make money. Higher ticket items are more likely to be competitively priced.


Fulfillment by Amazon Revenue Calculator << great calculator to see this.

The point is, that you can't run your own warehouse and ship that same light item for $5.57.
Once I seriously investigated selling on Amazon, I bought stock.
It is really tough to beat their fees.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

You don't have to beat their fees. You have to beat the competition on the marketplace. Amazon is a bizarro world where people compare prices within Amazon and don't care that they can pop down to their local store and buy certain things for half the cost. Poor people don't shop on Amazon, they shop Walmart (in-store). Shocking how much cheaper basics are there. Amazon is more a middle-class to upper-middle class phenomenon, particularly the people who buy random stuff on Amazon as it occurs to them. When I was relatively poorer than I am now, I would buy esoteric things on Amazon that could not be found easily otherwise. Amazon also seemed to be more price competitive before. I feel like they have figured out their niche better and realize they don't have to be so sharp on price, especially when they are the default for Prime lemmings. It's about convenience. I have to admit though, I can't see myself buying paper towels, etc. on Amazon, though.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Our Amazon parcels are delivered by Intelcom. I talked to a driver today and he said he just started this week. He doesn't think he will work there long.

Personally, I think it would be beneficial for Amazon to add the option to tip the driver when you order the merchandise. 

It would raise the driver rates, not cost Amazon a nickle and people could donate if they wish. I never carry cash and they don't carry debit machines.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It seems to me the complaints from business claiming they can't find employees, are most often from companies nobody wants to work for anytime.

I doubt employers paying decent wages are having any such labor shortages.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The one thing Amazon offers is lots of choice. They gather products from all over the world in one place.

They know their customers well and want to provide them with everything.

I don't think it will be long before they offer financial products such as Amazon insurance or maybe even Amazon banking.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> It seems to me the complaints from business claiming they can't find employees, are most often from companies nobody wants to work for anytime.
> 
> I doubt employers paying decent wages are having any such labor shortages.


Well there are workers looking for jobs, and jobs looking for workers.
That's good.

Now we just need to address the mismatches.

People want more money, companies want to pay less money.

However companies have an upper limit where the job is no longer economically sustainable. 
There is also the value at which the worker doesn't feel it is worthwhile to work at that rate.

The trick/problem is that many people can't generate sufficient excess value to justify the higher pay rate.
When you want to make $20/hr, that cost the company $30/hr or more (overhead). 
For them to be profitable, and account for the risk, plus any training, investment, supervision etc, you have to be delivering a good $40+/hr in value to the company, and quite honestly lots of people don't deliver that much value, which is why the jobs don't pay that much.


----------

