Posted on 09/23/2015 6:49:12 PM PDT by markomalley
The Seattle City Council began considering a bill Wednesday it claims will help give Uber and Lyft drivers a voice, but which critics say is nothing more than a giveaway to unions.
Democratic Councilman Mike O’Brien introduced the bill, which would impact contract drivers for Uber, Lyft and any other ride-sharing company. The goal, its supporters say, is to give the drivers more of a voice by allowing drivers to collectively negotiate.
“The majority of drivers for hire come from historically disadvantaged communities,” the city council noted in an issue page on its website. “Unfortunately, they are often taken advantage of by the companies that hire them or contract with them.”
Advances in digital technologies have allowed companies like Lyft and Uber to use contracting in unique ways. Companies make digital platforms where individuals can create their own business ventures, in what is known as the sharing economy.
But the sharing economy has been the subject of criticism, in part because it’s relatively unregulated and allegedly unfair to workers. Democratic presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have condemned the model, and officials at the Department of Labor have spoken out against it. Unions have been some of the more adamant rivals of the model.
O’Brien has several connections to the labor movement. According to his campaign website, most of the groups that endorsed him were unions. And one of his legislative aides is a former community organizer for the union UNITE HERE Local 8.
Contracting as a whole makes it more difficult for unions to organize workers, because unions have to pursue one contractor at a time, as opposed to all employees within a single workplace.
Though contractors can join a union, it’s much easier to unionize employees because consent doesn’t have to be unanimous. A union only has to get the majority of employees within a single bargaining unit to agree to representation, in order to become the Exclusive Representative of all the employees.
And if the union becomes the Exclusive Representative of all of the employees in a mandatory dues state, all the employees within that bargaining unit must pay union dues or fees, whether they agree with the union or not.
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation (NRTW) argues the Seattle City Council is proposing the change not to give employees a voice, but to make it easier for unions to organize them.
“Acting at the behest of union officials, the Seattle City Council is targeting independent drivers, such as those who contract with Uber and Lyft, for mandatory unionization and the seizure of compulsory union fees,” NRTW said in a press release. “The legality of Seattle’s imminent attempt to foist compulsory unionization on independent drivers is highly suspect and may be susceptible to legal challenge.”
The bill, NRTW notes, could undermine the ride-sharing model in several ways. It would require independent drivers to turn over personal information to union officials, and it would allow exclusive union representation of independent drivers. The bill would also authorize union officials to make agreements with companies that require drivers to be unionized as a condition of employment.
There are any number of “Uber Driver” forums/discussion boards that are populated with actual Uber drivers.
They don’t hold anything back and are not complete idiots.
Here’s one.
Best place I ever lived was in Versailles, Kentucky.
In order to be successful, those companies have to balance out the needs of drivers and riders. I suspect they go through tremendous turnover because drivers are just looking for extra money part time. They will run out of drivers quick if drivers can’t make money.
“Unfortunately, they are often taken advantage of by the companies that hire them or contract with them.”
Yeah, because you know, they aren’t legal adults capable of making their own choices about whether or not to take the job. /eyeroll.
Yep.
Read just a few posts on the forums.
They are being abused by both Uber on pricing and the games they play, and their passengers.
Unionizing isn’t the solution. It’s never going to happen and the drivers don’t want it.
From what I have read, the only way to make or even average $200 a day is to work the “Drunk” shifts and get long hauls.
Their passengers are extraordinarily abusive.
Mostly the millennials that have adopted the technology.
Uber’s market cap is a joke. They come in, fight all the legal battles, spend all the money, so some other company that didn’t take on all that overhead can swoop in with their own app that does the exact same thing. Long term, Uber is a zero.
And that’s from someone who uses and appreciates Uber.
I always thought it the drivers willingly joined Uber to make some extra money and Werner forced to drive at gunpoint. I guess these council critters know more than I do.
How about butting out of a deal both sides seem to like?
That Chinese app already exists ... It’s called Didi Kuaidi :-). It’s not here in the States just yet.
I personally like Uber and love how they drive the medallion thugs crazy. Liberals are torn over Uber ... On one hand, their masters demand that they need to hate the business model since their taxes aren’t yanked directly from their paycheck. On the other hand, they all seem to love the service. Most I know vocally scream about how horrible they treat employees yet use it every weekend.
What's wrong with gypsy cabs?
What's wrong with Uber for coming along and giving gypsy cabs the app they've needed all their existence?
Or is it that you believe in Progress and Social Justice?
I’m not big on regulation but are you against regulating taxi services?
Indeed. The millennials, who were a key segment of Zero's electoral support, love Uber. Yet now we have the libtard establishment, exemplified by Bill de Blasio, landing on Uber, depriving the millennials of a favorite app! The GOP must make this a teachable moment for those young skulls full of collegiate mush.
love how they drive the medallion thugs crazy
As Uber and Lyft drive the medallion values to zero, let the medallion thugs rightly take it out on the liberals, who passed laws forcing them to scrimp and save and go into debt to buy those unnecessary medallions!
As a proud user of gypsy cabs since before the internet, I have found them to be superior to regulated taxis. So, yes! Plus, I get the thrill of breaking the law!
E.g., I'm at LaGuardia, need a ride to the WTC. There's a Jamaican limo driver just dropped somebody off. I tell him where I want to go, we agree on the price, and he takes me there in his limo. I get a superior ride, he gets compensated for the return trip, and we both get the satisfaction of defeating the will of the Sheeple of New Yawk as expressed through their corruptly elected representatives! Medallion schmedallion!
As for "regulating" taxi services, an app can address that through a customer review process. Let drivers set their prices. Drivers with high reputation can set higher prices.
Progressives are on the wrong side of Right & Wrong. Always.
Just sayin'...
Ok, I can agree with you on most things.
It’s funny to see a Lyft ad looking for new drivers ... posted on that Uber driver forum.
What's happened is that Uber runs a different type of operation in NYC, where they have cut a deal with the city to get their drivers licensed through the TLC. So now Lyft -- which operates in NYC the same way Lyft and Uber operate all over the rest of the country -- is a cheaper alternative to BOTH traditional taxi cabs and Uber.
Uber is really just full of sh!t, in this case.
I AM an UBER driver as is my wife. I do it for fun mostly, and work just a few hours on Saturday nights. Uber is a GREAT free market supply/demand product! That being said, they dont pay much (each market is different, mine is .85/mile) and they churn drivers like crazy. I’ve read the average length of a driver is about 3 months. The reason for that is thats probably the length of time it takes for someone to realize they are basically trading in their cars’ long term equity (depreciation) for a short term gain. I dont know how you can make money if you drive more than just the peak hours that pay more - thru surge pricing (higher demand/fewer drivers). When you add in the dead miles which are about 30-50% of your miles, you CANT make money on non-surge pricing.
.
I have a lease (I know, I know) of a Nissan Leaf and I wasnt going to use all the miles. So, I’m not paying for depreciation or gas, and it allows me to actually make money. My wife drives just a little bit and we only signed her up to get the referral bonuses.
.
Uber could be really good, but they would have to raise the rates a little bit more - but still under taxis - to make that happen. They just want to grab as much market share as possible before an IPO, so its a race to the bottom right now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.