News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Uber, Lyft Poised to Lose Fight Against CA Bill to Label ... by birdyrooster on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @01:52AM (#20925399)
The opponents of this bill claim that they would need to institute shifts. Why so? Why can't they just be part-time employees with flexible schedules?
Re:Uber, Lyft Poised to Lose Fight Against CA Bill to Label ... by rockinghigh on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @08:27AM (#20927423)
If all drivers are employees and all show up to work at 10AM when there is little demand, you can’t pay all of them minimum wage. The companies would have to predict demand and ask just enough driver employees to match the demand.
Re:Uber, Lyft Poised to Lose Fight Against CA Bill to Label ... by ergothus on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @09:32AM (#20927934)
Why does "employee" equate to "show up at 10AM" ? Why cant they work the same hours and style they do now, but with the title of "employee"?

That's an honest question, I know employment laws are complex and likely didnt include these concepts, but I'm also interested in facts over speculation.

Re:Uber, Lyft Poised to Lose Fight Against CA Bill to Label ... by birdyrooster on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @09:50AM (#20928129)
You are correct. They could. This comes down to offering a minimum income to people who work for Uber and Lyft and giving them benefits that they would otherwise never qualify for like paid health insurance.
Re:Uber, Lyft Poised to Lose Fight Against CA Bill to Label ... by birdyrooster on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @09:48AM (#20928114)
Then why am I paying surge pricing at times of high demand or low supply? Don’t you think that companies can profit share with their employees on that price differential?