Uber Drivers Sue Company over Pressure to Support Prop 22

Re:Uber Drivers Sue Company over Pressure to Support Prop 22 by nickff on Thursday October 22, 2020 @08:47PM (#24864996)

Well, your idea actually produces an effect counter to what I would assume your preferences are:

Large employers, with a lot of market power would still be able to communicate to their employees via public channels. Small employers with very little (employment) market power would be basically muted.

Is this what you're looking for?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber Drivers Sue Company over Pressure to Support Prop 22 by munk-a on Friday October 23, 2020 @04:35PM (#24873793)

It's better than what we have now - I think the US needs to take a very serious look at purchased speech in the long run but there are a whole bunch of problems we'd need to solve for that and I've been told by the PM that that's out of scope for this project ;P

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber Drivers Sue Company over Pressure to Support Prop 22 by hrktb on Thursday October 22, 2020 @09:38PM (#24865224)

Employers can still share internally (same way public interviews can be shared as a heads up)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Uber Drivers Sue Company over Pressure to Support Prop 22 by nickff on Thursday October 22, 2020 @09:49PM (#24865264)

That would still be biased heavily in favor of large corporations; NASDAQ-100 CEOs get a lot more interview requests than local bakers.

[ Parent | on HN ]