News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Uber funds new lobbying group to deny rights for gig workers by achow on Saturday March 12, 2022 @11:10AM (#30652320)
Not necessary. In India there is law that if you are running cabs on govt license then you cannot refuse passengers. If you as a cab driver do refuse (for whatever reason) then traffic police can take action (article mentions this).

There must be reason that this condition has been put into place.

Re:Uber funds new lobbying group to deny rights for gig workers by koolba on Saturday March 12, 2022 @12:10PM (#30652843)
NYC had a law for decades that a licensed cab must take a passenger to any location in the five boroughs. In practice, late night cabbies would never take you to the boonies as the ride back is unprofitable dead time.

They’d ask you, “where you going?”, before you got in the cab and drive off if they didn’t like the destination. Experienced riders would ignore the cabbie, enter the cab, and then explain the destination. Then when the cabbie argues with you, you’d cuss them out and tell them to drive before you call the taxi commission to get their medallion revoked.

While many of us do miss the fun of those arguments, not having to deal with that is one big plus that Uber blessed the world.

Re:Uber funds new lobbying group to deny rights for gig workers by Ekaros on Saturday March 12, 2022 @12:26PM (#30652970)
And this is why the system really should be reverse. The riders provide all details and then drivers provide the price. Forming binding contract on both sides for agreed upon price. And there should be absolute no limit on the price. Be it 1 dollar or 1 million. And the company offering this should take action to enforce any contract in court.
Re:Uber funds new lobbying group to deny rights for gig workers by koolba on Saturday March 12, 2022 @02:40PM (#30654219)
In a pure market system, sure. I’m about as free market as they come, but the intention here is not just to maximize GDP. A functioning transit system with known costs makes a city more livable. That’s a sustainability issue for the city as a whole.
Re:Uber funds new lobbying group to deny rights for gig workers by Step888 on Sunday March 13, 2022 @04:22AM (#30659134)
> There must be reason that this condition has been put into place.

It's because it's a democracy. That's the reason. And the majority of people don't like the idea of potentially being stranded in the middle of nowhere in the middle of the night. Now, I can appreciate that reason. And I totally understand it myself. And I also understand that drivers can be shit.

But as a former Uber driver myself (not in India, but in California), please try understand it from my perspective as well. Uber doesn't pay for elevation changes. If your car gets damaged on a windy rocky dirt road, or on a road with no lighting whatsoever (Santa Cruz hills, I'm talking to you). Uber won't pay for damages or loss of income. Or if Uber calls you to a neighborhood where drivers get carjacked and pistol-whipped, as a driver, you're the one who has to bear most of those consequences, not Uber (we're not cops, we don't get paid leave, workers comp, or even medical benefits). The same goes if you get called to an area notorious for handing out traffic tickets or parking tickets. Uber pays for none of that, but it will penalize you for refusing the ride (and in San Francisco, it took them almost 10 years from finally blacklisting Market St for pickups, the part that's downtown).

And people can be shit. They'll call you just for getting down a windy dirt road that they don't want to walk down themselves because it's too steep. Or they'll call you just to dump their semi-conscious intoxicated friend into your car. I could tell you a thousand stories.

But my point is, the situation is more nuanced than you think.

Re:Uber funds new lobbying group to deny rights for gig workers by zdragnar on Saturday March 12, 2022 @11:17AM (#30652371)
My gut instinct is that it is a protection from caste discrimination, that is really just a wild guess on my part.
Re:Uber funds new lobbying group to deny rights for gig workers by JumpCrisscross on Saturday March 12, 2022 @01:48PM (#30653721)
> My gut instinct is that it is a protection from caste discrimination

You’re probably right. Not even a decade ago in New York I had to call cabs for my Ivy-league educated, well-dressed black roommate because they would curiously blow past him.

Re:Uber funds new lobbying group to deny rights for gig workers by achow on Saturday March 12, 2022 @11:21AM (#30652406)
Absurd.

It is about passenger safety. The article itself mentions that people are stranded late night and one driver after another refusing to pickup the rider. Think women, emergency,.. etc.

Re:Uber funds new lobbying group to deny rights for gig workers by Ekaros on Saturday March 12, 2022 @12:27PM (#30652986)
Then offer to pay more. There is always a price point where someone is ready to provide the service. This should be in the system, maybe provide all details up front and then include extra payment which the rider can agree to pay to get their service, free market.
Re:Uber funds new lobbying group to deny rights for gig workers by kelseyfrog on Saturday March 12, 2022 @04:48PM (#30655230)
None of that is false, but the higher-order effects are socially unacceptable.
Re:Uber funds new lobbying group to deny rights for gig workers by cscurmudgeon on Saturday March 12, 2022 @11:38AM (#30652548)
Please stop making everything about caste without any evidence.