Some drivers at DoorDash and Grubhub supported the New York City pay bump, but others say it will actually mean less pay and freedom.

  • fiat_lux@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    From the article, a few drivers were concerned that mandating benefits and hourly wages would require the companies to implement work scheduling and eliminate the driver’s time and commitment flexibility. This is the consequence DoorDash is also implicitly threatening.

    Which, is… a valid concern from the perspective that companies will always do what is in their best interest rather than employee interests. But wages and benefits have no actual dependency on scheduling even if it’s a common implementation. So they’re basically just scared of any change which might affect their current precarious income, understandably. And DoorDash are obviously financially short-sightedly invested in drivers staying scared and exploitable.

    • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      But wages and benefits have no actual dependency on scheduling

      This is only loosely true. If companies must pay a stable hourly wage, then they’re going to want stable continuous labor for that. As of now, drivers are paid for each job, which creates a lot of flexibility for both parties. If that becomes illegal, Uber Eats etc. isn’t going to want to pay people to sit around in between jobs. It also allows them to explicity direct a driver to do a certain job rather than offer a job to a driver.

      It’s fundamentally a pretty different dynamic. Some people might find it preferable, others won’t. There’s some nuance here