Slashdot Mirror
Seattle Passes First Uber Drivers' Union Into Law (thestack.com)
An anonymous reader writes: The city council of Seattle has unanimously voted in favour of a proposal which will require Uber — and driving-related companies which operate on the same principle — to allow its drivers to be represented by a union, the first of its kind in the US. The lead-up to the vote was hallmarked by opposition from Seattle's mayor Ed Murray, and by a publicity campaign from Uber, which opposed the bill. Though the law will allow collective bargaining for drivers which are effectively on zero-hours contracts, any effect it has on current disputes as to whether Uber drivers are employees or contractors will be ambient rather than direct.
Unions were very good at one point in history when corporations were actually abusing their employees. Now that there are ample laws in place protecting employees, unions have become less necessary.
Except now companies like Uber are finding inventive ways to not call employees employees. That means they have none of the protections any more, since they're not employees. And so the union has a use again.
until it becomes financially irresponsible to the shareholders to continue to pay those rates, when they know that there are cheaper workers who will do the job in other countries.
Good luck outsourcing taxi drivers to another country.
Also "finanance" doesn't excuse unethically not paying a living wage and etc. Being a dick for money doesn't make you less of a dick. Working in a company does not magically grant you some sort of ethical bypass. If you're happy to do so then you should declare "yes I am happy to screw over my fellow man for money". Don't try to hide behind "finance".
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Uber is very interested in self driving cars. They know what the end game is. Having human drivers is just a stop gap step in getting their foot in the door in the taxi industry.
Don't worry, it's Seattle. I'm sure self-driving cars will be allowed to join the union as well!
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
But we already have laws stating what employers can and cannot do to employees. We have laws detailing how long a shift can be and how long you must have off between shifts. We have laws about what kind of breaks you have to have during your shift. We have laws about the employer not being able to discriminate pay rates or hiring practices based on things like gender or ethnicity. There are laws about minimum wages.
Well, you're right. But most of this is NOT relevant to this particular situation, because Uber has fought to claim that it's employees aren't actually "employees."
Thus, they don't have to conform to most of those laws you mention. Hence people arguing that they may need a union to obtain such basic protections.
Or have you somehow missed the continuous parade of court cases about whether Uber "employees" are actually employed by Uber?
"if you don't make enough money driving for Uber then DON'T drive for them and find a new "job". "
How did this get upvoted? This is rehashing of "if you have nothing to hide" fallacy.
To address this directly. Finding a new job may impose undue hardship. Imagine if you had to put up with an abusive boss at work, and instead of being sympathetic I tell you to find a new job. Maybe you are nearing retirement age Turbo Pascal programmer and this is not really an option.
Some people.