‘It’s definitely backfiring’: Seattle ordinance intended to help app delivery workers is ‘hurting’ them::undefined

  • Cyber Yuki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Did the ordinance specify that the app companies would have to absorb the costs and NOT pass them to the users? No? Ah, well, that explains it then.

    • wahming@monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      How exactly would they absorb the costs? Most of them aren’t even turning a profit as it is

      Edit: Not sure why the downvotes. I support the ordinance, minimum wages are great. But the cost is obviously going to the customers, where else would it go?

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        the cost is obviously going to the customers, where else would it go?

        People have this idea that you can bleed money from corps and that corps will magic the money from somewhere other than customers.

        • The Uncanny Observer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          They don’t need magic the money out of anywhere, they already have it. They just have to want something other than to exploit whatever they can for profit, which is something they won’t consider.

        • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          I mean, they could, they just won’t. Lower the pay of the higher ups and you’d have more free money magicked up.

      • Cyber Yuki@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        By decreasing billionaire executive bonuses, of course. You realize apps like Uver give shitty pay to the drivers and keep most of the profits for the execs, don’t you?

        Repeat after me: They are MIDDLEMEN.

    • Antergo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Thats not how economics works, if the cost of a product goes up one way or another, the price goes up, one way or another

      • tastysnacks
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        And oddly, the price of a product can go up even if the cost of the product doesn’t change or goes down.

    • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      How would that work, really? I can’t figure out how that could be regulated.

      • Cyber Yuki@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago
        1. Establish a wage floor.

        2. Establish a price cap.

        If the corporation can’t make a profit from this, then perhaps their business model was not viable in the first place.

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          A price cap seems to be based on the premise that not having a service at all is better then having it be too expensive. I find that idea very questionable.

          • Cyber Yuki@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            “Let’s treat our workers like slaves or else the entire economy will suffer” is a far worse take IMHO.

            • jdeath@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              i don’t think that is what they meant. is that a strawman you’re slaying?

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Replace that price cap with a wage cap for the people at the top that is based on the wages of everyone else in the company and companies it contracts (to avoid the obvious loophole as well as giving an actual mechanism for “trickle down”).

        • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          “No fair! Our business model was very simple: price gouge the customer while exploiting our labor force!”

  • wahming@monyet.cc
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    https://web.archive.org/web/20240205222645/https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/seattle-ordinance-intended-app-delivery-workers-hurting-them/281-9516c79c-3161-41f3-a662-798b9db16d3f

    It’s also mentioned that the amount of drivers has risen sharply since the ordinance went into effect, as drivers from surrounding areas have moved in to try to take advantage of the higher prices. So yeah, doesn’t sound like the ordinance is at fault, sounds like more places just need to implement it themselves

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      This is the crux of most of this kinda of piecemeal legislation. If the change is localized, people just move to the place that suits them best.

      The same thing happens with sugar tax on drinks at the local level, people just buy their drinks elsewhere.

      It needs to be state wide to make much of a difference overall.

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        The same thing happens with sugar tax on drinks at the local level, people just buy their drinks elsewhere.

        Right. So, I’m going to travel to the the next town over just to save 50 cents on a bottle of soda? These are often impulse buys, anyway.

  • Steve@communick.news
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I expect this is temporary as the market adjusts to the new prices. Eventually drivers will leave since its not worth it to them, increasing the orders per driver. And some amount of people ordering will come back once the sticker shock passes. It’ll work out.

    • Veedem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      That’s my thinking, too. I wonder how many new drivers started once the ordinance was passed in an attempt to catch the higher wage being spoken about.

    • Habahnow@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      In addition, increase pay, so the supply goes high while demand drops. It will be interesting how this works out in a year from now.