Lyft and Uber To Cease Operations In Minneapolis After New Minimum Wage Law (cnn.com) 130
The city council of Minneapolis on Thursday voted 10-3 to allow rideshare drivers to be paid the local minimum wage of $15.57 an hour, overriding the mayor's veto of the bill. As a result, Lyft and Uber said they will cease operations in the city. From a report: Lyft said in a statement the bill was "deeply flawed" and that the ordinance makes its "operations unsustainable." "We support a minimum earning standard for drivers, but it should be done in an honest way that keeps the service affordable for riders," said a Lyft spokesperson. Uber said in a statement obtained by CNN that it's "disappointed the council chose to ignore the data and kick Uber out of the Twin Cities, putting 10,000 people out of work and leaving many stranded."
The ordinance mandates rideshare drivers make at least $1.40 per mile and $0.51 per minute within Minneapolis. However, the analysis Frey referred to showed lower numbers -- $0.89 per mile and $0.49 per minute -- to make minimum wage. The mayor is imploring local politicians to come up with a solution before May 1. The rideshare services say that user prices would double if they stayed in the city.
The ordinance mandates rideshare drivers make at least $1.40 per mile and $0.51 per minute within Minneapolis. However, the analysis Frey referred to showed lower numbers -- $0.89 per mile and $0.49 per minute -- to make minimum wage. The mayor is imploring local politicians to come up with a solution before May 1. The rideshare services say that user prices would double if they stayed in the city.
Of course (Score:5, Insightful)
Lyft said in a statement the bill was "deeply flawed" and that the ordinance makes its "operations unsustainable."
Having to pay people tends to do that, especially when you're barely making any money [reuters.com] as it is.
In the second half of 2023, the median earnings for a Lyft driver using their personal vehicle was $30.68, including tips and bonuses per engaged hour. For Uber, it was $33 per hour, in the December quarter.
"Lyft is trying to earn less money from the drivers in order to grow the amount of driver pool that they have and to grow the amount of passengers that they want to drive and Uber is doing the opposite," said Cambiar's Ballantyne. "This is a huge gamble for Lyft because they make very little money as it is."
Re: (Score:3)
Is that $30.68 per hour available for hire, or $30.68 per hour responding and sevicing customers, or $30.68 per hour of actually driving the customer around?
Also, note the proviso "using personal vehicle". In many places most of the drivers I talked to are leasing vehicles -- from the ridshare company. They aren't clearing anything like a thousand a week, mainly its a way to they can gin up some cash in a hurry.
Re: Of course (Score:3)
No, "Gin Up" is correct here:
Gin up (or ginned up) means enliven, excite or enthuse. Its probable derivation is from the 1800's British slang term "ginger up," which referred to the practice of putting ginger up a horse's butt to make him spirited and prance with a high tail, for purposes of show or sale.
Source: https://www.urbandictionary.co... [urbandictionary.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Different dialect. This is how we used the expression when I was young fifty years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
I think "gin up" in your sense is a UK thing. Check out the wiktionary entry [wiktionary.org] which is pretty much how we used it -- to generate or create.
Its tough. (Score:3)
Do we exploit cheap labor to give more people a convenience for less? Or do we provide fair wages for work?
(Lol jk the question is rhetorical)
Well of course Uber and Lyft hate it (Score:2)
Without the constant influx of VC cash, these companies' business models will really only work with autonomous vehicles. They're just biding their time and trying to stay afloat, paying human drivers as little as possible while trying to gain (and hold onto) mindshare until true automated full self driving arrives - at which point they will tell the humans "so long, and thanks for all the fish".
Re: (Score:2)
So they aint going anywhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Without the constant influx of VC cash, these companies' business models will really only work with autonomous vehicles. They're just biding their time and trying to stay afloat, paying human drivers as little as possible while trying to gain (and hold onto) mindshare until true automated full self driving arrives - at which point they will tell the humans "so long, and thanks for all the fish".
In that case maybe these venture capitalist genius princes of the universe should pour there money into something with better profitability prospects than Uber, Lyft and the rest of that ilk until Elon Musk perfects the fully autonomous vehicle technology he promised us back in 2016.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What kind of lawless hellhole do you live in?
Re: Well of course Uber and Lyft hate it (Score:2)
They're just biding their time and trying to stay afloat, paying human drivers as little as possible while trying to gain (and hold onto) mindshare until true automated full self driving arrives
And assuming it does arrive, why should the developers and owners of those vehicles hand them over to Uber or Lyft? They can program a car to drive itself, but can't write an app?
Re: (Score:2)
Says enough about their business models (Score:3)
There is no place for Ubers and Lyfts in this world.
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? Uber and Lyft are nothing more than taxi services. If you think otherwise, I recommend looking at the details and operations of taxi services. The only difference is that with traditional taxi services, communications from the customer to the service is done by a phone call, communications between dispatch and driver is done by radio, and pricing is done (for honest drivers) by meter. For Uber and Lyft, they've eliminated the labor behind dispatch and replaced it with digital radio communications,
That's a bad move for Uber and Lyft (Score:5, Insightful)
The harsh reality is that it costs Uber and Lyft absolutely nothing to continue offering service in a city versus not doing so. Their costs come entirely from operating expenses for keeping their servers up and running, R&D expenses for software, and paying drivers for mileage and wages. The fees they charge riders cover the cost of mileage and wages, and if nobody is riding, they aren't paying mileage and wages. So the marginal cost for offering service versus not offering service is exactly zero.
What Uber and Lyft are doing by acting this way is sending a message, to intimidate other cities into not passing similar laws, because they want to keep prices low, because some people will choose other modes of transportation if their cost is too high. The last thing they want is for prices to go up to compensate for the higher costs, and for things to end up being business as usual, without a huge drop in ridership, because that will prove that they've been unreasonably underpaying people for years, and will harm their reputation.
On the flip side, by refusing to provide any service, they're instantly cementing their reputation as being the slum lords of taxi service, and at some point (two or three months at most), a disruptive innovator will cover that city, provide better service, and pass on more of the revenue to drivers. It will be successful enough that drivers in other cities will start to join their service, and eventually they'll kick Uber and Lyft to the curb. So in the long run, this is likely to go down in history as an incredibly shortsighted and generally bad business decision, because it creates an easy opening for new competitors to move into the market.
Re:That's a bad move for Uber and Lyft (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That seems like a leap in logic. Without competition why would they pass on more of the revenue to drivers?
Re: That's a bad move for Uber and Lyft (Score:2)
Because a minimum wage has just been voted.
Re: (Score:2)
As for how it turned out for Seattle, well, so far the rideshare prices went up, less people are ordering rides or food deliveries, more drivers are swarming to Seattle city limits from surrounding cities because "they pay
Re: (Score:2)
You make it sound simple, and I hope I'm wrong, but why would some other "disruptive innovator" be interested in taking over this now-empty market when the costs are largely based on people costs and they would be faced with the same minimums?
I don't think there's a magical way around that.
Re: (Score:2)
The ordinance mandates $15.57 an hour. It flat out says per hour, unlike the additional $0.49 per minute of the ride.
Minimum wage "per hour" in MI already defines the hourly rate as the time you are working for an employer.
So if you're logged into the app for 8 hours of the day, that's $124.56 if you accept zero rides. If you accept more than zero rides, add on to that $0.49 per minute during the ride.
Here's the law [minneapolismn.gov]. Notice that it says nothing of the sort. In fact, what it says is:
(1) A TNC driver shall be paid at least one dollar forty cents ($1.40) per mile and fifty-one cents ($0.51) per minute for the time transporting a rider, subject to annual adjustment as provided by this section, or five dollars ($5.00), whichever is greater. A TNC driver shall be paid at least one dollar eighty-one cents ($1.81) per mile and fifty-one cents ($0.51) per minute for the time transporting a rider if the vehicle is a wheelchair accessible transportation network vehicle, subject to annual adjustment as provided by this section, or five dollars ($5.00), whichever is greater. Minimum compensation is due only for the portion of the ride that occurs within the city.
It also provides for annual adjustments, paying the driver 80% of any cancellation fee that the user pays, timely payment of tips and gratuities, 80% of any special event surcharge paid by the user, timely payment of all other money that they owe the driver, and paying the driver even if the customer somehow stiffs the rideshare company.
It also strictly limits when the rideshare company can deduct money from the money paid t
Re: That's a bad move for Uber and Lyft (Score:2)
It's even worse than that. Uber has established market presence for years and still struggles to be profitable. The only way to make this work is to first become a monopoly or cartel then raise all prices.
Spending (Score:4, Informative)
Perhaps Uber and Lyft should have put some money away for a rainy day. Instead they spent $200 million on passing favorable legislation. https://www.latimes.com/califo... [latimes.com]
Just think of the positive headlines and worker happiness had they passed that money down. Pay people more money? Nah fuck it let's spend it on commercials and lobbying instead.
Re: Spending (Score:2)
Without the "favorable legislation" they wouldn't exist as a service, so rather than viewing the $200M as wasted, it's was actually a valid business expense...
Easy solution (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: Easy solution (Score:2)
So taxpayers are funding non-profit ride share/ride services? That sounds great, until the govt decides to undercut YOUR employer with taxpayer dollars and drive you out of a job...
Re: (Score:2)
Surely the non-profit rideshare services are not non-worker rideshare services. There's still a job available.
Re: (Score:2)
The free market ideal is infinite competition. Starting new competition is one way to free market-ify an industry, though usually that is done by breaking up monopolies.
Re: (Score:2)
I made a generic true statement. You don't know whether the companies mentioned were started with government money or as a co-op by private citizens, nor whether the "kicked out" was by enforcing previous rules or competition or making new laws. You just assumed your own fantasy as reality, without checking. Is there any particular city you wish to discuss, that matches what you said?
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't this thread in the context of reality? Could you tell me one of the specific cities you're talking about?
Re: Easy solution (Score:2)
Because public services are generally good for the public. You don't seem to have a problem with Uber and Lyft using public roads though, so you do draw the line somewhere, some level of public service is acceptable to you. What makes public roads acceptable to you but not public ride sharing?
I'll just go work for the government (Score:2)
Companies were never loyal to you. Companies were faced with strong opposition from unions and they couldn't just use cheap overseas labor to undercut you.
The gig economy is a lie (Score:2)
It's the emperor's new clothes offering pseudo autonomy to "consultants" who are then abused as underpaid employees.
Instead, Uber and Lyft should be treated as the taxi companies they are. If that can't happen, then previous Uber and Lyft drivers should be temporarily assisted onto a path to become legitimate taxi drivers.
they weren't allowed to get paid? (Score:2)
> The city council of Minneapolis on Thursday voted 10-3 to allow rideshare drivers to be paid the local minimum wage of $15.57 an hour
Was getting paid this specific amount of money not legal before?
Boy, they sure do like their rules in this city!
$15/hr while driving (Score:2)
Ironically, $15/hr was the minimum hourly pay that drivers were guaranteed when Lyft first launched in the Twin Cities market back in 2013.
And by guaranteed, I mean that Lyft would pay a driver the difference between what they made per hour UP TO $15/hr.
Driver made $10/hr, Lyft paid extra $5. Driver made $20/hr, Lyft paid extra $0. Driver made $0/hr, Lyft paid $15/hr.
"say that user prices would double" (Score:2)
So double them?
They are free to pull out, I doubt they are free to get together and promise each other they will pull out until government gives in. That is clearly what happened here, they colluded.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need to collude with the rest of your sector, bec
Unsustainable to... (Score:2)
Let them eat cake (Score:2)
Is anyone ever impressed by these blustering threats from these "disruptive" technological enslavement companies?
Don't want to serve the city anymore? Good, then fuck off. And that tool of a mayor can go to hell too.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Let me order a shovel to be delivered by Uber, it's getting deep in here.
Re:uber and lyft pushed to use rob-taxis (Score:5, Insightful)
Minimum wage increases naturally decreases the workforce, increases inflation, and encourages automation.
Expect more kiosks in stores, more robotics, and more robo-taxis.
Expect micro-stores, or mega vending machines, where you go up to a kiosk and order milk, eggs and a pair of socks.
California will lead the way, because of artificial wage inflation. Workers will loose.
Translation: My business model isn't profitable in the absence of slave labour #me #victim.
Re:uber and lyft pushed to use rob-taxis (Score:4, Interesting)
Such a low paying job is subsidizing the employer by the employee and in the end society.
Now don't see 'society' as something socialist, even the weirdo living off the grid in the Alaskan wilderness is part of (a) society.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Indeed, if a wage does not allow a minimum living standard it is a waste of money to the economy a whole. Such a low paying job is subsidizing the employer by the employee and in the end society. Now don't see 'society' as something socialist, even the weirdo living off the grid in the Alaskan wilderness is part of (a) society.
Yeah, it's definitely better to get that employee kicked out, for his own good of course, so instead of the lousy wage he gets nothing, contributes nothing, and becomes fully dependent on the society. But at least then he'll be sure to vote for socialists, so it's a win.
Re: (Score:2)
"Yeah, it's definitely better to get that employee kicked out, for his own good of course, so instead of the lousy wage he gets nothing, contributes nothing, and becomes fully dependent on the society."
There are plenty of jobs to be had in The Cities.
However it is more expensive to live there, than out here in greater Minnesota.
Re: (Score:3)
"Yeah, it's definitely better to get that employee kicked out, for his own good of course, so instead of the lousy wage he gets nothing, contributes nothing, and becomes fully dependent on the society."
So... how does an Uber driver having to get Food Stamps or Supplemental income from the government not count as Uber getting a handout in the form of relaxed labor requirements?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, if a wage does not allow a minimum living standard it is a waste of money to the economy a whole.
Ok ...
Such a low paying job is subsidizing the employer by the employee and in the end society.
Correct ...
Now don't see 'society' as something socialist, even the weirdo living off the grid in the Alaskan wilderness is part of (a) society.
Ummm ok? You had such a great buildup there. Here, let me complete it for you.
There are a group of people within America that have 'cornered the market'. They are now busy extracting as much wealth as possible. That wealth is extracted from society, never to be seen again, not even as luxury item purchases. I have no idea what they are doing with that wealth. When they leave America, America will collapse as they have hollowed it entirely. I wonder where they will move to and when, as what
Re: (Score:2)
Minimum wage increases naturally decreases the workforce, increases inflation, and encourages automation.
Expect more kiosks in stores, more robotics, and more robo-taxis.
Expect micro-stores, or mega vending machines, where you go up to a kiosk and order milk, eggs and a pair of socks.
California will lead the way, because of artificial wage inflation. Workers will loose.
Translation: My business model isn't profitable in the absence of slave labour #me #victim.
I'm an Australian (min wage: A$23 p/h +25% loading for casual employees) who lives in the UK (£11.44 for over 21s) and the things described by the GP haven't happened here.
Australia has always been expensive (it's a complex answer as to why), but the UK is fairly cheap, probably almost as cheap as the US. We don't have "mega vending machines", in fact a vending machine is rare here compared to the US, Australia and many other countries, it hasn't affected inflation that much (the opposite is true r
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
They are not necessarily white; I have heard the same sentiment spoken by black political activists. It is referencing the age old technique of the Bourgeoise to incite the Proletariat to fight each other instead of them.
Re: (Score:2)
I think automating jobs that no one wants to do is a big plus for humanity.
Re: uber and lyft pushed to use rob-taxis (Score:2)
Unwell your skill set is limited, and those are the only jobs you can work to feed yourself/family.
Re: uber and lyft pushed to use rob-taxis (Score:2)
Bet you must have been raging when they invented the wheel
Re: (Score:3)
Expect more kiosks in stores
Nice of you to let us know just how uninformed and out of touch you are. Retail chains are scaling back self checkout and eliminating it in some places [fastcompany.com]. Not small retailers, either; Walmart, Dollar General, ShopRight, Five Below, Target, etc.
Kroger isn't named in the article, but they experimented with a self-checkout only store and have put human cashiers back in place after an overwhelming number of problems and complaints. They're reducing the number of self-checkout lanes in other stores too.
So no.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice of you to let us know just how uninformed and out of touch you are. Retail chains are scaling back self checkout and eliminating it in some places [fastcompany.com]. Not small retailers, either; Walmart, Dollar General, ShopRight, Five Below, Target, etc.
All of the "kiosks" that you describe (which are being eliminated) are using honor system pay terminals. They are being shut down because they loose money to theft (especially in non prosecuted theft places like California).
More appropriate examples of kiosks would be
- restaurant kiosks, like it McDonalds, that most people seem now use instead of the one cashier. McDonalds once had 4 or 5 cashiers.
- Vending/restaurants payment in Japan, since you mentioned it. Pay at the kiosk. get the item or a ticket for
Re: uber and lyft pushed to use rob-taxis (Score:2)
They loost money? That's terrible!
Re: uber and lyft pushed to use rob-taxis (Score:2)
Retail stores are also shutting down due to 'uncompensated purchases' (AKA shoplifting).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fine by me. If I can get what I need from a vending machine that doesn't give me attitude for having the audacity to interrupt their day with my business transaction, bring on the vending machines.
I'm tired of the bullshit from the disaffected "service" workers that have been told their entire (young) careers that they deserve way more and they're getting such a raw deal, so they don't put forth any effort at all and act like I'm a nuisance, when I'm paying their ridiculously high prices to pay their ridic
Re: (Score:1)
You wouldn't last a single day in those jobs serving entitled assholes like yourself. If markets determine value that would mean high turnover at $15 an hour is still underpaid.
Re: uber and lyft pushed to use rob-taxis (Score:2)
Shit service is rife, he's got a point
Re: (Score:2)
Except for early in my career when I was doing customer service, and helped people without attitude or projecting a sense of general displeasure with having to deal with paying customers.
TL;DR: you don't know anything about me, or what I'm capable of. So shove your weak shit assumptions right up your ass.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: uber and lyft pushed to use rob-taxis (Score:3)
Annual raises increase inflation, sign yourself up for the no more raises program and show us how it's done.
Re: uber and lyft pushed to use rob-taxis (Score:3)
I live in a country with a minimum wage and as you say everything is automated and no-one has a job. If only people had listened to libertarians like yourself then I would be able to afford a device to type this on rather than having to have a sarcastic bigoted robot do it for me.
Stop snivelling flesh bag, you voted for this. Next!
Re:Prove it (Score:4, Informative)
Opposition to a living wage == "I acknowledge that your job needs to be done but believe you deserve to live in poverty for doing it."
Re: Prove it (Score:2)
Nobody predicts an apocalypse. What you're doing is increasing the velocity of money each time you raise it. To wit, each time you raise it, gradually the price of everything else increases to reach a new equilibrium, aka inflation, and then you're right back where you started, only now any savings you've had is devalued. In other words, you're just chasing your damn tail while being convinced that it's somehow making things better all because minimum wage workers get a temporary boost.
IMO if we're going to
Re: Prove it (Score:2)
There's probably an outward appearance of that because 1940 to 1980 was the period of highest growth the United States had ever seen and more than likely ever will see. More than half of the world was experiencing either the Great Leap Forward or Collectivization, which contrary to the claims of the architects of each, resulted in mass famines and otherwise total economic collapse. The other half of the world, with North America being the major exception, was decimated by the most destructive event in reco
Re:Prove it (Score:4, Informative)
Unemployment in 1969 was under 4%, and that May was 3.4%.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to drive your own vehicle into the ground while charging less than taxis for livery services, thats on you.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Remember (Score:4, Interesting)
If no one was making any kind of money from these services, they would have quit a long time ago. The customers like the service and the drivers are willing to provide the services at the agreed upon rate. If Lyft or Uber can't make enough from their cut, that's their problem. But I'm glad that you know better than everyone else and can let them all know how they're allowed to conduct themselves and their affairs.
The city of Minneapolis not only cut their own tax revenues, but they also created more people who now need government assistance because they have no income.
Re:Remember (Score:4, Insightful)
All that's happening here is that the govt. are applying employment law to protect citizens from employers who are demonstrably treating them as disposable.
Re: Remember (Score:2)
The government is supposed to act for the benefit of the population, including and especially the poorest since they need it the most, it's doing that with that minimum wage, what's wrong with that?
Re: (Score:2)
I mean the US is the one western rich country with high poverty, and also one with the fewest worker protections (including minimum salary). There are variations, for example Germany didn't have a national minimum salary until recently but they were still minimum salaries per profession, negotiated and enshrined in collective agreements. I don't know why some people are so intent on maintaining aspects of US law and society that ensure poverty and precariousness but it does not signal the best of intentions
Re: (Score:2)
So if I can get enough people to decide your labor is hyper-exploitive (whatever the hell that means) we can make it illegal for you to work your job?
Yes. That's called "employment law".
Re: (Score:2)
If no one was making any kind of money from these services, they would have quit a long time ago.
That is not how the tech industry business model works. These services have survived entirely on VC funding on the promise they would do something grand. Kind of like how Twitter never made profit either. The ones getting scammed are the investors.
The customers like the service
Customers are price conscious and will always look for the cheapest mode of minimally viable transport. They were cheaper than taxis, of course customers like them.
and the drivers are willing to provide the services at the agreed upon rate
And this is where your argument goes into full on ignorance. Drivers aren't willing to provide the s
Re:Remember (Score:4, Insightful)
Sounds like Lyft and Uber are simply bad at business if they can't make a profit. More power to the guy starting his own delivery company in the article you linked.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Remember (Score:2)
That's more or less what they started out doing. However most governments decided that by offering a Marketplace like that they were responsible for ensuring their drivers had things like driver's licenses and insurance. Probably more reasonable than expecting the people getting in the car to do that check for each ride. They also mani
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like Lyft and Uber are simply bad at business if they can't make a profit. More power to the guy starting his own delivery company in the article you linked.
+1. The food delivery services (DoorDash, Uber Eats, etc.) are, IMO, an absolute blight on society. The fees they charge are mostly proportional to the size of the order, even though the actual cost of doing the delivery is entirely fixed per order. So a $38 food order might cost $60 delivered, even though it's maybe a 15-minute round trip, which means they're charging $88 per hour and probably paying the drivers less than a quarter of that. And that's before you factor in all the hidden costs, where th
Re: (Score:2)
I could understand grocery delivery being that much...
A fool and his money...
Re: (Score:2)
It's ridiculous. And they are absolutely right when the per-item price is larger as well. Find some restaurant on GrubHub / Uber Eats / whatever, and then look at the same restaurant's menu on Google to see the markup.
Why anyone would use this shit if they can't expense it to someone else is beyond me.
Re: Remember (Score:2)
A disruptive innovator should be able to come into just about any of these markets, set up a competing delivery service with only slightly longer average times, provide warmers and coolers so that they can make two or three pickups and drop-offs per run, undercut these companies' delivery fees by half, double the driver salaries, treat the drivers like actual employees with benefits, and still make a healthy profit. If they can't, they're not thinking about the problem hard enough.
Amazing that the solution is so obvious that NO ONE ever thought of this before you, perhaps maybe it's not as simple as you imagine, sitting on your sofa, waiting for DoorDash to deliver your next meal?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like Lyft and Uber are simply bad at business if they can't make a profit. More power to the guy starting his own delivery company in the article you linked.
Pretty much this.
Illegal taxi services who depend on ignoring laws to compete with legitimate taxi companies find their business isn't viable. shockedpikachu.jpg
Re: (Score:3)
Always funny to hear people make excuses for why people shouldn't be paid. If that's the case, then perhpas the folks at the top should cut their salaries and get rid of stock bonuses and perks. After all, what justification can there be for them to make $13 to $16 million [salary.com] for doing so little?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lyft is losing money.
Lyft is not losing money. They finally eeked out a profit.
I do t know how long their CEO has been there
Their current CEO has been there about a year.
but if he's managing to gradually lose less of the investors money,
All he did was fire some people. Management to be specific.
hey may be quite happy to pay $12 million dollars for that.
Making the decision to fire people is worth $12 million? I can do it for far less and save the company bundles of money.
I don't own any of their stock, an
Re: (Score:3)
There certainly are real leaders, but most of what you see is bullshit. If you have a lot of stock, your salary doesn't matter. I can't speak to whether or not the examples you put forwa
Re: Remember (Score:2)
Like the President and CEO of Columbia Sportswear did during covid. The guy cut his salary to $10K and other execs voluntarily took a 15% pay cut, all the while paying full salaries to all their employees.
The CEO gave up $10K? So what? How many employees did his sacrifice save from getting fired during COVID?
Other Exec's took a 15% pay cut? Wow. For every 6 or 7 execs that took the pay cut, one more exec kept their jobs.
Oh look, a quick Google turned up that despite the management teams sacrifice, Columbia Sportswear DID NOT pay all employees full salary and benefits during COVID, they laid-off 3,500 workers! [kgw.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Lyft is losing money.
Not my problem or the fault of the employees.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean, the priority is putting a price on their importance to everyone else. Treating everyone the same doesn't work and demanding everyone work, only shows the dishonesty when people do things for free: Like pregnancy, or retire without a self-funded allowance (eg. government pension).
Taxis haven't gone out of business and none of those Uber/Lyft drivers are proclaiming how they bought a second vehicle (or, even a first vehicle) with their wages. A big part of that, is those drivers already have a fi
Re: Remember (Score:2)
I'm not sure if you realised but "the market" is people, and they don't tend to play fair when they have all the leverage.