Lyft Sparks Uproar After Opening Online Store to Sell Masks to Its Drivers (theguardian.com) 60
"The ride-hailing platform Lyft has opened an online store to sell masks and other protective gear as the Covid-19 pandemic intensifies, enraging drivers and labor organizers who say the company should be providing these free," reports the Guardian:
The tech company's move to sell drivers protective gear rather than provide it resurfaces the debate of whether drivers are employees or independent contractors, and to what extent the tech giants carry responsibility for the work conditions of gig workers... The Lyft store launched on 1 June, a company spokeswoman told the Guardian, and sells the supplies "at cost", she said.
"Lyft does not make a profit on PPE," she said, adding that Lyft had distributed more than 150,000 sanitizing products and masks to drivers since the Covid-19 crisis began. "The Lyft store is a resource to provide millions of drivers across the US easy access to cleaning supplies and face masks that have consistently been difficult to find." Still, drivers complain they have shouldered much of the safety responsibilities, and cost. Eden Alva, a driver organizer in the Bay Area, said Lyft should not be charging drivers for the personal protective equipment required to work safely but instead providing it free...
"From the start they have pushed all costs, expenses and risks on to drivers while pocketing as much revenue as possible," he said. "During a crisis like coronavirus, drivers suffer even more, and there isn't any form of safety net."
"Lyft does not make a profit on PPE," she said, adding that Lyft had distributed more than 150,000 sanitizing products and masks to drivers since the Covid-19 crisis began. "The Lyft store is a resource to provide millions of drivers across the US easy access to cleaning supplies and face masks that have consistently been difficult to find." Still, drivers complain they have shouldered much of the safety responsibilities, and cost. Eden Alva, a driver organizer in the Bay Area, said Lyft should not be charging drivers for the personal protective equipment required to work safely but instead providing it free...
"From the start they have pushed all costs, expenses and risks on to drivers while pocketing as much revenue as possible," he said. "During a crisis like coronavirus, drivers suffer even more, and there isn't any form of safety net."
You're independent contractors, remember? (Score:4, Insightful)
But it's true that an enterprise with no fixed relationship with the workers will struggle with fixed expenses like sending "X" masks to every driver per month. How many people sign up as a driver and do a few trips for a few weeks and then hardly ever if at all? How many run bot the Uber and Lyft apps and take whatever is best at the moment?
Re: (Score:3)
Good point. People could just sign up, get free equipment and never do any work.
The whole issue seems kind of overblown. Lyft is providing supplies at cost to contractors who have no obligation to do any work. A loose relationship has its advantages and disadvantages for both parties.
Re: (Score:3)
No danger of that if Lyft priority vets drivers like they are supposed to.
Re: (Score:2)
*properly vets drivers
bloody auto-correct and tiny screens, this is why I need a phone that folds out to 10 inches
Re: (Score:2)
Oddly the relationship is "loose" enough that Lyft requires drivers to use masks even in jurisdictions where there is no mask mandate [lyft.com], but not "loose" enough for the drivers to tell Lyft to stay in its "arrange a ride share" lane. Oh, and Lyft is also attempting to dictate what passengers must wear, wheth
Re: (Score:2)
Well that's thing, in the UK they are employees.
Re: (Score:2)
Contractors are responsible for their own uniforms, they are typically not responsible for mandatory disposable PPE required when contracting to a company. This is why at my work when I walk into the building with a Worley engineer in toe they get given the same face mask I do.
gig economy (Score:2)
Welcome to the gig economy, this is just the second phase of the race to the bottom. Not only do you make minimum wage, you need to supply your own vehicle and gas, but now supplies to keep people safe
And people are wondering why socialism is gaining traction with the young. The young cannot afford rent and if they went to college they pretty much bought a house with nothing to show for it. All the have to look forward to is a life of debt (unless you are offspring of the super rich).
Socialism started of
Re: (Score:2)
Holy Fuck. A pack of 10 costs $8
I worked at a manufacturing facility and we bought our own damned safety glasses and boots.
Re: gig economy (Score:2)
Mention "socialism" in the wrong context in the US, and you will automatically be judged poorly, excommunicated, shunned, or perhaps worse. Nothing like the open-mindedness and quality education system of modern Americans to produce such enlightened and worldly individuals that can't seem to name the differences between communism, Stalinism, and socialism but they really, really hate all of them anyhow.
Where have you been hiding for the last decade? Socialism is no longer taboo. It is celebrated especially at the university level.
The only thing you got right is that people canâ(TM)t tell you the difference between socialism and communism but it doesnâ(TM)t matter they love them both.
Re: (Score:2)
Erm, college tuition rose because of socialist-like policies of making college more accessible to more people by providing easy or guaranteed student loans.. If you increase the the number of people wishing to buy and the a
Re: gig economy (Score:2)
Easy or guaranteed loans isn't socialism, its just guaranteed money for the banks. Socialism would be free college.
Company Store (Score:1)
They owe their soul to the company store.
"Some people say a man is made outta mud
A poor man's made outta muscle and blood
Muscle and blood and skin and bones
A mind that's a-weak and a back that's strong
You load sixteen tons, what do you get?
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store
I was born one mornin' when the sun didn't shine
I picked up my shovel and I walked to the mine
I loaded sixt
Re: Company Store (Score:2)
I have a question (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Why do Lyft and Uber get called "tech companies" in the press?
Because their app is what differentiates them from other cab companies.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Computers help us do stupid things faster. Most of the things that computers commonly do are things that we can do much more slowly without them. They make certain things practical that weren't practical before. Cheap mobile phone internet has made it possible for you to get by-the-minute information about your driver. Other than that, Uber's primary contribution to the transportation industry has been doing an end-run around around the laws on taxis in many jurisdictions.
Re: I have a question (Score:2)
If they were cabs, no one would use them, because cabs sucked.
selling independent contractors uniforms. (Score:2)
Selling independent contractors uniforms.
Is very iffy as uniforms = employees and in some states uniforms must be free to employees. In other states the cost of the uniforms can not pull them under min wage.
Re:selling independent contractors uniforms. (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow, you're gonna tear a tendon stretching that far.
PPE are not uniforms. It's not branding. Oddly enough, employers can require their employees to wear clothing at work and don't have to pay for it.
I suppose they could provide "free," but we all know nothing is free - so they'd have to raise rates or take a bigger cut. And, of course, "free" would only mean some drivers taking advantage, and selling off their "free" stuff for profit. Selling to drivers at cost eliminates a lot of incentive for fraud and distributes the costs equitably.
Re: selling independent contractors uniforms. (Score:2)
For God's sake, PPEs are PROTECTIVE devices. Of course the company must provide them, like a helmet for construction workers (and contractors).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
This is America. There's really only rule by class, not rule of law.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure the law doesn't differentiate between employees or contractors on this - if they are working for you, then *you* need to ensure they have the necessary PPE.
So, if I hire a painter or a carpenter to work on my home, I'm supposed to "ensure that they have the necessary PPE?" and magically know what PPE they need, buy it for them, and enforce their use?
That said, I did tell the painter that it would be wise to wear hearing protection while operating his electric sander. He did show up with earmuffs the next day.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds familiar (Score:2)
Reminds me of a company store [wikipedia.org]. The only real difference is Lyft claims to sell this stuff at cost out of "the goodness of their heart".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
couldn't you still report it on your taxes?
Yes. Schedule C as a business expense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The "only difference" is there's no company scrip and you're free to buy your equipment elsewhere, or most of everything else in the article.
I've worked for and with several companies that have employee-only stores where goods are sold at cost to employees. Nothing unusual or wrong with that.
It's not even unusual that departments sell their goods and services to other departments of the same company for accounting purposes. Which is kind of comparable as drivers aren't employees but contractors.
Re: (Score:2)
No one is forcing anyone to drive for Lyft
Re: (Score:2)
And somehow that excuses their behavior?
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody is forcing Lyft to do business in California [businessinsider.com]. But if they do, then they need to follow California's laws.
Re: (Score:2)
And no one is forcing anyone to buy their PPE through Lyft.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The State of California has a different opinion [businessinsider.com] on the matter.
Re: employee vs. Independent (Score:2)
California might want to consider them employees but it doesnâ(TM)t make a lot of sense. One of the reasons that California wants to consider them employees is for unemployment benefits but even this doesnâ(TM)t make much sense. If I drive for Uber/Lyft one month and then donâ(TM)t drive for a month, Iâ(TM)m not unemployed, I just didnâ(TM)t work. What prevents someone from working on even months and collecting unemployment on odd months?
Same with PPE, unless Lyft requires a pers
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I dunno, the fact that you're ineligible if you voluntarily quit your job [ca.gov]. It's also difficult to collect unemployment when you're still employed at a job but decide to take unpaid leave, a.k.a., work zero hours.
Oh no, someone has rece
so really, truly (Score:2)
...don't work for lyft?
How is it any more complicated?
Why not give passengers masks? (Score:2)
At the end of the day because in reality, many Lyft driver
Re: (Score:2)
At the end of the day because in reality, many Lyft drivers are wearing masks for the optics and find it ineffective to keep wearing them
False. Viruses do not linger in the air, they settle on surfaces, and then die soon after. There's quite a difference between sitting in a car after dropping off someone and having a ciggy and sitting in a small chamber where someone just coughs in your direction.
Is it perfect? No. Is it just for optics and ineffective? No. Every little bit helps.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Homemade masks provide *ZERO* protection to the person wearing them... because by the time aerosol droplets that are small enough to get through the pores of the mask are that close to your face, any droplets that come into contact with your mask will just be inhaled on your next breath
They do inhibit asymptomatic transmission effectively by slowing down any droplets that escape your mouth in such circumstances so at least they will not typically reach other people under ordinary social conditions.
Hom
Re: (Score:2)
Regarding reporting this to the company..considering Lyft is based in SF where I live, all the company needs to do is look out the window or take a walk to see what I'm describing. It's really that common.
Hmm... (Score:2)
While I understand the general controversy of employee versus contractor do I have to wonder... Which employee or contractor gets enraged over not getting something for free? Besides, this late into the pandemic should every employee or contractor have a supply of masks regardless of where these came from. Everyone, from bosses to the homeless, have managed to get their hands on masks.
There seems to be a notion of entitlement in these demands, which needs to be looked at. The company may actually just try t
Same old tech story. (Score:2)
Reading the comments has been interesting.
From NoNonAlphaCharsHere:
"Why do Lyft and Uber get called "tech companies" in the press? They're just labor-scab pimps with apps that Larry Ellison's cat could have written."
I agree. Using available tech to provide a social service is not tech itself. It is like calling a self-serve laundry a tech company because they use appliance machines that a century ago were born from the current new technologies of those times. Or, calling a business office "tech" because
Pragmatic solution (Score:2)
Yes, of course people want free stuff all the time, that includes both Lyft and their drivers in this case, but how about a pragmatic solution? Rather than pushing the costs onto contractors, they just need to push them onto customers. Lyft should allow each driver credit for PPE based on how much they work. Each ride can have a PPE surcharge for example, which would go towards credits for the driver to use in the Lyft PPE store.
This would be no different that electricians, mechanics, construction workers,
Fungusible (Score:2)
Money is fungible. It's gotta come out of the driver's work effort somehow. Everything else is just accounting gimmicks.