His revenue was ~20% more than the minimum wage. Add in the employer half of FICA (+6.2%) and wear-and-tear on the car and gas and it looks like worse. If he drove more than 4.17 miles an hour (at US average IRS mileage rates) he made less than minimum wage. And that's ignoring other costs I may have forgotten.
And that's assuming that for some reason the PR stunt showed no preference to the CEO in route assignment and otherwise was an up and up demo.
As far as I can tell, he was using the app for 5.5 hours. The fact that 2 of them were looking for the next delivery is irrelevant. That time counts as working time. It's not just the 3.5 hours when the delivery is in the system
AFAIK, biking vs. driving doesn't change mileage reimbursement rates. It does change the vehicle that experiences the wear and tear and, for most bikes, eliminates the cost of gas. And it may change his true cost. But not the reimbursement a minimum wage employee would be entitled to.
not willing to register to read the article. wishing there was micropayment - send a buck - get the content without registering.
Did they get into expenses for the vehicle with the calculation? Taxes?
I had some fun doing lyft for a month here and there several times - and they kept cutting the rates they paid drivers. The last few weeks I did it I realized the after expenses and taxes was about $6 / hour.
Every uber/lyft driver I've ridden with has told me they have no info about tax time and what's to be expected - and none were saving for it. It's a disaster every year I bet.
I've asked around a bit for banking option that would let you set rules for percentages - like each time money is deposited from place X take 28% and put into other savings account Y - but not found any.. I think it's needed.
I saw a submarine article recently that said a thing called "lilly" debit card type thing made for freelancers(?) - says it can move money based on percentages - but the signup page the article referenced had no info about that feature so I let it linger in a tab and forgot about it.
Whatever the money is with uber/lyft - so many don't understand all the expenses - I try to say it's like getting good money for driving neighbors around - but you don't see that you are basically taking a knife to your brakes and other components, handing over pieces of your car to the riders in exchange for $12 or whatever - and the more you drive the more you are in danger with other cars / etc.. and don't see the actual cost for a long time so you think it's better than what it is.
love to know how many people they have had as drivers and how many do it more than 18 months.
The "Simple" app used to have a function for automatically saving a percentage of every deposit, but Simple as a company is gone now, destroyed for no good reason by their acquirer.
I think it depends on the car, the mileage deduction rate is 57.5 cents per mile. If I have a Prius, my depreciation isn’t nearly that high so I may not be bad off come tax time.
I can deduct not only the logged miles, but miles in between jobs and to/from work sites. If I’m driving 30 miles an hour then I’m deducting $17/hour from auto expenses that will greatly reduce my taxable revenue.
Of course, there are expenses to be paid on the vehicle for fuel, insurance and depreciation. But there are vehicles where this is much less than the IRS deduction that is just flat for all vehicles.
Some (most?) people reading the headline will think it's a shame uber is exploiting workers.
Me, I'm just taking it as pretty definite proof that people are more than willing to occasionally work below minimum wage. I'm seeing it as a pretty solid indictment on the whole "minimum wage is protecting poor people" idea.
People not being carbon copy automatons have actual contexts and preferences. Maybe they value being independent more than a minimum wage. Maybe they do their math and come to the conclusion that averaged over a longer time, it's actually a pretty good wage. Maybe the CEO was a shitty driver in his first day (should we stop him from learning then?). Maybe some are going through a rough spot and want to make rent money, and damn whatever an accountant would say their "hourly wage" is. I'm betting most just get better, even if they occasionally go through a bad day.
But steamroll this to fit with "minimum wage", and in absolutely all the contexts above you have unemployed people.
I also strongly believe that people are more than willing to work below minimum wage - it's just that I have a less happy explanation: Otherwise, their food, their car, and their house gets taken away.
If becoming homeless was the alternative, I'd also do whatever job I have to.
So in my opinion, this mostly just shows us that productivity in general is so high and automation works so well that we honestly don't need a healthy chunk of our fellow citizens. That's why they are forced to compete for even the shittiest jobs. Now the question is, what do we do with them?
It is cruel, I agree, but it might be the reality. We have collectively decided to value people based on their economic output. It's called capitalism and it seems to work OK or better for the majority of people. But sticking to it does dehumanize or at the very least devalue a certain part of our people.
That said, it was not my intention to judge people based on their work merit. I am merely pointing out that our society would continue to function even if let's say 20% of all people were permanently unemployed. So please don't shoot the messenger.
And no, most of society doesn't care whether I do what I do or not. If my finances allow it, I might even opt to voluntarily become part of the "not needed = permanently unemployed" group and spend more time with my family instead of working.
I dont know about you, but I would love the opportunity to just have my bills paid, while I pursue some passion project. Write some code for broad utility and GPL it. Maybe paint. Maybe teach some neighbors' kids how to code. Maybe help the neighbors with a few things, so they can have time with their kids. Finally build that 3D printer filament recycler for those plastic cups. And print toys for the neighborhood kids by how much they can collect.
Share. Build. Dream. Learn. Live.
Its not that these things arent contributing to our society. Its that these things are not itemized by a monetary value as part of the GDP.
And I think that says something about the way we run our economy, more than it says about "laziness," or whatever hustle-culture sales-pitch theyre calling it now.
People are passionate. If someone lacks it? Someone or something trained them to be otherwise - usually mistakenly calling this a part of "discipline."
Well, not force them to live on welfare would be a good start :) Which is what minimum wage is doing.
Comparative advantage is a thing. Lower work cost enough, and ideally lower other living wage floors like NIMBYsm, and things should settle to a decent enough level. Which we can supplement with a very low level UBI when we can afford it.
But the current system is not just discouraging - it's forbidding unproductive people from working.
How getting rid of minimum wage (from your original post) would reduce reliance on welfare?
Also NIMBYism manifests as a wage floor, but keeping the wrong sort of people out is the cause and money’s not gonna solve that.
Finally, from everything I’ve read UBI is already affordable. Especially when you replace welfare and the all of the bookkeeping/gate keeping costs associated with ensure not a single dollar is ever “abused”.
Try sketching the math on a napkin. I assume you're in US - multiply the population with a monthly figure, then 12 months, and compare it with the current yearly budget.gonna be interesting, I promise.
If I'm understanding, you're saying people will work for less than their value because there's either a capital or job supply isssue in their market, not because the cost or risk to an average person to just doing the work or starting their own business is so high that minimum wage is a more appealing proposition?
It sounds more like labor is being artificially broken to deter people from asking for the value of their labor over accepting wage work.
If Uber were a service to organize and empower workers by allowing them to set their own prices, how many do you think would continue working for less than minimum wage?
No I'm arguing that "value" here is strongly determined by supply and demand. And if you have an oversupply of people willing to work - because they literally have to work to survive - it drives down prices to unsustainable levels.
Me, I'm just taking it as pretty definite proof that people are more than willing to occasionally work below minimum wage. I'm seeing it as a pretty solid indictment on the whole "minimum wage is protecting poor people" idea.
You talk like people have a wealth of options and are just choosing to work below minimum wage.
Things are hard out there. Really hard. Folks are struggling.
YES. And guess what is not going to help them at all? Forbidding them to work below an artificially set productivity level. This means they can't learn on the job, can't prove they can do a good job if it's not already obvious in the interview, can't work if they're part of a discriminated minority (would _you_ hire a gipsy or an ex con if you have 5 other equally qualified applicants? At the same wage, sorry, I wouldn't. The extra risk is real). And of course, they can't take a bad job to get through a rough patch which means... a bad month can turn into homelessness and a bad decade.
>Maybe they value being independent more than minimum wage
Excuse me? In the middle of a National, potentially global housing affordability crisis, where this locale is ground zero for some of the worst wage-to-rent ratios on Earth...
How in the world is not making minimum wage anything approaching "independent"? The app is a less caring boss than any human could be. If you get run over by a car? There is nothing to stop the app from penalizing you for missing deliveries, not opting-in for enough deliveries, or taking too long to deliver burritos while we're being taken to the hospital.
Independence? Thats a life that only comes from living wages.
Wait, of course people are occasionally willing to work for below minimum wage! That's the whole point of having a law about it!
If every single worker said "I will never work for below $x," you wouldn't need to set the minimum wage to $x by law - nobody would be employed at below $x. The whole reason for a law is that people are, in fact, willing to take jobs below minimum wage on occasion.
Therefore the argument that a minimum wage law is good for poor workers does not rest on the idea that such a law matches their individual revealed preferences, and it takes into account that the law prevents them from being offered jobs which they would occasionally be willing to take.
Engage with the actual argument for a minimum wage law, please, not some obviously false straw man.
The rideshare driver has a similar predicament as a traditional pizza delivery driver. Expenses for providing the service are outsourced to the employee. The employee probably has only a vague, incorrect notion what their actual income is.
It's unfair because the companies take advantage of the fact the worker probably does not, or even can not, understand how much income they take home.
My partner delivered pizzas for years. We bought them a newer car for safety. They drove it to death for the giant pizza chain. Carrying their own non-commercial vehicle insurance which really wouldn't cover them for commercial use. Paid personal health insurance on the ACA marketplace. Bought their own gas. The restaurant had a shady scheme to keep a portion of their credit card tips in many situations, by adjusting their hourly pay down when they had good tips.
It was quite a battle for my partner to grasp how our family was paying to deliver pizzas, instead of getting paid for it. After work they were too exhausted to keep enough records and do spreadsheets to find their actual P&L. They had just done this job forever, invisibly outsourcing the company's operating costs into their own households.
Friends who have driven rideshare have had similar experiences. They get baited in by the illusion of income, and maybe make good money at first under incentive programs. Then the rideshare company cancels or reduces incentives, changes prices, in non obvious ways, they're stuck with the same expenses but lower, unpredictable income, subject to the latest project manager trying to optimize profit away from the driver.
Yup. There are definitely people who would rather have the flexibility over money, but the problem is that all unskilled/semi-skilled labor is being commoditized and which prevents people in those labor class from earning a living wage in a reasonable time (40 he/wk) or often even in an unreasonable time(60-80 hr/wk).
Unfortunately the only lever we have in this area is minimum wage.
How do I put this? That is just such a stupid line of reasoning. In the absence of labour laws, people are "willing" to work 14 hours a day. In the absence of regulations, people are "willing" to work dangerous jobs without safety protection. In the absence of enforced law, people are "willing" to compromise their ethics. That's the difference between barbarism and a society. Society has figured out that it serves the greater good to set rules in place than let individuals sort things out for themselves.
Now, average wage? Sure, lots of people would be willing to work below average wage but nobody is "willing" to be the bottom of anything. People are forced to take minimum wage because of the power dynamic between workers and providers. When you are desperate to the point your livelihood is on the line, you don't get to be picky with what is on offer.
"When you are desperate to the point your livelihood is on the line, you don't get to be picky with what is on offer."
We both agree with this, but we come to different conclusions :)
My point is that minimum wage helps those that are already in a moderately good situation, or at least less desperate. Why? Because they managed to get a job for minimum wage.
There are many others that can't do that, and a good slice of them can't do that exactly because of the enforce performance floor created by the minimum wage.
I've had this illustrated to me rather vividly one evening when I was cleaning out an apartment. A homeless dude was going through the stuff that was thrown out and was sorting old kitchenware. And I mean really old, not in a good way. It was dark, and the monetary value of what he was getting was probably in very low single digits. And yet he was willing to do that.
I've spent some hours pondering why is this guy sorting half broken plates in the dark instead of washing cars for 10x the income. That's when I realized minimum wage is evil. Not just "suboptimum" or "imperfect", but evil. Because it targets precisely those that are in the worst possible position and exiles them away from society. If you're not worth at least $X per hour for somebody, you're worthless.
"He said he earned $106.71 over five-and-a-half hours, over just over $19. San Francisco’s minimum wage is $16.07."
This headline is extremely misleading, if not borderline fake news. I was expecting his earnings to be around $8 an hour or something, but he did $19 an hour on a bicycle, ~20% over minimum wage.
The Independent seems to also realize this, because right after that, they feel the need to immediately add that "Uber Eats drivers, part-time contractors who provide their own transportation, food, healthcare, etc, often take home less than that figure, sometimes less than minimum wage."
They seem to be less interested in reporting the facts and more interested in pushing a narrative.
42 comments
[ 4.9 ms ] story [ 58.2 ms ] threadGarbage headline.
And that's assuming that for some reason the PR stunt showed no preference to the CEO in route assignment and otherwise was an up and up demo.
Did they get into expenses for the vehicle with the calculation? Taxes?
I had some fun doing lyft for a month here and there several times - and they kept cutting the rates they paid drivers. The last few weeks I did it I realized the after expenses and taxes was about $6 / hour.
Every uber/lyft driver I've ridden with has told me they have no info about tax time and what's to be expected - and none were saving for it. It's a disaster every year I bet.
I've asked around a bit for banking option that would let you set rules for percentages - like each time money is deposited from place X take 28% and put into other savings account Y - but not found any.. I think it's needed.
I saw a submarine article recently that said a thing called "lilly" debit card type thing made for freelancers(?) - says it can move money based on percentages - but the signup page the article referenced had no info about that feature so I let it linger in a tab and forgot about it.
Whatever the money is with uber/lyft - so many don't understand all the expenses - I try to say it's like getting good money for driving neighbors around - but you don't see that you are basically taking a knife to your brakes and other components, handing over pieces of your car to the riders in exchange for $12 or whatever - and the more you drive the more you are in danger with other cars / etc.. and don't see the actual cost for a long time so you think it's better than what it is.
love to know how many people they have had as drivers and how many do it more than 18 months.
I can deduct not only the logged miles, but miles in between jobs and to/from work sites. If I’m driving 30 miles an hour then I’m deducting $17/hour from auto expenses that will greatly reduce my taxable revenue.
Of course, there are expenses to be paid on the vehicle for fuel, insurance and depreciation. But there are vehicles where this is much less than the IRS deduction that is just flat for all vehicles.
Me, I'm just taking it as pretty definite proof that people are more than willing to occasionally work below minimum wage. I'm seeing it as a pretty solid indictment on the whole "minimum wage is protecting poor people" idea.
People not being carbon copy automatons have actual contexts and preferences. Maybe they value being independent more than a minimum wage. Maybe they do their math and come to the conclusion that averaged over a longer time, it's actually a pretty good wage. Maybe the CEO was a shitty driver in his first day (should we stop him from learning then?). Maybe some are going through a rough spot and want to make rent money, and damn whatever an accountant would say their "hourly wage" is. I'm betting most just get better, even if they occasionally go through a bad day.
But steamroll this to fit with "minimum wage", and in absolutely all the contexts above you have unemployed people.
If becoming homeless was the alternative, I'd also do whatever job I have to.
So in my opinion, this mostly just shows us that productivity in general is so high and automation works so well that we honestly don't need a healthy chunk of our fellow citizens. That's why they are forced to compete for even the shittiest jobs. Now the question is, what do we do with them?
So dehumanising the way you talk about these people. We definitely need YOU, right?
Maybe I should just log off HN for today.
That said, it was not my intention to judge people based on their work merit. I am merely pointing out that our society would continue to function even if let's say 20% of all people were permanently unemployed. So please don't shoot the messenger.
And no, most of society doesn't care whether I do what I do or not. If my finances allow it, I might even opt to voluntarily become part of the "not needed = permanently unemployed" group and spend more time with my family instead of working.
Share. Build. Dream. Learn. Live.
Its not that these things arent contributing to our society. Its that these things are not itemized by a monetary value as part of the GDP.
And I think that says something about the way we run our economy, more than it says about "laziness," or whatever hustle-culture sales-pitch theyre calling it now.
People are passionate. If someone lacks it? Someone or something trained them to be otherwise - usually mistakenly calling this a part of "discipline."
Comparative advantage is a thing. Lower work cost enough, and ideally lower other living wage floors like NIMBYsm, and things should settle to a decent enough level. Which we can supplement with a very low level UBI when we can afford it.
But the current system is not just discouraging - it's forbidding unproductive people from working.
Also NIMBYism manifests as a wage floor, but keeping the wrong sort of people out is the cause and money’s not gonna solve that.
Finally, from everything I’ve read UBI is already affordable. Especially when you replace welfare and the all of the bookkeeping/gate keeping costs associated with ensure not a single dollar is ever “abused”.
It sounds more like labor is being artificially broken to deter people from asking for the value of their labor over accepting wage work.
If Uber were a service to organize and empower workers by allowing them to set their own prices, how many do you think would continue working for less than minimum wage?
You talk like people have a wealth of options and are just choosing to work below minimum wage.
Things are hard out there. Really hard. Folks are struggling.
Excuse me? In the middle of a National, potentially global housing affordability crisis, where this locale is ground zero for some of the worst wage-to-rent ratios on Earth...
How in the world is not making minimum wage anything approaching "independent"? The app is a less caring boss than any human could be. If you get run over by a car? There is nothing to stop the app from penalizing you for missing deliveries, not opting-in for enough deliveries, or taking too long to deliver burritos while we're being taken to the hospital.
Independence? Thats a life that only comes from living wages.
If every single worker said "I will never work for below $x," you wouldn't need to set the minimum wage to $x by law - nobody would be employed at below $x. The whole reason for a law is that people are, in fact, willing to take jobs below minimum wage on occasion.
Therefore the argument that a minimum wage law is good for poor workers does not rest on the idea that such a law matches their individual revealed preferences, and it takes into account that the law prevents them from being offered jobs which they would occasionally be willing to take.
Engage with the actual argument for a minimum wage law, please, not some obviously false straw man.
It's unfair because the companies take advantage of the fact the worker probably does not, or even can not, understand how much income they take home.
My partner delivered pizzas for years. We bought them a newer car for safety. They drove it to death for the giant pizza chain. Carrying their own non-commercial vehicle insurance which really wouldn't cover them for commercial use. Paid personal health insurance on the ACA marketplace. Bought their own gas. The restaurant had a shady scheme to keep a portion of their credit card tips in many situations, by adjusting their hourly pay down when they had good tips.
It was quite a battle for my partner to grasp how our family was paying to deliver pizzas, instead of getting paid for it. After work they were too exhausted to keep enough records and do spreadsheets to find their actual P&L. They had just done this job forever, invisibly outsourcing the company's operating costs into their own households.
Friends who have driven rideshare have had similar experiences. They get baited in by the illusion of income, and maybe make good money at first under incentive programs. Then the rideshare company cancels or reduces incentives, changes prices, in non obvious ways, they're stuck with the same expenses but lower, unpredictable income, subject to the latest project manager trying to optimize profit away from the driver.
They figure that they’re already paying for these things so the marginal cost HAVE to be small, right?
Why do you insist that employees are so stupid they cannot even calculate their income?
Unfortunately the only lever we have in this area is minimum wage.
Now, average wage? Sure, lots of people would be willing to work below average wage but nobody is "willing" to be the bottom of anything. People are forced to take minimum wage because of the power dynamic between workers and providers. When you are desperate to the point your livelihood is on the line, you don't get to be picky with what is on offer.
We both agree with this, but we come to different conclusions :)
My point is that minimum wage helps those that are already in a moderately good situation, or at least less desperate. Why? Because they managed to get a job for minimum wage.
There are many others that can't do that, and a good slice of them can't do that exactly because of the enforce performance floor created by the minimum wage.
I've had this illustrated to me rather vividly one evening when I was cleaning out an apartment. A homeless dude was going through the stuff that was thrown out and was sorting old kitchenware. And I mean really old, not in a good way. It was dark, and the monetary value of what he was getting was probably in very low single digits. And yet he was willing to do that.
I've spent some hours pondering why is this guy sorting half broken plates in the dark instead of washing cars for 10x the income. That's when I realized minimum wage is evil. Not just "suboptimum" or "imperfect", but evil. Because it targets precisely those that are in the worst possible position and exiles them away from society. If you're not worth at least $X per hour for somebody, you're worthless.
I disagree with that.
What's wrong with earning the minimum wage?
Why should he make more?
This headline is extremely misleading, if not borderline fake news. I was expecting his earnings to be around $8 an hour or something, but he did $19 an hour on a bicycle, ~20% over minimum wage.
The Independent seems to also realize this, because right after that, they feel the need to immediately add that "Uber Eats drivers, part-time contractors who provide their own transportation, food, healthcare, etc, often take home less than that figure, sometimes less than minimum wage."
They seem to be less interested in reporting the facts and more interested in pushing a narrative.