Uber: EU rules will see us pull out of “hundreds” of European cities — Brussels’ proposal to classify gig workers as de facto employees could slam the breaks on operations across the bloc::An Uber boss has issued a stark warning that Brussels’ proposal to classify gig workers as de facto employees could slam the breaks on operations across the bloc.

  • VonReposti
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    248
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Our business model isn’t sustainable unless we remove worker rights”

    • zoe @infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      luckely everyone has become wary of what these tech bros startups are all about. Tech companies like this just add extra steps to a preexisting business and pride themselves of being innovative

      • Obi@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        But but but, there’s an app, surely that’s worth all the downsides right.

    • Asifall@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t forget consumer protections!

      Uber somehow managed to convince people that it’s not their fault if their drivers don’t follow traffic laws, drive intoxicated, and assault people.

        • Kalash@feddit.ch
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Right, let’s not forget we already have an even shittier version of uber.

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          29
          ·
          1 year ago

          Taxis also use a platform to function. They have radio dispatch, they rent cars to drivers, they have digital platforms with online orders.

          Taxi companies traditionally stiff their drivers out of benefits too, and are typically in bed with local administration and politicians so they never get called out on it.

          Their online platforms have ratings you can’t rely on, there’s fake cabs, fake meters, ghost drivers, cash only, angry drivers, dirty and broken cars, aggressive and unsafe driving etc.

          So if your point is that taxi companies will fill back the demand after Uber is gone that’s true, but it won’t change anything for the drivers.

          In fact many of the Uber drivers will be permanently out of the picture because they’re not pro drivers and are not familiar with the more cut throat taxi business.

          • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s lots of accusations and most of them do not fit for western Europe at all.

            Obviously, you have no clue.

            • dezmd@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              You must be young or just ignorant of the history of taxis in general, even in what is apparently your idolizing view of those in western Europe.

              Taxi services are worldwide known to be protectionist, corrupt, and sus. Its why Uber and similar disruptive alternatives were able to grow.

              Uber might be trash, but its just mimicking traditional taxi services by doing whatever it can to squeeze another dollar out by fucking over drivers.

          • Hiccup@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            26
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I’m sorry but taxis were never as bad as Uber. Taxis had actual rules and regulations that they would abide by. I never saw a taxi driver run an endless shift like they would as an uber driver that jeopardizes the health/safety of the driver/passenger. Also, taxis actually followed proper maintenance of their vehicle. I’ve seen one too many uber’s that looked like the driver didn’t give a shit.

            Surge pricing wasn’t a thing until uber because taxis actually stuck to a standard pricing; you knew what to expect. Uber was an answer to a problem that was already solved long ago.

            • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I’m sorry but taxis were never as bad as Uber.

              They were (and still are) worse than Uber in my city and not just for riders. A lot of Uber drivers here used to be Taxi drivers, tried Uber in their personal car, and quickly decided it’s better to be an Uber driver.

              • Iron Lynx@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                That sounds more like a problem with your city and less like a problem with taxis in general.

                And honestly, that sounds like it could have a theoretically straightforward solution:

                Either tie taxis to the transit network, optionally with an app, or create an Uber-esque app specifically for legitimate, professional taxis. And in either case, optimise these services for the end-user experience.

      • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ehhhh… No, now Uber has to contribute to the social security for those workers. And pay then for annual leave.

  • jantin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    115
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The hubris of thinking that a random driver-exploiting app is some kind of godsend utility and we’ll be scared of losing it.

    At this point the old school taxi companies have their apps too, you’re not the cool kid anymore, uber

    • echo64@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 year ago

      All anyone ever wanted was an app. Uber stopped being cheapna decade ago. It’s not competitive so let it die.

    • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Around here any taxi driver can have their rating on the online app reset to 5 stars for $50 whenever their want.

  • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    107
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you can’t pay your workers ethically then your business doesn’t deserve to exist. Simple as that.

    • Christer Enfors@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes. These people are not entitled to be business owners. If they can’t hack it, then get out of the way for the people that can. But don’t worry, business owners - I’m sure you’d be perfectly happy being a gig worker for another company instead, right?

  • rekabis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    ·
    1 year ago

    If your business model requires the economic exploitation of your workers, your company possesses no legitimate reason to exist.

    • TheGreenGolem@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      Similar to what I always say: if your company’s survival relies on tax evasion, you shouldn’t have a company.

    • LordPassionFruit@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      This might not be universal, but here it doesn’t even require it.

      Back in 2017, Uber tried to expand to my home province and tried to get us to change our local regulations regarding rideshare (it boiled down to Uber being required to call its drivers employees and to function like the pre-existing taxi services).

      Local government doesn’t budge, so Uber decides that it doesn’t want to come anymore. Within the year, a local alternative pops up that complies with the regulations Uber tried to fight, and they’re still profitable 6 years later.

      It’s not that Uber isn’t capable of paying their employees living wages, it’s that they can earn more money if they don’t.

  • Concetta@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    "Since 2021 in the UK, Uber drivers are considered ‘workers’, which is not full employee status but does mean they receive sick pay and annual leave.

    The firm has gone further than UK competitors including Ola and Bolt in worker benefits.

    The number of drivers on the UK platform has doubled in recent years."

    Go fuck yourself uber.

    • Wrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Having just returned from Australia on vacation, I’ll say it was extremely inconvenient when Uber wasn’t in a region. We even managed to get stuck in a small airport because there were no regular taxis, and the local Taxi app simply didn’t work for the required 2fa with a foreign phone number (though the UI for selecting country was there, no text was ever received).

      Uber is great when available while traveling. Makes life so much easier.

      That said, I fully support regulating them to have to support their drivers as any other employer. Fuck them and their repeated threats to their ball and go home. Force them out of every market until they concede and restructure.

      • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Um, you do realise that the only reason you couldn’t get a normal taxi was because Uber’s business model was to destroy the industry and take over?

        • Wrench@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          … yes, they destroyed the taxi industry in a remote airport where they never rolled out service to. Right.

          • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Oh boy 😂

            Edit - I should explain

            Uber never rolled out service to the airport because it wasn’t profitable enough, that would be the only reason

            The few remaining taxi drivers still in work after Uber destroyed their industry won’t go to the airport, for the same reason Uber didn’t. But now the taxi drivers are even less likely to go there as they’re forced to go where the money is, wherever that may be

            Let’s face it, if you ever used Uber to save yourself a few dollars, it was at Uber’s expense; they made a loss on it

            Now the taxi drivers have gone, they have a monopoly and have quadrupled their prices

            As they say, there’s never one flake of snow that thinks it was responsible for an avalanche

            • Wrench@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Your point was obvious. It’s still awful and makes bad assumptions on taxi availability and demand in an a rural area. Your entire argument seems to be based on city economics of supply and demand at scale.