Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

<it's not uncommon for drivers to allow undocumented immigrants without drivers licenses to use their Uber car/account> pulling an Uber on Uber

In Brazil, there are now Uber users, with fleets of cars, who no longer have to drive themselves, since these users rent the cars out to unemployed people (or those unable to have their own car) in exchange for a large part of the profits.

Its bad, but isnt it actually exactly the same why the current taximedalion and similar systems work today? A person or company buys the expensive right to drive a taxi service, and employs people to do just that?

same in Ukraine, street posts are plastered with ads for Uber drivers, meaning they give you a car and you get to keep ~50% of fees and ~10% of bonus

This is a good thing though, isn't it?

Not entirely. Adding more middle men isn't a good thing, and depending on the terms for renting the car, they can be obscenely predatory. I know Uber and Lyft's rental terms are pretty shitty.

> Adding more middle men isn't a good thing

Would the people who chose employment through them as a preferable choice to other options (or unemployment) agree with you?

>Would the people who chose employment through them as a preferable choice to other options (or unemployment) agree with you?

It's not just about them. These drivers are effectively working for 50% of what other drivers are making. This drives down the median wage for all other drivers, because more middle men will be able to step in and outcompete independent drivers. Overall, you get more people working longer hours for less compensation.

To what end? Who really benefits from this trend?

> Overall, you get more people working longer hours for less compensation

So then the solution to increasing wages is simply to ban hard-working, willing people from taking jobs! Brilliant. Let's force them to be unemployed just so that those who are allowed to work can make a bit more money.

The biggest flaw in your argument is that it completely leaves out the value of experience. Those lower-wage drivers are not signing up for a lifetime of low-wage driving, they are taking a job that they can leave after a few months after gaining useful/valuable experience.

The beauty of Uber is that it offers the opportunity of part-time commitment work to many people who have not had the option before.

Now, instead of pouring a stiff drink to reduce the stress of personal debt (for example) someone can hop in their car and make a few hundred dollars and actually do something about it. The impact of this on people's sense of being in control of their destiny is profound.

"So then the solution to increasing wages is simply to ban hard-working, willing people from taking jobs!"

Yes, when the job is a systemic arbitrage of labor that externalizes costs and consequences in a way that's bad for society.

You might as well say 'so the solution to increasing wealth is simply to ban enterprising, daring people from robbing houses, stores and banks!' We're talking about the ways capital is exchanged in a dynamic with a labor and an owner class. To blindly assume the owner class cannot arbitrage labor is… kind of unobservant, when we've already got what they call a 'precariat'.

I get that some people want to believe a job as a fry cook (or Uber driver) is a step towards being a CEO, but there's already a CEO. These are not 'ladders of opportunity'. Most likely being unemployed or a dropout has higher odds of ending up the CEO.

it still beats sleeping under the bridge, though

edit: what makes you so sure about what's good for society?

No, these drivers are effectively spending 50% of their revenue on their car. The other drivers have to buy and maintain a car themselves, which isn't free either.

are they? Because they are renting the capital equipment in order to do that job. Without it they'd have a car loan and maintenance payments (if they even qualify for a loan).

I've never given this argument any respect, and I'm not going to start now. Saying that being fucked over might provide a little bit of benefit is no excuse for fucking people over in the first place.

> is no excuse for fucking people over in the first place

Who is getting fucked over because of the job? Are you claiming that people choose those jobs over other, better jobs?

If I didn't own a car and was considering making a career as an Uber driver I'd happily accept a lower level of pay and rent someone else's car for a few months to get a sense of how much the job appealed to me and how hard I'd need to work to make money.

The person renting out the car is the one who has taken out loans and risk and now owns a depreciating asset. He or she must find someone to drive it, and depending on the supply of labor there will be a cost of hiring a driver (which is the driver's pay).

Who do you think needs to be stopped from doing business here? The one investing in renting the cars in hopes of finding drivers? Or the drivers who can't afford a car (or don't want to invest in one) but who want to earn a wage driving?

Or are you arguing that we need some wise arbiter of who can do what work, some sort of jobs minister or similar title?

Again, I have no respect for this line of argument. I don't care what you think about someone "risking" things. That's no reason whatsoever to screw people over simply because they have little other choice.

Given the reported strictness of the Uber rating system, are the actual drivers good? Isn't that what the rating system is supposed to solve?

I'm guessing it's part of the contract when the fleet owners hire, as well as something the owners watch like a hawk. Since the drivers wish to keep their job in order to keep earning, they theoretically need to worry about ratings as much as the next person. If we assume that finding a new fleet owner is easy, then jumping ship and finding employment with someone else may make the driver's need to maintain a good rating a fuzzy matter.

If anyone wishes to learn more, here's an article to throw into Google Translate:


Simple; all drivers register their own Uber account, and lose the car if their ratings are not good enough. Actually I wouldn't be surprised if the cars were rented out for a flat daily fee instead of depending on the number of rides.

Just a taxi company using Uber.

The Uber account becomes the new medallion.

No they are complete crap, worse than taxi drivers

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact