Hacker News Reader

Comment by joshklein | Hacker News Reader

This article is about a suit from The California Trucking Association, a trade group and industry lobbyist representing corporate management, not truckers. You can learn about them on their website if you're curious. The only source providing a statement in the body of this article is the association's head lobbyist. Background sources seem to include a politician and an academic institute. No truckers.

I don't have any comment about the suit or the law, but I do think this is fine opportunity to discuss the nature of propaganda.

View on HN

It's not even a new lawsuit. It was originally filed October 5, 2018: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/casdce/3:2018cv...

The story seems to be created based on a PR release (https://millerpublicaffairsgroup.cmail19.com/t/ViewEmail/i/5...) that CTA issued after amending their complaint (https://01a3edcb-713b-4446-a7f4-8c833b6d990e.filesusr.com/ug...).

The Fox article is just an AP release: https://apnews.com/7f23a934b6514560a2c9f3bb5ee326c0. I guess the author emailed the press release to the politician and went from there, threw in Berkeley because it was in his inbox too.

There are other articles, e.g. https://thetrucker.com/california-trucking-association-two-o... has a Teamster's union source (but no politician).

https://www.routefifty.com/management/2019/09/california-gig... from September has some of your prized trucker sources, they basically say the same thing as the association except they sound more scared and anti-union.

There's not much to see here besides the continued death of journalism in mainstream news.

Thank you! The Teamsters union (and locals), which actually represent truckers, supported AB5.

Ah yes, the teamsters... who will no longer have to compete with independents.

> Ah yes, the teamsters... who will no longer have to compete with independents.

Not to overstate the obvious, but that's pretty much the entire point of unions: by working collectively, individuals aren't directly competing against each other, forcing management to pay higher wages, with the goal being that the wages paid are higher than any individual could make if the union didn't exist.

Thus avoiding a race to the bottom where truckers drive all day just to feed themselves and our insatiable desire for free shipping.

By preventing large numbers of people from working at all.

Joining unions is impossible for many. I once lost a job because the union insisted that I be let go rather than let me join. It was not a performance issue.

What if someone is perfectly happy to drive for $1 less than the union negotiated? Why would you use the force of government, police with guns, to keep them from selling their labor a dollar cheaper. Especially when they’re perfectly happy to do so?

Welcome to America, where we neither practice true Capitalism nor true Democracy contrary to widespread opinion.

Always darkly humorous when people openly support using force to control how people sell their labor in a very strict sense, which is certainly kissing cousins with slavery.

Yeah, governments setting a market bottom is definitely similar to unpaid, forced labour.

> forcing management to pay higher wages,

Independent truckers don't have management. They make more money and don't pay union dues. That's the whole point, and why the Teamsters want them gone.

Right. The Owner Operator Independent Driver Association says low pay is the problem.[1] They're concerned about the Hours of Service regulations. They have a list of state issues, state by state. CA-5 isn't even mentioned.[2]

[1] https://www.ooida.com/MediaCenter/PressReleases/pressrelease... [2] https://www.ooida.com/Legislative/leg-watch.aspx

Where do you see that? The CTA does seem to represent independent truckers (owner-operators): https://www.caltrux.org/owner-operators/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com