I think it also has to do with the massive discrepancy in resources pro and anti-union advocates are able to put towards those races. Uber and Lyft invested massively in defeating prop 22, even advertising in their app directly.
1) I do not believe they are in equal footing generally and never stated that - I was pointing out the nuances with respect to Prop 22. Gig cos. didn't win just because they had more money - they won because AB5 is a despised policy.
2) Unions != Labor. Workers == Labor. This is the key point I'm trying to make.
This would seem to imply equal footing, wouldn't it?
> Unions != Labor. Workers == Labor. This is the key point I'm trying to make.
So I'm not sure how this is relevant to the prop 22 discussion - did the legislation have anything to do with unionization? As far as I know it was only about extending existing labor protections to gig workers.
And there's a distinction there, to be sure, albeit a pedantic one. Outside of organized labour, how exactly do these "workers" exert any power in the work place or politics?
Prop 22 is strongly linked with AB5 - the entire push was by union leaders and the leaders of both AB5 and No on 22 (e.g. Lorena Gonzalez) regularly tweet things like "#AB5IntoAUnion."
I actually think there is no currently effective system. I believe in collective bargaining, but I just think that unions as a tool have become increasingly concerned with political representation and political power rather than worker representation. Using AB5 as a case study, there are virtually n=0 freelancers in California (incl. myself) that are happy with the law. It's a universally despised policy by workers and businesses alike, loved by unions...
What does this mean and why aren't you being specific about what you're saying was dirty fighting? You're omitting your argument and just leaving the FUD.
I find it sad.
Every job I didn't despise secretly had union affiliation.
Uber did buy prop 22. They used simple psychological ployes to pass their prop. (Yes--I know prop 22 was just about Independant Contrators. They will use similar tactics if we ever see an uptick in unions.)
More start-ups/companys will use it in the future.
Uber knew they could get desperate guys to go out and buy a late model 4 door car, pay all expenses, and be at the mercy of Uber.
America The Great is not so great anymore. An idiot became president exploiting the obvious. Yes--he went to race, but it's of his flock only went to working conditions.
We have a lot of lousy jobs.
Calling it a Side Hussle, or your ouwn boss, was just a beautiful ploy. I hope the fresh faced immoral corporate MBA stooge who brought that up in the meeting was well compensated.
I don't know very many people (Americans) who don't believe they will make it someday. They liked the little bit of autonomy Uber provided, even if that meant working for under minimum wage, after computing the car, insurance, maintance, and gas.
Driving for Uber was just going to be temporary.
The psychology is I'm an entrepreneur, and this Uber gig is just a stepping stone until I get a better gig. (Rap music playing in the backround)
The truth is most will never get a better gig, or worse--might go bankrupt, be fired over email, or just become Judgement proof after they ruin their credit.
Uber played into this mind puck beautifully.
They actually got those desperate guys fearful they would not be successful if they were just employees.