Hacker News Reader

Comment by KMnO4 | Hacker News Reader

Is there anything really stopping drivers from not striking? Unlike a union strike, Uber/Lyft drivers are striking on their own terms.

Presumably if everyone else is striking, rates will be really high and the drivers not striking will be making decent wage (ironically part of the reason to strike).

View on HN

This is the same with a union. Unions' only sanction against people ignoring the strike is social pressure. Ultimately strikes will only work when enough people have decided to work together and take the action together, whether there is a union or not.

I'm in an Uber right now and the rate was noticeably cheaper than it has been. I had no idea about this strike until now. I asked my driver and wasn't aware of it either.

That's called scabbing.

It's not scabbing. The contractors "striking" aren't employees. And it's not a strike as defined by the law.

This kind of pedantry reminds me of people who want to call prisoners "detainees" and who want to call torture "enhanced interrogation".

Setting aside the implication you are trying to make that following employment law equals to agreeing with torture, it's not the same at all.

There's a legal definition of a strike, union and employment vs contractor. Just like there's a legal definition for prisoners and torture.

You can't get the rights associated with an unionized strike (anti scab laws) without the consequences of being unionized (dues for instance).

You're a scab if you are undermining the strike. No legal pedantry will suddenly wash that away. This is just common sense.

A scab is just a union term for people who disagree with them. It’s like being called racist when complaining about crime.

It's a pejorative for someone undermining other people's struggle for a better life. Either way, it's a sad state of affairs when HN threads constantly get derailed by a dozen or two very prolific reactionaries like yourself. Always the same names.

A scab is a scab, regardless of what legal trickery the owning class has engaged in to make striking illegal

If I am willing to work for less than someone else, it is wrong to insult me for that with terms such as "scab". I own my labor and other people own theirs. I would not take a job unless it were the best available to me.

"Scab" is a hate term that has been used to justify violence against so-called scabs. Epithets for gays have served a similar purpose in the past and are now considered to say more about the speaker than the target.

It’s incredibly irresponsible to compare homophobia to a worker not cooperating with a strike.

Why? "Scab" is a term meant to dehumanize. Something like "replacement worker" or "picket line crosser" or "strike-breaker" should be preferred.

Replacement worker is just as dehumanizing.

"Worker" is treating people as resources and not people

Don’t scabs usually come from outside the company? Like if uber hired new drivers at high rates.

Everything has a name, Lieutenant Dan.

I think it is actually happening now, at least in my area. There are less drivers, and rides cost more because of it.

I wonder which way the financials tip for Uber/Lyft. If Uber/Lyft are losing money over fewer riders willing to pay the higher price? Or if people need to go where they're going anyway and will pay the premium during the (limited time) strike?

In my case, it was not because of the strike, but just fewer drivers. I assume because covid meant less rides, and that meant less drivers signing on.

I was willing to pay a premium to drink without risking a DUI. I don't know how many others would make the same decision, but with things opening up I suspect the number will be growing. Conversely, In the begining of the pandemic I had many medical visits that were super cheap and fast because the only people on the road were uber drivers.

I think surge pricing is almost perfect free market, and the only thing that could be better is more competitors in the app side of it. Most drivers already drive for uber and lyft, and choose whichever they think is the best deal for them at the moment. If there were 4 or 5 viable competitors then it would be perfect. Not as great from a user perspective, but also not awful. Many people I know have uber and lyft and check prices/times on both before picking one.

I am really surprised all of the traditional taxi companies have not got together and made an app yet. Uber made things so much better in every way that matters from a rider's perspective. They didn't even need to compete on price, all they needed was a way to get a ride, and know how long it was going to take to get to you, and trust that the price was the price. Anyone who ever needed a taxi in anywhere but a classy urban area hates taxis.

That said, I think operating at a loss on purpose to drive out competition should be illegal. I'm not sure how that could be enforced while it's happening, but it's usually obvious after the fact. In which case I think jail time is warranted.

If this was the case, Uber/Lyft would likely simply charge the higher price all the time, paying the drivers the same amount they pay normally, and pocket the difference.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com