'I can't keep doing this': gig workers say pay has fallen after California's Prop 22

[Kellhound]

Why are you talking about development? IT jobs are not only development... my links are not talking about just development. I am not a developer...



That’s not how you derive jobs from a medium.

What do you mean by heavy industry? You are complaining about 28k NEW jobs, when we spent millions prepping up 42k jobs, that are decreasing. Outside keeping old money rich... what is the point of forcing a dying industry, when there is a booming one? Oil Barron’s need their billions from tax payers?



You are shitting on in demand jobs, that pay more than the jobs being lost, because of left leaning? I am pointing out the demand... the pay... and the variety of jobs coming from Information Technology... for you to respond with some bullshit about left leaning? Is this about jobs or pushing ideology? Is this about jobs or calling billionaires conservatives, so you can protect their failing industry in the name of fighting leftist?



Since it’s not... what’s going on here? Let me guess, the last 20 years of growth doesn’t count, because it’s new billionaires? It’s not coal barons, real estate moguls and Exxon CEOs that are getting richer... but, people who were middle class just 20 years ago, but rose up to rival and threaten the power of old money?

8 or the 10 jobs listed in the article you linked are described as needing a BA/BS or better. Those are generally equivalent to a CS programmer.

I am aware of that, just using it as an easy barometer.

Heavy industry is such things as shipyards, heavy equipment, aircraft, steel production. One might include Fabs in it as well.

I wasn't the one brining politics into it. There is no doubt there is a significant left lean to high tech people in general. I have plenty of experience working with people in tech jobs. I spent several years in software development, have a degree in IT and am finishing up my masters in data analytics. I am not shitting on the new jobs, I am lamenting the ones we have lost over the past decades.

The percentage of the upper class has increase, the percentage of lower class has increased about as much, the middle class is smaller. Any shift in labor demands that increases the lower class is not really good. Unless you enjoy the idea of only having a lower and upper class with even more significant wealth inequity we already have.

- - - Updated - - -

As I've been trying to get people to understand about the meat industry (which is the same for all big industry):

Between this and the shit going on with Texas power grid, there is literally no valid argument for deregulation.

It is not a matter of if there should be regulation, but of the correct amount.

[Bodakane]

It is not a matter of if there should be regulation, but of the correct amount.

There's 3 kinds of regulations:

1. The kind that forces businesses to the right/safe things. These grow and become extensive as new dangers/issues emerge and as businesses find new loopholes to not comply.
2. The kind that that are pushed by businesses through lobbies/PACs to hurt their competition.
3. Archaic ones that no ones uses, is worried about or are enforced.

#3 is not relevant and not worth effort right now.

The big problems are #1 & #2, but they are 100% the fault of businesses themselves. Businesses are like teenagers in that they don't follow the rules in place to keep them safe and honest then bitch and moan when they get caught and are then subjected to stricter rules because of their own indiscretions.

This is what happens when you have a philosophy, Capitalism, that is only concerned with the bottom line. Not ethics. Not fairness. Not compassion. Just money.

[Felya]

8 or the 10 jobs listed in the article you linked are described as needing a BA/BS or better. Those are generally equivalent to a CS programmer.

No, they are not... you are making shit up and think it’s a point because you generalize.

I am aware of that, just using it as an easy barometer.

It’s easier, because being wrong, agrees with your assertion. If you used an accurate one, not one that is incorrect, but is easier to fit your assertions, you wouldn’t have a point.

Your data point is admittedly incorrect, yet your argument is based on it. :\

Heavy industry is such things as shipyards, heavy equipment, aircraft, steel production. One might include Fabs in it as well.

Why exactly would you want those jobs, while shitting on much easier and higher paying jobs, that you can usually do from home? Have you heard of the concept of mass production?

I wasn't the one brining politics into it. There is no doubt there is a significant left lean to high tech people in general. I have plenty of experience working with people in tech jobs. I spent several years in software development, have a degree in IT and am finishing up my masters in data analytics. I am not shitting on the new jobs, I am lamenting the ones we have lost over the past decades.

You are bringing politics into it... you are arguing that new money, is somehow leftist. You either don’t understand what leftist means or are repeating talking points from old money trying to hang on, as reality of modern age makes their established fortunes, obsolete.

I’ll give you an example... There are 2 corporations... one makes Antifa flags and the other makes American flags... which of these two corporation would Karl Marx claim is leftist? Which corporation most exemplifies the proletariat controlling means of production?

The percentage of the upper class has increase, the percentage of lower class has increased about as much, the middle class is smaller. Any shift in labor demands that increases the lower class is not really good. Unless you enjoy the idea of only having a lower and upper class with even more significant wealth inequity we already have.

You have not provided any evidence of this being true, but to humor this. Do you think this has any connection to half the country creating policy to fight the industry, expanding jobs in the other half of the country? Could it be that half the country got convinced that IT is liberals and are supporting legislation, like revoking 230, that explicitly hinders jobs with upward mobility?

Amazon has been paying 15$ an hour for a while... Walmart is now promising the same... guess why... they are going on all on online shopping, targeting Amazon. Oh hey! IT jobs from Waltons... that’s “conservative”... right?

- - - Updated - - -

Ya’ll supported the removal of prop 230, which would cost hundreds of thousands of well paying jobs, because Trump didn’t like how he was being treated on something so trivial, as social media. Why? Because they are liberal jobs... wtf?

[Kathandira]

This is wild. California, the state with the, if not one of, highest cost of living would do such a thing.

I'd more readily accept and support mid western states with way lower costs of living being allowed to pay lower than the federal minimum as that makes more sense.

People should be bringing this to court immediately.

[Felya]

This is what happens when you have a philosophy, Capitalism, that is only concerned with the bottom line. Not ethics. Not fairness. Not compassion. Just money.

What? I thought IT corporations were socialist?

Yes, it’s fucking sarcasm...

- - - Updated - - -

This is wild. California, the state with the, if not one of, highest cost of living would do such a thing.

I'd more readily accept and support mid western states with way lower costs of living being allowed to pay lower than the federal minimum as that makes more sense.

People should be bringing this to court immediately.

This was a vote by the people... corporate advertising/marketing beat the what ever none profits were pushing against it.

[Flarelaine]

What does this have to do with immigration?

Migrants moved back and forth across the US/Mexican border ever since there wasn't even really a border there, doing farming work further north in the summer and moving back down to Mexico in the colder months.

And before them, there were integral migrants, say, from the Prairie states. Underpaid and illegally employed workers have been a part of America's agriculture since like forever. So maybe, just maybe, the problem has fuck all to do with immigration and a lot with employer greed and labour laws (or the lack thereof).

[Felya]

And before them, there were integral migrants, say, from the Prairie states. Underpaid and illegally employed workers have been a part of America's agriculture since like forever. So maybe, just maybe, the problem has fuck all to do with immigration and a lot with employer greed and labour laws (or the lack thereof).

What does this have to do with gig workers? I am aware of migrant workers, but this isn’t about that...

[Kathandira]

What? I thought IT corporations were socialist?

Yes, it’s fucking sarcasm...

- - - Updated - - -



This was a vote by the people... corporate advertising/marketing beat the what ever none profits were pushing against it.

I need to read into this. How could the citizens vote in their worst interest!? What a world...

[Felya]

I need to read into this. How could the citizens vote in their worst interest!? What a world...

That part is easy...

[Flarelaine]

What does this have to do with gig workers? I am aware of migrant workers, but this isn’t about that...

The strong underlying current of unregulated employment is the common theme.

[Themius]

I need to read into this. How could the citizens vote in their worst interest!? What a world...

Advertising. Basically mass manipulation of the California populace.

[Katchii]

I need to read into this. How could the citizens vote in their worst interest!? What a world...

Because depending on who you talk to, even among gig workers, it wasn't in their worst interest. Clearly most folks agreed with that mentality otherwise it wouldn't have been voted on the way it was.

[Felya]

Because depending on who you talk to, even among gig workers, it wasn't in their worst interest. Clearly most folks agreed with that mentality otherwise it wouldn't have been voted on the way it was.

Because both sides argued it was for the benefit of the workers, but the side that was helping corporations had more money to push their version of helping workers.

[Katchii]

Because both sides argued it was for the benefit of the workers, but the side that was helping corporations had more money to push their version of helping workers.

There are some actual gig workers I know personally that fully agreed with that mentality though. In those cases the gig workers fully accepted what they were signing up for when they took the "gig" work and weren't expecting all the extra stuff working for a company would normally get them.

[Elegiac]

There are some actual gig workers I know personally that fully agreed with that mentality though. In those cases the gig workers fully accepted what they were signing up for when they took the "gig" work and weren't expecting all the extra stuff working for a company would normally get them.

The term you're looking for is "class traitor".

[Katchii]

The term you're looking for is "class traitor".

I don't think so. They legitimately voted in the best interests of their business and their workers who supported their stance because the requirements within Prop 22 would have completely destroyed their business model. The business model that every one of their workers supported and depended on for their income and knew what they were getting into when they signed up for it. The business model that was simply not designed or based around all the extra costs of what Prop 22 would have required. To comply with Prop 22 to stay in business and keep paying their workers a rate they would agree to work for on top of the benefits (which they either didn't want, didn't need or didn't care about....), their rates would have gone so high, no one would book from them anymore. A gig that would have been ~$500, would now be nearly ~$1500.

I'm not necessarily supporting their model, just their choice to operate that way because that's what their workers wanted and signed up for.

[Elegiac]

I don't think so. They legitimately voted in the best interests of their business and their workers who supported their stance because the requirements within Prop 22 would have completely destroyed their business model. The business model that every one of their workers supported and depended on for their income and knew what they were getting into when they signed up for it. The business model that was simply not designed or based around all the extra costs of what Prop 22 would have required. To comply with Prop 22 to stay in business and keep paying their workers a rate they would agree to work for on top of the benefits (which they either didn't want, didn't need or didn't care about....), their rates would have gone so high, no one would book from them anymore. A gig that would have been ~$500, would now be nearly ~$1500.

I'm not necessarily supporting their model, just their choice to operate that way because that's what their workers wanted and signed up for.

Not seeing how this doesn't make them class traitors, lol. You seem to be of the impression that a given business model existing is inherently pro-worker because some people choose to work under that model, which...No.

Just as bigotry stemming from trauma does not justify the bigotry, supporting exploitative economic policies because "some people might prefer it" does not make the economic practice less exploitative. Shit like that is how indentured servitude gets normalized.

[Edge-]

I don't think so. They legitimately voted in the best interests of their business and their workers who supported their stance because the requirements within Prop 22 would have completely destroyed their business model.

Voting for your continued exploitation because the company is threatening to kill your job if they have to treat you like an employee and not a serf is kinda like, very much the definition of a "class traitor" if we're going down that road.

The business model that every one of their workers supported and depended on for their income and knew what they were getting into when they signed up for it.

A model a great many despise and have been aggressively lied to about, and a model that many accepted simply because they needed to work and this was all there was for them. Or they needed a second gig and this is all they could get. Begging for scraps from corporate overlords ain't great, and that's again, pretty "class traitor".

The business model that was simply not designed or based around all the extra costs of what Prop 22 would have required.

Correct, it was built around exploiting the ever-living fuck out of drivers and gig workers, pushing off costs to them while limiting expenses by denying them benefits etc.

Generally the history of labor is companies trying to do this very thing and getting eventually owned by the workers.

To comply with Prop 22 to stay in business and keep paying their workers a rate they would agree to work for on top of the benefits (which they either didn't want, didn't need or didn't care about....), their rates would have gone so high, no one would book from them anymore. A gig that would have been ~$500, would now be nearly ~$1500.

So they don't have a functional business model that's not built on exploiting the fuck outta their workers? Sounds like AB5 was a pretty good thing, then!

I'm not necessarily supporting their model, just their choice to operate that way because that's what their workers wanted and signed up for.

"that's what their workers signed up for" remains the worst corporate-slave argument around.

"I guess we shouldn't ask for bathroom breaks, we knew what we signed up for."
"I guess we don't deserve days off or overtime, we knew what we signed up for."
"I guess we don't need safety regulations, we knew this dangerous job we we signed up for."

[Elegiac]

"that's what their workers signed up for" remains the worst corporate-slave argument around.

"I guess we shouldn't ask for bathroom breaks, we knew what we signed up for."
"I guess we don't deserve days off or overtime, we knew what we signed up for."
"I guess we don't need safety regulations, we knew this dangerous job we we signed up for."

And let me add: when the response to an unjust system is trying to validate its existence as a function of people's faith in it, what you're actually doing is signaling that you value the comfort of a certain group of people over the basic dignity and wellbeing of another.

Which... Yeah. Kinda telling that's considered the social baseline in this country.

[Edge-]

And let me add: when the response to an unjust system is trying to validate its existence as a function of people's faith in it, what you're actually doing is signaling that you value the comfort of a certain group of people over the basic dignity and wellbeing of another.

Which... Yeah. Kinda telling that's considered the social baseline in this country.

Yeah. I mean granted I've largely had good experiences when I'm forced to use rideshares for work, but I always try to get cabbies whenever possible. Those folks earned the shit outta their pay, actually get compensated fairly (usually), get benefits etc. And they actually know where the fuck they're going without needing to rely on their phones (usually).

Does it cost more? Sure, and I don't mind paying a bit extra knowing the actual dudes driving me around are getting paid instead of a bunch of tech bros coding in an office somewhere.