296
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

Uber: EU rules will see us pull out of “hundreds” of European cities — Brussels’ proposal to classify gig workers as de facto employees could slam the breaks on operations across the bloc::An Uber boss has issued a stark warning that Brussels' proposal to classify gig workers as de facto employees could slam the breaks on operations across the bloc.

all 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] VonReposti@feddit.dk 189 points 1 year ago

"Our business model isn't sustainable unless we remove worker rights"

[-] zoe@infosec.pub 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

luckely everyone has become wary of what these tech bros startups are all about. Tech companies like this just add extra steps to a preexisting business and pride themselves of being innovative

[-] Obi@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 year ago

But but but, there's an app, surely that's worth all the downsides right.

[-] Asifall@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Don’t forget consumer protections!

Uber somehow managed to convince people that it’s not their fault if their drivers don’t follow traffic laws, drive intoxicated, and assault people.

[-] HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml 109 points 1 year ago

If you can't pay your workers ethically then your business doesn't deserve to exist. Simple as that.

[-] Enfors@lemm.ee 22 points 1 year ago

Yes. These people are not entitled to be business owners. If they can't hack it, then get out of the way for the people that can. But don't worry, business owners - I'm sure you'd be perfectly happy being a gig worker for another company instead, right?

[-] Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev 6 points 1 year ago

Tell that to the shareholders

[-] rekabis@lemmy.ca 81 points 1 year ago

If your business model requires the economic exploitation of your workers, your company possesses no legitimate reason to exist.

[-] TheGreenGolem@lemm.ee 22 points 1 year ago

Similar to what I always say: if your company's survival relies on tax evasion, you shouldn't have a company.

[-] LordPassionFruit@lemm.ee 15 points 1 year ago

This might not be universal, but here it doesn't even require it.

Back in 2017, Uber tried to expand to my home province and tried to get us to change our local regulations regarding rideshare (it boiled down to Uber being required to call its drivers employees and to function like the pre-existing taxi services).

Local government doesn't budge, so Uber decides that it doesn't want to come anymore. Within the year, a local alternative pops up that complies with the regulations Uber tried to fight, and they're still profitable 6 years later.

It's not that Uber isn't capable of paying their employees living wages, it's that they can earn more money if they don't.

[-] vinceman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 65 points 1 year ago

"Since 2021 in the UK, Uber drivers are considered ‘workers’, which is not full employee status but does mean they receive sick pay and annual leave.

The firm has gone further than UK competitors including Ola and Bolt in worker benefits.

The number of drivers on the UK platform has doubled in recent years."

Go fuck yourself uber.

[-] paboppa@jlai.lu 56 points 1 year ago

Honestly that's good, who cares ?

[-] Wrench@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Having just returned from Australia on vacation, I'll say it was extremely inconvenient when Uber wasn't in a region. We even managed to get stuck in a small airport because there were no regular taxis, and the local Taxi app simply didn't work for the required 2fa with a foreign phone number (though the UI for selecting country was there, no text was ever received).

Uber is great when available while traveling. Makes life so much easier.

That said, I fully support regulating them to have to support their drivers as any other employer. Fuck them and their repeated threats to their ball and go home. Force them out of every market until they concede and restructure.

[-] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk 6 points 1 year ago

Um, you do realise that the only reason you couldn't get a normal taxi was because Uber's business model was to destroy the industry and take over?

[-] Wrench@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

... yes, they destroyed the taxi industry in a remote airport where they never rolled out service to. Right.

[-] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh boy 😂

Edit - I should explain

Uber never rolled out service to the airport because it wasn't profitable enough, that would be the only reason

The few remaining taxi drivers still in work after Uber destroyed their industry won't go to the airport, for the same reason Uber didn't. But now the taxi drivers are even less likely to go there as they're forced to go where the money is, wherever that may be

Let's face it, if you ever used Uber to save yourself a few dollars, it was at Uber's expense; they made a loss on it

Now the taxi drivers have gone, they have a monopoly and have quadrupled their prices

As they say, there's never one flake of snow that thinks it was responsible for an avalanche

[-] Wrench@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Your point was obvious. It's still awful and makes bad assumptions on taxi availability and demand in an a rural area. Your entire argument seems to be based on city economics of supply and demand at scale.

[-] Mr_Blott@feddit.uk -1 points 1 year ago

No worries, keep using Uber and Airbnb

[-] Hiccup@lemmy.dbzer0.com 49 points 1 year ago
[-] baropithecus@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago

As a European, all I can say is good riddance, you greasy fuckers.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago

So people will go back to fairly-paid taxi drivers. Not seeing a problem here.

[-] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 32 points 1 year ago

Oh no! Anyway...

[-] acceptable_pumpkin@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

EU please do what California utterly failed to do!

[-] remus989@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 year ago
[-] JudahBenHur@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Yes. Fuck off then.

[-] wolo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 1 year ago

Good, if someone is selling their labor they should be protected as an employee.

[-] jaschen@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago
[-] Iron_Lynx@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Oh no- anyway.

[-] squirrel@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 1 year ago

Okay, byeee!

[-] CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago

Good fuck em

[-] Asifall@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago
[-] blackluster117@possumpat.io 7 points 1 year ago
[-] hydrashok@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

Well... bye.

[-] t0lo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

When will this happen?

[-] zoe@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago

all the better

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Oh no!

Anyways, I heard it was sunshine this weekend?

[-] RickTofu@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago

Wow, what an interesting technology this is!

this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
296 points (97.4% liked)

Technology

60337 readers
4419 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS