You realize that gig economy is the neoliberal slang for a poverty class work, but without the rights of workers, right?
So you’re criticizing people who are forced by the system in which we live, to be ordered around by a fucking algorithm, and then take abuse from people who have enough money to NOT work in the gig economy, but no where near enough to actually own the servant class they get off on abusing.
You realize that the gig economy is not my responsibility, right? I’m not criticizing the workers for being underpaid. I’m criticizing the exploiters for underpaying their workers. If you can’t pay your workers enough, that is not my fault. You are not entitled to exploit anyone for your personal gain.
If the pay isn’t enough without the tip, then maybe they should consider getting a different job.
I’m not criticizing the workers for being underpaid.
Study: When questioned about continuing to work for poverty wages, gig workers across the nation respond with resounding “guess I just didn’t think about it because I’m so goddamned stupid” ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ .
The first statement was meant as in these delivery services don’t deserve to keep their workers. They should instead look for a better job that will pay them properly. But that’s what these delivery services do…prey on the vulnerable that are desperate which is why there should be laws protecting them.
The pay is about $2 per order, regardless of mileage. Dashers can typically complete 2-3 orders per hour, and pay for their own fuel. The base pay is absolutely not worth it.
They are paid approximately $4 to $6 per hour, and yet some people are still defending the practice and asking customers to pay extra on top of the food and the $10+ delivery charge…
Given their compensation model, all I can say is that if you are not willing to tip, and/or you are not willing to tip ahead of time, you absolutely should not use the service at all.
Practically nobody does uber as their main job, they do it because they either want/need extra money, or are struggling to survive at all. I know uberers, none of them would choose the job, but they can’t find other work. There’s an intentional lack of employment, in my country at least, to keep the workers moving forward; “Do for us, or end up like those people”.
If your business requires you to exploit your workers in order to make a profit, then your business doesn’t deserve to exist. Making excuses for the exploiters changes nothing.
That’s actually an excellent question. You should look into why people who work for America’s largest employer can only afford to shop at Walmart, have little to no benefits, no job security, and often qualify for food stamps (which is American taxpayers subsidizing their salaries). The owners of America’s largest employer are worth like $140,000,000,000.
“Free” market doesnt really work without regulation, otherwise we shift towards current business models where you, the customer, often dont really have the choice.
Why are customers responsible for ensuring that workers get paid fairly? I’m looking for a service. If your service cannot exist without exploiting your workers, then it doesn’t deserve to exist. You are not entitled to exploit people for your own gain.
If you know the workers are being exploited, and you use the service anyway, how are you not partially responsible for exploiting them? It seems like you feel entitled to exploit them for your own gain as a customer. I agree that the employer is also responsible. A way to hold them accountable would be to eschew the service altogether. Otherwise, what incentive do they have to change?
I don’t use these services, for that exact reason. I’d rather cut out the middle man and contact the restaurant directly and then pick up my own order. That way all the money goes to the restaurant, instead of some business who’s only purpose is to extract money from other people’s work.
If they don’t fulfill your expectations, you inform DoorDash. They hand out full refunds like candy.
That “rando” is not a DoorDash employee. You’re hiring a contractor through a broker, not asking a restaurant to send a waitress to your table.
The employee-waitress can’t refuse you service without getting herself fired, but a contractor-driver can tell you exactly where and how far to shove your bullshit offer.
I don’t understand what point you’re trying to make. I realize they aren’t employees. That’s the root of the problem. They should be employees and paid by their employer. If they can’t run their business that way, then that clearly shows that it’s an exploitative and shitty business model that shouldn’t exist in the first place.
I do not appreciate Doordash offloading its responsibility of paying and “disciplining” its workers onto customers. Do you honestly have no problem with that?
They hand out refunds like candy.
That is assuming that I have the time and remember to do this, not to mention that I shouldn’t have to do it.
That’s the root of the problem. They should be employees and paid by their employer.
I strongly disagree. Employment is not a mutually beneficial relationship. Employment is an encumbrance on the worker, especially a non-union worker. As an employer, DoorDash can demand exclusivity. DoorDash would be allowed to add a non-compete clause, prohibiting employees from performing courier work on the side, or for competing platforms. I don’t want my working hours dictated to me on a schedule. I don’t want to have to negotiate time off or finding someone to cover my shift.
Employment would allow them to force drivers to take all “assignments”. I like being able to refuse service to a particular vendor or abusive customer. I don’t want to be forced to wait in the drive thru line for 45 minutes at a Taco Bell in a high-crime area.
Courier service is menial labor. When I look at other large businesses that utilize menial labor, I am not particularly struck by the equity of their employment agreements. I don’t see “employment” working out too well for the workers of Walmart, for example.
I do not appreciate Doordash offloading its responsibility of paying and “disciplining” its workers onto customers. Do you honestly have no problem with that?
No, I don’t have a problem with that. I think DoorDash retains too much control over pay and discipline of workers, and interferes too much between customers and workers.
DoorDash punishes workers for refusing orders, by downgrading their priority for higher paying offers. When a customer insists on placing a $3 offer for a 9-mile delivery, every driver in the area will reject it. That single shitty order results in every active driver having their “Acceptance Rate” stat lowered. DoorDash should not be giving customers this particular power over drivers. It is the customer who should be “punished” for making an offer so far below minimum wage.
You seem to be portraying “libertarianism” as a negative attribute for a worker. I don’t concede that at all.
A menial laborer has a sudden, unexpected opportunity fall in his lap. He wins tickets to a baseball game for him and his daughter.
As an employee, he has to weigh the ramifications of going to the game against his obligation to his employer. He has to face their attendance policy. A policy he had no meaningful input in developing, that he can either accept, or lose his job. That policy says he has to be at his station, stacking product on retail shelves, or earn himself a mark toward termination.
As a contractor, he writes his own attendance policy. The only consequence he faces for skipping work is he doesn’t get paid.
As an employee, he will likely have to say “Sorry, I can’t afford to skip my job stacking boxes on shelves, even for the opportunity to share this game with my kid. Can I get cash value instead?”
As a contractor, turning down the tickets doesn’t even begin to enter his thoughts. The time at the game is more valuable to him than the compensation for stacking boxes on shelves, so he turns off his driver app and goes to the game. His “company” doesn’t care that he skipped work to go to a game. They just keep dispatching work to the people who show up.
The “employment” model is absolutely terrible for the menial laborer, especially for non-union workers. It gives business entirely too much control over the lives of its workers. It’s completely disgusting that we allow major corporations to use this model.
The primary compensation method for most menial labor should be piecework, not hourly. A business needs to set a piecework rate high enough that new, inexperienced workers are willing to perform. Experienced, efficient, and proficient menial laborers who can optimize their production and produce several times the rate of a new worker should be paid several times higher.
Hourly wages should be reserved for skilled jobs, or where the worker is spending a substantial part of their time waiting for processes to finish rather than proceeding at their own pace.
Employer-sponsored healthcare and other essential programs are not “benefits”. They are entanglements designed to make it harder for the employee to say “no” to the employer’s demands. They aren’t benefits; they are extortions.
The point of tipping (to the tipper) is to show appreciation for the quality of service you received. If service is shit, you don’t get tipped as much.
Tipping before you get the service means quality of service plays no part in the transaction.
There is a base level of pay. That doesn’t mean you get to hate the poor person who is stuck serving you. You should appreciate what others do for you.
Please tip your plumber, i mean you do appreciate their work dont you?
15% would be fair wouldnt it?
You should tip anyone or dont you appreciate what they do for you? What? You already paid them? But you didnt yet appreciate them yet! How could you!
My sons a plumber and he just got $100 tip for doing a job, but it was right before Christmas and the client was really rich. I don’t condone tipping but if I do tip it’s usually in cash
Flip it around - why would you work a job, any job, where you don’t know your pay until after the work is done?
“Tipping” is rich-people speak for shifting the expense (and blame) to the customer.
They already know the pay. If the pay isn’t enough without the tip, then maybe they should consider getting a different job.
You realize that gig economy is the neoliberal slang for a poverty class work, but without the rights of workers, right?
So you’re criticizing people who are forced by the system in which we live, to be ordered around by a fucking algorithm, and then take abuse from people who have enough money to NOT work in the gig economy, but no where near enough to actually own the servant class they get off on abusing.
You realize that the gig economy is not my responsibility, right? I’m not criticizing the workers for being underpaid. I’m criticizing the exploiters for underpaying their workers. If you can’t pay your workers enough, that is not my fault. You are not entitled to exploit anyone for your personal gain.
Study: When questioned about continuing to work for poverty wages, gig workers across the nation respond with resounding “guess I just didn’t think about it because I’m so goddamned stupid” ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ .
The first statement was meant as in these delivery services don’t deserve to keep their workers. They should instead look for a better job that will pay them properly. But that’s what these delivery services do…prey on the vulnerable that are desperate which is why there should be laws protecting them.
The pay is about $2 per order, regardless of mileage. Dashers can typically complete 2-3 orders per hour, and pay for their own fuel. The base pay is absolutely not worth it.
They are paid approximately $4 to $6 per hour, and yet some people are still defending the practice and asking customers to pay extra on top of the food and the $10+ delivery charge…
Given their compensation model, all I can say is that if you are not willing to tip, and/or you are not willing to tip ahead of time, you absolutely should not use the service at all.
And I don’t, specifically for that exact reason.
Good.
Now, fuck off.
Practically nobody does uber as their main job, they do it because they either want/need extra money, or are struggling to survive at all. I know uberers, none of them would choose the job, but they can’t find other work. There’s an intentional lack of employment, in my country at least, to keep the workers moving forward; “Do for us, or end up like those people”.
If your business requires you to exploit your workers in order to make a profit, then your business doesn’t deserve to exist. Making excuses for the exploiters changes nothing.
If the business doesn’t deserve to exist, why do customers keep supporting them? Why is the onus only on the workers to suffer?
That’s actually an excellent question. You should look into why people who work for America’s largest employer can only afford to shop at Walmart, have little to no benefits, no job security, and often qualify for food stamps (which is American taxpayers subsidizing their salaries). The owners of America’s largest employer are worth like $140,000,000,000.
Hint: it’s coercion.
“Free” market doesnt really work without regulation, otherwise we shift towards current business models where you, the customer, often dont really have the choice.
Why are customers responsible for ensuring that workers get paid fairly? I’m looking for a service. If your service cannot exist without exploiting your workers, then it doesn’t deserve to exist. You are not entitled to exploit people for your own gain.
If you know the workers are being exploited, and you use the service anyway, how are you not partially responsible for exploiting them? It seems like you feel entitled to exploit them for your own gain as a customer. I agree that the employer is also responsible. A way to hold them accountable would be to eschew the service altogether. Otherwise, what incentive do they have to change?
I don’t use these services, for that exact reason. I’d rather cut out the middle man and contact the restaurant directly and then pick up my own order. That way all the money goes to the restaurant, instead of some business who’s only purpose is to extract money from other people’s work.
Tips are no longer tips and companies have successfully forced us to pay their employees for them.
It’s not the customer’s fault. In addition to us paying their wages we have to trust some rando to do a good job with zero evidence they will.
If they don’t fulfill your expectations, you inform DoorDash. They hand out full refunds like candy.
That “rando” is not a DoorDash employee. You’re hiring a contractor through a broker, not asking a restaurant to send a waitress to your table.
The employee-waitress can’t refuse you service without getting herself fired, but a contractor-driver can tell you exactly where and how far to shove your bullshit offer.
I don’t understand what point you’re trying to make. I realize they aren’t employees. That’s the root of the problem. They should be employees and paid by their employer. If they can’t run their business that way, then that clearly shows that it’s an exploitative and shitty business model that shouldn’t exist in the first place.
I do not appreciate Doordash offloading its responsibility of paying and “disciplining” its workers onto customers. Do you honestly have no problem with that?
That is assuming that I have the time and remember to do this, not to mention that I shouldn’t have to do it.
I strongly disagree. Employment is not a mutually beneficial relationship. Employment is an encumbrance on the worker, especially a non-union worker. As an employer, DoorDash can demand exclusivity. DoorDash would be allowed to add a non-compete clause, prohibiting employees from performing courier work on the side, or for competing platforms. I don’t want my working hours dictated to me on a schedule. I don’t want to have to negotiate time off or finding someone to cover my shift.
Employment would allow them to force drivers to take all “assignments”. I like being able to refuse service to a particular vendor or abusive customer. I don’t want to be forced to wait in the drive thru line for 45 minutes at a Taco Bell in a high-crime area.
Courier service is menial labor. When I look at other large businesses that utilize menial labor, I am not particularly struck by the equity of their employment agreements. I don’t see “employment” working out too well for the workers of Walmart, for example.
No, I don’t have a problem with that. I think DoorDash retains too much control over pay and discipline of workers, and interferes too much between customers and workers.
DoorDash punishes workers for refusing orders, by downgrading their priority for higher paying offers. When a customer insists on placing a $3 offer for a 9-mile delivery, every driver in the area will reject it. That single shitty order results in every active driver having their “Acceptance Rate” stat lowered. DoorDash should not be giving customers this particular power over drivers. It is the customer who should be “punished” for making an offer so far below minimum wage.
Wow, what a bad set of takes.
You want Doordash to get the benefits of a company, but not the responsibilities of one. Because: libertarianism, or something
You seem to be portraying “libertarianism” as a negative attribute for a worker. I don’t concede that at all.
A menial laborer has a sudden, unexpected opportunity fall in his lap. He wins tickets to a baseball game for him and his daughter.
As an employee, he has to weigh the ramifications of going to the game against his obligation to his employer. He has to face their attendance policy. A policy he had no meaningful input in developing, that he can either accept, or lose his job. That policy says he has to be at his station, stacking product on retail shelves, or earn himself a mark toward termination.
As a contractor, he writes his own attendance policy. The only consequence he faces for skipping work is he doesn’t get paid.
As an employee, he will likely have to say “Sorry, I can’t afford to skip my job stacking boxes on shelves, even for the opportunity to share this game with my kid. Can I get cash value instead?”
As a contractor, turning down the tickets doesn’t even begin to enter his thoughts. The time at the game is more valuable to him than the compensation for stacking boxes on shelves, so he turns off his driver app and goes to the game. His “company” doesn’t care that he skipped work to go to a game. They just keep dispatching work to the people who show up.
The “employment” model is absolutely terrible for the menial laborer, especially for non-union workers. It gives business entirely too much control over the lives of its workers. It’s completely disgusting that we allow major corporations to use this model.
The primary compensation method for most menial labor should be piecework, not hourly. A business needs to set a piecework rate high enough that new, inexperienced workers are willing to perform. Experienced, efficient, and proficient menial laborers who can optimize their production and produce several times the rate of a new worker should be paid several times higher.
Hourly wages should be reserved for skilled jobs, or where the worker is spending a substantial part of their time waiting for processes to finish rather than proceeding at their own pace.
Employer-sponsored healthcare and other essential programs are not “benefits”. They are entanglements designed to make it harder for the employee to say “no” to the employer’s demands. They aren’t benefits; they are extortions.
There’s nothing to flip, gratuity and wages should be separate things. And minimum, standard living wages should be paid.
The point of tipping (to the tipper) is to show appreciation for the quality of service you received. If service is shit, you don’t get tipped as much.
Tipping before you get the service means quality of service plays no part in the transaction.
America’s view that tipping is normal needs to change.
How about an adequate wage instead, like the rest of the developed world?
Well no, tipping is how you show your appreciation for a service. You are bring selfish if you don’t at least tip a minimal amount.
A reasonable required base level of pay for service is necessary before a tip is showing appreciation.
There is a base level of pay. That doesn’t mean you get to hate the poor person who is stuck serving you. You should appreciate what others do for you.
Where did you get the idea that wanting reasonable wages before tips means I hate servers?
Learn to read.
Please tip your plumber, i mean you do appreciate their work dont you?
15% would be fair wouldnt it?
You should tip anyone or dont you appreciate what they do for you? What? You already paid them? But you didnt yet appreciate them yet! How could you!
The way this comment section is going I’d expect them to beet the plummer.
My sons a plumber and he just got $100 tip for doing a job, but it was right before Christmas and the client was really rich. I don’t condone tipping but if I do tip it’s usually in cash