undefined | Better HN

0 pointsshawnz6y ago0 comments

Uber paying their employees $21 is very competitive. Uber lobbying for their competitors to have to pay their employees $21 is anticompetitive. The latter is what is happening here.

0 comments

peteradio6y ago

Uber paying their employees $21 doesn't make sense, they will get undercut on pricing by race for the bottom competitors. There really isn't anyway to grant a viable minimum wage except via legislation. Paying more to the driver isn't the same thing as paying more for top-tier engineer. It isn't like getting a nascar driver in the seat is going to justify higher wages. So what do you recommend?

mamon6y ago

>> they will get undercut on pricing by race for the bottom competitors

If Uber unilaterally increased minimum salary, then those competitors would have to do the same, otherwise they would lose all their drivers to Uber. So, if Uber really cared about drivers they would just do it. Instead they are making PR stunt by "demanding" government regulation.

peteradio6y ago

I don't think that is true, they'd have a bunch of drivers sitting around not getting paid to give rides because they are being undercut by the competition. It is not skilled work so its always going to be a race to the bottom, the bottom has to be set by some governmental body. Without some reasonable minimum drivers are being sucked into quicksand.

1 more reply

shawnzOP6y ago

I don't necessarily disagree. This could be a net good for drivers, I'm just trying to point out the validity of the anticompetitive angle here. Regardless I certainly don't think you could argue that Uber is being more competitive by doing this unless they are willing to take the initiative themselves first.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

peteradio6y ago

mamon6y ago

>> they will get undercut on pricing by race for the bottom competitors

peteradio6y ago

1 more reply

shawnzOP6y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse