New York Passes Sweeping Bills To Improve Conditions for Delivery Workers (nytimes.com) 22
The New York City Council overwhelmingly approved a groundbreaking package of legislation on Thursday that will set minimum pay and improve working conditions for couriers employed by app-based food delivery services like Grubhub, DoorDash and Uber Eats. From a report: The bills, which have the support of Mayor Bill de Blasio, are the latest and most broad example of the city's continuing effort to regulate the multimillion dollar industry. While other cities have taken steps to restrict the food delivery apps, no city has gone as far as New York, which is home to the largest and most competitive food delivery market in the country.
The legislation prevents the food delivery apps and courier services from charging workers fees to receive their pay; makes the apps disclose their gratuity policies; prohibits the apps from charging delivery workers for insulated food bags, which can cost up to $50; and requires restaurant owners to make bathrooms available to delivery workers. Under the legislation, delivery workers would also be able to set parameters on the trips they take without fear of retribution. Workers -- who have been targeted by robbers intent on stealing their money or their e-bikes -- would be able to determine the maximum distance they want to travel from a restaurant or specify that they are not willing to go over bridges to make a delivery, for example.
The legislation prevents the food delivery apps and courier services from charging workers fees to receive their pay; makes the apps disclose their gratuity policies; prohibits the apps from charging delivery workers for insulated food bags, which can cost up to $50; and requires restaurant owners to make bathrooms available to delivery workers. Under the legislation, delivery workers would also be able to set parameters on the trips they take without fear of retribution. Workers -- who have been targeted by robbers intent on stealing their money or their e-bikes -- would be able to determine the maximum distance they want to travel from a restaurant or specify that they are not willing to go over bridges to make a delivery, for example.
Improve conditions (Score:3, Interesting)
By improve conditions, do they mean reduce the number of available jobs?
Re: (Score:2)
Or lessen the competition for their connected cronies?
Have a critical eye when a politician throws rhetoric in your face, and then watches you like the little guy waiting to see if you drink the tranya.
Re:Improve conditions (Score:4, Interesting)
By improve conditions, do they mean reduce the number of available jobs?
Did you read TFS? The improvements are listed.
I am a free-market capitalist, but most of these seem like reasonable conditions to me.
Re: (Score:1)
By improve conditions, do they mean reduce the number of available jobs?
Did you read TFS? The improvements are listed.
I am a free-market capitalist, but most of these seem like reasonable conditions to me.
If you really were a free market capitalist you should instantly see the obvious point backslashdot is trying to make, that any improvement in worker conditions is an unfair attack on Amazon.
Re: (Score:2)
any improvement in worker conditions is an unfair attack on Amazon.
The new legislation targets restaurant delivery services. It has little to do with Amazon.
Re: (Score:2)
you obviously don't understand the meaning of "free-market capitalist".
A free market is a market with low barriers to entry for either buyers or sellers, information transparency, and no power asymmetries.
Pro tip: If the government is forcing it, it ain't free-market.
Bullcrap. A free market is not the same as an unregulated market.
Government anti-trust laws and regulations against price-fixing and false advertising make markets more competitive, not less.
Re: (Score:2)
You are the one trolling, plenty of restaurants don't want these 3rd party companies ordering their food , and having unknown delivery person, ,not the customer, coming into their place, then putting their feces covered fingers in food or snacking on it.
Re: (Score:2)
This only applies if the restaurant has a contract with the delivery company, Here is a better summary [grubstreet.com] of the bills, including links to most of the actual text. The bathrorom break bill: https://legistar.council.nyc.g... [nyc.gov]
This bill would require that food delivery applications include a provision in contracts with restaurants requiring them to make their toilet facilities available for delivery workers’ use, as long as the delivery worker seeks to access the facilities while picking up a food or beverage order for delivery.
Re: (Score:2)
The legislation prevents the food delivery apps and courier services from charging workers fees to receive their pay; makes the apps disclose their gratuity policies; prohibits the apps from charging delivery workers for insulated food bags, which can cost up to $50; and requires restaurant owners to make bathrooms available to delivery workers
Yeah what a job killer.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, this is about 3rd party companies pretending to be customer and sending in unvetted 4th party (paid by the 3rd party) delivery person. Many restaurants don't like this, and might indeed also not want that 4th party person in their restrooms.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. This only applies when there is a contract between the restaurent and the delivery company.
The text of the bill is here: https://legistar.council.nyc.g... [nyc.gov]
This bill would require that food delivery applications include a provision in contracts with restaurants requiring them to make their toilet facilities available for delivery workers’ use, as long as the delivery worker seeks to access the facilities while picking up a food or beverage order for delivery.
they should also be able to take cash tips retribu (Score:2)
they should also be able to take cash tips retribution.
Racist much? (Score:2)
Workers -- who have been targeted by robbers intent on stealing their money or their e-bikes -- would be able to determine the maximum distance they want to travel from a restaurant or specify that they are not willing to go over bridges to make a delivery, for example.
This sounds like they'll be avoiding poorer and higher crime areas, areas that have higher populations of black and brown people.
Re: (Score:2)
Workers -- who have been targeted by robbers intent on stealing their money or their e-bikes -- would be able to determine the maximum distance they want to travel from a restaurant or specify that they are not willing to go over bridges to make a delivery, for example.
This sounds like they'll be avoiding poorer and higher crime areas, areas that have higher populations of black and brown people.
Sounds like an opportunity for you to step in and make some money!
Put your ass on the line instead of criticizing others for once.
Re: (Score:1)
Yup, that's exactly the complaint we'll be hearing next. Already happened w/ AirBnB. You can't have if fully both ways; If people are allowed to avoid things that scare them and favor less scary things, they're by definition discriminating against the scary things! The best you can do is try for a reasonable compromise.