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.
I agree with you completely but at the same time I have disdain for gig workers because they all seem to operate under an entirely different set of traffic laws and social conventions. At least where I live.
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 you think tipping, a current necessity to ensure proper pay, is not something you should be doing why don’t you stop using food services which expect tipping?
They won’t stop underpaying because you don’t tip they’ll just blame the worker. The one who can’t quit, because there’s not alot of work around, and they need food for survival
I’m all for ending tipping culture. And a tip before service may not be a tip, but as long as this is how it’s set up, it’s the current way we must do things.
Just like if you want someone to do some handy work for you, you can go on Craigslist and say “need someone to do ‘x’. Will pay $150” and workers who search on there for jobs will decide whether or not it’s worth it for them to do the job. This job just so happens to be giving you food or a ride.
Right, and if a company can’t pay their workers enough, then workers are not obligated to work there. It is not my responsibility to ensure your workers are paid fairly, regardless of how things are currently set up.
Ok, call your extra payment whatever name you want, and get the ball rolling on legislating new regulations to ensure fair pay. They deserve to get paid more, and when/if those regulations go through the drivers will have a better future.
That didn’t answer the question, though. We both agree that drivers deserve to get paid more, so why not open up your wallet and start paying them more now? Why wait months or years for legislation to go through to force you to pay more, when the power to make sure your driver is paid well is sitting in the palm of your hand today? Your individual act of tipping or not tipping will do nothing to address the system at large, but it will do everything to ensure your driver driver gets paid fairly for the labor they perform while they serve you.
Why is it my responsibility to ensure they’re paid fairly by me directly? It’s the employer’s responsibility to pay their workers fairly. If you can’t pay your workers fairly, why does your business deserve to exist?
You’ve got the wrong model. DoorDash is not an employer, and Dashers are not employees. Dashers are not assigned shifts, or expected to clock in and out at specific times. Dashers are free to refuse offers they don’t want to take.
DoorDash is a “broker”, not an employer. They attempt to connect a customer to a vendor and a Dasher. What you pay DoorDash is a brokerage fee, not a service charge. Your “tip” is not a tip: it is a bid for the Dasher’s delivery service. The Dasher is not obligated to serve you; if you want service, you need to offer payment for that service and find someone willing to provide it at that price.
Right…they are a middle man that only exists to extract money from other people’s work. Customers have to pay them for the privilege, restaurants have to pay them for the privilege, and then customers have to pay the driver to actually deliver it. Why anyone would use these services, let alone work for them, is beyond me…
Why is it my responsibility to ensure they’re paid fairly by me directly?
Because the price you pay for a service is a reflection of the relationship you have with the person providing that service, and to believe otherwise is something known as commodity fetishism
"What is, in fact, a social relation between people (between capitalists and exploited laborers) instead assumes “the fantastic form of a relation between things.”
We are defined both individually and societally by the relationships that we form with other people.
If you can’t pay your workers fairly, why does your business deserve to exist?
It does not deserve to exist. However, it does exist, drivers drive for them and are not paid enough for their labor, and you continue to use it despite all of that. I’ll ask again: why don’t you personally be the change you want to see in the world and pay them more now?
I’ll ask again: why don’t you personally be the change you want to see in the world and pay them more now?
Because it’s not my responsibility to subsidize your business. If a tip is required to get good service, then the question becomes how much of a tip required to get good service. It pits customers against workers, while you brush it off as just the cost of getting good service. But if people decide that the cost of your business plus a tip is too much, then no one will use your business. That’s capitalism…it works both ways. You can either decide to make less profit and pay your workers fairly without putting the onus onto your customers, or you can close the business. You are not entitled to exploit both your workers and your customers.
Man, I don’t know what you think we’re talking about, but I’m talking about DoorDash and DoorDash drivers in reality as it is today. I do not own DoorDash, so you are not subsidizing my business. The service offered is just bringing your food to your door, there isn’t really any “good” service that can be used to justify a tip or vice versa. If people decide that the cost of a DoorDash delivery plus a tip is too much, they won’t close the app and go get their food themselves–they will just not tip like OP did and like you do and they will both receive a message like the one above. If you want to have your order picked up quickly, you have to place a winning bid.
THAT is what capitalism is–not some idealized pursuit of profit that refuses to exploit its workers; but a house of cards built out of dozens of competing contradictions, full of people hoping to leave someone else holding the bag when it all comes crashing down. I recommend reading Contradiction 7 of Seventeen Contradictions and The End of Capitalism, “The Contradictory Unity of Production and realisation”. It’s all about how capitalists are fighting the competing contradictions of wanting to sell their goods for as much as possible while paying their laborers as little as possible, and what the broader social impacts of that may be.
In the UK (and a lot of Europe) tipping is completely optional. We only tip for exceptional service or if we’ve made the server’s life difficult. It’s an optional extra for the server.
At this point, it’s so endemic, in the US, that it likely needs to be fixed from the governmental level, but that doesn’t make it something that can’t be complained about.
American workers rights really scare me. Tipping being allowed to subsidise wages is awful, but so is the safety legislation, and child labour laws. We have issues in the UK obviously, but they’re relatively minor in comparison.
It’s only expected because consumers with a similar mentality keep supplying the bandaids to the business. That, and poor local and federal regulation.
Personally I tip 20% or more at most Restaurants. I draw the line at tipping before service as well. They aren’t even pretending anymore that it’s about service.
That said, I don’t use any Gig economy service; I don’t believe in their business models at all, and part of what you are saying is why. Workers shouldn’t be taking on the burden, companies should.
I do tip at some pre-service places that I’m a regular at, but I’ve run into some pretty ridiculous stores asking for tips where nothing warrants it. I try to be fair, but it is getting ridiculous.
One of the most ridiculous tipping related thing happened a couple of weeks ago. I was ordering some pantry items from an online store that shipped to me (shipping fee was separate, based on how much is purchased). They had a vinegar that I couldn’t find locally or online elsewhere, and since they are a small family business, I decided to order a few other things to support them even though all their prices were a bit higher than other places. When checking out, they asked for a 20-25% tip to help support their small family business. That just made me mad. Never going to shop from them again.
take it up with the state you elected. If they allow you to work for a wage that’s not enough to live on, and you don’t get a different job - that’s a you problem not a customer problem.
It’s a poverty trap. Your choice often isn’t “get another job” or stay there. It’s do this job, and survive another month, or quit and be not be able to afford basic necessities (like rent, or food). Unfortunately, the job can leave you too mentally and/or physically exhausted to properly hunt or reskill for another job. It’s a catch 22 situation.
Interestingly, COVID actually helped a lot of people on that front. The government income support, and enforced rest let people stop, breathe and think. Many then went on to do exactly what you suggested. Unfortunately there’s always more to be drawn into the trap.
This doesn’t justify flaming customers because we won’t pay them extra for doing their job. Does it suck for them? Maybe. Do I work hard for my money and don’t want to hand it our to them? Yes.
Dashers are not employees. There is no employer obligating a Dasher to serve the business’s customers.
A waitress is an employee. Her employer can demand that she serve a particular customer. She can be fired for refusing to serve you.
A Dasher is not an employee. DoorDash cannot fire a Dasher for refusing to accept an order. The Dasher is perfectly free to decline your offer for any reason they want.
The only information the Dasher is given is the location of the pickup, the location of the dropoff, and how much you are willing to pay for the trip. From that information, the Dasher has to decide whether to take the offer, or decline.
When your offer is so shitty that it would cost more to fulfill it than you’re offering the Dasher is absolutely justified in flaming you to a crisp.
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.
I agree with you completely but at the same time I have disdain for gig workers because they all seem to operate under an entirely different set of traffic laws and social conventions. At least where I live.
Wdym by social conventions?
I see them acting rudely to restaurant staff and grocery store staff often.
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.
If you think tipping, a current necessity to ensure proper pay, is not something you should be doing why don’t you stop using food services which expect tipping?
They won’t stop underpaying because you don’t tip they’ll just blame the worker. The one who can’t quit, because there’s not alot of work around, and they need food for survival
A tip before service is not a tip. It’s coercion. Maybe we should consider adding regulation to this entire industry to ensure fair pay.
I’m all for ending tipping culture. And a tip before service may not be a tip, but as long as this is how it’s set up, it’s the current way we must do things.
Just like if you want someone to do some handy work for you, you can go on Craigslist and say “need someone to do ‘x’. Will pay $150” and workers who search on there for jobs will decide whether or not it’s worth it for them to do the job. This job just so happens to be giving you food or a ride.
Right, and if a company can’t pay their workers enough, then workers are not obligated to work there. It is not my responsibility to ensure your workers are paid fairly, regardless of how things are currently set up.
Ok, call your extra payment whatever name you want, and get the ball rolling on legislating new regulations to ensure fair pay. They deserve to get paid more, and when/if those regulations go through the drivers will have a better future.
That didn’t answer the question, though. We both agree that drivers deserve to get paid more, so why not open up your wallet and start paying them more now? Why wait months or years for legislation to go through to force you to pay more, when the power to make sure your driver is paid well is sitting in the palm of your hand today? Your individual act of tipping or not tipping will do nothing to address the system at large, but it will do everything to ensure your driver driver gets paid fairly for the labor they perform while they serve you.
Why is it my responsibility to ensure they’re paid fairly by me directly? It’s the employer’s responsibility to pay their workers fairly. If you can’t pay your workers fairly, why does your business deserve to exist?
You’ve got the wrong model. DoorDash is not an employer, and Dashers are not employees. Dashers are not assigned shifts, or expected to clock in and out at specific times. Dashers are free to refuse offers they don’t want to take.
DoorDash is a “broker”, not an employer. They attempt to connect a customer to a vendor and a Dasher. What you pay DoorDash is a brokerage fee, not a service charge. Your “tip” is not a tip: it is a bid for the Dasher’s delivery service. The Dasher is not obligated to serve you; if you want service, you need to offer payment for that service and find someone willing to provide it at that price.
Right…they are a middle man that only exists to extract money from other people’s work. Customers have to pay them for the privilege, restaurants have to pay them for the privilege, and then customers have to pay the driver to actually deliver it. Why anyone would use these services, let alone work for them, is beyond me…
Because the price you pay for a service is a reflection of the relationship you have with the person providing that service, and to believe otherwise is something known as commodity fetishism
We are defined both individually and societally by the relationships that we form with other people.
It does not deserve to exist. However, it does exist, drivers drive for them and are not paid enough for their labor, and you continue to use it despite all of that. I’ll ask again: why don’t you personally be the change you want to see in the world and pay them more now?
Because it’s not my responsibility to subsidize your business. If a tip is required to get good service, then the question becomes how much of a tip required to get good service. It pits customers against workers, while you brush it off as just the cost of getting good service. But if people decide that the cost of your business plus a tip is too much, then no one will use your business. That’s capitalism…it works both ways. You can either decide to make less profit and pay your workers fairly without putting the onus onto your customers, or you can close the business. You are not entitled to exploit both your workers and your customers.
Man, I don’t know what you think we’re talking about, but I’m talking about DoorDash and DoorDash drivers in reality as it is today. I do not own DoorDash, so you are not subsidizing my business. The service offered is just bringing your food to your door, there isn’t really any “good” service that can be used to justify a tip or vice versa. If people decide that the cost of a DoorDash delivery plus a tip is too much, they won’t close the app and go get their food themselves–they will just not tip like OP did and like you do and they will both receive a message like the one above. If you want to have your order picked up quickly, you have to place a winning bid.
THAT is what capitalism is–not some idealized pursuit of profit that refuses to exploit its workers; but a house of cards built out of dozens of competing contradictions, full of people hoping to leave someone else holding the bag when it all comes crashing down. I recommend reading Contradiction 7 of Seventeen Contradictions and The End of Capitalism, “The Contradictory Unity of Production and realisation”. It’s all about how capitalists are fighting the competing contradictions of wanting to sell their goods for as much as possible while paying their laborers as little as possible, and what the broader social impacts of that may be.
In the UK (and a lot of Europe) tipping is completely optional. We only tip for exceptional service or if we’ve made the server’s life difficult. It’s an optional extra for the server.
At this point, it’s so endemic, in the US, that it likely needs to be fixed from the governmental level, but that doesn’t make it something that can’t be complained about.
American workers rights really scare me. Tipping being allowed to subsidise wages is awful, but so is the safety legislation, and child labour laws. We have issues in the UK obviously, but they’re relatively minor in comparison.
It’s only expected because consumers with a similar mentality keep supplying the bandaids to the business. That, and poor local and federal regulation.
Personally I tip 20% or more at most Restaurants. I draw the line at tipping before service as well. They aren’t even pretending anymore that it’s about service.
That said, I don’t use any Gig economy service; I don’t believe in their business models at all, and part of what you are saying is why. Workers shouldn’t be taking on the burden, companies should.
I do tip at some pre-service places that I’m a regular at, but I’ve run into some pretty ridiculous stores asking for tips where nothing warrants it. I try to be fair, but it is getting ridiculous.
One of the most ridiculous tipping related thing happened a couple of weeks ago. I was ordering some pantry items from an online store that shipped to me (shipping fee was separate, based on how much is purchased). They had a vinegar that I couldn’t find locally or online elsewhere, and since they are a small family business, I decided to order a few other things to support them even though all their prices were a bit higher than other places. When checking out, they asked for a 20-25% tip to help support their small family business. That just made me mad. Never going to shop from them again.
Yes that’s completely ridiculous. You’re helping their small business by shopping there in the first place.
take it up with the state you elected. If they allow you to work for a wage that’s not enough to live on, and you don’t get a different job - that’s a you problem not a customer problem.
It’s a poverty trap. Your choice often isn’t “get another job” or stay there. It’s do this job, and survive another month, or quit and be not be able to afford basic necessities (like rent, or food). Unfortunately, the job can leave you too mentally and/or physically exhausted to properly hunt or reskill for another job. It’s a catch 22 situation.
Interestingly, COVID actually helped a lot of people on that front. The government income support, and enforced rest let people stop, breathe and think. Many then went on to do exactly what you suggested. Unfortunately there’s always more to be drawn into the trap.
This doesn’t justify flaming customers because we won’t pay them extra for doing their job. Does it suck for them? Maybe. Do I work hard for my money and don’t want to hand it our to them? Yes.
Dashers are not employees. There is no employer obligating a Dasher to serve the business’s customers.
A waitress is an employee. Her employer can demand that she serve a particular customer. She can be fired for refusing to serve you.
A Dasher is not an employee. DoorDash cannot fire a Dasher for refusing to accept an order. The Dasher is perfectly free to decline your offer for any reason they want.
The only information the Dasher is given is the location of the pickup, the location of the dropoff, and how much you are willing to pay for the trip. From that information, the Dasher has to decide whether to take the offer, or decline.
When your offer is so shitty that it would cost more to fulfill it than you’re offering the Dasher is absolutely justified in flaming you to a crisp.
Noone said dashers has to accept every order regardless of the tip. If they accept it though, they need to stfu.
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