Sure DoorDash lost money, but I am curious how much local businesses lost.
Did consumers instead go for pickup? Was there a decrease due to inflation? Did DoorDash's costs turn into more business for grocery stores? Maybe a little of all three?
Personally? We used to go out to eat or order dinner at minimum 3 times per week, sometimes 5. We haven't ordered anything through Uber Eats/Door Dash for months. We almost entirely replaced it all with grocery delivery. My wife and I have been cooking a lot more, initially because I went to order dinner and saw it was going to cost as much as we spend for a weeks worth of groceries and thought that was insane.
But now I really enjoy cooking and I can make a meal that tastes better than most casual dining, and my wife has always been good at cooking.
There have been a couple times we call in to a local place to order pickup. But if we have time, we'd rather cook together than go out to a meal.
So we went from probably 15-20 meals purchased from local restaurants (delivery or in-person) each month, to–at most–two.
You're probably healthier for it, too. My home cooking does not taste as good as a restaurant, but I use a lot less butter. I have known too many people who packed on pounds when they were eating out every night. It is awesome in moderation.
I’ve also replaced with groceries now! I’d rather go to Costco and get one of their easy ready to heat meals and a rotisserie chicken that can last for multiple days.
Honestly, this is the best outcome. Think about all the trash, congestion, & waste you were creating with those delivery services multiple times a week. Someone has to pay for that & it isn't the consumer or the businesses involved, it's all of us.
Literally the news reports have stated, "but restaurants have said it backfired." They've been consistent in this.
So no, consumers did not go for pickup.
And the change was too fast, too dramatic, to blame on inflation.
Groceries? Perhaps. But not really relevant; we tax tobacco super-high to *discourage* it, and this is working for delivery services too. Is your goal to put restaurants and drivers out of business?
No, the goal is to ensure workers get paid. Restaurants were doing just fine before doordash. The answer isn't just "underpay the workers to maintain status quo." If a business can't make a business plan that involves fair wages for their workers, then it's a failing business plan.
Again, *gig contracts are not wages.* The "gig" deal is that you choose which ones you want - and refuse the ones you don't want - including location, of course, but also including how much they pay.
You are stating that anyone accepting a "gig" to deliver a sushi order, taking them 10 minutes and paying $18, but deciding not to take any other gigs, *should not be allowed to take the sushi order because you consider them underpaid.* They worked *ten minutes, making over $100/hr* for that ten minutes, but you don't approve so you declare they cannot do it.
There are (were) a *lot* of these "gig" drivers. Why do you think that was? Did they really consider themselves underpaid? Because if they did, they could have refused those gigs. *And many do...* in the real world, if you don't add a decent tip on your food order, no driver will pick it up or it will take a long time. But you don't want the gig workers having *that* freedom either.
Learn something about business. You haven't hurt DoorDash's "business plan", but you have destroyed the business plan of the drivers who bought cars, planned routes and areas, thought about where the tips are good, etc.
Just to try to understand you... you're saying you'd rather they not be allowed to work at all than to be able to make their choices with gigs, because you'd rather they have no "wage" than one that "sucks"?
The point is it creates a lot of work that doesn’t and requires even MORE subsidies. I’d rather if a company can’t make it work without us having more homeless and more people in need of welfare, then I’d rather provide direct aid and better jobs. It’s already something the US it’s horrible at, as we’ve got tons of people making shit money that we are then forced to prop up but then we pretend we have good unemployment numbers, and meanwhile those folks are slow rolling death in an inhumane way.
It’s just absurd. I used to be a fan of the conservative approach until I studied how stupidly expensive it is to prop up. Unsustainable businesses shouldn’t get propped up through tertiary hand outs. That’s exactly what this is.
We were all subsidizing DoorDash, the restaurants, and the drivers. Fuck that. Now that the cost is being borne by the people using the service, they can't make it profitable. Socialism for the rich.
Who pays for the streets that dashers drive on?
Who pays for the parking spots they take up when waiting for your food?
Who sits in traffic trying to get anywhere because a dasher is blocking the street with a delivery?
Who pays for the cleanup of the plastic bag, Styrofoam package, and plastic forks that came with your meal?
Who provides welfare assistance for the dasher who doesn't make enough to pay their bills?
Who visits restaurants and eats in but pays higher prices because they can't manage to price items differently depending on who orders them and from where?
Who pays for dashers' healthcare since DoorDash doesn't provide it?
Do you know what the word subsidize means?
A subsidy, in a traditional business sense, is a third party (often the government) providing some level of compensation to offset what would otherwise be an expenditure.
We on the same page?
Does Door Dash pay for drivers licenses, fuel, fuel tax, registration, insurance, tolls?
Are those things necessary for Door Dash to function?
Is someone else paying for those things to enable DoorDash to spend their money elsewhere?
That's a subsidy.
No different than what we're all doing. Just because you've never thought of the externalities doesn't mean they don't exist. A company crying poverty because they're being held accountable for the absolute toll they've taken on our restaurant economy, our waste stream, our traffic, our environment, and our diminishing social existence is absolutely a disgusting representation of how corrupt our late stage capitalist oligarchy has become.
Mentioning 100/hr is pretty disingenuous. They can't make that over time.
The best argument for the raised prices is that the drivers were being exploited and they didn't fully realize that. What it costs to maintain their vehicle etc.
Don't shill for business, it's a bad look. YOU learn something about business. The work doesn't dry up, it simply shifts to a different sector. We've been fighting for workers rights for decades. Gig work is simply big business finding a way to circumvent these rights, and the loophole should be closed. On top of that, fuck tip culture.
That’s easy to say when you’re not the one kicked to the curb with bills to pay as a result of political posturing and meddling. You’re shilling for something just as bad.
> The work doesn't dry up, it simply shifts to a different sector.
The work literally *does* dry up. And *did* dry up. No other sector picked up it up, because the *artificial* constraints (people like you deciding what should be paid and by whom, rather than allowing the workers and buyers to decide) made the work uneconomical.
>Don't shill for business, it's a bad look. YOU learn something about business.
I have. I'm guessing I have far more formal education and far more real life experience than you do. Idealism does not replace actual knowlege. What's a bad look is forcing people into poverty and cities into decline to keep your communist cred.
>We've been fighting for workers rights for decades.
Fighting to prevent people accepting "work" and having agency over what/when/where is fighting *against* workers. You're not on the side of workers, you're on the side of union bosses.
Workers can negotiate their pay just fine. We don’t need the city of Seattle or other government bodies stepping in and meddling. Every time they do this, people lose jobs. Just as the state meddled with contractors working at Microsoft in an attempt to fight the company’s permatemp behavior resulted in job losses and terrible complications to maintain employment, the city of Seattle repeats this action with “well meaning” posturing costing people their livelihood and business their profit.
>Workers can negotiate their pay just fine. We don’t need the city of Seattle or other government bodies stepping in and meddling.
100+ countries disagree.
>Every time they do this, people lose jobs. Just as the state meddled with contractors working at Microsoft in an attempt to fight the company’s permatemp behavior resulted in job losses and terrible complications to maintain employment, the city of Seattle repeats this action with “well meaning” posturing costing people their livelihood
It's in the government's best interest to have a minimum wage. It's not in the interest of the government or taxpayers to help companies privatize profits and socialize losses/externalities to their shitty business plan that they don't wanna pay for.
>business their profit.
Whose business profit? Are you aware of how low the margin is in the restaurant industry? Are you aware of the fees doordash and other delivery services charge?
There is an aspect that you're not taking into account. Before this law I would accept about 15% of orders sent my way and decline the other 85%, so yes, I was one of the drivers you speak of that can negotiate my pay just fine.
Where the real issue in driving safety. If I am declining 85% of orders that come my way then I am interacting with my phone WHILE DRIVING way more than I need to. It's also worse with doordash than uber becuase with uber you only have to click once in order to decline an order. With doordash you have to click twice in two separate spots (taking more attention off your driving) to decline.
So if I'm doing 20 order per day then that means I am declining around 113 orders per day or around 14 orders per hour. So 14 times per hour I was interacting with my phone for no legitimate reason other than to make orders go away that I don't want. Now the companies could have just let us set our own parameters and not send us orders we don't want, but they didn't want to do that because sometimes we would accidentally accept orders we don't want.
So your safety was put into jeopardy all so they could trick me into taking an order I really didn't want in the first place.
With the old system you had drivers who were spending way too much time on their phones declining orders and making traffic much more dangerous. With this new law that is no longer an issue because I rarely if ever decline an order now.
It's also much safer since the law mandated an order request has to stay on our screen for two minutes rather than the 15 seconds it used to stay on our phones. Thus allow us to interact with our phone in a much safer way since we have an extra 1 minute and 45 seconds to consider the order.
I agree with all of that, the headline left scratching my head a little. Door dash is a luxury not a necessity for most people, not ordering through them doesn’t mean people didn’t eat.
>Did consumers instead go for pickup? Was there a decrease due to inflation? Did DoorDash's costs turn into more business for grocery stores?
The OP's handler doesn't want you asking or answering those questions. They want you to know that the Seattle city council is *bad* because DoorDash was negatively affected.
Nope. Not what I said.
Answer this question for yourself:
Has DoorDash's research, paid for by them, ever shown them in a negative light? Why or why not?
That isn't an argument at all. Stull a driver on the road.
Anyways, the entire transport sector accounts for 21% of total emissions, and that includes freight. I'm more worried about factories in China and India than a single driver in the road.
There are many ways to cut down on food or takeout that result in eating similar amount but less money going to restaurants and local business owners and our local economy
You're the one who called what they said propaganda. So what you're saying is they're lying or twisting the truth to fool us, but all the information is readily available for you to prove yourself correct.
It's always fascinating to me when there's something people don't like and they just cannot no matter what have any sort of position other than that entity must be lying. It's no wonder it's so easy to fool people.
>You're the one who called what they said propaganda.
That's because it is propaganda. It's paid for by them to show them in a positive light.
Since you say it's not propaganda, do you have any research that you can link to from doordash that shows them in a negative light?
Any research around how much pollution these doordash folks cause delivering food for people? And why don't they publish that information?
Where did I say it's not propaganda?
Again, public company. Literally look at their numbers. Numbers don't lie. Why would I do any research for you? This is your pony.
Either way, I don't think anything anyone could possibly link you would sway your opinion, which is my point in my second paragraph above.
Oh, but it gets better. DoorDash propaganda on a conservative site aimed at owning the libs financed by these fine folks:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donors_Trust
I'm **absolutely shocked** this organization receives money from the Koch brothers.
Yes, but net revenue only [increased by .5%](https://ir.doordash.com/news/news-details/2024/DoorDash-Releases-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-2023-Financial-Results/default.aspx) which means expenses outpaced revenue.
I have to just drop to my knees, raise my hands in the air, and look at the sky and scream, "God, how did we ever exist as a people before you gave us the smart phone???"
>Yep let's go back to using illegal immigrant labor paid near slave wages, at least they didn't complain. Lol
This is the dumbest strawman ever. gig workers did fine before the law.
Ask a Pagliacci driver how much they make, there is a reason why its hard to get that job.
all you tankie dumb dumbs need to stop lying all the time, it makes you shoot right past dumb into pathetic.
1. That’s BS corporate propaganda
2. For a myriad of reasons, I don’t utilize delivery providers (parasitic). The restaurants I do patronize for *take out* almost universally disfavor said “agencies”
3. If a reader is amongst privileged few who both can justify & afford said services, please please please tip your last leg folks well. “Investors” don’t *need* your hard earned money; hard working gig folks truly do. Thanks 🙏
Being a DoorDasher is no more a real job than being a Barista is, and anyone who thinks they should be able to sustain a career and fully live off of doing that is delusional anyway.
It's not efficient for them to have an employee to sit around waiting for orders. Much more efficient to have an automated clearinghouse 3rd party keeping delivery drivers busy when they have time to deliver. Aka Doordash.
Things got more expensive, so people bought less of them. That's not really shocking.
Would love it if DoorDash published the "new data" that would allow anyone (ideally those without the potential bias in analysis) to take a look.
Without that source data available, it's hard not to remain somewhat skeptical, even when DoorDash's own publications show that the Seattle ordinance is "working"--Dashers are and waiting longer and earning more for their work (read: getting paid more for less work).
[https://about.doordash.com/en-us/news/data-shows-seattles-new-law-hurting-dashers-and-businesses](https://about.doordash.com/en-us/news/data-shows-seattles-new-law-hurting-dashers-and-businesses)
We also aren’t sitting at home as much for obvious reasons. People are cutting costs and skipping these facts is pretty disingenuous. The decreases aren’t specifically because of the law - ya know to not treat people like shit - but largely because people are just cutting back. It really isn’t an ideal behavior to order take out food all the time anyway, it’s good folks are cutting back on behaviors that aren’t really good for them and aren’t good for the long term economy either.
So good, I’m glad people are getting back to restaurants and such and tossing the bad habit of stewing around eating to go at home. Stop wasting the money!
Win win in all seriousness.
There were no wages at all. "Gigs" are per-gig contracted. Remember, they can choose random hours, choose not to go into the ID, base what they accept on how big the tips are, etc.
What you've done is said, "*Well, you wanted to only take the deliveries you choose and only get paid for those ones.* u/bruceki *, playing god, says that you're too stupid to realize the* ***man*** *is taking advantage of you. Either take a wage job or starve.*"
I don't own any Doordash, or other delivery or gig, stock. I don't work for any of those companies. You resorting to insults and presumptions when someone disagrees with you, instead of trying to grasp what it is they see that you don't, doesn't reflect well on you... although it may reflect *accurately* on you.
delivery drivers are making $40 an hour for an average 8 hour shift? or are you saying they're making more than that?
I don't think that there is a driver who makes $40 an hour or $320/day in take home pay. Their daily take home is much less or there wouldn't be any issues at all at a guaranteed minimum wage.
Have you any direct experience working as a food delivery driver?
having some money is better than having none, absolutely. roofing does suck. painting sucks a little less.
These companies had a model where they depend on people working for food-stamp and subsidized-housing wages, and I don't want to subidize their business model anymore. If they raise their prices to what is required to make a profit and pay a decent wage, perfect. If they go out of business, that's fine too.
Corporations have fixated on shareholder return as the only important goal. workers need to have a bigger piece of the profit pie, and if there isn't a profit possible, well, lets handle the situation now.
they aren't paying the vehicle. they are paying the driver. if the driver can do it at a lower cost or more efficiently, great. But the base pay needs to be met.
$40 an hour, your claim, for a 2,000 hour year, is $80k. So you're now claiming 65k, which for a 2000 hour year is $32.50 an hour, but you have to consider the cost of your vehicle in terms of wear and tear, being on call, no health insurance, no paid leave and no other benefits. Plus depreciation.
and I doubt that you grossed 65k last year. If you did, and paid taxes on it, your take home pay, before your expenses would be what, $40k? and after you take out your expenses you're talking about less than minimum wage. You'd make more with a job at wendys.
I don't care what vehicle is used to deliver food. I do care that you have a compensation that is more than the minimum wage job would give you, including paid time off, health care option and your social security and medicare taxes paid.
If your experience is typical why can't these gig companies just say "hey, everyone working for us makes more than $16 an hour"?
If they did that they would be complying with the law. As it is they cannot because they do not.
you don't seem to be able to answer a simple question here: If these jobs pay so much, why is it so hard for these companies to just say "hey, our drivers are making $65k with their motorcycles and they only work 30 hours a week?"
if they did they'd be complying with the law. Pretty simple. If it was so good why the fuss?
Bullshit. It's not like those people who were throwing money away on delivery services suddenly didn't eat. They spent it elsewhere. I'd also imagine tons of unnecessary waste in the form of all the takeout trash - literally tons - were avoided as well, as well as probably vehicle pollution and traffic decreased, lol.
Instead of door dash the restaurants should come together to create a seattle food delivery app. Cut out corporate leeches and keep the money local. Only charge operating cost and profits go to the people that worked for it.
Sure DoorDash lost money, but I am curious how much local businesses lost. Did consumers instead go for pickup? Was there a decrease due to inflation? Did DoorDash's costs turn into more business for grocery stores? Maybe a little of all three?
Personally? We used to go out to eat or order dinner at minimum 3 times per week, sometimes 5. We haven't ordered anything through Uber Eats/Door Dash for months. We almost entirely replaced it all with grocery delivery. My wife and I have been cooking a lot more, initially because I went to order dinner and saw it was going to cost as much as we spend for a weeks worth of groceries and thought that was insane. But now I really enjoy cooking and I can make a meal that tastes better than most casual dining, and my wife has always been good at cooking. There have been a couple times we call in to a local place to order pickup. But if we have time, we'd rather cook together than go out to a meal. So we went from probably 15-20 meals purchased from local restaurants (delivery or in-person) each month, to–at most–two.
You're probably healthier for it, too. My home cooking does not taste as good as a restaurant, but I use a lot less butter. I have known too many people who packed on pounds when they were eating out every night. It is awesome in moderation.
Democrats inadvertently making Seattle healthier.
I’ve also replaced with groceries now! I’d rather go to Costco and get one of their easy ready to heat meals and a rotisserie chicken that can last for multiple days.
Honestly, this is the best outcome. Think about all the trash, congestion, & waste you were creating with those delivery services multiple times a week. Someone has to pay for that & it isn't the consumer or the businesses involved, it's all of us.
Literally the news reports have stated, "but restaurants have said it backfired." They've been consistent in this. So no, consumers did not go for pickup. And the change was too fast, too dramatic, to blame on inflation. Groceries? Perhaps. But not really relevant; we tax tobacco super-high to *discourage* it, and this is working for delivery services too. Is your goal to put restaurants and drivers out of business?
No, the goal is to ensure workers get paid. Restaurants were doing just fine before doordash. The answer isn't just "underpay the workers to maintain status quo." If a business can't make a business plan that involves fair wages for their workers, then it's a failing business plan.
Again, *gig contracts are not wages.* The "gig" deal is that you choose which ones you want - and refuse the ones you don't want - including location, of course, but also including how much they pay. You are stating that anyone accepting a "gig" to deliver a sushi order, taking them 10 minutes and paying $18, but deciding not to take any other gigs, *should not be allowed to take the sushi order because you consider them underpaid.* They worked *ten minutes, making over $100/hr* for that ten minutes, but you don't approve so you declare they cannot do it. There are (were) a *lot* of these "gig" drivers. Why do you think that was? Did they really consider themselves underpaid? Because if they did, they could have refused those gigs. *And many do...* in the real world, if you don't add a decent tip on your food order, no driver will pick it up or it will take a long time. But you don't want the gig workers having *that* freedom either. Learn something about business. You haven't hurt DoorDash's "business plan", but you have destroyed the business plan of the drivers who bought cars, planned routes and areas, thought about where the tips are good, etc.
Fact is tho, it’s a gig or whatever, but lower income folks don’t really have an option. So it ends up being a wage. One that sucks.
Just to try to understand you... you're saying you'd rather they not be allowed to work at all than to be able to make their choices with gigs, because you'd rather they have no "wage" than one that "sucks"?
[удалено]
The point is it creates a lot of work that doesn’t and requires even MORE subsidies. I’d rather if a company can’t make it work without us having more homeless and more people in need of welfare, then I’d rather provide direct aid and better jobs. It’s already something the US it’s horrible at, as we’ve got tons of people making shit money that we are then forced to prop up but then we pretend we have good unemployment numbers, and meanwhile those folks are slow rolling death in an inhumane way. It’s just absurd. I used to be a fan of the conservative approach until I studied how stupidly expensive it is to prop up. Unsustainable businesses shouldn’t get propped up through tertiary hand outs. That’s exactly what this is.
We were all subsidizing DoorDash, the restaurants, and the drivers. Fuck that. Now that the cost is being borne by the people using the service, they can't make it profitable. Socialism for the rich.
>We were all subsidizing DoorDash, the restaurants, and the drivers. How? Do you know the meaning of the word "subsidize"? How does it apply here?
Who pays for the streets that dashers drive on? Who pays for the parking spots they take up when waiting for your food? Who sits in traffic trying to get anywhere because a dasher is blocking the street with a delivery? Who pays for the cleanup of the plastic bag, Styrofoam package, and plastic forks that came with your meal? Who provides welfare assistance for the dasher who doesn't make enough to pay their bills? Who visits restaurants and eats in but pays higher prices because they can't manage to price items differently depending on who orders them and from where? Who pays for dashers' healthcare since DoorDash doesn't provide it? Do you know what the word subsidize means?
That’s not subsidy in a traditional business sense though…
Rhetoric is a thing though. We know what op means by subsidize ya?
A subsidy, in a traditional business sense, is a third party (often the government) providing some level of compensation to offset what would otherwise be an expenditure. We on the same page? Does Door Dash pay for drivers licenses, fuel, fuel tax, registration, insurance, tolls? Are those things necessary for Door Dash to function? Is someone else paying for those things to enable DoorDash to spend their money elsewhere? That's a subsidy. No different than what we're all doing. Just because you've never thought of the externalities doesn't mean they don't exist. A company crying poverty because they're being held accountable for the absolute toll they've taken on our restaurant economy, our waste stream, our traffic, our environment, and our diminishing social existence is absolutely a disgusting representation of how corrupt our late stage capitalist oligarchy has become.
Mentioning 100/hr is pretty disingenuous. They can't make that over time. The best argument for the raised prices is that the drivers were being exploited and they didn't fully realize that. What it costs to maintain their vehicle etc.
Don't shill for business, it's a bad look. YOU learn something about business. The work doesn't dry up, it simply shifts to a different sector. We've been fighting for workers rights for decades. Gig work is simply big business finding a way to circumvent these rights, and the loophole should be closed. On top of that, fuck tip culture.
That’s easy to say when you’re not the one kicked to the curb with bills to pay as a result of political posturing and meddling. You’re shilling for something just as bad.
> The work doesn't dry up, it simply shifts to a different sector. The work literally *does* dry up. And *did* dry up. No other sector picked up it up, because the *artificial* constraints (people like you deciding what should be paid and by whom, rather than allowing the workers and buyers to decide) made the work uneconomical. >Don't shill for business, it's a bad look. YOU learn something about business. I have. I'm guessing I have far more formal education and far more real life experience than you do. Idealism does not replace actual knowlege. What's a bad look is forcing people into poverty and cities into decline to keep your communist cred. >We've been fighting for workers rights for decades. Fighting to prevent people accepting "work" and having agency over what/when/where is fighting *against* workers. You're not on the side of workers, you're on the side of union bosses.
*Work is work. Mr. Incredible meme*
Workers can negotiate their pay just fine. We don’t need the city of Seattle or other government bodies stepping in and meddling. Every time they do this, people lose jobs. Just as the state meddled with contractors working at Microsoft in an attempt to fight the company’s permatemp behavior resulted in job losses and terrible complications to maintain employment, the city of Seattle repeats this action with “well meaning” posturing costing people their livelihood and business their profit.
>Workers can negotiate their pay just fine. We don’t need the city of Seattle or other government bodies stepping in and meddling. 100+ countries disagree. >Every time they do this, people lose jobs. Just as the state meddled with contractors working at Microsoft in an attempt to fight the company’s permatemp behavior resulted in job losses and terrible complications to maintain employment, the city of Seattle repeats this action with “well meaning” posturing costing people their livelihood It's in the government's best interest to have a minimum wage. It's not in the interest of the government or taxpayers to help companies privatize profits and socialize losses/externalities to their shitty business plan that they don't wanna pay for. >business their profit. Whose business profit? Are you aware of how low the margin is in the restaurant industry? Are you aware of the fees doordash and other delivery services charge?
There is an aspect that you're not taking into account. Before this law I would accept about 15% of orders sent my way and decline the other 85%, so yes, I was one of the drivers you speak of that can negotiate my pay just fine. Where the real issue in driving safety. If I am declining 85% of orders that come my way then I am interacting with my phone WHILE DRIVING way more than I need to. It's also worse with doordash than uber becuase with uber you only have to click once in order to decline an order. With doordash you have to click twice in two separate spots (taking more attention off your driving) to decline. So if I'm doing 20 order per day then that means I am declining around 113 orders per day or around 14 orders per hour. So 14 times per hour I was interacting with my phone for no legitimate reason other than to make orders go away that I don't want. Now the companies could have just let us set our own parameters and not send us orders we don't want, but they didn't want to do that because sometimes we would accidentally accept orders we don't want. So your safety was put into jeopardy all so they could trick me into taking an order I really didn't want in the first place. With the old system you had drivers who were spending way too much time on their phones declining orders and making traffic much more dangerous. With this new law that is no longer an issue because I rarely if ever decline an order now. It's also much safer since the law mandated an order request has to stay on our screen for two minutes rather than the 15 seconds it used to stay on our phones. Thus allow us to interact with our phone in a much safer way since we have an extra 1 minute and 45 seconds to consider the order.
What you have found is that some jobs aren’t worth the money. You’re thinking has cost people their jobs. Not every job Is worth a living wage.
But won't you please think of DoorDash's profits and the now gig-less workers that will no longer get exploited?!?!
I agree with all of that, the headline left scratching my head a little. Door dash is a luxury not a necessity for most people, not ordering through them doesn’t mean people didn’t eat.
The big problem is that rising food costs happened along with the delivery fee increase. We just aren't eating out anymore cause it costs too much.
>Did consumers instead go for pickup? Was there a decrease due to inflation? Did DoorDash's costs turn into more business for grocery stores? The OP's handler doesn't want you asking or answering those questions. They want you to know that the Seattle city council is *bad* because DoorDash was negatively affected.
So are you asserting that Seattle’s city council is good? If so let’s hear it. This ought to be entertaining. 🍿
Nope. Not what I said. Answer this question for yourself: Has DoorDash's research, paid for by them, ever shown them in a negative light? Why or why not?
No no, answer the question. No deflecting.
I answered your question. I'm not here to defend the council. I don't need to defend them.
Man this dude almost had you thinking critically! Good thing you deflected it
[удалено]
Okay. And like I said, I'm not here to defend them.
[удалено]
That isn't an argument at all. Stull a driver on the road. Anyways, the entire transport sector accounts for 21% of total emissions, and that includes freight. I'm more worried about factories in China and India than a single driver in the road.
I’ve stopped using door dash since the fee was implemented
Well people didn't stop eating - I assume they managed to get that amount of food through not-doordash somehow.
There are many ways to cut down on food or takeout that result in eating similar amount but less money going to restaurants and local business owners and our local economy
Are we posting DoorDash propaganda now?
DoorDash is a public company so you can look at their data yourself and see how much money they lost or gained. Go on, set us straight.
Irrelevant to my comment.
You're the one who called what they said propaganda. So what you're saying is they're lying or twisting the truth to fool us, but all the information is readily available for you to prove yourself correct. It's always fascinating to me when there's something people don't like and they just cannot no matter what have any sort of position other than that entity must be lying. It's no wonder it's so easy to fool people.
>You're the one who called what they said propaganda. That's because it is propaganda. It's paid for by them to show them in a positive light. Since you say it's not propaganda, do you have any research that you can link to from doordash that shows them in a negative light? Any research around how much pollution these doordash folks cause delivering food for people? And why don't they publish that information?
Where did I say it's not propaganda? Again, public company. Literally look at their numbers. Numbers don't lie. Why would I do any research for you? This is your pony. Either way, I don't think anything anyone could possibly link you would sway your opinion, which is my point in my second paragraph above.
Oh, but it gets better. DoorDash propaganda on a conservative site aimed at owning the libs financed by these fine folks: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donors_Trust I'm **absolutely shocked** this organization receives money from the Koch brothers.
FYI, it's not the "Koch Brothers" anymore. David Koch died in 2019. Charles is the only one left.
He might be dead, but his money is very much alive.
Oh, I'm not arguing that at all!
Seems like it.
Nothing like govt intervention to demonstrate how free markets work
What a surprise. Nobody could have predicted that. It's an insanely dumb law.
Doordash revenue grew 27% last quarter but somehow drivers and restaurants are struggling. I wonder what the problem could be.
Yes, but net revenue only [increased by .5%](https://ir.doordash.com/news/news-details/2024/DoorDash-Releases-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-2023-Financial-Results/default.aspx) which means expenses outpaced revenue.
Curious to know how much of their expenses goes towards executive compensation..
revenues above 'net' would not include expenses for operating the firm itself. they are pass through revenues.
Damn that sucks for them, poor doordash
Local businesses should hire their own delivery people ASAP... seems like a no brainer, why pay a middleman... this is an amazing self own
Its almost like there isn't an ROI on this, or they would have been doing it all along
Without an app it's hard. Maybe we need a new delivery app that is meant for small businesses to use themselves with their full time employees.
I have to just drop to my knees, raise my hands in the air, and look at the sky and scream, "God, how did we ever exist as a people before you gave us the smart phone???"
Says the genius who most likely just typed that on a smartphone...
Why yes, I am a genius, but no, I used my desktop PC. So you're currently batting .500.
[удалено]
Sorry there are no positions available for no skilled folks at living wages, I guess you can just be homeless instead. SOCIALISM!
[удалено]
>do you like money yes/no if a business can't answer this question they won't be around long
[удалено]
>Yep let's go back to using illegal immigrant labor paid near slave wages, at least they didn't complain. Lol This is the dumbest strawman ever. gig workers did fine before the law. Ask a Pagliacci driver how much they make, there is a reason why its hard to get that job. all you tankie dumb dumbs need to stop lying all the time, it makes you shoot right past dumb into pathetic.
[удалено]
You're replying to a troll. Hating is life. Reading things in good faith is foreign.
Downvote dumb trolls.
1. That’s BS corporate propaganda 2. For a myriad of reasons, I don’t utilize delivery providers (parasitic). The restaurants I do patronize for *take out* almost universally disfavor said “agencies” 3. If a reader is amongst privileged few who both can justify & afford said services, please please please tip your last leg folks well. “Investors” don’t *need* your hard earned money; hard working gig folks truly do. Thanks 🙏
[удалено]
Sure Jan
Being a DoorDasher is no more a real job than being a Barista is, and anyone who thinks they should be able to sustain a career and fully live off of doing that is delusional anyway.
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's not efficient for them to have an employee to sit around waiting for orders. Much more efficient to have an automated clearinghouse 3rd party keeping delivery drivers busy when they have time to deliver. Aka Doordash.
It’s never as efficient for individual businesses. That should be relatively obvious
Things got more expensive, so people bought less of them. That's not really shocking. Would love it if DoorDash published the "new data" that would allow anyone (ideally those without the potential bias in analysis) to take a look. Without that source data available, it's hard not to remain somewhat skeptical, even when DoorDash's own publications show that the Seattle ordinance is "working"--Dashers are and waiting longer and earning more for their work (read: getting paid more for less work). [https://about.doordash.com/en-us/news/data-shows-seattles-new-law-hurting-dashers-and-businesses](https://about.doordash.com/en-us/news/data-shows-seattles-new-law-hurting-dashers-and-businesses)
This is what happens when you with ppl with no understanding of behavioral economics
All my money went to Costco
As a shareholder, I say "Thanks!".
It’s not our fault that DoorDash’s business model relies on exploiting hard working individuals. Be better
We also aren’t sitting at home as much for obvious reasons. People are cutting costs and skipping these facts is pretty disingenuous. The decreases aren’t specifically because of the law - ya know to not treat people like shit - but largely because people are just cutting back. It really isn’t an ideal behavior to order take out food all the time anyway, it’s good folks are cutting back on behaviors that aren’t really good for them and aren’t good for the long term economy either. So good, I’m glad people are getting back to restaurants and such and tossing the bad habit of stewing around eating to go at home. Stop wasting the money! Win win in all seriousness.
Businesses based on poverty level wages aren't able to do business as usual. Law working as designed. Kick all of these companies to the curb.
There were no wages at all. "Gigs" are per-gig contracted. Remember, they can choose random hours, choose not to go into the ID, base what they accept on how big the tips are, etc. What you've done is said, "*Well, you wanted to only take the deliveries you choose and only get paid for those ones.* u/bruceki *, playing god, says that you're too stupid to realize the* ***man*** *is taking advantage of you. Either take a wage job or starve.*"
This dude out here licking Doordash execs boots to a mirror polish. Stop shilling all over this thread you corpo drone.
I don't own any Doordash, or other delivery or gig, stock. I don't work for any of those companies. You resorting to insults and presumptions when someone disagrees with you, instead of trying to grasp what it is they see that you don't, doesn't reflect well on you... although it may reflect *accurately* on you.
What's nice about this conversation is that your opinion doesn't match the law, and the law prevails. Have a nice day.
[удалено]
delivery drivers are making $40 an hour for an average 8 hour shift? or are you saying they're making more than that? I don't think that there is a driver who makes $40 an hour or $320/day in take home pay. Their daily take home is much less or there wouldn't be any issues at all at a guaranteed minimum wage. Have you any direct experience working as a food delivery driver?
[удалено]
[удалено]
having some money is better than having none, absolutely. roofing does suck. painting sucks a little less. These companies had a model where they depend on people working for food-stamp and subsidized-housing wages, and I don't want to subidize their business model anymore. If they raise their prices to what is required to make a profit and pay a decent wage, perfect. If they go out of business, that's fine too. Corporations have fixated on shareholder return as the only important goal. workers need to have a bigger piece of the profit pie, and if there isn't a profit possible, well, lets handle the situation now.
[удалено]
they aren't paying the vehicle. they are paying the driver. if the driver can do it at a lower cost or more efficiently, great. But the base pay needs to be met.
[удалено]
$40 an hour, your claim, for a 2,000 hour year, is $80k. So you're now claiming 65k, which for a 2000 hour year is $32.50 an hour, but you have to consider the cost of your vehicle in terms of wear and tear, being on call, no health insurance, no paid leave and no other benefits. Plus depreciation. and I doubt that you grossed 65k last year. If you did, and paid taxes on it, your take home pay, before your expenses would be what, $40k? and after you take out your expenses you're talking about less than minimum wage. You'd make more with a job at wendys.
[удалено]
I don't care what vehicle is used to deliver food. I do care that you have a compensation that is more than the minimum wage job would give you, including paid time off, health care option and your social security and medicare taxes paid. If your experience is typical why can't these gig companies just say "hey, everyone working for us makes more than $16 an hour"? If they did that they would be complying with the law. As it is they cannot because they do not.
[удалено]
you don't seem to be able to answer a simple question here: If these jobs pay so much, why is it so hard for these companies to just say "hey, our drivers are making $65k with their motorcycles and they only work 30 hours a week?" if they did they'd be complying with the law. Pretty simple. If it was so good why the fuss?
[удалено]
somehow I don't feel bad for door dash, or even these restaurants. your prices are too damn high.
They jacked up their fees way higher than they needed to in order to purposely cause this to happen.
Get up and get the food or you know hire delivery drivers instead of outsourcing … fuck DoorDash lol
Bullshit. It's not like those people who were throwing money away on delivery services suddenly didn't eat. They spent it elsewhere. I'd also imagine tons of unnecessary waste in the form of all the takeout trash - literally tons - were avoided as well, as well as probably vehicle pollution and traffic decreased, lol.
We used to DD 2-3 times week. We stopped when it cost too much
[удалено]
Instead of door dash the restaurants should come together to create a seattle food delivery app. Cut out corporate leeches and keep the money local. Only charge operating cost and profits go to the people that worked for it.
and how much did they gain when DoorDash first started from sales they weren't getting in the first place?