Discussion in 'Advocacy' started by The D.A.G., Nov 24, 2016.
What kind of strategy would that be??
That is what is required of "advocacy" and "organization", or do you not know what this discussion concerns?
This discussion appears to be concerning organizing TNC contractors. I was questioning the "frontal assault" or broad-brush statement of supposedly "get[ing] 40k drivers and an international corporation to all agree on something."
That's not how business is done (typically).
That is not how business is done? That is the exact purpose of organization!
Unions have contracts between workers and employers. Those contracts are agreements between the workers and employers. Those contracts are the result of much negotiation and, again, the primary purpose of organization.
What do you mean that is not how business is done?
Are you saying that organization would result in other tactics that wouldn't involve open negotiation between employers and employees?
How well do you think THAT will work out?
LOL, I was hoping for a more nuanced discussion on this topic, but it looks like some are determined to limit it to negotiations between drivers and "corporations."
To answer your question, yes, the strategy would be to do something other than what's been being done for the last 100+ years (btw, tactics are what is done to bring about the execution of a strategy). At this point in history (imo), corporations are not going to share power unless they are forced by either government or labor or both.
No, what I think agtg is driving at (correct me if I'm wrong), is the same old strategies aren't working. Unions are in it for power & money (and that's a human trait, so I'm not necessarily saying that's evil, in-and-of-itself), so let us contractors wield that power and then collect the monies due us for our sweat and tears.
Does that make sense?
Stop imposing your inaccurate definitions on me and stop hoping for a nuanced discussion of a basic topic.
There is no other formal purpose for a union aside from the negotiation of terms between corporate entities and their employees.
The interpretation of tactics and strategy aside, the original subject of this thread has to do with whether UP supports drivers and advocates organization. I put in my two cents concerning that and, beyond that, it seems we both agree that unions are not the answer. What are we arguing about?
I think drivers have a ton of leverage with civil authorities because there are already labor laws on the books in most markets. A city can shut Uber down unless Uber is willing to change things.
Bringing irrefutable data regarding Uber's bad policies, well-reasoned proposals for change, and an appeal for worker's rights to local and state civil authorities would likely bring the quickest change to aid drivers in a particular market.
Really, it's the only way. Trying to collectively bargain with Uber would require a lot more people and would allow Uber to drag the process out and waste precious time and resources.
A city can shut Uber down, and Uber knows this. That's why you go to the civil authorities and not to Uber. If the authorities have an ear, they can make Uber play fair.
For better or worse, Uber has already displayed a tendency to flee in a fight-or-flight situation in may such situations. I think this would result in shutting them down more often than getting them to "change their ways".
I agree they are rapidly approaching the point in which some type of corrective action be taken, however, I would rather see it be productive and prosperous for all involved instead of cutting the opportunity for both company and cohorts.
You obviously have not been paying attention. Most of the change in Uber policy has been enacted locally by civil authorities or through law suits.
Rarely do they get shut down completely, though it happened in Austin which made room for smaller companies to come in who are more driver friendly in their policies.
Most of the change in Uber policy is made to points of Uber policy which have NOTHING to do with the things you are trying to change.
The city/county/state will concern itself with making things profitable and suitable for the city/county/state, not the drivers.
Obviously, you've got a contrarian attitude that makes it pointless to argue with.
i'd imagine that the forum has gone through this "fundraising" before.
Playing devils advocate here, what's to keep you from running off with all the money raised or know how you spent the money?
Not in the least.
You are simply frustrated at your inability to keep up with the conversation and are responding with personal attacks towards me since you cannot think of anything better to say relating to the actual topic at hand.
You can say that about any kickstarter campaign, fortunately things still get done with kickstarters. Do you understand what a kickstarter is? Maybe you should do some research. There is always risk, but, like I said earlier, the risk is very little per person.
Trying to prove myself to someone doesn't know me as as member of this forum would be worthless. Either you think it's worth the risk or not. But if you've seen my posts under my username agtg, you may be inclined to support the campaign as I am obviously pro-driver and have helped to defend driver's rights on these forums against the shills consistently. If you're still not convinced, no problem.
If anyone is afraid of getting ripped of $15 dollars, then they should keep their money.
The truth is, most drivers are getting ripped off at least that every month through scam fares Uber allows through their automated refund algorithm.
Saying you have a contrarian attitude is a personal attack? You're either really, really sensitive or you're trolling me. Whatever the case, I won't be bothering to respond back to you.
I do know what a kickstarter is and that is exactly why I brought up you running off with the money. There is no way to see how the drivers money is being spent.
I went back through your history and honestly, your attitude towards those that question you, sucks. You need to learn how to bring people together not push away people who have legitimate concerns.
BTW, I used to be a moderator on a racing forum and fundraising of this type is generally frowned upon by most forums.
Allow me to clarify: This kickstarter isn't happening as this forum isn't going to give it a platform to reach drivers.
Arguing hypothetically about whether or not you would support it is pointless. And if you don't appreciate my attitude, you don't understand the kind of attitude required to battle in advocacy.
Uber has paid shills crawling this forum to actively engage and run off anyone who would expose their endless stream of policy schemes. If you don't have the fortitude to put the truth out against their lies, that's your business. Don't get in the way of others who would, you're only hurting yourself in the end.
If the forum isn't giving you your platform to reach drivers, what is the purpose of you posting this thread.
There is a difference between fortitude and arrogance. You would be wise to sit back and mull over which of these you project.
I'm thinking it's arrogance.
Anyways, it's past my bedtime. Good Night.
Separate names with a comma.