B.C. Premier David Eby says app-based companies employing ride-hail and food-delivery workers can “suck it up” as new, first-in-Canada rules come into effect this fall.
The provincial government Wednesday announced news regulations protecting gig workers. Starting Sept. 3 companies like Uber and DoorDash will have to pay 120 per cent of the provincial minimum wage to their employees while working — $20.88 per hour. Ride-hail and food-delivery workers will also see their tips protected and they will become eligible for workers compensation benefits as part of other measures designed to create safe working environments.
The broad coordinates of the legislation became public in the fall, but yesterday’s announcement prompted another round of concerns from the companies themselves and business leaders at large.
Bridgitte Anderson, president and CEO of the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade, said in a statement that B.C. companies already contend with some of the highest costs and strictest regulatory and tax environments in North America.
“We are concerned that the new regulations will impose additional burdens and reduce flexibility, inevitably leading to even higher costs for transportation and food delivery services,” Anderson said. She also fears that companies will hand out fewer assignments to workers to cut their costs.
But Eby does not buy it.
“These companies can suck it up. They will be alright, they will be fine,” he said Thursday (June 13 during an unrelated event with Newfoundland Premier Andrew Furey." The companies that employ these ride-hail and food-delivery workers make billions while the workers themselves often live right at the edge, (British Columbians) don’t want a scenario where their food is delivered on the backs of someone, who is looking at homelessness and using a food bank to subsidize the delivery charge," he said.
“These companies can suck it up. They will be alright, they will be fine,” he said Thursday (June 13 during an unrelated event with Newfoundland Premier Andrew Furey. “The companies that employ these ride-hail and food-delivery workers make billions while the workers themselves often live right at the edge, (British Columbians) don’t want a scenario where their food is delivered on the backs of someone, who is looking at homelessness and using a food bank to subsidize the delivery charge,” he said.
Damn, it’s oddly refreshing to hear a politician say something like that.
beautiful … this what governments are for … to protect and represent people, not to protect and cuddle big corporations that have a never ending unending appetite for infinite profits.
If you’re a company that only invests in sending money to the people who do nothing to generate services or even labour that the business is based on … why should anyone accomodate you? If you’re a business that hires people to deliver your product or service … PAY YOUR STAFF FIRST … then pay your shareholders who do absolutely nothing except siphon money out of the system for no one’s benefit.
Companies can go suck it … if they can’t handle basic economics and human decency … they shouldn’t be allowed to run a company.
Lip service really. If they want to lay the hammer, mandate them to eat the cost and forbid them to pass it to restaurants and consumers.
forbid them to pass it
This would be either illegal or unenforceable
Not at all. There’s previous act in place which forbid them from charging more than certain amount to the restaurants already, just need to update it to also regulate the flip side. Should rhe platforms still choose to hike the prices, users can then report them to the applicable consumer protection agencies, and then they can impose fines on the violating platforms.
just need to update it to also regulate the flip side
“just need to update it” is not that simple, because if legislation forbids price adjustments in all directions it’s effectively dictating the price of the service, which is hard to defend in court. It was only justifiable to forbid cutting driver earnings because the assumption is that the company has other ways to compensate.
Why bother trying to protect Uber “consumers” anyway? If people want to make use of an exploitative service, they should pay a lot for it. Let Uber be priced out.
The part he didn’t say is that maybe they should consider paying the tax out of profits instead of attempting to pass it on to consumers.
If your app dies because you’re too greedy for profit, that seems to me like a benefit for all the people of BC.
While those words were uttered, somewhere, in a secret lair on the banks of the North Saskatchewan, Danielle Smith accidently stuck her toothbrush too far down her throat.
Hell yeah, hope to see more of this across Canada.
Any politician to say this in Alberta would get lynched by the very people who would benefit from the policy.
Yeah then trans folks are scapegoated. Let’s keep the clown car out our government.
Frankly it boggle my mind that these companies aren’t profitable with the amount they charge already. They continue to burn through money marketing and developing an app that should have been “done” a decade ago.
And really, what are their costs? Basically hosts to run a web based system, paying their drivers reasonably - which is what they continually try to fuck around on - IT administration, some cheap “customer support”, and … upper admin+shareholders.
That’s my premier!
