解开锁屏
In 1938 Franklin Delano Roosevelt warned America, “do not let any calamity-howling executive with an income of $1,000 a day,… tell you… that a wage of $11 a week is going to have a disastrous effect on all American industry.” The following day he signed the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), for the first time establishing a federal minimum wage of $.25 an hour, a 40-hour workweek, and a ban on child labor in mining and manufacturing. New Deal initiatives, combined with the industrial boom of World War II, would not only usher in an unprecedented era of American economic growth but ensure that the wealth created was shared broadly with the burgeoning American middle class.
1938年，富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福警告美国 ，“不要让任何一个灾难啸叫执行 每天收入1000美元，……告诉你……每周11美元的工资将对整个美国工业造成灾难性的影响。 ”第二天，他签署了公平劳动标准法案(FLSA)，首次建立的$ .25小时，40小时工作，并在采矿关于童工的禁令和制造联邦最低工资。 新政倡议与第二次世界大战的工业繁荣相结合，不仅将迎来前所未有的美国经济增长时代，而且还将确保所创造的财富与新兴的美国中产阶级广泛分享。
The United States in 2020 might look sadly familiar to FDR. In the past decade, we have returned to levels of income inequality and unemployment not seen since FDR sat in the Oval Office. In California, a new generation of what FDR called “economic royalists and sweaters of labor,” are howling calamity again, as they ask voters to support them in depriving gig workers of the basic protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act. They may have traded in the top hat and monocle for Allbirds and a Patagonia vest and the factory floor for the mobile app, but the story remains the same.
对于FDR来说，美国在2020年可能看起来很可悲。 在过去的十年中，我们回到了收入分配不平等和失业率的水平，这是罗斯福坐在椭圆形办公室以来的最高水平。 在加利福尼亚州，FDR所谓的“经济保皇主义者和劳工毛衣”的新一代正在再次大声疾呼，因为他们要求选民支持他们剥夺演出工人剥夺《公平劳工标准法》的基本保护。 他们可能会用高顶礼帽和单片眼镜换购Allbirds，Patagonia背心和移动应用程序的工厂车间，但情况仍然相同。
Last year, the California State Legislature passed AB-5, which establishes an “ABC test” for determining the degree of control a company has over its workforce, and therefore what the proper classification should be. Based on the test, California has ruled that many gig workers, including Uber drivers, should qualify for the protections of employment under the FLSA and subsequent legislation.
去年，加利福尼亚州立法机构通过了AB-5，该法案建立了“ ABC测试 ”，用于确定公司对其员工队伍的控制程度，因此应确定适当的分类。 根据测试，加利福尼亚州裁定，包括Uber司机在内的许多杂技工人应符合FLSA和随后的立法中有关就业保护的资格。
I think that Uber’s employees, riders, and drivers deserve better information than they are getting.
我认为，Uber的员工，骑手和驾驶员应该得到比他们得到的更好的信息。
The FLSA and subsequent worker protections afforded to employees include a minimum wage, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and, in California, paid family leave, paid sick leave, and vacation. They provide a foundation of security for tens of millions of American families and are especially critical today as we face a global pandemic.
FLSA和随后为雇员提供的工人保护包括最低工资，失业保险，伤残保险，以及在加利福尼亚州的带薪家庭假，带薪病假和休假。 它们为数以千万计的美国家庭提供了安全的基础，在我们面临全球大流行的今天，这一点尤其重要。
Last month, Dara Khosrowshahi, the chief executive of Uber, published an op-ed in the New York Times arguing against giving Uber drivers these basic protections. Uber has continued to make the same case elsewhere as it champions an upcoming ballot initiative that would allow it to continue denying workers the rights of being employees. The company, along with other gig economy employers, is committed to spending over $100 million to make sure it’s drivers never see the benefits of employment.
上个月，Uber首席执行官达拉·科斯罗萨西(Dara Khosrowshahi) 在《纽约时报》上发表了一篇专栏文章，主张不向Uber司机提供这些基本保护。 优步在其他地方继续提出同样的理由 ，它支持即将举行的投票倡议，这将使它继续剥夺工人的雇员权利。 该公司与其他零工经济雇主一道，承诺花费超过1亿美元 ，以确保驾驶员从未见过就业的好处。
While most working Americans can take a sick day, Uber drivers have been pushed to drive sick to put food on the table. Because they are deemed independent contractors, drivers lack proper training and are not empowered to speak up about unsafe working conditions, potentially contributing to the uncontrolled spread of Covid-19 in the United States relative to Europe.
虽然大多数在职美国人会生病，但是Uber司机被迫生病以便将食物放在餐桌上。 因为他们被认为是独立承包商，所以驾驶员缺乏适当的培训，也无权谈论不安全的工作条件，有可能导致Covid-19在美国相对于欧洲的不受控制的传播 。
What troubles me about Uber’s argument against reclassifying its drivers as employees is not that it advocates for a policy designed to enrich executives and shareholders at the cost of workers. By now we should expect no less. What troubles me most is the lack of integrity with which the key arguments are made. I think that Uber’s employees, riders, and drivers deserve better information than they are getting.
令Uber反对将其司机重新归类为雇员的论点困扰我的不是，它主张采取旨在以员工为代价来丰富高管和股东的政策。 到现在，我们应该期待不少。 最让我困扰的是关键论点缺乏完整性。 我认为，Uber的员工，骑手和驾驶员应该得到比他们得到的更好的信息。
Through his writing and numerous recent interviews, Khosrowshahi has emerged as the face of the modern-day opponent of labor, the calamity-howling executive that FDR warned us about. In order to unravel some of the fundamental untruths of Uber’s case, I’d like to address some of his own words directly.
通过他的著作和近期的大量采访，霍斯罗萨西(Khosrowshahi)成为现代劳工的反对者的面Kong，这是罗斯福(FDR)警告我们的灾难性高管。 为了弄清Uber案的一些基本真相，我想直接谈谈他的一些话。
Why not just treat drivers as employees? […] Uber would only have full-time jobs for a small fraction of our current drivers and only be able to operate in many fewer cities than today.
为什么不将司机视为雇员呢？ […] Uber只能为我们目前的驾驶员提供一小部分全职工作，并且只能在比今天更少的城市中开展业务。
The letter begins by introducing a false constraint that drivers would be required to work full-time jobs or that Uber would be obligated to provide full-time jobs. Surely Khosrowshahi and his colleagues are familiar with the part-time job. There is no state or federal law that determines a minimum number of hours an employee must work in any given day, week, month, or even year. About 23 million Americans hold part-time jobs today, and 8 million Americans hold more than one.
这封信首先提出了一个错误的约束条件，要求驾驶员必须从事全职工作，或者Uber有义务提供全职工作。 当然，科斯罗萨西和他的同事们都熟悉兼职工作。 没有任何州或联邦法律确定员工在任何给定的日，周，月甚至年内必须工作的最少小时数。 如今，约有2300万美国人担任兼职 ，而800万美国人拥有不止一份。
Did eliminating child labor increase the price of ladies’ hosiery? Probably. Was it the right thing to do? Absolutely.
消除童工会增加女士袜子的价格吗？ 大概。 这是正确的做法吗？ 绝对。
To support this dubious claim, Khosrowshahi links to an opaque blog post written by an Uber employee. She says that “shifting to an employment model would put pressure on Uber to consolidate working hours across fewer workers in order to manage costs that are fixed per employee.”
为了支持这一可疑的说法，Khosrowshahi链接到Uber员工撰写的不透明博客文章 。 她说： “转向雇佣模式将给Uber施加压力，要求其合并较少员工的工作时间，以管理每位员工固定的成本。 ”
There is no mention of how giving a better deal to drivers might impact the hundreds of millions of dollars the company is currently spending to recruit and onboard new drivers.
没有提及对驾驶员提供更好的待遇将如何影响公司目前招募和使用新驾驶员的数亿美元 。
Rides would be more expensive, which would significantly reduce the number of rides people could take and, in turn, the number of drivers needed to provide those trips.
乘车会更昂贵，这将大大减少人们可以乘车的次数，进而减少提供这些旅行所需的驾驶员的数量。
Uber has written millions of lines of code of software, but none of it changes the reality that someone has to drive you from A to B, and that that person needs to feed their family and pay their rent. The last time I rode in an Uber the driver told me he drove 19 minutes to pick me up. He then drove me for about 20 minutes, and I paid $19.70. Determining how much the average Uber driver makes per hour is a notoriously difficult task, but I would be surprised if after the cost of fueling and maintaining his vehicle he was making the New York City-mandated $15 minimum wage.
Uber编写了数百万行软件代码，但没有一个改变改变一个现实，即有人必须将您从A驱逐到B，而该人需要养家糊口并支付房租。 我上一次乘坐Uber时，司机告诉我他开车19分钟接我。 然后他开了我约20分钟，我付了$ 19.70。 确定Uber司机每小时的平均工资是一项众所周知的艰巨的任务 ，但如果在加油和维护自己的车辆的成本之后，他使纽约市规定的最低工资达到15美元，我会感到惊讶。
It is probably true that in order to provide the full benefits of employment to drivers, riders would be asked to pay a higher cost. However, is this a bad outcome? Did eliminating child labor increase the price of ladies’ hosiery? Probably. Was it the right thing to do? Absolutely.
为了向驾驶员提供就业的全部好处，可能会要求驾驶员支付更高的费用。 但是，这是不好的结果吗？ 消除童工会增加女士袜子的价格吗？ 大概。 这是正确的做法吗？ 绝对。
It is okay to celebrate innovators without accepting their violations of labor laws as innovation.
可以在不将违反劳动法的行为视为创新的情况下庆祝创新者。
If lower prices mean depriving drivers of the basic benefits of employment and other protections designed to shield our most vulnerable workers, then perhaps Uber should reconsider certain aspects of the operation that cannot operate profitably. It is okay to celebrate innovators without accepting their violations of labor laws as innovation.
如果较低的价格意味着剥夺了司机的基本利益以及旨在保护我们最脆弱工人的其他保护措施，那么优步应该重新考虑运营中某些无法盈利的方面。 可以在不将违反劳动法的行为视为创新的情况下庆祝创新者。
More important than what I think is what drivers think: In public surveys over the last decade, the vast majority of drivers have said they don’t want to be employees because of how much they value flexibility.
司机的想法比我想的要重要：在过去十年的公开调查中，绝大多数司机都说他们不想成为员工，因为他们非常重视灵活性。
Central to Khosrowshahi’s argument is that drivers do not want to be employees. He makes his argument by referencing another op-ed in the New York Times that is written by Harry Campbell, a former part-time Uber and Lyft driver and the founder of The Rideshare Guy, a blog and podcast for ride-share drivers.
Khosrowshahi的论点的核心是驾驶员不想当雇员。 他通过引用《纽约时报》上另一篇由哈里·坎贝尔(Harry Campbell)撰写的文章来发表自己的观点，哈里·坎贝尔(Harry Campbell)是前Uber和Lyft的兼职司机，也是乘车共享驾驶员博客和播客The Rideshare Guy的创始人。
Harry Campbell’s voice is far from independent. He is a paid consultant for Uber, Lyft, and other ride-sharing companies. This is no secret. Five years ago he stated publicly that he was making more than $20,000 a month on this enterprise. His entrepreneurship is commendable, but Khosrowshahi’s misrepresentation of the voice of the driver is not, nor is the New York Times’ failure to note this conflict.
哈里·坎贝尔的声音远非独立。 他是Uber，Lyft和其他乘车共享公司的付费顾问。 这不是秘密。 五年前，他公开表示，他每月在这家企业上的收入超过20,000美元。 他的企业家精神值得称赞，但霍斯罗萨西(Khosrowshahi)对驾驶员声音的错误陈述并非如此， 《纽约时报 》也没有注意到这一冲突。
Campbell’s article is titled “Uber Drivers Just Want to Be Free,” but in the article, he says “they’re essentially working an employee-like schedule but without any of the protections. That means no minimum wage, no unemployment insurance, no benefits, and no workers’ compensation. I can’t fault these drivers for pushing to improve their lives.” What, exactly, do drivers want to be free from?
坎贝尔的文章标题为“ Uber Drivers Just Want to Free”，但在文章中，他说“他们本质上是在制定类似于员工的时间表，但没有任何保护措施。 这意味着没有最低工资，没有失业保险，没有福利，也没有工人补偿。 我不能责怪这些司机努力改善他们的生活。” 司机到底想摆脱什么呢？
In Campbell’s own words it sounds like the benefits of employment are exactly what drivers want… unless of course they were convinced that they could never have them and that the alternative to their current arrangement was no work at all. This is consistent with both Uber and Lyft threatening to shut down service in California before classifying workers properly, in a capital strike that would make even Ayn Rand blush.
用坎贝尔自己的话来说，听起来正是就业带来的好处正是司机想要的……除非他们当然确信他们永远无法拥有，而且目前安排的替代方案根本没有工作。 这与优步和Lyft都威胁要在适当地对工人进行分类之前关闭加利福尼亚的服务，这是一次资本罢工，甚至会使Ayn Rand脸红。
A recent survey commissioned by Uber and other companies found that two out of three app drivers would stop driving if their flexibility was compromised.
由Uber和其他公司委托进行的一项最新调查发现，如果灵活性受损，则三分之二的应用程序驱动程序将停止驱动程序。
The greatest myth perpetuated by all gig economy companies is that workers have to choose between flexibility and the benefits of employment. The flexibility farce is the cornerstone untruth upon which Uber and its peers have built their business. Providing employees with scheduling flexibility is a choice that is made by the employer, and at many companies is perceived as a benefit. Uber conveniently ignores this fact and instead chooses to intimidate their drivers into accepting the status quo.
所有零工经济公司永远存在的最大神话是，工人必须在灵活性和就业福利之间做出选择。 灵活性闹剧是Uber及其同行建立业务的基石。 为员工提供日程安排的灵活性是雇主做出的选择，在许多公司中，这被认为是一种好处。 Uber方便地忽略了这一事实，而是选择恐吓他们的司机接受现状。
If Uber fears the increased cost and responsibility of being an employer and taking responsibility for millions of people, I don’t blame them. It is hard. I have faced all of these decisions, and their consequences, as co-founder and CEO of Managed by Q. Managed by Q was the target of frivolous lawsuits, outside union agitation, and was held responsible when our employees screwed up on the job. We screwed up too. It is not easy to be a large employer, especially of a financially and economically vulnerable employee population. But shouldn’t we expect our highest-paid executives to solve our hardest problems? FDR warned of executives making $1,000 a day, what would he think of Khosrowshahi’s compensation package of over $40 million?
如果Uber担心成为雇主并为数以百万计的人承担责任而增加的成本和责任感，我不会怪他们。 很难。 作为Managed by Q的联合创始人兼首席执行官，我已经面对了所有这些决定及其后果。Q的管理是无聊的诉讼，外部工会鼓动的目标，并且在我们的员工忙于工作时要承担责任。 我们也搞砸了。 要成为一个大雇主，尤其是那些在经济和经济上脆弱的雇员群体，是不容易的。 但是，我们不应该期望薪酬最高的高管解决我们最棘手的问题吗？ FDR警告说，高管们每天要赚1000美元，他对科斯罗萨西超过4000万美元的薪酬计划有何看法？
When Khosrowshahi joined Uber as CEO, he introduced a new company value: “We do the right thing, period.”
当Khosrowshahi加入Uber担任首席执行官时，他介绍了一种新的公司价值观：“我们在正确的时期内做正确的事。”
In 1938 unemployment was at 19%, nearly double what it is today. The opponents of the FLSA cried job destruction, called the bill unconstitutional, and were successful in killing the bill on the floor of the House the first time around. Roosevelt persisted and prevailed. In the depths of the Great Depression, millions of Americans got a raise. With 80 years of hindsight, it is clear that FDR did the right thing.
1938年的失业率为19％，几乎是当今的两倍。 FLSA的反对者大声疾呼摧毁工作，称该法案违宪，并首次在众议院地板上成功杀死了该法案。 罗斯福坚持并取得了胜利。 在大萧条的深处，数百万的美国人得到了加薪。 经过80年的事后调查，很明显FDR做得正确。
Today, Uber has the opportunity to be a leader and once again expand the protections of the FLSA to nearly 1 million workers at a time when they need it most. Instead, Uber is investing hundreds of millions of dollars to deprive their drivers, in many ways the same immigrant and minority workforce FDR sought to protect, of the very protections of the FLSA.
如今，Uber有机会成为领导者，并在最需要的时候，再次将FLSA的保护范围扩大到将近100万名工人。 取而代之的是，Uber投资数亿美元，以剥夺他们的司机，在很多方面，FDR试图保护的移民和少数族裔劳动力，都受到了FLSA的保护。
It took decades to know that the New Dealers were right and that a minimum wage could build the middle class, expand purchasing power, and grow the pie for everyone. We don’t need 80 years to pass to know what is the right thing to do here. I am not asking anyone to delete Uber, I am asking for Uber’s employees, drivers, and customers to rise to the moment and challenge Khosrowshahi to live by his own stated value, and do the right thing for the company and for our country.
数十年来，才知道新经销商是正确的，最低工资可以建立中产阶级，扩大购买力并为每个人增加蛋糕。 我们不需要80年的时间就可以知道在这里做正确的事。 我不是要任何人删除Uber，而是要Uber的员工，司机和顾客站起来，挑战Khosrowshahi以自己的价值观为自己生活，并为公司和我们的国家做正确的事。
翻译自: https://onezero.medium.com/unraveling-ubers-untruths-ef5d203de11f
解开锁屏
