Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

TheINTL t1_iz0vdz4 wrote

Is this a good amount? Feels like they should always be paying more. Yet they choose corporate profits over this

4

agate_ t1_iz1yysd wrote

That's the thing: there aren't any corporate profits either. DoorDash consistently loses a hundred million dollars a quarter, and the more business they do, the more money they lose. Read that last phrase again: it's the sure sign of a broken business model.

The problem is easy to see from OP's chart: working 14 hours a day, he makes 2600 deliveries at $26,000/year, or $10 per delivery. Not many people are gonna pay $10 to have $10 worth of Taco Bell delivered, so DoorDash charges less than that and pays OP more, taking a loss.

If we want OP to earn an actual living wage, with health insurance and coverage for gas and wear and tear on his car, it's gonna cost at least $30 per delivery. Ain't nobody on Earth going to pay that much.

Whether you're a customer, a dasher, or a stockholder, Doordash just. Doesn't. Work.

5

AftyOfTheUK t1_iz59r9y wrote

>If we want OP to earn an actual living wage, with health insurance and coverage for gas and wear and tear on his car, it's gonna cost at least $30 per delivery. Ain't nobody on Earth going to pay that much.

And as a society, we need to ask why they wouldn't.

That person considering paying also has a car, and gas, and wear and tear to pay for. They also have their own time that's worth something to them, just like the driver.

As a society, if we're in a position that someone with valuable time (say, a white-collar worker) and an expensive car with high gas prices CANNOT justify paying someone with less valuable time and a cheaper, better mileage car, we need to ask ourselves why - what barriers are we putting in place?

From an economical standpoint, having someone who earns 7$5k/year be unable to pay someone who earns $40k/year to do a simple task for them just means we have inefficiencies in our system that we need to work out. When we don't work them out, and leave the status quo, we have a far less efficient economy. The 75k guy has to waste his time and burn more gas to achieve something, and the 40k guy misses out on work.

I'd argue that your $30/hr figure is way too high though, given the number of people currently doing this work for far less.

1

Eswyft t1_iz135c1 wrote

They should, but people wouldn't pay it. And yea there seems to be no shortage of people willing to be paid peanuts like op here.

It's baffling why anyone does this. The one exception i see is on a bike for exercise and as a side gig, but if you have other income you'll get even more wrecked on taxes. Really, it'd just be for the few extra dollars and exercise.

4

Altruistic_Olives OP t1_iz2c52n wrote

That is the amount before prop 22 After counting in benefits and other pays it’s about 32k

It’s ok

2

abstract_concept t1_iz2d6u1 wrote

So what did you include in the earnings calc on the chart vs. excluded ?

2

Altruistic_Olives OP t1_iz2dwlg wrote

None of the charts include additional income from benefits

It’s tips + daily earnings

1

anotheralpaca69 t1_iz0yfvp wrote

It's literally a publicly traded gig job. Do you choose to pay people more than you have to?

−3

AftyOfTheUK t1_iz5a5fx wrote

You're getting downvoted on Reddit for pointing out that humans are human. This place is depressing sometimes.

I know people who are "against the tipping culture" and want to get rid of it... even though EVERY server I know wants to keep it because they earn more than they would otherwise. A couple of the people I know against tipping will tip far less than I do - and then when I point that out they get defensive and say that the person should be paid a better wage so they don't need tips.

It's impossible to get through their skull that their position is one of selfishness, not altruism.

2