首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 领导力 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

Uber收购外卖公司Postmates,为何被批评为“邪恶交易”

Robert Hackett
2020-07-11

有人认为,这种策略的设计目的就是最大程度压低人们的报酬。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

7月6日,Uber同意以26.5亿美元收购送餐服务公司Postmates,令投资者欢呼雀跃,但另外一群人的反应却截然相反,他们是网约车行业和送餐行业的主力零工人员。

伊丹·阿尔瓦是一名司机,他在Uber曝出丑闻后的几年转投Lyft。他形容Uber收购Postmates的交易是“不道德的”和“邪恶的”,因为这会助长Uber压榨工人工资的能力。在这些基于应用程序的公司收取的车费和订餐费中,网约车司机和送餐员可以获得一定的抽成,但比例已经大幅下降。

阿尔瓦同时还是劳工权益组织Gig Workers Rising的发起人。他说:“这笔交易如同允许一个贪污分子收购一家银行。”

阿尔瓦说他在湾区运送乘客平均每小时的收入约为20美元至22美元。但扣除油费和意外车辆维修费(仅去年就有5次爆胎)以后,他估计自己的收入“绝对远低于每小时15美元”,而且“极有可能接近10美元。”

阿尔瓦谴责网约车公司的“掠夺策略”,他说这种策略的设计目的就是最大程度压低人们的报酬,包括把公司最基本的工作者、司机和送餐员认定为承包商,而不是有权享有福利的全职员工等。Uber和其他零工经济公司目前正在抗争加州的一项法律,这项法律可能迫使这些公司将其旗下的工作者重新划分为全职员工。

这些公司豪掷数千万美元,试图发起一项替代性的州公民表决提案,让它们能够在规则改革中得到豁免。

食物金字塔顶端的争夺

为了抗击全球新冠疫情,各地政府纷纷采取封城措施,导致网约车公司和送餐公司的业务陷入困境。即使在这种情况下,这些公司为了争夺市场份额依旧没有停止厮杀。

DoorDash的送餐员路易斯·瓦斯克斯曾经是Uber和Lyft的司机,他在新冠疫情爆发时改为送餐。他对行业整合表示担忧。对于Uber收购Postmates的交易,他说:“我觉得这对司机来说不公平,也不是什么好事。Uber之所以这样做是因为它们想要主宰这个行业。”

消费趋势跟踪机构Edison Trends表示,Uber与Postmates合并后将占到美国送餐行业37%的市场份额。这将使其仅次于当前的市场领导者DoorDash。DoorDash占有44%的市场份额。

尽管在疫情期间,竞争依旧愈演愈烈。DoorDash上个月刚刚融资4亿美元,估值接近160亿美元。Grubhub拥有17%的市场份额。在传闻中与Uber的交易失败之后不久,该公司上个月同意出售荷兰Just Eat Takeaway公司。

随着竞争对手逐渐减少,剩下的公司纷纷提供最便宜、最便利的服务,这压缩了公司的利润空间。

瓦斯克斯是一位单身父亲。他哀叹说自己的收入越来越少。谈及早在五年前的收入,瓦斯克斯说:“开始的时候收入真得不错。”

他说:“现在却变成了鸡肋。”

拆东墙补西墙

有些司机谴责Uber花数十亿美元收购Postmates,给工作者支付的报酬却少得可怜。

妮可·穆尔是一位Lyft兼职司机。她形容Uber的行为非常虚伪。她说:“他们没有钱给人们支付基本工资,却有钱收购一家全新的公司?”

穆尔说:“我认为这笔交易就是一记响亮的耳光。”她是另外一家劳动者权益组织Rideshare Drivers United的发起人。该组织正在鼓动网约车司机建立工会。

Postmates的送餐员彼得·杨说,他看不出Uber收购Postmates有任何好处。他在一封电子邮件中写道:“我不觉得交易之后,劳动者的待遇会有任何好转。收入不会增加,就业保障也不会有任何改善。”

此外,杨说他担心这笔交易会影响人们的就业状况,包括他自己在内。他说,他做过两年Uber司机,但一年前他发生过一次小事故之后,Uber取消了他的资格,直接把他踢出了平台。

杨说,在Postmates被Uber收购之后,他担心自己也会被Postmates封杀。虽然Postmates已经向送餐员承诺该笔收购不会对送餐员的工作产生直接影响,但他认为,这个承诺“像他们的话一样苍白无力。”

杨补充说:“现在他们说的都是废话。”

Uber强调其关心工作者的利益

但也有人对该笔交易持更乐观的态度。

前Uber和Lyft司机迈克尔·古墨拉表达了截然相反的观点。古墨拉目前经营一个有关网约车行业的博客Rideshare Report。他说,从长远来看,他认为行业整合“实际上对司机是有利的”,因为这将迫使更多工作者团结起来,从而更容易“实现劳资谈判的目的”。

但古墨拉指出,Uber“进行[该笔交易]根本不是为了司机的利益。”

Uber声称收购Postmates将对零工人员有利。一位发言人在写给《财富》杂志的电子邮件中表示,凭借合并后的餐厅网络、订单和送餐机会,“我们能够为餐厅和食品杂货店等领域的派送人员提供更可预测的、更丰厚的收入机会。”

然而,对于该笔交易对零工人员的好处,接受《财富》杂志采访的多数人都持怀疑态度。Postmates的送餐员保罗·奥哈是一个非官方的Facebook同行群组的管理员,他说他认为该笔交易“给送餐员带来好处的可能性微乎其微。”

奥哈说:“希望Uber能像可口可乐公司(Coca-Cola)那样做。”他的意思是,Uber最终为消费者提供许多选择(用按需服务应用与软饮料对比),基本上形成内部竞争的格局。

他说,成为送餐员就像是加入了一场充满不确定性的经济“游戏”。潜在雇主越少,代表“设计城市”的方法越少,也就意味着潜在回报减少。

失去胃口,赢得战争

如果Uber授予Postmates一定程度的独立自主权,允许司机、商户和客户根据自己的偏好在不同应用程序之间切换,这将带来更多选择和更高的灵活性。但该笔交易背后的逻辑显然是为了利用整合和规模经济节约成本。

Uber在公布该交易的声明中表示,在明年第一季度交易按计划完成之后,公司“打算允许面向消费者的Postmates应用继续独立运营。”公司还表示,计划合并两家公司的后端业务,并削减日常开支2亿美元。

威尔弗雷德·陈是一位自由撰稿人。他平时通过在Postmates等按需服务应用程序上送餐来赚取外快。他总结了零工人员的焦虑。行业整合将使零工人员越来越受制于少数几家超级强大的公司。

他说:“问题是,这意味着工作者的选择越来越少,也意味着平台变得更加庞大,越来越难以对付。随着Uber的霸权不断扩大,它们会有更多手段对付工作者,剥削我们的手段也会变得更加残忍。”(财富中文网)

译者:Biz

7月6日,Uber同意以26.5亿美元收购送餐服务公司Postmates,令投资者欢呼雀跃,但另外一群人的反应却截然相反,他们是网约车行业和送餐行业的主力零工人员。

伊丹·阿尔瓦是一名司机,他在Uber曝出丑闻后的几年转投Lyft。他形容Uber收购Postmates的交易是“不道德的”和“邪恶的”,因为这会助长Uber压榨工人工资的能力。在这些基于应用程序的公司收取的车费和订餐费中,网约车司机和送餐员可以获得一定的抽成,但比例已经大幅下降。

阿尔瓦同时还是劳工权益组织Gig Workers Rising的发起人。他说:“这笔交易如同允许一个贪污分子收购一家银行。”

阿尔瓦说他在湾区运送乘客平均每小时的收入约为20美元至22美元。但扣除油费和意外车辆维修费(仅去年就有5次爆胎)以后,他估计自己的收入“绝对远低于每小时15美元”,而且“极有可能接近10美元。”

阿尔瓦谴责网约车公司的“掠夺策略”,他说这种策略的设计目的就是最大程度压低人们的报酬,包括把公司最基本的工作者、司机和送餐员认定为承包商,而不是有权享有福利的全职员工等。Uber和其他零工经济公司目前正在抗争加州的一项法律,这项法律可能迫使这些公司将其旗下的工作者重新划分为全职员工。

这些公司豪掷数千万美元,试图发起一项替代性的州公民表决提案,让它们能够在规则改革中得到豁免。

食物金字塔顶端的争夺

为了抗击全球新冠疫情,各地政府纷纷采取封城措施,导致网约车公司和送餐公司的业务陷入困境。即使在这种情况下,这些公司为了争夺市场份额依旧没有停止厮杀。

DoorDash的送餐员路易斯·瓦斯克斯曾经是Uber和Lyft的司机,他在新冠疫情爆发时改为送餐。他对行业整合表示担忧。对于Uber收购Postmates的交易,他说:“我觉得这对司机来说不公平,也不是什么好事。Uber之所以这样做是因为它们想要主宰这个行业。”

消费趋势跟踪机构Edison Trends表示,Uber与Postmates合并后将占到美国送餐行业37%的市场份额。这将使其仅次于当前的市场领导者DoorDash。DoorDash占有44%的市场份额。

尽管在疫情期间,竞争依旧愈演愈烈。DoorDash上个月刚刚融资4亿美元,估值接近160亿美元。Grubhub拥有17%的市场份额。在传闻中与Uber的交易失败之后不久,该公司上个月同意出售荷兰Just Eat Takeaway公司。

随着竞争对手逐渐减少,剩下的公司纷纷提供最便宜、最便利的服务,这压缩了公司的利润空间。

瓦斯克斯是一位单身父亲。他哀叹说自己的收入越来越少。谈及早在五年前的收入,瓦斯克斯说:“开始的时候收入真得不错。”

他说:“现在却变成了鸡肋。”

拆东墙补西墙

有些司机谴责Uber花数十亿美元收购Postmates,给工作者支付的报酬却少得可怜。

妮可·穆尔是一位Lyft兼职司机。她形容Uber的行为非常虚伪。她说:“他们没有钱给人们支付基本工资,却有钱收购一家全新的公司?”

穆尔说:“我认为这笔交易就是一记响亮的耳光。”她是另外一家劳动者权益组织Rideshare Drivers United的发起人。该组织正在鼓动网约车司机建立工会。

Postmates的送餐员彼得·杨说,他看不出Uber收购Postmates有任何好处。他在一封电子邮件中写道:“我不觉得交易之后,劳动者的待遇会有任何好转。收入不会增加,就业保障也不会有任何改善。”

此外,杨说他担心这笔交易会影响人们的就业状况,包括他自己在内。他说,他做过两年Uber司机,但一年前他发生过一次小事故之后,Uber取消了他的资格,直接把他踢出了平台。

杨说,在Postmates被Uber收购之后,他担心自己也会被Postmates封杀。虽然Postmates已经向送餐员承诺该笔收购不会对送餐员的工作产生直接影响,但他认为,这个承诺“像他们的话一样苍白无力。”

杨补充说:“现在他们说的都是废话。”

Uber强调其关心工作者的利益

但也有人对该笔交易持更乐观的态度。

前Uber和Lyft司机迈克尔·古墨拉表达了截然相反的观点。古墨拉目前经营一个有关网约车行业的博客Rideshare Report。他说,从长远来看,他认为行业整合“实际上对司机是有利的”,因为这将迫使更多工作者团结起来,从而更容易“实现劳资谈判的目的”。

但古墨拉指出,Uber“进行[该笔交易]根本不是为了司机的利益。”

Uber声称收购Postmates将对零工人员有利。一位发言人在写给《财富》杂志的电子邮件中表示,凭借合并后的餐厅网络、订单和送餐机会,“我们能够为餐厅和食品杂货店等领域的派送人员提供更可预测的、更丰厚的收入机会。”

然而,对于该笔交易对零工人员的好处,接受《财富》杂志采访的多数人都持怀疑态度。Postmates的送餐员保罗·奥哈是一个非官方的Facebook同行群组的管理员,他说他认为该笔交易“给送餐员带来好处的可能性微乎其微。”

奥哈说:“希望Uber能像可口可乐公司(Coca-Cola)那样做。”他的意思是,Uber最终为消费者提供许多选择(用按需服务应用与软饮料对比),基本上形成内部竞争的格局。

他说,成为送餐员就像是加入了一场充满不确定性的经济“游戏”。潜在雇主越少,代表“设计城市”的方法越少,也就意味着潜在回报减少。

失去胃口,赢得战争

如果Uber授予Postmates一定程度的独立自主权,允许司机、商户和客户根据自己的偏好在不同应用程序之间切换,这将带来更多选择和更高的灵活性。但该笔交易背后的逻辑显然是为了利用整合和规模经济节约成本。

Uber在公布该交易的声明中表示,在明年第一季度交易按计划完成之后,公司“打算允许面向消费者的Postmates应用继续独立运营。”公司还表示,计划合并两家公司的后端业务,并削减日常开支2亿美元。

威尔弗雷德·陈是一位自由撰稿人。他平时通过在Postmates等按需服务应用程序上送餐来赚取外快。他总结了零工人员的焦虑。行业整合将使零工人员越来越受制于少数几家超级强大的公司。

他说:“问题是,这意味着工作者的选择越来越少,也意味着平台变得更加庞大,越来越难以对付。随着Uber的霸权不断扩大,它们会有更多手段对付工作者,剥削我们的手段也会变得更加残忍。”(财富中文网)

译者:Biz

As investors cheered on Uber's agreement to buy Postmates for $2.65 billion on July 6, another crowd reacted differently: the gig workers who underpin the ride-hailing and food-delivery business.

Edan Alva, a driver who opted for Lyft over Uber during the latter’s years of scandal, called the deal "unethical" and "immoral" because, he said, it will amplify Uber's ability to suppress worker pay. Drivers and food couriers receive a share of the ride and meal-order fees charged by the app-based companies, which also take a hefty cut.

"It's like if a large-scale embezzler were allowed to buy a bank," said Alva, who is also an organizer for Gig Workers Rising, a labor advocacy group.

Alva said he makes roughly $20 to $22 hourly on average ferrying passengers around the Bay Area. But after expenses like gas and unexpected car maintenance costs—he had five flat tires in the past year alone—his take is “definitely well below $15 per hour,” and “possibly closer to the $10 point," he estimates.

Alva criticized ride-hailing firms’ “predatory tactics” that he said are designed to minimize people’s compensation, including by recognizing their most essential workers, drivers and couriers, as contractors rather than as full-time employees with benefits. Uber and fellow gig-economy companies are currently fighting a law in California that could force them to reclassify their workers as full-time employees.

The companies are shelling out tens of millions of dollars to promote an alternate state ballot initiative that would exempt them from the rule change.

Fighting atop the food pyramid

Ride-hailing and food-delivery businesses are locked in a fierce battle for market share even as the lockdown measures imposed by authorities to combat the global coronavirus pandemic cause their core operations to flounder.

Luis Vasquez, a DoorDash courier who used to pick up passengers for Uber and Lyft before switching to meal delivery amid the onset of COVID-19, said he is concerned about the industry consolidation. "I don't think it's gonna be fair or good for the drivers," he said of the Uber-Postmates deal. "Uber is doing this because they want to take over."

A combined Uber-Postmates would claim 37% of food delivery market share in the U.S., according to payments-tracker Edison Trends. That would make it the runner-up to the current leader, DoorDash, which has a 44% market share.

Competition continues to heighten, despite the pandemic. DoorDash just last month raised $400 million at a nearly $16 billion valuation. Grubhub, which last month agreed to sell to Netherlands’ Just Eat Takeaway shortly after a rumored deal with Uber fell through, has 17% of the market.

Margins have slimmed as a narrowing band of rivals compete to offer the cheapest, most convenient service.

Vasquez, a single parent, lamented the continual reduction in pay his assignments provide. "When I started it was really good,” he said of his early earnings five years ago.

“Now it's crap,” Vasquez said.

Robbing Peter to feed Paul

Some drivers blasted Uber for spending billions on Postmates while paying workers a pittance.

Nicole Moore, a part-time driver for Lyft, described Uber's actions as hypocritical. "They don't have the money to pay people basic labor standards, but they have the money to buy a whole new company?" she said.

"To me, this is a slap in the face," said Moore, who is also an organizer for Rideshare Drivers United, another worker advocacy group that is agitating to unionize ride-hailing drivers.

Peter Young, a courier for Postmates, said he sees no upside to the Uber-Postmates deal. “I don't really see anything getting better for workers after this. I don't expect pay to rise, or job security to improve, or anything,” he wrote in an email.

Further, Young said, he fears the deal could affect people’s employment status, including his own. After two years transporting riders for Uber, the company “deactivated” him, effectively booting him from its platform, after he got into a “fender-bender” accident last year, he said.

Young said he worries that Postmates could ban him, too, as it gets absorbed by Uber. Though Postmates has assured couriers the acquisition won’t have an immediate effect on their ability to work, that promise, he said, is “only as strong as their word."

"And their word generally means nothing these days,” Young added.

Ride sharing is caring

Some people looked more optimistically on the deal.

Michael Gumora, a former Uber and Lyft driver who now runs Rideshare Report, a blog about the ride-sharing business, gave an opposing view. He said he thinks the consolidation will be "good for drivers actually" in the long term, because it will force more workers together, making it easier for them "to get together for the purposes of collective bargaining."

But, Gumora noted, Uber is “not doing [the deal] for the benefit of the drivers at all.”

Uber contends its acquisition of Postmates will offer advantages to their gig workers. A spokesperson wrote to Fortune in an email that with the combined network of restaurants, orders, and opportunities for delivery fulfillment, "we'll be able to offer even stronger and more predictable earning opportunities to delivery people across meals, grocery, and more."

Most people Fortune interviewed were skeptical of any possible benefits for gig workers, however. Paul Oh, a Postmates courier who is the administrator of an unofficial Facebook group for his peers, said he sees only "a very slim chance it is a positive thing for couriers."

"Hopefully, Uber approaches this like Coca-Cola," Oh said, meaning that Uber ends up offering so many options to consumers—on-demand apps versus soft drinks, in this case—that it basically competes against itself.

Being a courier is like participating in an uncertain economic “game,” Oh said. Fewer potential employers means fewer ways “to play your city,” which means less potential reward.

Losing an appetite, winning the war

If Uber grants Postmates some level of separation and autonomy, allowing drivers, merchants, and customers to switch between apps based on their preferences, it could allow for more choice and flexibility. But the logic for the deal no doubt derives from savings presented by consolidation and economies of scale.

In statement announcing the deal, Uber said it “intends to keep the consumer-facing Postmates app running separately” even after the transaction closes, slated for the first quarter of next year. The company said it also plans to combine back-end operations and cut $200 million in overhead costs.

Wilfred Chan, a freelance writer who supplements his income by delivering meals for on-demand apps like Postmates, summed up his gig-worker peers' anxieties. The move puts gig workers increasingly at the mercy of a few ultrapowerful players.

"The problem is that it means less choice for workers. It means that these platforms are growing bigger and harder to fight," Chan said. "As Uber's hegemony grows, they're going to have even more leverage against workers and be able to exploit us even more harshly.”

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开