[pessimizer]

The hole in this theory is that, unlike general delivery drivers, almost every restaurant's peak hours are at the same time - meaning that there's no reason to think that the app/website would have fewer idle drivers than the restaurants.

The primary value is the logistics of dealing with governments in order to abuse workers with impunity. If a restaurant tried to claim that their drivers were independent contractors that don't need to be paid between orders, they'd be laughed at. Put a massively funded, massively lobbying intermediary between the driver and the restaurant, and it becomes fine.

edit: I'm sure there's a term for this - labor-laundering?

[chongli]

My father drives for one of the big delivery apps. He does not consider it an abuse of his labour. The driver app offers him 4 hour shifts which he takes or rejects as he sees fit.

During his shifts he's essentially busy driving the entire time. Because the app has a big pool of drivers it is far better equipped to accommodate the shifting demand among the restaurants. As it turns out, not every restaurant does equally well on every day's peak hours. The delivery app acts as a load balancer by distributing drivers among restaurants according to demand.

My dad used to drive a limousine for a small, local business owner. He was verbally abused and often forced to drive clients to the airport at 4am one day and other clients to a rock concert at 3pm the next day. The owner also regularly stole his tips. He VASTLY prefers delivering food. He also has no interest in picking up a 9-5 job because he's older and he simply does not want to work more than 24-28 hours per week.