Last week the City Council unveiled laws to restrict food-delivery-app offerings like Grubhub, DoorDash and UberEats. But it appears just like the wrong reply.
Last May’s exposé by The Post’s Kevin Dugan and Lisa Fickenscher revealed that Grubhub was charging eating places charges as excessive as $11 for calls that didn’t lead to takeout orders. That led to City Council hearings and now a six-bill “reform” package deal.
The council would restrict app-services’ commissions and impose a price construction. But lawmakers haven’t defined why present rules (and businesses) have been inadequate to take care of the issue.
Councilman Mark Gjonaj (D-Bronx), who chairs the Small Business Committee, explains: Apps “are available in and undermine the enterprise mannequin, and have an effect on whether or not or not [restaurants] keep in enterprise.”
So abuse isn’t the difficulty: It’s the disruption introduced by innovation. But what makes the council competent to kind that out?
A Grubhub flack warns, “This invoice will slash enterprise to mom-and-pop eating places and damage customers within the course of.” Anyone is free to not work with app offerings. But plainly most eating places select to take the enterprise, even when they pine for the outdated days.
New York eateries face larger issues, together with necessary paid sick time for workers and a $15 minimal wage. As one among our latest “Save Our City” essays famous, the City Council may make a far larger distinction by requiring economic-impact statements for every proposed new legislation, revealing its price to the companies it hits.
In different phrases: “First, do no hurt.”