A shiny wonder of Afro-European art-pop, Mr. Manager is the second release by the inspired duo of French composer/producer Hector Zazou and Congolese singer Bony Bikaye. Initially released in 1985 by Belgian imprint Crammed Discs, the label now offers up a deluxe reissue of this lost gem, expanding its original track list with nine more songs from the same sessions.
Following the cult success, Zazou Bikaye’s fascinating 1983 collaboration with analog synth duo CY1, Noir et Blanc, the two musicians assembled a similarly eclectic cast that included horn and woodwind players, percussionists, a guitarist, and backing vocalists to accompany Zazou’s electronic compositions and Bikaye’s increasingly wild vocal performances. A five-song version of Mr. Manager appeared in 1985, receiving due acclaim and garnering some international attention, though the sessions that bore this material lasted well into 1986, with most of the other tracks remaining unreleased until now.
An Afro-beat-funk hybrid that encompasses avant-garde pop, electronic programming, and inventive vocals, Mr. Manager remains a shockingly fresh and progressive listen 35 years later. In spite of its attention to detail, a sense of immediacy and spontaneity informs the whole endeavor from the joyous “Nostalgie” to the vivid call-and-response of “Nakangi,” the latter of which benefits from a fascinating cacophony of quirky drum machines, abstract digital noises, and a thrilling soprano sax part courtesy of daring Frenchman Philippe de la Croix Herpin.
Other songs are almost surreal in their balance of aching tenderness and eerie abstraction, like “Signorina”e and the enchanting “Soki Akei,” which features some of Bikaye’s most daring vocals. Likewise, his strangely affected delivery on “Viva la Musica” breathes and stutters in a way that sounds almost like a backward tape effect. Between Zazou’s offbeat arrangements and Bikaye’s fearless vocals, every track feels like an adventure with surprises around every corner.
Whether New York was taking notice of Zazou Bikaye or vice versa, it’s not hard to make a sonic parallel to some of Talking Heads’ and Arthur Russell’s mid-80s adventures, though Bikaye’s soukous/avant-pop influence makes this much more of a wildcard. There is much to unpack among Mr. Manager’s wealth of treasures and nearly all of it is exciting.
Business Insider
Tyler Sonnemaker October 13, 2020
A California appeals court heard arguments on Tuesday from Uber and Lyft as they appeal a recent ruling that would force the companies to reclassify drivers as employees.
A lower court determined in August that Uber and Lyft drivers are employees, not contractors, under the state’s gig work law, AB-5, but delayed enforcing the ruling while the companies appeal it.
Uber, Lyft, and other gig companies have fought AB-5 aggressively, pouring more than $180 million into a ballot measure aimed at California voters that would permanently exempt them from the law.
Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi and Lyft CEO Logan Green Laura Buckman/Reuters; Carlo Allegri/Reuters
The companies argue reclassifying drivers as employees will reduce their flexibility, while proponents of AB-5 say Uber and Lyft’s business models rely on underpaying drivers and skirting labor laws.
A California appeals court heard oral arguments Tuesday from Uber, Lyft, and the state over whether a lower court reached the right conclusion in August when it ruled that the companies’ drivers are employees under the state’s gig work law, AB-5.
Judges from California’s first district Court of Appeal pressed lawyers for Uber and Lyft over drivers’ wages and autonomy, and questioned the companies’ arguments that AB-5 would require them to reduce drivers’ flexibility, according to The Washington Post and The New York Times reporter Kate Conger.
The judges also asked a lawyer for the state about potential harms to Uber and Lyft and drivers’ preferences around their employment status, according to reports.
The landmark case could fundamentally alter the contractor-based business model that Uber and Lyft have relied on, and the companies are aggressively fighting the law in court and via a ballot measure that California voters will decide on in November.
AB-5, which went into effect at the beginning of this year, allows companies to treat workers as independent contractors instead of employees only if workers meet three criteria: they’re “free from the control and direction” of the company; they perform work “outside the usual course” of the company’s business; and they’re “customarily engaged” in their own independent business.
California state and city attorneys general sued Uber and Lyft in May over their refusal to comply with the law, arguing that ride-hailing drivers don’t pass that test. San Francisco Superior Court Judge Ethan Schulman sided with the state in August, ruling that Uber and Lyft must reclassify drivers as employees, but the ruling was stayed by Schulman and again by the appellate court while the companies appeal.
In Tuesday’s oral arguments, Uber lawyer Theodore Boutrous Jr. argued the ruling would cause “irreparable harm” and that “Uber would have to turn into a different company” and cut jobs if the ruling is upheld, The Washington Post reported.
But according to Conger, Judge Brown questioned Uber on that claim, asking what part of AB-5 would require the company to reduce drivers’ flexibility.
Uber and Lyft have focused heavily on flexibility in their opposition to the law, citing drivers’ alleged preference to work as contractors, but critics of the business model say it allows the companies to cut costs by depriving drivers of protections like minimum wage, health insurance, and unemployment insurance that other California workers are entitled to.
Matthew Goldberg, a lawyer from the San Francisco city attorney’s office, responded to a question about drivers’ preferences by saying “employees should not have the right to work without those underlying benefits. … You are not permitted to work for less than the minimum wage, even if you want to.”
When pressed by the judges on potential harms to Uber and Lyft, Goldberg responded that every other company follows the law and so Uber and Lyft should have to as well, The New York Times’ Kate Conger tweeted. He also said Uber and Lyft were causing harm to drivers: “This is dollars and wages and money that is being stolen from drivers by virtue of the misclassification.”
Uber and Lyft have repeatedly claimed that the law doesn’t apply to them in the first place — an argument Lyft lawyer Rohit Singla brought up again Tuesday, while Boutrous cited changes Uber has made to its app that should exempt its drivers, according to The Washington Post.
But the judges appeared skeptical, Conger reported, pointing out that Uber still sets the base fare for drivers.
They also cast doubt on Lyft’s claim that underpayment of drivers’ wages isn’t irreparable harm, according to The Washington Post, with one asking: “Are you suggesting that the specter of thousands of individual claims for back wages is something that is insignificant and something that need not be considered in balancing the appropriateness of an injunction at this point?”
California’s Labor Commission brought a separate lawsuit against Uber and Lyft over the same issue in August, alleging they’ve been committing wage theft by classifying drivers as contractors.
Uber and Lyft have sought to head off a potential loss in court by pouring more than $180 million into a ballot measure, Proposition 22, that would exempt ride-hail and food delivery workers from AB-5. That’s the most money ever used to back a ballot measure in the state, according to Ballotpedia.
Uber and Lyft also came under fire earlier this week after SF Gate reported that the companies indirectly funded ballot guides sent to California voters urging them to vote for Proposition 22 by falsely claiming to be affiliated with Sen. Bernie Sanders and other “progressive” groups.
If you’re driving in Thailand for the first time, you should learn the road signs before hitting the road…
Driving in Thailand for the time is likely to be like no-other road going experience. Rarely will the differences between driving in the hustle and bustle of it’s congested city streets vary so much to the tranquility of the rural roads. But that’s not to suggest that once you leave the city it’s all plain sailing as the countries rural roads can be some of the most hazardous in the world.
From mountain roads to forest tracks, driving in Thailand presents a unique set of hazards that the road signs in Thailand and designed to prepare you for. Take a moment to look at our list of road signs in Thailand before you pick your rental car in Thailand to give yourself the best chance of a safe and enjoyable journey on the roads in Thailand.
What is the language of traffic signs in Thailand?
Thai traffic signs use Thai, the national language of Thailand. However, English is also used for important public places such as tourist attractions, airports, railway stations, and immigration checkpoints. Both Thai and English are used on directional signage.
