# 180 ride challenge



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Lyft offering a 180 ride challenge to recoup some of the surge that is stolen from you throughout the week. However, this forces a driver to work 50+ hours to get what is rightfully theirs in the first place, meaning that rideshare isn't really rideshare but a full time job. RIdeshare is designed to share a ride going in the same direction. If you are forcing a driver to work 50 hours a week to continue to make the money that they are used to making, you are controlling them like an employee and owe them overtime and health benefits and compensation for their gas and vehicle.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

nosurgenodrive said:


> what is rightfully theirs


❓🙄


----------



## 25rides7daysaweek (Nov 20, 2017)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Lyft offering a 180 ride challenge to recoup some of the surge that is stolen from you throughout the week. However, this forces a driver to work 50+ hours to get what is rightfully theirs in the first place, meaning that rideshare isn't really rideshare but a full time job. RIdeshare is designed to share a ride going in the same direction. If you are forcing a driver to work 50 hours a week to continue to make the money that they are used to making, you are controlling them like an employee and owe them overtime and health benefits and compensation for their gas and vehicle.


I want free lunches too and a hooker 😎


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Lyft offering a 180 ride challenge to recoup some of the surge that is stolen from you throughout the week. However, this forces a driver to work 50+ hours to get what is rightfully theirs in the first place, meaning that rideshare isn't really rideshare but a full time job. RIdeshare is designed to share a ride going in the same direction. If you are forcing a driver to work 50 hours a week to continue to make the money that they are used to making, you are controlling them like an employee and owe them overtime and health benefits and compensation for their gas and vehicle.


50+ hours per week? How can that be when big wigs from all the gig companies swear up and down that gig work is meant to be a part time job? 

I guess they consider 50 hours to be "part time".

I'd hate to see what they consider full time.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Heisenburger said:


> ❓🙄


Legally, you can’t take so much of the fare and still call yourself a broker. 75% of fare is ours.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

25rides7daysaweek said:


> I want free lunches too and a hooker 😎


Ask for a brain and critical thinking skills while you’re at it.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

nosurgenodrive said:


> 75% of fare is ours.


Based on what exactly? Or are ya just pulling a number outta your ass?


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Legally, you can’t take so much of the fare and still call yourself a broker. 75% of fare is ours.


The original deal with Uber was 75% of time and mileage was ours… go read your contract and rate card. I’m not talking about upfront pricing.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

SinTaxERROR said:


> The original deal with Uber was 75% of time and mileage was ours… go read your contract and rate card. I’m not talking about upfront pricing.


Your reply seems misplaced because this is ostensibly your first comment in this thread... Unless you're wearing socks.


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

Heisenburger said:


> Your reply seems misplaced because this is ostensibly your first comment in this thread... Unless you're wearing socks.


My answer is misplaced? How so…

BTW… You should go wash your dirty socks… you’re stinking up the place…


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

SinTaxERROR said:


> My answer is misplaced? How so…


It's not in context to the quoted text. Sounds like you're arguing with yourself but you're not.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

nosurgenodrive said:


> to continue to make the money that they are used to making


You're not a free market proponent anymore ❓


----------



## 25rides7daysaweek (Nov 20, 2017)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Ask for a brain and critical thinking skills while you’re at it.


I'm not the one who is complaining
about money and driving for lyft
I worked 5 days last week 😎😎😎








Seems like my critical thinking skills 
are functioning perfectly well to me.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Heisenburger said:


> You're not a free market proponent anymore ❓


This is not the free market. This is a tax shelter and gross breaking of independent contractor laws. It is anti-trust and anti-consumer. If it was truly IC, we would get surge multiplier and they would take a flat rate cut. Presently, it is bent upon manipulating consumers and stealing from drivers.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

25rides7daysaweek said:


> I'm not the one who is complaining
> about money and driving for lyft
> I worked 5 days last week 😎😎😎
> View attachment 681426
> ...


Every market has their salad days.


----------



## Buckiemohawk (Jun 23, 2015)

They come up with numbers out of their heads. They have never worked as a driver or having consulting them who worked as a driver. iThey are a bunch of idiots, who the only reason they are in business is because the bought people off with investor money


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> 50+ hours per week? How can that be when big wigs from all the gig companies swear up and down that gig work is meant to be a part time job?
> 
> I guess they consider 50 hours to be "part time".
> 
> I'd hate to see what they consider full time.


What year are you living in when you make these statements? 2014? 2015? Please show me where any Uber executive in 2022 is “swearing” up and down that this is supposed to be part time side work. Such garbage analysis.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

SinTaxERROR said:


> The original deal with Uber was 75% of time and mileage was ours… go read your contract and rate card. I’m not talking about upfront pricing.


Your contract has changed many times. Things change. If you don’t like the new contract, then go find work that has a contract fit to your liking.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> This is not the free market. This is a tax shelter and gross breaking of independent contractor laws. It is anti-trust and anti-consumer. If it was truly IC, we would get surge multiplier and they would take a flat rate cut. Presently, it is bent upon manipulating consumers and stealing from drivers.


If you were truly IC you’d also have a lot more to pay for out of pocket. You’d also probably have to get a professional certification of some sorts. Along with collecting payment and taking the hit in the case of pax not paying or using stolen electronic payment. Lots of potential disadvantages to being truly IC from a financial aspect if shit hits thw

We are kind of getting the best of both worlds. Uber n Lyft do almost all the logistics, pay us contractor rates, and limit our liability to around $2500 for at fault accidents.

You can contend all you want that Uber is stealing from drivers but at the end of the day, the data doesn’t lie. And none of you actually produce any data showing yourselves not making well above the minimum wage (after expenses) for the state or city you live in. It’s just really bad analysis by entitled drivers.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Livekilometers96 said:


> If you were truly IC you’d also have a lot more to pay for out of pocket. You’d also probably have to get a professional certification of some sorts. Along with collecting payment and taking the hit in the case of pax not paying or using stolen electronic payment. Lots of potential disadvantages to being truly IC from a financial aspect if shit hits thw
> 
> We are kind of getting the best of both worlds. Uber n Lyft do almost all the logistics, pay us contractor rates, and limit our liability to around $2500 for at fault accidents.


Being an independent contractor doesn’t mean that drivers need to have rideshare app infrastructure 🤦‍♂️. If Uber/Lyft are truly service providers, they and other companies can offer services to drivers for a subscription or per ride fee. What they do instead, is act like employers while claiming to be services.



> You can contend all you want that Uber is stealing from drivers but at the end of the day, the data doesn’t lie. And none of you actually produce any data showing yourselves not making well above the minimum wage (after expenses) for the state or city you live in. It’s just really bad analysis by entitled drivers.


So Uber/Lyft have a 4% (or less) 1-year retention rate because it’s such a wonderful gig? 😂🤦‍♂️ The only reason many think it’s more lucrative than it is, is because they only account for gas…but not the depreciation and maintenance cost of their vehicle. If the true cost of operating a vehicle is closer to 62 cents a mile and the apps are paying 20 cents a minute, then drivers are at hovering around minimum wage for booked time and can easily drop below when all time spent on the gig is considered.


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> I’m the moron, but you are the one clinging to a contract that you knew would be null n void the moment you signed the new one. Something seems off about that.


The last time I did Uber a few months ago the same pay rate was in effect… the same as it was for the last 5 years… and it was based on 75% of time and mileage…


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> Being an independent contractor doesn’t mean that drivers need to have rideshare app infrastructure 🤦‍♂️. If Uber/Lyft are truly service providers, they and other companies can offer services to drivers for a subscription or per ride fee. What they do instead, is act like employers while claiming to be services.


That’s exactly what they do. Have you looked at your recent pay statements? It breaks down the difference between the fees they collect that would normally be YOUR responsibility and what they keep as profit. If you are not happy with how those fees are collected, that’s unfortunate but definitely in the category of zero ****s given by the people that fronted billions and billions of dollars to get to this point. 


Qdx said:


> If the true cost of operating a vehicle is closer to 62 cents a mile and the apps are paying 20 cents a minute, then drivers are at hovering around minimum wage for booked time and can easily drop below when all time spent on the gig is considered.


This shows me you don’t know much about the industry. The .62 figure is actually a tax profit strategy for Uber drivers because it’s nearly DOUBLE the actual cost of operating a typical vehicle used for rideshare. You should really educate yourself better before pretending to speak as an expert. Having a strong opinion that sounds smart in your head is completely different from fact based research!!!!!


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> I’m the moron, but you are the one clinging to a contract that you knew would be null n void the moment you signed the new one. Something seems off about that.


I would like for you to show me a fare based percentage of pax payment contract that you have from Uber in your possession…


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

SinTaxERROR said:


> I would like for you to show me a fare based percentage of pax payment contract that you have from Uber in your possession…


I’m not contesting the fact that your contract WAS FORMERLY based on 75% of time and distance. It’s not anymore. Why am I a moron for pointing that out regardless of the last time you logged on? Uber sent emails and messages and reminders. It’s not like you did not know this was happening. I’m confused as to what you are so upset about othe than “it’s not the way it was”


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> I’m not contesting the fact that your contract WAS FORMERLY based on 75% of time and distance. It’s not anymore. Why am I a moron for pointing that out regardless of the last time you logged on? Uber sent emails and messages and reminders. It’s not like you did not know this was happening. I’m confused as to what you are so upset about othe than “it’s not the way it was”


I asked you to show me the contract that you have that shows you will receive a percentage of the payment that a pax pays to Uber… so far you have not produced such contract.

The way it was… was the way I described when I last did Uber a few months ago. Uber never sent me any emails or forced me to sign a contract where the pay calculations were ever changed.

I’m not upset about anything… you decided to troll me, now I’m asking you to produce the contact that states you will be paid 75% of fare… or whatever other percentages stated.

Should not be that difficult to produce what I have asked for… should it?


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Livekilometers96 said:


> That’s exactly what they do. Have you looked at your recent pay statements? It breaks down the difference between the fees they collect that would normally be YOUR responsibility and what they keep as profit. If you are not happy with how those fees are collected, that’s unfortunate but definitely in the category of zero ****s given by the people that fronted billions and billions of dollars to get to this point.


I didn’t say that they don’t collect service fees, I said that they are acting like an employer instead of just a service. If it was only a service, they wouldn’t do things like hide upfront info, pressure drivers into having a high acceptance rate, and using other methods of control and manipulation.



> This shows me you don’t know much about the industry. The *.62 figure is actually a tax profit strategy for Uber drivers *because it’s nearly DOUBLE the actual cost of operating a typical vehicle used for rideshare. You should really educate yourself better before pretending to speak as an expert. Having a strong opinion that sounds smart in your head is completely different from fact based research!!!!!


Yeah, you’re being a real clown. The 62 cents figure was not created specifically for Uber drivers. If you think your true cost of operating a vehicle is only 30 cents a mile, especially if those miles are heavily biased towards short trips, then you have no idea what you’re talking about.


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> I’m not contesting the fact that your contract WAS FORMERLY based on 75% of time and distance. It’s not anymore. Why am I a moron for pointing that out regardless of the last time you logged on? Uber sent emails and messages and reminders. It’s not like you did not know this was happening. I’m confused as to what you are so upset about othe than “it’s not the way it was”


Here is the latest contract addendum to my contract about how fares are calculated… time and mileage, not a percentage of pax payments…


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

SinTaxERROR said:


> Here is the latest contract addendum to my contract about how fares are calculated… time and mileage, not a percentage of pax payments…
> 
> View attachment 681469


“May be calculated” 👀 Leaves wiggle room.

Then in the last paragraph the CONTRACT explicitly states that certain trips come with a pre trip fare that you agree to by accepting the trip. It’s literally in the screenshot you are using to badly support your point.

Thanks for making that easy for me…….


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> If it was only a service, they wouldn’t do things like hide upfront info, pressure drivers into having a high acceptance rate, and using other methods of control and manipulation.


Businesses do have the right to things to maximize their profit and efficiency. Offering a rewards program for drivers willing to accept the rides that aren’t always max profit is NOT pressuring anyone into high acceptance rate unless one can get deactivated for low AR, which I don’t believe is the case anywhere in the country.

Just because isn’t how you would prefer it doesn’t make it manipulative and controlling. They are running a business too.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> Yeah, you’re being a real clown. The 62 cents figure was not created specifically for Uber drivers


I know very well the number wasn’t created for Uber. It’s actually designed with employees in mind who do less than 5000 per year in business miles.

You know where it comes from? It’s comes from a study done in association with AAA from the average cost of the top 5 selling cars for that model year. Using 12,000 miles per year on a financed vehicle. It’s an overinflated number that allows high mileage contractors to lessen their tax burden, and lessen it we do.
You call me a moron yet try and claim that driving a car 100,000 miles will run you $62,000 per year? I seriously question your math skills if you think you spend that much.

Yes the average cost per mile including depreciation is around .30-.35 for a reasonable vehicle. Should come out to around $5-7 per hour in total expenses.

I look this type of shit up before I say it. You just say things that make your argument sound correct inside your head. Please do better.


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> “May be calculated” 👀 Leaves wiggle room.
> 
> Then in the last paragraph the CONTRACT explicitly states that certain trips come with a pre trip fare that you agree to by accepting the trip. It’s literally in the screenshot you are using to badly support your point.
> 
> Thanks for making that easy for me…….


I stated before that I did not include upfront pricing fares. But it does not matter if I do.

Nothing in the contract states that upfront pricing is based on a percentage of what the pax pays.

Time and miles can be used to calculate upfront pricing as stated by the contract which would also include upfront pricing. I have included the full next paragraph as well which clearly indicates upfront pricing based on time and mileage.

Nothing states anything about percentages to be paid by Uber to the driver.

You still have not shown me a copy of your contract where a percentage of pax fare will be paid to you.



Making it easy for you? Try again troll…


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Livekilometers96 said:


> What year are you living in when you make these statements? 2014? 2015? Please show me where any Uber executive in 2022 is “swearing” up and down that this is supposed to be part time side work. Such garbage analysis.


"Garbage analysis"? Take a look in the mirror.

You're 180 degrees in error.

Up until the 2014 Pay Rate Massacre which overnight transformed rideshare from a middle class job into a poverty-level job, Travis the Terrible heavily promoted rideshare as a FULL TIME occupation. He also promoted the purchase of vehicles fleets as a "sustainable business opportunity".

In his zeal to recruit full time drivers, Travis got Uber into trouble with the govt for falsely advertising inflated earnings for 40 hour per week driving. Uber was fined millions of dollars.

It was only AFTER the catastrophic pay cuts of 2014-15 that Uber did a complete 180 and begin promoting rideshare as "part time", a "side-hustle", etc. I saw one of Uber's VPs lie to his interviewer on CNBC by saying that rideshare wasn't meant to be a full time job but rather a part time job.

Other gig company execs have been parroting the same lie ever since. The latest liar to spout that garbage was Tony the Scumbag Xu a week or two ago.

NONE of these gig companies could survive without full time grunts. Xu knows this of course but lied anyway.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Businesses do have the right to things to maximize their profit and efficiency. Offering a rewards program for drivers willing to accept the rides that aren’t always max profit is NOT pressuring anyone into high acceptance rate unless one can get deactivated for low AR, which I don’t believe is the case anywhere in the country.
> 
> Just because isn’t how you would prefer it doesn’t make it manipulative and controlling. They are running a business too.


You do know that many people have posted screenshots of messages they received about being at risk for deactivation solely because of acceptance rate? Your boot licking is astounding.


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> "Garbage analysis"? Take a look in the mirror.
> 
> You're 180 degrees in error.
> 
> ...


Nats… We are all being trolled by @Livekilometers96 …


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Livekilometers96 said:


> I look this type of shit up before I say it.


You obviously failed to do your homework in your BS reply to my post.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> "Garbage analysis"? Take a look in the mirror.
> 
> You're 180 degrees in error.
> 
> ...


How old are you? Where does this manchild behavior come from? Hanging onto words from 2014 from executives that are long gone. You have to realize things evolve and how they do so………….virtually NOTHING is the same from 2013-2016 time frame in this industry. Catch up with the rest of us homie, you are falling way behind…….


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> You do know that many people have posted screenshots of messages they received about being at risk for deactivation solely because of acceptance rate? Your boot licking is astounding.


Show me one deactivation. For ACCEPTANCE rate. If there are so many you should be able to find one from very recent.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Livekilometers96 said:


> I know very well the number wasn’t created for Uber. It’s actually designed with employees in mind who do less than 5000 per year in business miles.
> 
> You know where it comes from? It’s comes from a study done in association with AAA from the average cost of the top 5 selling cars for that model year. Using 12,000 miles per year on a financed vehicle. It’s an overinflated number that allows high mileage contractors to lessen their tax burden, and lessen it we do.
> You call me a moron yet try and claim that driving a car 100,000 miles will run you $62,000 per year? I seriously question your math skills if you think you spend that much.
> ...


100,000 miles of short trip biased driving is going to give you about 25/mpg with the average vehicle. 4,000 gallons at about $4 (higher or lower depending on the city and state) is going to be $16,000 worth of gas alone…and over $20,000 worth of gas alone in more expensive cities. 

So you are then putting the total cost of ownership, depreciation and maintenance of an average vehicle for 100K miles to be $10,000 to $14,000? Let me get some of that shit you smoking 😅.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Emptynesst said:


> I suspect he’s not JUST licking the boot 😉 He’s a shill , even though he’s happy with his pay in his market , he could give 2 shits about how Uber treats their employees around the country , so long as his markets good , **** the rest is @Livekilometers96 motto


Actually I am rooting for the rest of you to get a Prop 22 style bill Nationwide or in each individual state. I’m almost positive Prop 22 is the reason why our UFF are so much better than most of you guys.

Also I’ve seen some pretty good earnings out there in Vegas. What is the boomer so mad about? That he can’t get CA pay where the cost of living is 1/2 as much. That’s very much up your boomer mentality!

PS $46/ONLINE hour and $74/ACTIVE hour last week………….I always get mine homie. Maybe you should consider less *****y time and more drivey time. PM me and I’ll set you up with a private lesson for only $69 introductory price. 2nd lesson cost $420.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Show me one deactivation. For ACCEPTANCE rate. If there are so many you should be able to find one from very recent.


Moving the goalposts I see.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Livekilometers96 said:


> How old are you? Where does this manchild behavior come from? Hanging onto words from 2014 from executives that are long gone. You have to realize things evolve and how they do so………….virtually NOTHING is the same from 2013-2016 time frame in this industry. Catch up with the rest of us homie, you are falling way behind…….


Your post was totally erroneous and now you're trying to slither your way out of it.

The only exec from 2014 who's gone is Kalanick. Green and Zimmer (Lyft) and Xu (Doordash) are still on the job.

Truths are truths and lies are lies, they don't "evolve". For 8 years the gig companies have been lying to the public and the govt by telling them that gig work isn't meant to be full time....despite the fact that they can't survive without them, and despite the fact that full timers do a disproportionately high percentage of the trips.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Show me one deactivation. For ACCEPTANCE rate. If there are so many you should be able to find one from very recent.


First, even if it happens we wouldn't know it unless the drivers go public about it.

Second, if Uber chooses to fire drivers for AR they're smart enough not to admit it. They have a multitude of false reasons they can use instead.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> 100,000 miles of short trip biased driving is going to give you about 25/mpg with the average vehicle. 4,000 gallons at about $4 (higher or lower depending on the city and state) is going to be $16,000 worth of gas alone…and over $20,000 worth of gas alone in more expensive cities.
> 
> So you are then putting the total cost of ownership, depreciation and maintenance of an average vehicle for 100K miles to be $10,000 to $14,000? Let me get some of that shit you smoking 😅.


Yes. You could even rent a car from Hertz for about the same cost. If you gave me .62 per mile I’d have a new car every 6 months. 

Let’s use some reasonable figures for this too then. At $14,000 that’s $1166 a month. Let’s say you have bad credit and only $1000 down you can get a $15,000 car for around $350.

Per month:
$350 car payment
$200 insurance
$60 oil change (one per month)
$50 tires (1.5 sets at $400 per set)
$17 registration (I pay $200 per year, probably more than most since it’s CA)
$200 misc repairs
$250 straight line depreciation

Total: $1127 per month or $13,524 and that includes $200 a month in miscellaneous to cover emergencies.

Can you reasonably justify another $30k in expenses somewhere? I HIGHLY doubt it.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> Moving the goalposts I see.


I’m not the one claiming people are getting deactivated for AR. You are. How is you being asked to prove your claim ME moving the goal post?


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> First, even if it happens we wouldn't know it unless the drivers go public about it.
> 
> Second, if Uber chooses to fire drivers for AR they're smart enough not to admit it. They have a multitude of false reasons they can use instead.


He CLAIMED there are many people going public about it ON THIS SITE. All I asked was for him to prove it.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> Your post was totally erroneous and now you're trying to slither your way out of it.
> 
> The only exec from 2014 who's gone is Kalanick. Green and Zimmer (Lyft) and Xu (Doordash) are still on the job.
> 
> Truths are truths and lies are lies, they don't "evolve". For 8 years the gig companies have been lying to the public and the govt by telling them that gig work isn't meant to be full time....despite the fact that they can't survive without them, and despite the fact that full timers do a disproportionately high percentage of the trips.


Who is saying rideshare it’s not meant to be full time? Please provide a link of all these claims. Maybe Xu said something about delivery, and he’d be right. Cuz I see Uber and Lyft spending 100’s of millions of dollars trying to get Proposition 22 style laws elsewhere which promote more full time work and access to benefits for doing so. Why would they do that if they are supposedly saying it’s not meant for that?


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Yes. You could even rent a car from Hertz for about the same cost. If you gave me .62 per mile I’d have a new car every 6 months.
> 
> Let’s use some reasonable figures for this too then. At $14,000 that’s $1166 a month. Let’s say you have bad credit and only $1000 down you can get a $15,000 car for around $350.
> 
> ...


Most cars are going to lose half their value after 100K miles and they also encounter the most expensive repairs around that point. 

I'm sure it's possible to come up with figures that are below 62 cents per mile, but we are talking about "the average car" a person who signs up for Uber has.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Livekilometers96 said:


> I’m not the one claiming people are getting deactivated for AR. You are. How is you being asked to prove your claim ME moving the goal post?


So you've moved on to lying now? I said that many people have posted screenshots of being threatened with deactivation for AR. You changed that into me saying something I didn't say.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> So you've moved on to lying now? I said that many people have posted screenshots of being threatened with deactivation for AR. You changed that into me saying something I didn't say.


Okay fine, prove that anyone has been threatened with deactivation recently. Especially in CA. I can play by your rules and still win this one.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> Most cars are going to lose half their value after 100K miles and they also encounter the most expensive repairs around that point.
> 
> I'm sure it's possible to come up with figures that are below 62 cents per mile, but we are talking about "the average car" a person who signs up for Uber has.


I have included $200 a month is miscellaneous repairs. That’s more than enough for a car less than 5 years old. Especially todays cars. Drivers must also make good decisions and buy reliable vehicles.

For example I have a Toyota Prius that has few less than $750 total in repairs over the 175,000 miles I’ve put on since February 2020. With a budget of $200/mo for repairs I actually have put over $5000 aside towards repairs or my next car.

Im absolutely making you guys look foolish on this topic. Walk away with some dignity……….


----------



## W00dbutcher (Jan 14, 2019)

To completely get rid of them damn grid boxes when you accidentally hit it, right click select all and then cut.


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

@Livekilometers96 how come you didn’t respond to me? LOL

Just proves you were wrong all along…


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Who is saying rideshare it’s not meant to be full time? Please provide a link of all these claims. Maybe Xu said something about delivery, and he’d be right. Cuz I see Uber and Lyft spending 100’s of millions of dollars trying to get Proposition 22 style laws elsewhere which promote more full time work and access to benefits for doing so. Why would they do that if they are supposedly saying it’s not meant for that?


NONE of the gig companies, be they rideshare, food delivery, grocery shopping (Instacart) can survive without a bedrock core of full time bodies doing the grunt work, most especially the daily rush hours for rideshare.

Xu is not right, he's lying thru his teeth. He needs full time grunts as well and he's got plenty of them.

The threat of govt regulation or AB5 type of laws are the reasons the companies have been trying to con everyone into buying their "side-hustle" propaganda.

They didn't create Prop 22 because they wanted to, they did it prevent employee status for drivers.

The gig companies NEVER wanted a Prop 22 law. They were perfectly happy with the status quo of constant pay cuts and zero benefits for drivers. They had no choice but to create Prop 22. It was a bitter pill for Dara and the gig company bigwigs to swallow.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

SinTaxERROR said:


> @Livekilometers96 how come you didn’t respond to me? LOL
> 
> Just proves you were wrong all along…


Because you are argue with me about something that I’m not arguing with you about. I am not claiming we get a percentage of a fare. I am saying that the contract you are bound by includes the description that nullifies your mileage and time rates when you accept an upfront fare.

My argument has nothing to do with what you keep asking me for. Try keeping up with the rest of the class.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> NONE of the gig companies, be they rideshare, food delivery, grocery shopping (Instacart) can survive without a bedrock core of full time bodies doing the grunt work, most especially the daily rush hours for rideshare.
> 
> Xu is not right, he's lying thru his teeth. He needs full time grunts as well and he's got plenty of them.
> 
> ...


Prop 22 is the best deal for rideshare……….hands down.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Okay fine, prove that anyone has been threatened with deactivation recently. Especially in CA. I can play by your rules and still win this one.


Moving the goalposts again. They have a history of doing it, I don't have to show you that they did it last week *🤦*






Livekilometers96 said:


> I have included $200 a month is miscellaneous repairs. That’s more than enough for a car less than 5 years old. Especially todays cars. Drivers must also make good decisions and buy reliable vehicles.
> 
> For example I have a Toyota Prius that has few less than $750 total in repairs over the 175,000 miles I’ve put on since February 2020. With a budget of $200/mo for repairs I actually have put over $5000 aside towards repairs or my next car.
> 
> Im absolutely making you guys look foolish on this topic. Walk away with some dignity……….


The average car costs more than $14K though and gas alone would have set your budget at less than $10K in California. It's more than possible for you to create some idealized scenario, but it does not represent the *average* cost.


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Because you are argue with me about something that I’m not arguing with you about. I am not claiming we get a percentage of a fare. I am saying that the contract you are bound by includes the description that nullifies your mileage and time rates when you accept an upfront fare.
> 
> My argument has nothing to do with what you keep asking me for. Try keeping up with the rest of the class.
> View attachment 681490


LOL… you lost… the original post of mine that you quoted was about my response to the 75% of the fare… you know the one where you went all haywire? And continued as such…


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Please provide a link of all these claims.


I'm not gonna provide a bunch of links. I've provided two examples (Uber VP on CNBC and Tony Xu). There's more on the web.

Throughout the entire AB5 battle the gig companies constantly tried to downplay the percentage of full timers and play up the percentage of part timers. 

Even Mr. Wishy Washy Don't Rock The Boat Harry Campbell acknowledged in an article that the companies couldn't survive without full timers. He further acknowledged that the companies don't want the public to know about their dependence on full timers.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

SinTaxERROR said:


> LOL… you lost… the original post of mine that you quoted was about my response to the 75% of the fare… you know the one where you went all haywire? And continued as such…
> 
> F’in troll… stay out of my business from now on…



Kindly point out where I said anything about 75% of fare here?

The ONLY thing I was wrong about was the fact that UPFRONT fares weee already part of your contract, therefore they didn’t need a new one when they switched to the new system. Which I pointed out in thecontract YOU provided.

I’m not a troll, you just aren’t very smart.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> I'm not gonna provide a bunch of links. I've provided two examples (Uber VP on CNBC and Tony Xu). There's more on the web.
> 
> Throughout the entire AB5 battle the gig companies constantly tried to downplay the percentage of full timers and play up the percentage of part timers.
> 
> Even Mr. Wishy Washy Don't Rock The Boat Harry Campbell acknowledged in an article that the companies couldn't survive without full timers. He further acknowledged that the companies don't want the public to know about their dependence on full timers.


You are a professional conspiracy theorist when it comes to rideshare. Explains a lot. Mostly how you are still doing deliveries and not working the more profitable gigs. And then blaming Tony Xu for it.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> NONE of the gig companies, be they rideshare, food delivery, grocery shopping (Instacart) can survive without a bedrock core of full time bodies doing the grunt work, most especially the daily rush hours for rideshare.


Nobody denies this and nobody is out shouting from the rooftops that it’s a part time gig. “Manchild gets mad at newsheadlines” should be the permanent title of all your posts.


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Kindly point out where I said anything about 75% of fare here?
> 
> The ONLY thing I was wrong about was the fact that UPFRONT fares weee already part of your contract, therefore they didn’t need a new one when they switched to the new system. Which I pointed out in thecontract YOU provided.
> 
> I’m not a troll, you just aren’t very smart.


You went berserk over my response to someone else that stated the 75%… you don’t remember that???

Get with the picture and stop trying to weasel your way out.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

SinTaxERROR said:


> You went berserk over my response to someone else that stated the 75%… you don’t remember that???
> 
> Get with the picture and stop trying to weasel your way out.


No I went berserk over your “it used to be” argument. I don’t give any ****s about your thoughts of what we got 75% of previously because it’s never really mattered.

Prior to the companies going public it was merely a contract for show since 75% of the rides were subsidized. We weren’t shown the pax payments until after they went public. So while you THOUGHT you were getting 75% of time and mileage when you were actually getting 100-300% or more of the pax payment when all incentives from both sides were applied. 

To be fair as well, you still have not produced a contract that states 75% of any figure. You are just basing it off of historical data and previous contract wording. I’m not saying you are wrong because I’m aware that the rates are based on 75-80% of the old mileage/time rates before they contractually eliminated them. But the contract you posted makes no mention of 75%


----------



## SinTaxERROR (Jul 23, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> No I went berserk over your “it used to be” argument. I don’t give any ****s about your thoughts of what we got 75% of previously because it’s never really mattered.
> 
> Prior to the companies going public it was merely a contract for show since 75% of the rides were subsidized. We weren’t shown the pax payments until after they went public. So while you THOUGHT you were getting 75% of time and mileage when you were actually getting 100-300% or more of the pax payment when all incentives from both sides were applied.
> 
> To be fair as well, you still have not produced a contract that states 75% of any figure. You are just basing it off of historical data and previous contract wording. I’m not saying you are wrong because I’m aware that the rates are based on 75-80% of the old mileage/time rates before they contractually eliminated them. But the contract you posted makes no mention of 75%


Ubers cut is already shown on the rate card for your area … not in contract.

The amount shown for time and mileage already reflects Ubers 20% or 25% cut… it used to show the full amount before cut but they simplified it long ago.

So if the rate card shows $0.66 mile that is what you receive after their cut. The actual mileage rate is $0.88 before their cut is factored it in this example.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Businesses do have the right to things to maximize their profit and efficiency. Offering a rewards program for drivers willing to accept the rides that aren’t always max profit is NOT pressuring anyone into high acceptance rate unless one can get deactivated for low AR, which I don’t believe is the case anywhere in the country.
> 
> Just because isn’t how you would prefer it doesn’t make it manipulative and controlling. They are running a business too.


Bro, they decrease the surge bonus for drivers throughout the city when they do this, essentially holding the Surge hostage unless you get 180 rides, which is absolute insanity.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Bro, they decrease the surge bonus for drivers throughout the city when they do this, essentially holding the Surge hostage unless you get 180 rides, which is absolute insanity.


What’s insane your your analysis. Bonuses are for people who work hard. It’s a choice and you get rewarded for choosing to work hard.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> What’s insane your your analysis. Bonuses are for people who work hard. It’s a choice and you get rewarded for choosing to work hard.


Bonuses are for EMPLOYEES who work hard. You have this all upside down. Your vehicle is an Air BNB. You should be able to set your own rates. Uber and Lyft have their taxes and your taxes set up like this: the passenger pays YOU and YOU pay Uber and Lyft their broker's fees. THIS IS FICTION! THE PASSENGERS PAY UBER AND LYFT AND THEN THEY PAY YOU! YOU HAVE NO CLUE OR SAY IN WHAT THEIR BROKER'S FEES ARE.

Are you daft, man?


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Yes. You could even rent a car from Hertz for about the same cost. If you gave me .62 per mile I’d have a new car every 6 months.
> 
> Let’s use some reasonable figures for this too then. At $14,000 that’s $1166 a month. Let’s say you have bad credit and only $1000 down you can get a $15,000 car for around $350.
> 
> ...


Bro, your car that you are paying $350 a month for (mine is $630 btw) will be upside-down in value within 6 months. Have you not read the horror stories on here of people who get in a wreck and still owe thousands of dollars and now have no vehicle? You completely left out gas in this analysis, which just shows how clueless you are.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Used cars have gone through a crazy inflation after the chip shortage. I don't think you properly understand how much a vehicle depreciates and how much people are often paying in interest on their loans. I am at 2.5% interest, but there are plenty of people paying 8-14% interest on their loans and not really attacking the principal of the loan with their payments. Uber and Lyft PREY on these people.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Bonuses are for EMPLOYEES who work hard. You have this all upside down. Your vehicle is an Air BNB. You should be able to set your own rates. Uber and Lyft have their taxes and your taxes set up like this: the passenger pays YOU and YOU pay Uber and Lyft their broker's fees. THIS IS FICTION! THE PASSENGERS PAY UBER AND LYFT AND THEN THEY PAY YOU! YOU HAVE NO CLUE OR SAY IN WHAT THEIR BROKER'S FEES ARE.
> 
> Are you daft, man?


No. I’m fully aware of what you are saying. I don’t think your system would work. Too many drivers think they should be paid way more than they should. Most of you think that because there once was a week that you made $3,000 that being an Uber driver should pay $3,000 a week. It’s not a job filled with skilled labor and smart people. If they let you do it your way, you guys would run rideshare into the ground in a matter of months.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Bro, your car that you are paying $350 a month for (mine is $630 btw) will be upside-down in value within 6 months. Have you not read the horror stories on here of people who get in a wreck and still owe thousands of dollars and now have no vehicle? You completely left out gas in this analysis, which just shows how clueless you are.


Ummmmmm then buy a cheaper car. This was strictly an example of how one could operate a vehicle for $14,000 after gas. I provided that information.

Please forgive me if I do not find “have you seen how many people on here get into wrescks and still owe” to be a credible argument for multiple reasons. First, this is a TINY forum representing a microscopic portion of overall drivers. So even if 1,000 people came on here and told that story it would only be 1000 out of over ONE MILLION drivers. That would not faze me in the least. It’s an unlikely scenario and has no bearing on the actual cost to own and opening the vehicle. Second there are at least 4 different to get into a vehicle for rideshare even if temporary so your stupid ****ing sob story is worthless. Make better decisions, that’s not Lyft or Ubersresponsibility


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Used cars have gone through a crazy inflation after the chip shortage. I don't think you properly understand how much a vehicle depreciates and how much people are often paying in interest on their loans. I am at 2.5% interest, but there are plenty of people paying 8-14% interest on their loans and not really attacking the principal of the loan with their payments. Uber and Lyft PREY on these people.


My figures are calculated using a calculator that includes interest and I used a bad credit score. Total payments would exceed $20,000.

Try again with another bullshit sob story excuse.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Ummmmmm then buy a cheaper car. This was strictly an example of how one could operate a vehicle for $14,000 after gas. I provided that information.
> 
> Please forgive me if I do not find “have you seen how many people on here get into wrescks and still owe” to be a credible argument for multiple reasons. First, this is a TINY forum representing a microscopic portion of overall drivers. So even if 1,000 people came on here and told that story it would only be 1000 out of over ONE MILLION drivers. That would not faze me in the least. It’s an unlikely scenario and has no bearing on the actual cost to own and opening the vehicle. Second there are at least 4 different to get into a vehicle for rideshare even if temporary so your stupid ****ing sob story is worthless. Make better decisions, that’s not Lyft or Ubersresponsibility


There are no cars that you can get a $350 payment for right now. You would be dumping money in repairs quite soon after purchase. 

Bro, there are millions of stories that never come close to being posted on the web. Thousands of older drivers and drivers that don't speak much English. People who just don't internet.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> My figures are calculated using a calculator that includes interest and I used a bad credit score. Total payments would exceed $20,000.
> 
> Try again with another bullshit sob story excuse.


Bro, you left out gas. You're daft. It's obvious.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Ummmmmm then buy a cheaper car. This was strictly an example of how one could operate a vehicle for $14,000 after gas. I provided that information.


No, we were talking about the average cost of operating a vehicle. If you think the average cost of owning and operating a reliable vehicle for 100,000 miles based on 2022 prices is $10K-$14K you are smoking crack. No one asked you to create an imaginary budget.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> No. I’m fully aware of what you are saying. I don’t think your system would work. Too many drivers think they should be paid way more than they should. Most of you think that because there once was a week that you made $3,000 that being an Uber driver should pay $3,000 a week. It’s not a job filled with skilled labor and smart people. If they let you do it your way, you guys would run rideshare into the ground in a matter of months.


I think you are wrong. I'd simply set my rates at $1.20 a mile .15 a minute while driving and .25 a minute while waiting to compensate for stops and passengers that make you wait the full 5 minutes (which is $15 an hour). Then I wouldn't have to fuss about which rides I am accepting because I know I'd be paid fairly on every ride. As it stands, .61 a mile is an insult, especially when Uber/Lyft are charging $3+ a mile.

You seem like a new and clueless driver. Good luck to you. I am through interacting with you, though, because you do not understand independent contractor laws nor the legal fiction of Uber and Lyft finances.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Bro, you left out gas. You're daft. It's obvious.











@Qdx calculated the gas at $20k. Told me I couldn’t do the rest for $14k. I did easily by buying a $15k car. Insuring it and sticking away $200 for future repairs and STILL came in under.

Please pay attention to the entire conversation……


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> No, we were talking about the average cost of operating a vehicle. If you think the average cost of owning and operating a reliable vehicle for 100,000 miles based on 2022 prices is $10K-$14K you are smoking crack. No one asked you to create an imaginary budget.


I created a reasonable budget using a reasonable car loan. If you are a ****ing moron that buys a brand new 2022 car. Then it’s your fault, NOT Uber’s that your car cost so much. Take some ****ing responsibility for your own ****ing decisions people .


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> My figures are calculated using a calculator that includes interest and I used a bad credit score. Total payments would exceed $20,000.
> 
> Try again with another bullshit sob story excuse.
> [/QUOTE





Livekilometers96 said:


> Yes. You could even rent a car from Hertz for about the same cost. If you gave me .62 per mile I’d have a new car every 6 months.
> 
> Let’s use some reasonable figures for this too then. At $14,000 that’s $1166 a month. Let’s say you have bad credit and only $1000 down you can get a $15,000 car for around $350.
> 
> ...


Show me gas in this analysis. 

No one on the planet will have a $350 car payment with a bad credit score. Like I said, you are daft. You're like the bad version of Daft Punk that isn't worth listening to.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Livekilometers96 said:


> I created a reasonable budget using a reasonable car loan. If you are a ****ing moron that buys a brand new 2022 car. Then it’s your fault, NOT Uber’s that your car cost so much. Take some ****ing responsibility for your own ****ing decisions people .


How does creating an imaginary budget (that excluded taxes, fees, car washes, etc) represent the average real world cost of owning and operating a vehicle for $100K miles? You have a terrible habit of side stepping the actual subject to go on an irrelevant tangent.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> I created a reasonable budget using a reasonable car loan. If you are a ****ing moron that buys a brand new 2022 car. Then it’s your fault, NOT Uber’s that your car cost so much. Take some ****ing responsibility for your own ****ing decisions people .


New cars are optimal, actually, as vehicle repairs are exceedingly likely after the first 80k of the vehicle when it is out of warranty. But even then, say you buy a 2018 Elantra on Carvana with 75k miles on it. You are likely paying WAY too much for it and your car payment will be around $500 a month. You're smoking crack if you think anyone has a $350 car payment on a reliable car. You may save $200 a month in payments on a garbage car, but you'll pay $200 more a month in repairs and $100 more a month in interest on an already overpriced asset


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Show me gas in this analysis.
> 
> No one on the planet will have a $350 car payment with a bad credit score. Like I said, you are daft. You're like the bad version of Daft Punk that isn't worth listening to.


He thinks you can easily put 100,000 miles on the average $15,000 car and still end up paying less than $14K total 😅🤦‍♂️


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> You seem like a new and clueless driver. Good luck to you. I am through interacting with you, though, because you do not understand independent contractor laws nor the legal fiction of Uber and Lyft finances.


I understand Proposition 22 and how to make a great living of this gig. When you factor in incentives surge and healthcare stipend I make at least twice what you would make at $1.25/mile and .25 per minute. Don’t forget as a true IC you would need to pitch in more towards advertisements and commercial insurance. They wouldn’t keep doing that all for you while you get to charge what you want and keep a fixed %. You’d have to pay your fair share of the operational costs of the platform.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> He thinks you can easily put 100,000 miles on the average $15,000 car and still end up paying less than $14K total 😅🤦‍♂️


Yep. That I do. We see it all the time. If you need advice on what kind of car will do the trick I have some suggestions. DM me and I’ll help you out. I’ve put over 175,000 miles on my current Prius and the only things I’ve done mechanically outside of oil changes filters and tires is spark plugs and a new car battery. If you add the windshield I had to replace its $1000 in additional maintenance over the course of 30 months and almost 200,000 miles. It can EASILY be done for less than $14k a year.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> How does creating an imaginary budget (that excluded taxes, fees, car washes, etc) represent the average real world cost of owning and operating a vehicle for $100K miles? You have a terrible habit of side stepping the actual subject to go on an irrelevant tangent.



A car payment includes taxes and fees. Are you a ****ing idiot? Have you ever bought a car before?
I included yearly registration in the analysis
In CA I can get unlimited car washes for less than $150 for the year.

You REALLY gonna keep pulling petty shit out of a hat? C’mon dude. Take the L.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> He's an idiot. He's in California too.











This car would need almost zero additional maintenance and is under $14,000! In California.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> New cars are optimal, actually, as vehicle repairs are exceedingly likely after the first 80k of the vehicle when it is out of warranty.


You are not cut out for this gig. You should go back to whatever you used to do. You have incredibly horrible analytical skills for this type of work.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> You are not cut out for this gig. You should go back to whatever you used to do. You have incredibly horrible analytical skills for this type of work.


In the past 4 years I've done pretty well. Never had a car repair. Trade in at 80k. Last vehicle I traded in for the same amount I paid for it, thanks to the pandemic. Presently driving a vehicle with the best depreciation in the market with $10k in equity in it and a very comfortable amount in savings. So, I guess you're right. I should just go flip burgers or hope that Walmart will let me stock their shelves.

Keep in mind that I have achieved this fighting the apps every step of the way. I have to be VERY strategic with how I drive now. There are plenty of weeks where I tell rideshare apps to kick rocks and go to various other forms of revenue streams. If I don't gross $1.30+ a mile, I don't drive. Period.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> View attachment 681538
> 
> This car would need almost zero additional maintenance and is under $14,000! In California.


If you think a Prius with over 100k miles will not need maintenance, you are a fool. So many people flipping Priuses to barely make it 4-6 months before a major repair. Refurbished battery with install will set you back $2k. Most of them will need a number of repairs on suspension, power steering, etc.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Yep. That I do. We see it all the time. If you need advice on what kind of car will do the trick I have some suggestions. DM me and I’ll help you out. I’ve put over 175,000 miles on my current Prius and the only things I’ve done mechanically outside of oil changes filters and tires is spark plugs and a new car battery. If you add the windshield I had to replace its $1000 in additional maintenance over the course of 30 months and almost 200,000 miles. It can EASILY be done for less than $14k a year.


I’m done with you man. You think you’re going to buy a used car for $15K, put enough miles on it to put into junk status, all while spending less than cost of the car itself. You’re a moron.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> In the past 4 years I've done pretty well. Never had a car repair. Trade in at 80k. Last vehicle I traded in for the same amount I paid for it, thanks to the pandemic. Presently driving a vehicle with the best depreciation in the market with $10k in equity in it and a very comfortable amount in savings. So, I guess you're right. I should just go flip burgers or hope that Walmart will let me stock their shelves.


So if you essentially just admitted it doesn’t cost $62k yearly to own and operate a brand new vehicle, why are you so angry at me for saying a used $15k one doesn’t either? You are confusing me?

PS you car “success” story isn’t all that impressive. The $10k in equity is nice but you still have a $630/month car payment even if the car breaks down. I have a $0 monthly payment. Plus my car is also worth 4K more than it was a year ago.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> If you think a Prius with over 100k miles will not need maintenance, you are a fool. So many people flipping Priuses to barely make it 4-6 months before a major repair. Refurbished battery with install will set you back $2k. Most of them will need a number of repairs on suspension, power steering, etc.


I have a Prius with 200,000 miles on it and it’s had no mechanical issues. Prior to buying this car I rented Prius cars ranging from 2010-2017 and put 80-100k miles a year on them. All had over 100k miles with no mechanical issues.

You must have bad luck with cars or you listen to your dealerships service manager too much. They probably love when you come in 🤑


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Qdx said:


> I’m done with you man. You think you’re going to buy a used car for $15K, put enough miles on it to put into junk status, all while spending less than cost of the car itself. You’re a moron.


Yep. If you are truly spending as much as you claim on a car, I HIGHLY recommend switch to renting from Hertz. $275 out the door plus gas is far cheaper than the bullshit figures you are claiming. You should try it out.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> So if you essentially just admitted it doesn’t cost $62k yearly to own and operate a brand new vehicle, why are you so angry at me for saying a used $15k one doesn’t either? You are confusing me?
> 
> PS you car “success” story isn’t all that impressive. The $10k in equity is nice but you still have a $630/month car payment even if the car breaks down. I have a $0 monthly payment. Plus my car is also worth 4K more than it was a year ago.


My success story involves suing both rideshare platforms for misclassification of employment and being very strategic with how I drive. During the pandemic I didn't use the rideshare apps at all. I am a beast when it comes to the rideshare apps. I have learned how to turn them against themselves and only drive during special events and busy seasons here in the valley. I did well when everyone was taking in the unemployment durning the pandemic and drove strategically when our city wide mask restrictions were lifted. I am not a success story. I am the worst enemy of these rideshare apps. I fight them tooth and nail and they hate that they can't milk me for more money. I am lawyered to the teeth and if they screw with me, I will sue them into oblivion.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> I will sue them into oblivion.


Just so you know, they are worth BILLIONS of dollars and the $20k you got from your is so far from “oblivion” that I question whether you understand what that phrase actually means. They give you and your loser friends a few million every couple years just to go away. They aren’t scared of you. In fact in a roundabout way all you are doing is suing yourself and the rest of us into lower and lower pay because you don’t have the balls or financial ability to do this on your own. You need Uber or you won’t have business.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Here’s the surge map presently compared with what they are charging passengers. Zero surge with 8.74 the minimum payment for a .6 mile ride.

Driver would make $2.62, Lyft will make $6.12-$14. This is insanity. And a driver would have to give 180 rides to get any of that Surge they are stealing RETURNED to them.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Oh your one of those ****sticks. Can’t hack it in the business on their own so they sue. Worst of the worst. I wish deactivation upon you. This industry is better off without losers like you.


Bro, I have a genius IQ, highly educated and could do anything I want. This has worked for now as an option away from the corporate life. I make my own way. Always have.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

View attachment 681544


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Just so you know, they are worth BILLIONS of dollars and the $20k you got from your is so far from “oblivion” that I question whether you understand what that phrase actually means. They give you and your loser friends a few million every couple years just to go away. They aren’t scared of you. In fact in a roundabout way all you are doing is suing yourself and the rest of us into lower and lower pay because you don’t have the balls or financial ability to do this on your own. You need Uber or you won’t have business. You’re a ****ing leach.


One lawsuit opens the door for millions more.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Just so you know, they are worth BILLIONS of dollars and the $20k you got from your is so far from “oblivion” that I question whether you understand what that phrase actually means. They give you and your loser friends a few million every couple years just to go away. They aren’t scared of you. In fact in a roundabout way all you are doing is suing yourself and the rest of us into lower and lower pay because you don’t have the balls or financial ability to do this on your own. You need Uber or you won’t have business. You’re a ****ing leach.


If things get worse, I’ll just start my own business. I already have a long list of clients that only want me as their driver.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Driver would make $2.62, Lyft will make $6.12-$14. This is insanity. And a driver would have to give 180 rides to get any of that Surge they are stealing RETURNED to them.


Problem with this analysis is that you aren’t including any of the streaks or streak zones that may be active. Nor have you included the ride challenge equity for doing the ride.

A guy with a supposedly genius IQ should be able to understand simple things like that.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> If things get worse, I’ll just start my own business. I already have a long list of clients that only want me as their driver.


No you won’t. You would’ve already done that if you are so smart. You got a few folks who took your number hoping to get special treatment when they need you. You probably aren’t properly licensed or insured to be taking private clients so you are illegally driving people around. Once your see how much it costs to legally start your own gig and how much time and money hours into advertising and networking, you will go crawling back to Daddy Dara looking for an cheaper easier way.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Problem with this analysis is that you aren’t including any of the streaks or streak zones that may be active. Nor have you included the ride challenge equity for doing the ride.
> 
> A guy with a supposedly genius IQ should be able to understand simple things like that.


That’s the whole ****ing point! They can’t ****ing legally hold your share of the fare hostage via streak bonuses and insanely high ride challenges. Not only are you forcing drivers to perform as more than full time drivers to get that “bonus” you are making roads unsafe having them drive for too many hours chasing a very small carrot. The full payout for the insane 180 rides is $1.60 a ride! And they’re stealing much more than that from us as IC! That fare is OURS! They have no legal rights to more than 30% of it max! I don’t have to give 180 rides to have a pittance of it reimbursed to me. I am the small business. They are the brokers. The fare is ****ing MINE! Learn the ****ing law!


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> No you won’t. You would’ve already done that if you are so smart. You got a few folks who took your number hoping to get special treatment when they need you. You probably aren’t properly licensed or insured to be taking private clients so you are illegally driving people around. Once your see how much it costs to legally start your own gig and how much time and money hours into advertising and networking, you will go crawling back to Daddy Dara looking for an cheaper easier way.


No. Virtually 75% off my passengers ask how they can have me as a driver all of the time. Passengers hate the platforms and hate that the drivers aren’t getting the fare.

It’s perfectly legal for me to give my friends a ride for free and they can throw me gas money if they want . . .


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> It’s perfectly legal for me to give my friends a ride for free and they can throw me gas money if they want . . .


Keep telling yourself that. Let’s see how friendly they are when you don’t have the insurance to cover their hospital stay and they tell the truth. You think the guy you crippled is gonna laugh and let it slide? You dumb AF.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> You are not a genius IQ. That’s such CAP. You are a certified adult cry baby though.


University of Texas. What college did you go to?

Why do you think these companies settle law suits, dude? They know they’re wrong. If their shit ever went to discovery and their books were opened, it would be game over, dude.

I know the ****ing law, and these companies are about to have the hammer dropped on them from the FTC and Labor Department. This is one last cash grab before the chickens come home to roost. But I don’t live week to week, so I’ll just go on vacation and they can kick rocks.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Nobody denies this and nobody is out shouting from the rooftops that it’s a part time gig. “Manchild gets mad at newsheadlines” should be the permanent title of all your posts.


The gig companies have been denying it for 8 years.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Keep telling yourself that. Let’s see how friendly they are when you don’t have the insurance to cover their hospital stay and they tell the truth. You think the guy you crippled is gonna laugh and let it slide? You dumb AF.


I have max insurance. I also have never had an accident my fault in 29 years of driving. Yawn. Any friend who asks me for a ride for free is thoroughly vetted and explained the rules/risks. I drive like a grandma. Genius IQ knows how to handle his business in high risk scenarios.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

The fact that my friends get rides for free should tell you exactly how well I understand the law.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Why do you think these companies settle law suits, dude? They know they’re wrong. If their shit ever went to discovery and their books were opened, it would be game over, dude.


That’s a very interesting conspiracy theory. It’s wrong. But it’s interesting. Whyndo
I get this feeling you might think Trump
won in 2020?!?!?


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> Uber's conspiracy to take as much as they can out of the drivers' pockets isn't a theory, it's a fact. They never rest.











Maybe they are only taking it from YOUR pocket and giving it directly to ME?????


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Livekilometers96 said:


> View attachment 681546
> 
> Maybe they are only taking it from YOUR pocket and giving it directly to ME?????


I don’t think you understand how much more heavily CA is scrutinized than the rest of the country because of legislators fighting these companies in CA. You would be getting half of that if Uber had their way.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Why do I get this feeling you do a lot of drugs and listen to trash music?


One the most frequent compliments I get from pax is how great my music is. I got playlist for every kind of pax. 

One of the most frequent compliments from my friends is how great my weed is.

To quote the great LL Cool J………I’m 

“Doing it and doing it and doing it well”


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Livekilometers96 said:


> View attachment 681546
> 
> Maybe they are only taking it from YOUR pocket and giving it directly to ME?????


Your screenshot proves nothing.

If you think posting a screenshot like that disproves my point that Uber is trying to pick their drivers' pockets I could post a zillion screenshots with terrible payouts and offers that proves they are. There's exponentially more screenshot of bad payouts than ones like yours.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

nosurgenodrive said:


> I don’t think you understand how much more heavily CA is scrutinized than the rest of the country because of legislators fighting these companies in CA. You would be getting half of that if Uber had their way.


I don’t think you understand this industry AT ALL. You believe a new $630/mo car is the optimal rideshare option. 


Nats121 said:


> Your screenshot proves nothing.
> 
> If you think posting a screenshot like that disproves my point that Uber is trying to pick their drivers' pockets I could post a zillion screenshots with terrible payouts and offers that proves they are. There's exponentially more screenshot of bad payouts than ones like yours.


I wasn’t trying to prove anything. I was being funny. Sometimes humor is the best way to deal with people like you. I know I’ll never change your opinion. Conspiracy theorists rarely come off their crazy path. They just keep yelling at clouds like you do here. You are gonna be a miserable **** until Dara personally comes and delivers the food for you and pays you a minimum of 2-3x the market rate for said job while he assumes the majority of the financial risk. So i troll you with humor sometimes while
reminding you that $46/hr (or the local equivalent) is attainable for non conspiracy theory cry baby’s.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Consequently, because of their thievery, this is the map of the city. One driver on the map.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Prop 22 is the best deal for rideshare……….hands down. You would make a killing with Prop 22 but you’re too much of a ****ing moron to try and truly understand it. Instead you just keep being an angry disgruntled internet warrior. It’s disgusting.


You're the guy who lacks reading comprehension skills by posting a reply that's unrelated to my post.

The merits or lack thereof of Prop 22 is irrelevant to this discussion and unrelated to my post.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

The destination filter trick shouldn’t be necessary if the apps weren’t trying to steal all of the money.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Livekilometers96 said:


> View attachment 681546
> 
> Maybe they are only taking it from YOUR pocket and giving it directly to ME?????


Those are serious Boss numbers.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Livekilometers96 said:


> It’s just really bad analysis by entitled drivers.


💯



SinTaxERROR said:


> it was always 75% of time and mileage


And *_*?



Qdx said:


> If the true cost of operating a vehicle is closer to 62 cents a *mile* and the apps are paying 20 cents a *minute*


 You're not an analyst by trade. High school much?



Qdx said:


> The 62 cents figure was not created specifically for Uber drivers.


False.


----------



## W00dbutcher (Jan 14, 2019)

Heisenburger said:


> Your opinion has been recorded for future generations to admire in awe.
> 
> If only saying words actually made them into facts.
> 
> Nobody else is understanding your point.


You understood it.
@UberBastid understood it.

So ya, it was understood perfectly.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

nosurgenodrive said:


> The destination filter trick shouldn’t be necessary if the apps weren’t trying to steal all of the money.


An even bigger reason is that Uber and Lyft were HIDING THE DESTINATIONS from the drivers. Although DFs don't provide destination info to the drivers they at least give the drivers some CONTROL over where they're going.


----------



## Mikekk (Aug 6, 2020)

SinTaxERROR said:


> The original deal with Uber was 75% of time and mileage was ours… go read your contract and rate card. I’m not talking about upfront pricing.


Lol we get 40% or less 🤣


----------



## ThereAreSomeWhoCallMeTim? (8 mo ago)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Lyft offering a 180 ride challenge to recoup some of the surge that is stolen from you throughout the week. However, this forces a driver to work 50+ hours to get what is rightfully theirs in the first place, meaning that rideshare isn't really rideshare but a full time job. RIdeshare is designed to share a ride going in the same direction. If you are forcing a driver to work 50 hours a week to continue to make the money that they are used to making, you are controlling them like an employee and owe them overtime and health benefits and compensation for their gas and vehicle.


Here's some one that wants to be a unionized employee.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> RIdeshare is designed to share a ride going in the same direction.


Out of curiosity - what "rideshare company do you own that allows you to define what 'rideshare' is?

Your definition is more apropos of ROADIE (now owned by UPS) which was designed to allow anyone heading somewhere to pick up goods and deliver them along the way.

Uber was brought to the light of day so that 'ballers' (Kalanick's word) could get black care service quickly and easily instead of having to call a limo company. It all grew from there - it was the demand that determined what direction (and definition) 'risdeshare' would take. If your definition were accurate, then there would have been no UberPool, UberTaxi, UberReserve/Schedule, etc. Lyft, regardless of what Zimmer may have had in mind, has always had to follow Uber in service offerings in order to remain competitive in the market.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> ... this forces a driver to work 50+ hours to get what is rightfully theirs in the first place,


I know you mean well - but that's a pretty entitled statement - claiming that something that never belonged to you is 'rightfully' yours.


----------



## Skysurfer (Oct 3, 2017)

25rides7daysaweek said:


> I'm not the one who is complaining
> about money and driving for lyft
> I worked 5 days last week 😎😎😎
> View attachment 681426
> ...


Damn, where do you live? I’m moving there to create competition 😂
Haven’t had a week like that since the pandemic


----------



## Skysurfer (Oct 3, 2017)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Lyft offering a 180 ride challenge to recoup some of the surge that is stolen from you throughout the week. However, this forces a driver to work 50+ hours to get what is rightfully theirs in the first place, meaning that rideshare isn't really rideshare but a full time job. RIdeshare is designed to share a ride going in the same direction. If you are forcing a driver to work 50 hours a week to continue to make the money that they are used to making, you are controlling them like an employee and owe them overtime and health benefits and compensation for their gas and vehicle.


I wish I got any ride challenges! 
haven’t seen one since April 2022


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Skysurfer said:


> I wish I got any ride challenges!
> haven’t seen one since April 2022


you can have mine


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I know you mean well - but that's a pretty entitled statement - claiming that something that never belonged to you is 'rightfully' yours.


It does belong to me. Each driver is the small business. On paper, Lyft makes it look like that the passenger pays me and then I pay Lyft their "brokers fees" but how can I agree to their brokers fees if I am never even made aware of what they are. And how can I pay Lyft when they handle all of the money? What really happens is that the passengers pay Lyft and Lyft pays us, which makes us employees.

Learn the law, man. There's nothing entitled about understanding what is legally yours if you are indeed an independent contractor.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Out of curiosity - what "rideshare company do you own that allows you to define what 'rideshare' is?
> 
> Your definition is more apropos of ROADIE (now owned by UPS) which was designed to allow anyone heading somewhere to pick up goods and deliver them along the way.
> 
> Uber was brought to the light of day so that 'ballers' (Kalanick's word) could get black care service quickly and easily instead of having to call a limo company. It all grew from there - it was the demand that determined what direction (and definition) 'risdeshare' would take. If your definition were accurate, then there would have been no UberPool, UberTaxi, UberReserve/Schedule, etc. Lyft, regardless of what Zimmer may have had in mind, has always had to follow Uber in service offerings in order to remain competitive in the market.


It's what rideshare came out of in the first place. It was Lyft and Uber's way of avoiding taxi laws in a number of cities. They fabricated some myth of rideshare when, in actuality, each driver is a taxi driver.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

ThereAreSomeWhoCallMeTim? said:


> Here's some one that wants to be a unionized employee.


absolutely. either that or a true independent contractor. none of this legal fiction that we presently have.


----------



## 232439 (7 mo ago)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Lyft offering a 180 ride challenge to recoup some of the surge that is stolen from you throughout the week. However, this forces a driver to work 50+ hours to get what is rightfully theirs in the first place, meaning that rideshare isn't really rideshare but a full time job. RIdeshare is designed to share a ride going in the same direction. If you are forcing a driver to work 50 hours a week to continue to make the money that they are used to making, you are controlling them like an employee and owe them overtime and health benefits and compensation for their gas and vehicle.


How much are they paying for the challenge? A thousand bucks?


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Antares said:


> How much are they paying for the challenge? A thousand bucks?


$287


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

nosurgenodrive said:


> It does belong to me. Each driver is the small business. On paper, Lyft makes it look like that the passenger pays me and then I pay Lyft their "brokers fees" but how can I agree to their brokers fees if I am never even made aware of what they are. And how can I pay Lyft when they handle all of the money? What really happens is that the passengers pay Lyft and Lyft pays us, which makes us employees.
> 
> Learn the law, man. There's nothing entitled about understanding what is legally yours if you are indeed an independent contractor.


Yeah, it’s an obvious scheme. Uber and Lyft pay us as if they are playing a middleman position, but the passenger is not the driver’s customer.

If I’m an independent contractor working for U/L then I should be invoicing them for my services. However, if the passenger is my customer, then how come I have no control in pricing?

The evidence points towards drivers being miss-classified employees


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> It does belong to me. Each driver is the small business. On paper, Lyft makes it look like that the passenger pays me and then I pay Lyft their "brokers fees" but how can I agree to their brokers fees if I am never even made aware of what they are. And how can I pay Lyft when they handle all of the money? What really happens is that the passengers pay Lyft and Lyft pays us, which makes us employees.
> 
> Learn the law, man. There's nothing entitled about understanding what is legally yours if you are indeed an independent contractor.


You're right - that is the reality - but the legality (what matters) is how the law sees it. The whole system is corporations taking advantage of lack of regulation to shift as many of the costs of operation to the labor force. No one disagrees with that - it's what gig companies are based on.

The bone I'm picking with you is that it is your choice to work with these jerks. You're not entitled to anything more than what you agree ti in your work agreement with them. To agree to their terms, work their gigs and then claim you are entitled to something beyond the terms you agreed to is 'entitlement'. You woul dbe entitled to the fare the rider pays if you went out and solicited that rider - not when you just accept a third party's offer.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You're right - that is the reality - but the legality (what matters) is how the law sees it. The whole system is corporations taking advantage of lack of regulation to shift as many of the costs of operation to the labor force. No one disagrees with that - it's what gig companies are based on.
> 
> The bone I'm picking with you is that it is your choice to work with these jerks. You're not entitled to anything more than what you agree ti in your work agreement with them. To agree to their terms, work their gigs and then claim you are entitled to something beyond the terms you agreed to is 'entitlement'. You woul dbe entitled to the fare the rider pays if you went out and solicited that rider - not when you just accept a third party's offer.


Labor laws exist because the average person doesn’t have unlimited income opportunities. People often choose Uber and Lyft because of the flexible scheduling, no barrier to entry if you already own a car and instant pay.

That doesn’t mean that U&L should get away with unethical, unfair and illegal business practices.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> It's what rideshare came out of in the first place. It was Lyft and Uber's way of avoiding taxi laws in a number of cities. They fabricated some myth of rideshare when, in actuality, each driver is a taxi driver.


You are caught up in the semantics of the word rideshare. The term does not [and never has] referred to sharing a ride to a destination a driver was already going to. 
In this industry, *'RIDSHARE' means that a driver uses (ie: shares) their personal vehicle as a work vehicle in order to provide rides to paying customers* (as opposed to leasing a cab for dedicated business use). You're not alone - most people don't understand what the term 'ride share' has to do with anything. No one really cares about the semantics of it.


----------



## 232439 (7 mo ago)

nosurgenodrive said:


> $287


Hell no 🤣 omg that's definitely no no. 180 rides is way too much. That's abuse right there. You're in Boston or some west coast city?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Qdx said:


> Labor laws exist because the average person doesn’t have unlimited income opportunities.


No, that's not why labor laws exist.
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938 explains why the FLSA was esablished:

*§ 202. Congressional finding and declaration of policy*
*(a)* The Congress finds that the existence, in industries engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, of labor conditions detrimental to the maintenance of the minimum standard of living necessary for health, efficiency, and general well-being of workers​(1) causes commerce and the channels and instrumentalities of commerce to be used to spread and perpetuate such labor conditions among the workers of the several States;​(2) burdens commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce;​(3) constitutes an unfair method of competition in commerce; (4) leads to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce; and (5) interferes with the orderly and fair marketing of goods in commerce. That Congress further finds that the employment of persons in domestic service in households affects commerce.​*(b)* It is declared to be the policy of this chapter, through the exercise by Congress of its power to regulate commerce among the several States and with foreign nations, to correct and as rapidly as practicable to eliminate the conditions above referred to in such industries without substantially curtailing employment or earning power.​


> That doesn’t mean that U&L should get away with unethical, unfair and illegal business practices.


No laws currently exist that force a company to classify workers one way or another. The Dept of Labor publishes 'guidelines and regulations for companies to consider - but *it is up to the company to determine how they want to classify their labor*. It's easy enough for anyone to challenge how a company classifies their labor and then let the court system consider all arguments presented and make a ruling. So far, the TNCs have won most (but not all) challenges. Which means that while you can call their operations illegal, you'd be wrong. You can call them 'unfair' and be right - but there's no law against being unfair or unethical until a court determines that what a company is doing is unfair and/or unethical (as a judge in CA in the 9th circuit did when he found the Uber contract to be just that).

The current US administration is working on a proposal to try to find that happy medium where gig workers have some basic labor protections while still providing the companies and workers the flexibility they both want. We should something proposed and passed in 2023.


----------



## RadarRider (Feb 12, 2019)

at 3 rides an hour that is 60 hours... Which is not likely unless you cherry pick small rides... which may or may not have a higher profit margin. at 2 rides per hour that is 90 hours. How many days do you actually have to make those rides? Is that right? $287?


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> No, that's not why labor laws exist.
> The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938 explains why the FLSA was esablished:
> 
> *§ 202. Congressional finding and declaration of policy*
> *(a)* The Congress finds that the existence, in industries engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, of labor conditions detrimental to the maintenance of the minimum standard of living necessary for health, efficiency, and general well-being of workers​(1) causes commerce and the channels and instrumentalities of commerce to be used to spread and perpetuate such labor conditions among the workers of the several States;​(2) burdens commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce;​(3) constitutes an unfair method of competition in commerce; (4) leads to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce; and (5) interferes with the orderly and fair marketing of goods in commerce. That Congress further finds that the employment of persons in domestic service in households affects commerce.​*(b)* It is declared to be the policy of this chapter, through the exercise by Congress of its power to regulate commerce among the several States and with foreign nations, to correct and as rapidly as practicable to eliminate the conditions above referred to in such industries without substantially curtailing employment or earning power.​​​


​​🤦‍♂️ Are you serious? This isn’t all labor laws, nor does this contradict with what I said. I didn’t say workers having limited options is the ONLY reason labor laws exist.​​​​


> No laws currently exist that force a company to classify workers one way or another. The Dept of Labor publishes 'guidelines and regulations for companies to consider - but *it is up to the company to determine how they want to classify their labor*.​​


​​You have zero idea what you’re talking about. Employers couldn’t be sued for misclassification if they could legally do so. Are you trolling?​​​


> It's easy enough for anyone to challenge how a company classifies their labor and then let the court system consider all arguments presented and make a ruling. So far, the TNCs have won most (but not all) challenges. Which means that while you can call their operations illegal, you'd be wrong. You can call them 'unfair' and be right - but *there's no law against being unfair or unethical* until a court determines that what a company is doing is unfair and/or unethical (as a judge in CA in the 9th circuit did when he found the Uber contract to be just that).​​


​​Of course there are laws against unfair and unethical business practices. Are you trolling?



> The current US administration is working on a proposal to try to find that happy medium where gig workers have some basic labor protections while still providing the companies and workers the flexibility they both want. We should something proposed and passed in 2023.


Source?


----------



## Jenga (Dec 10, 2018)

That contract states drivers have a right to negotiate a lower fare.
1. Why in the blazes would anyone choose to do that?! A: They wouldn't!

2. Which begs the question: Why is this even in the contract? To which I answer: Solely to create some pseudo-legal illusion that drivers can negotiate their fares therefore they are truly I.C.s.

3. There is no actual mechanism for a driver to exercise this absurd "option" in any case. (At least not on my app in my market.)

4. And if there was, then why would drivers not be equally given a way to negotiate a HIGHER fare? A: Only so the company can continue to dictate fares (notwithstanding the alleged ability to negotiate a "lower" fare. ) This gives them totalitarian control over both the fare AND their own added fees for booking the rides.

Example: on a recent ride with surge of $10, the fare breakdown was: $12 fare (base+t+d), $10 surge to driver, yet pax was charged $82! What entitles Uber to take $60 - over 3x driver net? Oh yeah, the contract!

I've said it for years: this is neither a truly independent contractor situation nor a transparent booking agency. It also is not a free market wherein drivers would set their own rates. Drivers are more akin to indentured servants doing the wili of their masters under a contract which allows the masters free reign to determine the fees while giving only limited choices to their servants.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You're right - that is the reality - but the legality (what matters) is how the law sees it. The whole system is corporations taking advantage of lack of regulation to shift as many of the costs of operation to the labor force. No one disagrees with that - it's what gig companies are based on.
> 
> The bone I'm picking with you is that it is your choice to work with these jerks. You're not entitled to anything more than what you agree ti in your work agreement with them. To agree to their terms, work their gigs and then claim you are entitled to something beyond the terms you agreed to is 'entitlement'. You woul dbe entitled to the fare the rider pays if you went out and solicited that rider - not when you just accept a third party's offer.


A judge will disagree and I’ve already won arbitration with both platforms.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You are caught up in the semantics of the word rideshare. The term does not [and never has] referred to sharing a ride to a destination a driver was already going to.
> In this industry, *'RIDSHARE' means that a driver uses (ie: shares) their personal vehicle as a work vehicle in order to provide rides to paying customers* (as opposed to leasing a cab for dedicated business use). You're not alone - most people don't understand what the term 'ride share' has to do with anything. No one really cares about the semantics of it.


No. Labor boards and federal trade commission will soon rule against this. If you’re driving commercially with a passenger, you’re a defacto taxi.


----------



## Mozart27 (Jun 12, 2017)

Mikekk said:


> Lol we get 40% or less 🤣


not originally... and the rates for mileage and time, that we received, were a lot higher. Than UBER raised their rider pricing...but no increase came to the drivers.


----------



## Mozart27 (Jun 12, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Out of curiosity - what "rideshare company do you own that allows you to define what 'rideshare' is?
> 
> Your definition is more apropos of ROADIE (now owned by UPS) which was designed to allow anyone heading somewhere to pick up goods and deliver them along the way.
> 
> Uber was brought to the light of day so that 'ballers' (Kalanick's word) could get black care service quickly and easily instead of having to call a limo company. It all grew from there - it was the demand that determined what direction (and definition) 'risdeshare' would take. If your definition were accurate, then there would have been no UberPool, UberTaxi, UberReserve/Schedule, etc. Lyft, regardless of what Zimmer may have had in mind, has always had to follow Uber in service offerings in order to remain competitive in the market.


Also, as a point of fact, Lyft has tried and succeeded in undercutting Uber's service fees. And Lyft was the first platform to introduce tipping as a feature. Uber did not always have this, and actually discourage drivers from talking about it. This is based on the language in the service agreement at the time. I have always liked Lyft better for these reasons. Not to mention the fact, that you still get a better percentage of payout on Lyft over what Uber gives you.


----------



## Mozart27 (Jun 12, 2017)

Skysurfer said:


> Damn, where do you live? I’m moving there to create competition 😂
> Haven’t had a week like that since the pandemic


@25rides7daysaweek 
He probably lives in NYC. I've seen other summaries similar to this one from there. Or LA... much bigger cities where it's almost easier to rideshare or take public transit than drive. and with the recent raise in crime on the subways, people are probably wanting to avoid it.


----------



## Mozart27 (Jun 12, 2017)

Qdx said:


> Yeah, it’s an obvious scheme. Uber and Lyft pay us as if they are playing a middleman position, but the passenger is not the driver’s customer.
> 
> If I’m an independent contractor working for U/L then I should be invoicing them for my services. However, if the passenger is my customer, then how come I have no control in pricing?
> 
> The evidence points towards drivers being miss-classified employees


That's not accurate...

My parents own a RDS (restaurant delivery service). The OG Doordash, if you will. The way my step-dad made it work is this. He set the pricing for the services (delivery, possible an upcharge on menu items...) as he saw fit or how he worked it out with the Restaurant partner. Then he would acquire IC drivers to make the delivery. The driver only got paid on a 'per delivery' basis (much like U/L's per ride basis). The driver was entitled to the delivery fee (all but around a $1 now; this fluctuated over the years), and their gratuity. 

This created a symbiotic relationship. As long as there are orders, the drivers would make more money for services rendered. So it was up to the drivers to promote said services, continue to offer courteousness and professionalism, and be available during the day to work the shift times available (Brunch/Lunch or Dinner). The company also did it's own marketing (mailers, flyers, email, etc) to produce orders. 

This is no different than being an 'independent agent' of an insurance broker/company. You are your own business. In most cases you are licensed. and the Broker helps you with lead generation. However you only get paid if you create business (i.e. policies)


----------



## Mozart27 (Jun 12, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You are caught up in the semantics of the word rideshare. The term does not [and never has] referred to sharing a ride to a destination a driver was already going to.
> In this industry, *'RIDSHARE' means that a driver uses (ie: shares) their personal vehicle as a work vehicle in order to provide rides to paying customers* (as opposed to leasing a cab for dedicated business use). You're not alone - most people don't understand what the term 'ride share' has to do with anything. No one really cares about the semantics of it.


@nosurgenodrive 

Michael, you are correct. what he is defining, I think, is what we call 'carpooling.' Sharing a vehicle to the same destination. Rideshare is simply 'sharing your vehicle.' And then it evolved to 'let's make a profit by doing so.'


----------



## Mozart27 (Jun 12, 2017)

Antares said:


> Hell no 🤣 omg that's definitely no no. 180 rides is way too much. That's abuse right there. You're in Boston or some west coast city?


I think the challenge is over the course of a specific month. correct me if I'm wrong. Uber has Quest. The bottom level quest is 40 rides in a week for only $15 (this 'reward' seems to vary week by week.)


----------



## 232439 (7 mo ago)

Mozart27 said:


> I think the challenge is over the course of a specific month. correct me if I'm wrong. Uber has Quest. The bottom level quest is 40 rides in a week for only $15 (this 'reward' seems to vary week by week.)


Even over a month it's garbage. Too many rides. It needs to be $800+


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Mozart27 said:


> I think the challenge is over the course of a specific month. correct me if I'm wrong. Uber has Quest. The bottom level quest is 40 rides in a week for only $15 (this 'reward' seems to vary week by week.)


week


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Antares said:


> Even over a month it's garbage. Too many rides. It needs to be $800+


just a week


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Mozart27 said:


> @nosurgenodrive
> 
> Michael, you are correct. what he is defining, I think, is what we call 'carpooling.' Sharing a vehicle to the same destination. Rideshare is simply 'sharing your vehicle.' And then it evolved to 'let's make a profit by doing so.'


The legal difference between taxis, limousines and rideshare companies is ZERO. Any difference pumped by Uber and Lyft are legal fictions.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Qdx said:


> 🤦‍♂️ Are you serious? This isn’t all labor laws, nor does this contradict with what I said. I didn’t say workers having limited options is the ONLY reason labor laws exist. You have zero idea what you’re talking about. Employers couldn’t be sued for misclassification if they could legally do so. Are you trolling?


Before you say someone has no idea what they are talking about you ought know who you'te talking to and what their experience is. 

You do not know labor law. A worker can file a complaint with the Dept of Labor and then it is up to the DoL to chose to investigate a claim of misclassification. Same with state law. It is the government that brings a suit against a company for misclassification. As I said, it is the company that first chooses how to classify their worker - and the gov't's job to challenge that classification - and the courts job to rule on the charge of misclassification if the company denies the government's review.
​


> Of course there are laws against unfair and unethical business practices. Are you trolling?


*Cite one.*
You are stating incorrect information here and denying the source material from the US Gov't. 
And calling someone a troll for sharing info (right or wrong) is no way to have a discussion, asshole, lol



> Source?


Do you read newspapers?

New York Times, 11 OCT 2022​*Biden Proposal Could Lead to Employee Status for Gig Workers*​A proposed rule, long awaited by labor activists, would make it harder for companies to classify workers as independent contractors.​


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> The legal difference between taxis, limousines and rideshare companies is ZERO. Any difference pumped by Uber and Lyft are legal fictions.


it's kinda funny how you believe your opinion is fact - and law is fiction.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> No. Labor boards and federal trade commission will soon rule against this.


lol... fact based on crystal ball fiction. (that's called an 'opinion', not a fact)

Please tell me what it is you _think_ that the FTC will soon rule against?
(It sounds like you have no idea what the FTC regulates)
Here's the last case that the FTC settled with Uber (and it had to do with how Uber lied to the public about earnings potential - nothing to do with worker classification) FTC to Send Refund Checks to Uber Drivers as Part of FTC Settlement


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Jenga said:


> That contract states drivers have a right to negotiate a lower fare.
> 1. Why in the blazes would anyone choose to do that?! A: They wouldn't!
> 
> 2. Which begs the question: Why is this even in the contract? To which I answer: Solely to create some pseudo-legal illusion that drivers can negotiate their fares therefore they are truly I.C.s.
> ...


I jumped on that absurd part of the driver contract right here on UP .net way back in 2015 - it was so stupid.
I don't think it's in the current driver agreement. And you're right - it was in there only because some genius lawyer suggested that by including it they could point to it in court to support Uber's claim that fares in the app were only 'suggestions'... remember that? lol
All of that was tossed by the 9th circuit ruling in the Lis-Riordin law suit settlement.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Mozart27 said:


> That's not accurate...
> 
> My parents own a RDS (restaurant delivery service). The OG Doordash, if you will. The way my step-dad made it work is this. He set the pricing for the services (delivery, possible an upcharge on menu items...) as he saw fit or how he worked it out with the Restaurant partner. Then he would acquire IC drivers to make the delivery. The driver only got paid on a 'per delivery' basis (much like U/L's per ride basis). The driver was entitled to the delivery fee (all but around a $1 now; this fluctuated over the years), and their gratuity.
> 
> ...


Just because they signed up as ICs it doesn’t mean it wasn’t representative of an employee relationship. The only thing that hints at genuine IC status is them promoting the service.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Before you say someone has no idea what they are talking about you ought know who you'te talking to and what their experience is.
> 
> You do not know labor law. A worker can file a complaint with the Dept of Labor and then it is up to the DoL to chose to investigate a claim of misclassification. Same with state law. It is the government that brings a suit against a company for misclassification. As I said, it is the company that first chooses how to classify their worker - and the gov't's job to challenge that classification - and the courts job to rule on the charge of misclassification if the company denies the government's review.


This is dumb. You’re essentially saying that a crime isn’t committed until someone is charged and convicted. You might as well claim that Jay-walking is legal because you never went to jail for it.


> *Cite one.*
> You are stating incorrect information here and denying the source material from the US Gov't.
> And calling someone a troll for sharing info (right or wrong) is no way to have a discussion, asshole, lol


🤦‍♂️








12.1 Unfair Trade Practices - Business Law I Essentials | OpenStax


The term “unfair trade practice” describes the use of deceptive, fraudulent, or unethical methods to gain business advantage or to cause injury to a con...




openstax.org





Anti-trust laws also go into the unfair business practices category. States also have laws against unfair business practices, not just the U.S. Gov.




> Do you read newspapers?
> 
> New York Times, 11 OCT 2022​*Biden Proposal Could Lead to Employee Status for Gig Workers*​A proposed rule, long awaited by labor activists, would make it harder for companies to classify workers as independent contractors.​


I skimmed and read through much of the 180+ page proposal. Have you?

Nothing in it talks about “medium where gig workers have some basic labor protections while still providing the companies and workers the flexibility they both want”

Also, it is not a law being proposed. It’s guiding how the department tries to enforce existing laws.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Qdx said:


> Just because they signed up as ICs it doesn’t mean it wasn’t representative of an employee relationship.


I may not understand what you are saying, so feel free to clarify - but workers don't "sign-up" as ICs.
The company that pays them makes the initial decision to pay (ie: classify) the worker as a W2 employee or a 1099 (IC) worker.
In other words, a worker can't tell me as the employer to 1099 or W2 them - there are Dept of Labor guidelines I am supposed to follow in determining worker classification by applying several 'tests', like
autonomy​control of time​control of location​ability to complete work as the worker sees fit​worker's ability to increase profitability​worker's ability to SUBCONTRACT the work​worker's ability to accept or decline offers of work​​The problem with gig driving is that interested parties can make legitimate arguments either way and the regulations say that no single 'test' is a defining issue.

Hello - Congress - are you listening?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Qdx said:


> This is dumb. You’re essentially saying that a crime isn’t committed until someone is charged and convicted. You might as well claim that Jay-walking is legal because you never went to jail for it.


Not what I said at all.



> 🤦‍♂️
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Please cite a LAW - don't point to an administration that regulates and enforces the law. I'm asking seriously - I don't know under what law(s) the FTC gets its authority. If you know, please state the ACT (law) the FTC regs are enforcing. 


> I skimmed and read through much of the 180+ page proposal. Have you?
> 
> Nothing in it talks about “medium where gig workers have some basic labor protections while still providing the companies and workers the flexibility they both want”


Yes - and this is an administration proposal, in its early stages and is in public discussion now. Only Congress can write laws. This proposal as it is out there now makes it more difficult to just call a gig labor force all ICs. It broadens the IC vs Employee tests back to what they were before the prior administration changed the guidelines to more easily just do what they want.



> Also, it is not a law being proposed. It’s guiding how the department tries to enforce existing laws.


Exactly - and no one has said otherwise.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I may not understand what you are saying, so feel free to clarify - but workers don't "sign-up" as ICs.
> The company that pays them makes the initial decision to pay (ie: classify) the worker as a W2 employee or a 1099 (IC) worker.
> In other words, a worker can't tell me as the employer to 1099 or W2 them - there are Dept of Labor guidelines I am supposed to follow in determining worker classification by applying several 'tests', like
> autonomy​control of time​control of location​ability to complete work as the worker sees fit​worker's ability to increase profitability​worker's ability to SUBCONTRACT the work​worker's ability to accept or decline offers of work​​The problem with gig driving is that interested parties can make legitimate arguments either way and the regulations say that no single 'test' is a defining issue.
> ...


What I’m saying is that it is not uncommon for employers to make new employees sign up as Independent Contractors so that the employer doesn’t have to pay for employee benefits or related taxes.

In some instances, the line between being an IC and an employee is blurry, but on a whole they are evaluating if:

“As explained below, as used in this proposal, the term “independent contractor” refers to workers who, as a matter of economic reality, are not economically dependent on their employer for work and are in business for themselves”

There are several points in which you can argue that Uber drivers are not “in business for themselves.” Being able to set your own schedule, decline gigs or work for other gig companies doesn’t really prove that you are in business for yourself…especially when allowing all of those things are simply part of the employer’s business model and they exert employer-like control over the worker in other ways.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Qdx said:


> What I’m saying is that it is not uncommon for employers to make new employees sign up as Independent Contractors so that the employer doesn’t have to pay for employee benefits or related taxes.
> 
> In some instances, the line between being an IC and an employee is blurry, but on a whole they are evaluating if:
> 
> ...


That's what I've been saying. And that's why congress has refused to get involved: you can make legit arguments either way.

In my opinion, the US needs a new worker classification that requires gig companies to contribute in to state and/or federal funds that can cover gig workers with unemployment insurance, SSI contributions and worker's comp insurance - so that companies can avoid having to pay min wage, overtime, expenses, provide equipment, etc - and gig workers can choose the flexibility they want.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Not what I said at all.


You’re claiming that a worker is not misclassified unless the government challenges the classification. Which is incorrect. The existence of laws and whether or not you break the law is a different issue from law enforcement and convictions. 




> Please cite a LAW - don't point to an administration that regulates and enforces the law. I'm asking seriously - I don't know under what law(s) the FTC gets its authority. If you know, please state the ACT (law) the FTC regs are enforcing.











15 U.S. Code § 45 - Unfair methods of competition unlawful; prevention by Commission







www.law.cornell.edu







> Yes - and this is an administration proposal, in its early stages and is in public discussion now. Only Congress can write laws. This proposal as it is out there now makes it more difficult to just call a gig labor force all ICs. It broadens the IC vs Employee tests back to what they were before the prior administration changed the guidelines to more easily just do what they want.
> 
> Exactly - and no one has said otherwise.


You said: “The current US administration is working on a proposal to try to find that happy medium where gig workers have some basic labor protections while still providing the companies and workers the flexibility they both want.”

However, that’s not what the proposal is about. It’s just addressing the enforcement of proper employee/IC classification. It has nothing to do with finding a happy medium for gig workers.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> That's what I've been saying. And that's why congress has refused to get involved: you can make legit arguments either way.


There’s no clear line, but the weight of the evidence tilts more towards Uber drivers being misclassified employees. The fuzziness of the line is by design. Uber and Lyft want to give drivers the appearance of being ICs, while using technology, gamification, manipulation and coercive tactics to control drivers like an employer.



> In my opinion, the US needs a new worker classification that requires gig companies to contribute in to state and/or federal funds that can cover gig workers with unemployment insurance, SSI contributions and worker's comp insurance - so that companies can avoid having to pay min wage, overtime, expenses, provide equipment, etc - and gig workers can choose the flexibility they want.


Agreed.


----------



## Unkar's Muffins (Mar 9, 2017)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Lyft offering a 180 ride challenge to recoup some of the surge that is stolen from you throughout the week. However, this forces a driver to work 50+ hours to get what is rightfully theirs in the first place, meaning that rideshare isn't really rideshare but a full time job. RIdeshare is designed to share a ride going in the same direction. If you are forcing a driver to work 50 hours a week to continue to make the money that they are used to making, you are controlling them like an employee and owe them overtime and health benefits and compensation for their gas and vehicle.


So, while I am all for drivers getting whatever they can, the mistaken assumption you made in first sentence is that "Lyft stole your surge throughout the week". Lyft currently pays by ride mileage and ride time. Anything outside of that is a BONUS!

Yes, they are probably encouraging you to work a lot of hours, or trying to "reward" those who already do (maintain interest), but you don't HAVE to do the 180 ride challenge. I sure wouldn't. That's way too much driving and unhealthy, IMHO.

You sound like someone who probably needs a regular job, so you will feel more stable. Lyft is not it.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Qdx said:


> You’re claiming that a worker is not misclassified unless the government challenges the classification. Which is incorrect. The existence of laws and whether or not you break the law is a different issue from law enforcement and convictions.


Sorry, but you're wrong: just because you have an opinion that some should be classified one way or another doesn't make it so. worker classification is complex and rule-based, often requiring a court's intervention. As an example, over several years in the early 2000s I submitted SS-8 requests to the IRS requesting a determination of whether a particular worker should be classified by their employer as an IC or as a W2 employee. Half the requests came back one way - half the other, and all said it was just a preliminary opinion not a determination which could only be made by a court. (thanks, IRS, big help)


> 15 U.S. Code § 45 - Unfair methods of competition unlawful; prevention by Commission
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thx - now I see what you're referring to.
Of course - and you're right - blatant deception, anti-trust, racketeering (RICO), etc are illegal.
I was thinking more along the lines of what (dare I say, 'most of us?!) consider unfair treatment of drivers by the TNCs (unfair pay, unethical rating systems, lack of due process). These are what I was saying are the issues that are perfectly legal - and wholly unethical and unfair. Thank you for the citation.




> You said: “The current US administration is working on a proposal to try to find that happy medium where gig workers have some basic labor protections while still providing the companies and workers the flexibility they both want.” However, that’s not what the proposal is about. It’s just addressing the enforcement of proper employee/IC classification. It has nothing to do with finding a happy medium for gig workers.


 That's just not true - it's not about enforcement, it's about the process for classification.
If you read the article and the administration's comments on it, then you'll see the administration says it is is just a first step towards further proposals (and legislation) that will take place over time. The administration's goal to narrow the IC classification in order to broaden the labor safety nets of social security, workers comp and unemployment are clear.


> You’re claiming that a worker is not misclassified unless the government challenges the classification. Which is incorrect.


Sorry, again, I know you're wrong - I've been dealing with this for over 20 years. The law does not unequivocally classify a worker one way or another. Classification, if challenged, must be established by a ruling which will apply the current 'tests' and administrative directives. That's precisely how the very same law can have different interpretations over decades without ever changing a single word of the law - but just by changing the language of the rules used by the regulating authority.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Sorry, but you're wrong: just because you have an opinion that some should be classified one way or another doesn't make it so. worker classification is complex and rule-based, often requiring a court's intervention. As an example, over several years in the early 2000s I submitted SS-8 requests to the IRS requesting a determination of whether a particular worker should be classified by their employer as an IC or as a W2 employee. Half the requests came back one way - half the other, and all said it was just a preliminary opinion not a determination which could only be made by a court. (thanks, IRS, big help)


You’re still conflating enforcement and judgements with whether or not something is objectively (as a matter or reality and literal interpretation) against the law. If I murder someone and beat the case, being exonerated doesn’t prove that I didn’t break the law in terms of objective reality. 

If an employer makes their employees sign a W9 it doesn’t mean that the classification is proper unless the courts rule against it. Objective truth is not determined by enforcement.



> Thx - now I see what you're referring to.
> Of course - and you're right - blatant deception, anti-trust, racketeering (RICO), etc are illegal.
> I was thinking more along the lines of what (dare I say, 'most of us?!) consider unfair treatment of drivers by the TNCs (unfair pay, unethical rating systems, lack of due process). These are what I was saying are the issues that are perfectly legal - and wholly unethical and unfair. Thank you for the citation.


I mean, I think there are business practices by Uber especially that are outright deceptive and illegal. There are ongoing lawsuits against both companies about several issues. 



> That's just not true - it's not about enforcement, it's about the process for classification.
> If you read the article and the administration's comments on it, then you'll see the administration says it is is just a first step towards further proposals (and legislation) that will take place over time. The administration's goal to narrow the IC classification in order to broaden the labor safety nets of social security, workers comp and unemployment are clear.
> 
> Sorry, again, I know you're wrong - I've been dealing with this for over 20 years. The law does not unequivocally classify a worker one way or another. Classification, if challenged, must be established by a ruling which will apply the current 'tests' and administrative directives. That's precisely how the very same law can have different interpretations over decades without ever changing a single word of the law - but just by changing the language of the rules used by the regulating authority.


This is just a rehash of the same argument in where you are asserting that misclassification doesn’t exist unless it’s judged as a misclassification. You’re basically arguing that a crime doesn’t occur until conviction.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Qdx said:


> You’re still conflating enforcement and judgements with whether or not something is objectively (as a matter or reality and literal interpretation) against the law. If I murder someone and beat the case, being exonerated doesn’t prove that I didn’t break the law in terms of objective reality.


Actually, in legal terms, you have been found not guilty of a crime.
It's actually as simple as this: In the US, you are not guilty of a crime until found guilty by a court of law.
That's the basis of all law in our country. But this discussion doesn't even need to go there. Because there is no single test for worker classification, there can be no finding of misclassification until a claim is adjudicated. You are conflating accusation with conviction.


> If an employer makes their employees sign a W9 it doesn’t mean that the classification is proper unless the courts rule against it.


 You're still not following: It's not a matter of 'proper' it's a matter of validity. As a W9 vs W2 worker, you will be paid as an IC until some agency rules that the classification is incorrect. That is the fact of the law.


> I think there are business practices by Uber especially that are outright deceptive and illegal.


 I think we've all felt that way at one time or another over one practice or policy or another! But what we _think_ and how we feel have nothing to do with legal rulings.


> There are ongoing lawsuits against both companies about several issues.


 Yep - and Uber has won most of them - especially at the state level (in no small part because Uber & Lyft's attorney's wrote the state laws.)


> This is just a rehash of the same argument in where you are asserting that misclassification doesn’t exist unless it’s judged as a misclassification. You’re basically arguing that a crime doesn’t occur until conviction.


 For the sake of argument, your're right. And until conviction it is an _ALLEGED_ crime (misclassification).

But what you don't seem to get is that in the specific case of worker classification, the law says "You tell us how you are going to classify the worker - we'll let you know if anyone (or any entity) objects".

Go back to the example I cited of my filing forms SS-8* with the IRS asking for direction on whether a worker should classified one way or another and there answers being: 'well, it could be this or it could be that and even if in our opinion it's _that_, a court could disagree'. That is how our wonderful system works - you can't even get 2 departments in the same branch of government to agree on something - and it's left to a judge to decide (who can be overturned or upheld).

* IRS Form SS-8 _for the Determination of Worker Status for Purposes of Federal Employment Taxes_​
Thanks for bringing this back to reasonable discussion - we're going to disagree on some things here but there's plenty here for people to read, click through to learn more and reach their own conclusions: what the forums are best at. Thanks.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Actually, in legal terms, you have been found not guilty of a crime.
> It's actually as simple as this: In the US, you are not guilty of a crime until found guilty by a court of law.
> That's the basis of all law in our country. But this discussion doesn't even need to go there. Because there is no single test for worker classification, there can be no finding of misclassification until a claim is adjudicated. You are conflating accusation with conviction.
> You're still not following: It's not a matter of 'proper' it's a matter of validity. As a W9 vs W2 worker, you will be paid as an IC until some agency rules that the classification is incorrect. That is the fact of the law.
> ...


You’re just doubling down on a nonsensical argument. When Uber paid $100 million in back taxes to New Jersey for misclassifying drivers, when did the misclassification occur? Obviously, misclassification occurred before the ruling or they wouldn’t have to pay back taxes.

You’re making several ridiculous arguments all around the premise that wrongdoing doesn’t occur until conviction…but if crimes don’t exist before conviction, what are people being convicted of?

There’s a clear difference between the assumption of innocence in the court of law and being innocent in terms of objective reality. A murderer doesn’t have to be convicted of murder to commit murder.

Why are you going to these absurd lengths to shill for Uber?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Qdx said:


> You’re just doubling down on a nonsensical argument. When Uber paid $100 million in back taxes to New Jersey for misclassifying drivers, when did the misclassification occur? Obviously, misclassification occurred before the ruling or they wouldn’t have to pay back taxes.
> 
> You’re making several ridiculous arguments all around the premise that wrongdoing doesn’t occur until conviction…but if crimes don’t exist before conviction, what are people being convicted of?
> 
> ...


Well there you go, name calling again. Not worth discussing any further, you don't understand the law or how it works.
Be well, "live long and prosper"
(Now are you going to call me a Vulcan?)


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Unkar's Muffins said:


> So, while I am all for drivers getting whatever they can, the mistaken assumption you made in first sentence is that "Lyft stole your surge throughout the week". Lyft currently pays by ride mileage and ride time. Anything outside of that is a BONUS!
> 
> Yes, they are probably encouraging you to work a lot of hours, or trying to "reward" those who already do (maintain interest), but you don't HAVE to do the 180 ride challenge. I sure wouldn't. That's way too much driving and unhealthy, IMHO.
> 
> You sound like someone who probably needs a regular job, so you will feel more stable. Lyft is not it.


This is against IC laws and any court or arbitration would side with me. So, yes, the fare and surge are MINE by the ****ing letter of the law


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Sorry, but you're wrong: just because you have an opinion that some should be classified one way or another doesn't make it so. worker classification is complex and rule-based, often requiring a court's intervention. As an example, over several years in the early 2000s I submitted SS-8 requests to the IRS requesting a determination of whether a particular worker should be classified by their employer as an IC or as a W2 employee. Half the requests came back one way - half the other, and all said it was just a preliminary opinion not a determination which could only be made by a court. (thanks, IRS, big help)
> 
> Thx - now I see what you're referring to.
> Of course - and you're right - blatant deception, anti-trust, racketeering (RICO), etc are illegal.
> ...


When Uber and Lyft misclassify us as IC, they are guilty of breaking labor laws and owe us either or both of: delayed employee benefits, wage theft of stolen fares.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Well there you go, name calling again. Not worth discussing any further, you don't understand the law or how it works.
> Be well, "live long and prosper"
> (Now are you going to call me a Vulcan?)


I was pulling back…there’s no name calling in that post, I used shill as a verb 😅

You’re really playing devil’s advocate when you make arguments about wrongdoing not existing unless a person is found guilty in a court of law.

You’re also attempting to make misclassification seem like a mere filing error, rather than a deliberate attempt exploit labor and dodge taxes.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> This isn't settled law, dumb ass. This shit goes through a good decade of legal proceedings, which we are now seeing. States, cities, and the fed are realizing that this is a tax shelter and that not only are drivers getting taken advantage of, but the state/fed are losing tax revenue. Chickens are coming home to roost, which will open up the door for all drivers to sue for retroactive employee compensations. If this were allowed to play out for decades, you would have a new gig retiree class with ZERO social security. This will be an even bigger burden on the local, state and federal government. This game is all smoke and mirrors while the companies grow and kick the can down the road.
> 
> Regardless, one of two truths are certain: we are employees that deserve compensation or they are breaking IC laws with how much of the fare they are taking, controlling us as employees by withholding vital trip information, and controlling us as employees by not letting us set our own rates or see what kind of "broker fees" we are agreeing to on EACH AND EVERY ****ING RIDE.


Yep, they've been in violation of every labor law in the books for 9 years now and the courts just refused to admit it. You're right, they are wrong. Go get a job and you won't have to worry about it. Oh and don't forget to call people all kinds of names along the way cuz it's a great way to make friends and influence people. Yeah, I know, you don't care what other people think of you and that's why you keep posting over and over the same nonsense.


----------



## Illini (Mar 14, 2019)

🍿 🍿 🍿


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Yep, they've been in violation of every labor law in the books for 9 years now and the courts just refused to admit it. You're right, they are wrong. *Go get a job and you won't have to worry about it.* Oh and don't forget to call people all kinds of names along the way cuz it's a great way to make friends and influence people. Yeah, I know, you don't care what other people think of you and that's why you keep posting over and over the same nonsense.


A pure masterclass in defending evil 😅

If a multi-billion dollar corporation exploits its workers, all those workers should just get another job.

Uber and Lyft spending hundreds of millions of dollars on legal defense and lobbying has nothing to do with them getting away with things that smaller companies would have already been penalized for 😑


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Yep, they've been in violation of every labor law in the books for 9 years now and the courts just refused to admit it. You're right, they are wrong. Go get a job and you won't have to worry about it. Oh and don't forget to call people all kinds of names along the way cuz it's a great way to make friends and influence people. Yeah, I know, you don't care what other people think of you and that's why you keep posting over and over the same nonsense.


It hasn't gone to court yet. Arbitration clause stalls it out and drivers settle. When it does go to court, it will all fall apart. California has already made it clear, Massachusetts is working on it, and California Supreme Court is in the process of dismantling the farce of Prop 22.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Yep, they've been in violation of every labor law in the books for 9 years now and the courts just refused to admit it. You're right, they are wrong. Go get a job and you won't have to worry about it. Oh and don't forget to call people all kinds of names along the way cuz it's a great way to make friends and influence people. Yeah, I know, you don't care what other people think of you and that's why you keep posting over and over the same nonsense.


Governors and State Reps get paid off by lobbyists. The can gets kicked down the road. Austin started requiring fingerprints and then Uber paid off the state to pass a law that only the State can regulate rideshare. I mean most of this stuff is the wild Wild West of legislating and laws and will all be overruled either on the national level or a run to the Supreme Court eventually. Courts will see that rideshare and taxi are synonymous and the house of cards will fall apart.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> It hasn't gone to court yet.


Why do you just make stuff up? 
This issue has been in the courts for more than 7 years. In state courts, in appeals courts and in the Supreme Court. That's right, the conservative supreme Court has upheld a company's right to enforce arbitration as long as there's an opt-out clause. The only successful challenges where Uber has settled have been from those who opted out of the arbitration clause. 








Uber enters into $8.4 million settlement over worker misclassification lawsuit


San Francisco company's case may 'revive weakened California law,' legal experts say




www.hcamag.com




.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Why do you just make stuff up?
> This issue has been in the courts for more than 7 years. In state courts, in appeals courts and in the Supreme Court. That's right, the conservative supreme Court has upheld a company's right to enforce arbitration as long as there's an opt-out clause. The only successful challenges where Uber has settled have been from those who opted out of the arbitration clause.
> 
> 
> ...











Prop 22 Was a Failure for California’s App-Based Workers. Now, It’s Also Unconstitutional. 


The judge's decision represents an important advancement in the gig-worker-led movement for universal labor rights for all workers.




www.nelp.org





go learn a thing or two.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Supreme Court of Canada finds Uber arbitration clause is unconscionable - Global Arbitration News


In Uber Technologies Inc. v. Heller, 2020 SCC 16 (“Uber v. Heller“) the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision that Uber’s arbitration agreement is invalid and unenforceable, leaving disputes under the clause to be litigated in the courts. The Court re-affirmed the...



www.globalarbitrationnews.com





Canada has already got the ball rolling, I imagine a liberal state or city in the US will set precedent here. Lid is blowing off in the UK. Legal processes are long and Uber and Lyft have the money and connections to kick the can down the road for close to a decade now.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

I mean, shit, you have two companies openly preying on consumers and stealing from independent contractors. There are lines in their code that would get them shut down overnight if they were discovered. Do you understand how despicable these companies are? They're ****ing evil, man. People will be going to jail if the shit that they do came to light.


----------



## Qdx (5 mo ago)

nosurgenodrive said:


> I mean, shit, you have two companies openly preying on consumers and stealing from independent contractors. There are lines in their code that would get them shut down overnight if they were discovered. Do you understand how despicable these companies are? They're ****ing evil, man. People will be going to jail if the shit that they do came to light.


Anybody who’s received a ping for a delivery that takes more than 30-40 minutes but pays less than $5 including tip that doesn’t believe that these companies don’t give a **** and are unethically exploiting drivers needs to get their heads examined.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Qdx said:


> smaller companies would have already been penalized for


How is that relevant? Got any real-world examples?


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Qdx said:


> Anybody who’s received a ping for a delivery that takes more than 30-40 minutes but pays less than $5 including tip that doesn’t believe that these companies don’t give a **** and are unethically exploiting drivers needs to get their heads examined.


Seems to be at least a little bit fascist.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> I mean, shit, you have two companies openly preying on consumers and stealing from independent contractors. There are lines in their code that would get them shut down overnight if they were discovered. Do you understand how despicable these companies are? They're ****ing evil, man. People will be going to jail if the shit that they do came to light.


Sounds like you don't know much about the history of Uber? They have been caught - they were caught manipulating law enforcement in San Francisco; they were caught using illegal surveillance on riders through the app; they were caught in data breaches.
"_shut down overnight_" ? ha!​"_People will be going to jail if the shit that they do came to light_."? ha!​*They reach a settlement and pay a fine*:

Uber will pay $20,000 fine in settlement over 'God View' tracking
Uber Commits to Changes and Pays Millions to Resolve Justice Department Lawsuit for Overcharging People with Disabilities
Leaked Uber files reveal history of lawbreaking, exploiting
Yes - they are EVIL (and I've been saying so here on UP .net since 2015.)
*But consumers don't care*. Consumers like cheap rides they can get fast and they have proven over and over again that they don't care about drivers. Consumers will not support draconian regulation of the TNCs. And* as long as consumers don't care, it's a long hard road to get a politician or legislator to care* - which is why it was so freaking easy for Uber & Lyft's attorneys to get state legislators and governors to pass and sign off on state laws declaring drivers as IC and disallowing local municipalities the ability regulate the TNC in the local jurisdictions.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

nosurgenodrive said:


> companies openly preying on consumers and stealing from independent contractors


You've never heard of Amazon? They're nowhere close to being shut down. Your thoughts seem a bit disconnected with reality.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

SinTaxERROR said:


> The last time I did Uber a few months ago the same pay rate was in effect… the same as it was for the last 5 years… and it was based on 75% of time and mileage…


It hasn't been that way for a long time. Uber un-linked earnings from fares to avoid challenges to its business model. Mystically magic earnings calculations were rolled out over 20221 and implemented across the US in 2022.

Secretive Algorithm Will Now Determine Uber Driver Pay in Many Cities – The Markup
EXCLUSIVE Uber revamps driver pay algorithm in large U.S. pilot to attract drivers
They no longer tell exactly how the figure the trip earnings -
*and they bolster the IC classification claim by showing you an estimated earnings amount before you accept a trip*.
Uber is just as evil an entity now as it was with Kalanick - it's just a lot smarter now.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I do. Apparently you don't. A settlement means that no ruling was reached by the court and only that the court agreed to the settlement between the parties, dumbass, lol.


A settlement means it never went to trial


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Sounds like you don't know much about the history of Uber? They have been caught - they were caught manipulating law enforcement in San Francisco; they were caught using illegal surveillance on riders through the app; they were caught in data breaches.
> "_shut down overnight_" ? ha!​"_People will be going to jail if the shit that they do came to light_."? ha!​*They reach a settlement and pay a fine*:
> 
> Uber will pay $20,000 fine in settlement over 'God View' tracking
> ...


I see you watched Super Pumped. Good for you.

Every passenger can sue Uber for above mentioned and win. This completely leaves out Lyft too. You are proving my point.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Qdx said:


> You do know that many people have posted screenshots of messages they received about being at risk for deactivation solely because of acceptance rate? Your boot licking is astounding.


Can you point to any of those screenshots from after, May 2016 when in an effort *to support the business model of paying drivers as ICs*, and as part of a court settlement in 9th circuit *Uber agreed to no longer deactivate a driver "solely because of acceptance rate*"? 
(I'm tempted to say "Your ignorance is astounding" just for the entertainment value - but I won't stoop so low)


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> I see you watched Super Pumped. Good for you.
> 
> Every passenger can sue Uber for above mentioned and win. This completely leaves out Lyft too. You are proving my point.


? lol - I've been following Uber and it's legal battles since 2014 - that's what got me started driving: Forbes was talking about this company that was valued at $10 bil that had no assets and didn't make anything - I had to learn more about it. I've been following every policy change and legal challenge ever since. 

yeah, right... every pax can sue and win. That's why every pax is lined up waiting for their court date. I have no idea what your point is.

I'm sure you are aware that it is a prosecutor that brings criminal charges (not an individual) - so you must be referring only to civil claims that 'every passenger can sue" Uber for... and I'm sure you also know that in order to win a civil law suit, it has to go to judgement (and not be dismissed or settled). And in order to 'win' compensation in a civil trial, you have to prove damages. Good luck with that.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> A settlement means it never went to trial, idiot.


No, that's not what a settlement means.
The parties to a law suit can reach settlement (and the claimant can request dismissal) at any time prior the court's pronouncement of a verdict.
A settlement means that a case never reached VERDICT.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Update: Lyft offered the same ride challenge to me again. This time they added $2 to it. 180 rides for $289.

They can kick rocks.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> No, that's not what a settlement means.
> The parties to a law suit can reach settlement (and the claimant can request dismissal) at any time prior the court's pronouncement of a verdict.
> A settlement means that a case never reached VERDICT.


Yes but they settle because they don’t want to go to discovery. In almost all cases settlement is pretrial either because it’s cheaper than the trial, cheaper than what they would actually have to pay, or they don’t want to set legal precedent and have their books opened.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nosurgenodrive said:


> Yes but they settle because they don’t want to go to discovery.


 Cases settle for different reasons. You're ignoring that it takes both sides to settle. A claimant or prosecutor may settle because they know they don't have a good chance to succeed. The defendant may settle because the risk of costing even more if they lose is high. You cannot make blanket statements about why cases settle. Lis-Rioridn settled the CA/MA classification suit even the judge was siding with her and everyone thought she had defeated Uber. Drivers were furious with her (even through she got a lot of policy concessions from Uber). But she had to settle because she knew that any win would would be overturned on appeal due to the arbitration clause -and further arguments in the ongoing trial (not pre-trial) would have been a waste of time and money.


> In almost all cases settlement is pretrial either because it’s cheaper than the trial, cheaper than what they would actually have to pay, or they don’t want to set legal precedent and have their books opened.


Yup. And that fact remains, a settlement can take place right up the moment before verdict.
_Statistically *90%* of all lawsuits filed are settled before trial. Of the 10% of the cases that go to trial 90% of them settle before verdict._​And, again - it takes two parties to settle. No one can force the claimant to settle with the defendant - they have to have a reason for settling, too.


----------

