# So long destination filter, it's been nice knowing you...



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

Uber doesn't give a shit about their drivers. I'm so glad I kept that $82 mistake in my favor last month.


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

I guess this will be the last nail in the coffin? At least second to last?


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

I've always been one to speak favorably of Uber to riders. That changed today. I was on a roll.

I actually had a good day today. Five long airport rides. I was in downtown Dallas, 30 miles from home, and set my destination filter. I got two nice rides on the way home. A 20 mile ride and a 7 mile ride.


----------



## Solid 5 (Aug 24, 2018)

Saw it today in Charlotte too.........just another reason as to why I quite rideshare...........

All the new ants U/L recruits will never ever know about this change. And that's how U/L likes it.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Coachman said:


> I've always been one to speak favorably of Uber to riders. That changed today. I was on a roll.
> 
> I actually had a good day today. Five long airport rides. I was in downtown Dallas, 30 miles from home, and set my destination filter. I got two nice rides on the way home. A 20 mile ride and a 7 mile ride.


Did you provide Uber with "valuable feedback"?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Coachman said:


> Uber doesn't give a shit about their drivers. I'm so glad I kept that $82 mistake in my favor last month.
> 
> View attachment 304117


If uber simply didn't care about the drivers it would be a big step up.

Uber holds the drivers in utter contempt.



Coachman said:


> I've always been one to speak favorably of Uber to riders. That changed today. I was on a roll.
> 
> I actually had a good day today. Five long airport rides. I was in downtown Dallas, 30 miles from home, and set my destination filter. I got two nice rides on the way home. A 20 mile ride and a 7 mile ride.


With the garbage rates in Dallas there was never a reason to speak favorably about uber to the pax.


----------



## KD_LA (Aug 16, 2017)

Coachman said:


> Uber doesn't give a shit about their drivers. I'm so glad I kept that $82 mistake in my favor last month.
> 
> View attachment 304117


How many DF did you have in your market?

In the beginning we had 6, then they cut it down to 2. Now I'm wondering if we'll get cut again.


----------



## welikecamping (Nov 27, 2018)

That's a bummer. I was considering adding Uber. Guess not.


----------



## UtherPenDragon (Nov 6, 2017)

ever since I came back after surgery, incentives, time and mileage, and now destination adjusted? absurd always saying it is affecting other drivers......bullshit! I use to get 60 bucks for 55 rides now only $25, **** that.

half the time destination makes me go backwards to pick up just to drive a few minutes passed the place I turned around to pick up rider, never works as it should.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

Hope this isn't spreading, but i fear it might be. I actually got one of those messages that DF had been temporarily turned off, for the first time recently.

I don't know about others, but most of the time when I use DF it means that if not for the DF I wouldn't be online anyway. So taking it away won't really get me to take any rides I otherwise wouldn't have.



Coachman said:


> Uber doesn't give a shit about their drivers. I'm so glad I kept that $82 mistake in my favor last month.


My question here is even from a business point of view, how will taking away DF benefit them? Presumably Uber wants the max amount of drivers taking trips at any given time. Taking away DF will obviously make some drivers available for more trips, but conversely many drivers who would have used DF (e.g, those who only want to head home, or on a personal trip) will just stay offline. Even if they suspect the first factor outweighs the second, IMHO they could still modify how DF works rather than eliminate it.


----------



## #professoruber (Feb 19, 2018)

The survey asked if you would be willing to take the destination filter at a reduced rate. This implies motive in my opinion.


----------



## 1.5xorbust (Nov 22, 2017)

Coachman said:


> Uber doesn't give a shit about their drivers. I'm so glad I kept that $82 mistake in my favor last month.
> 
> View attachment 304117


You'll just have to up your cancellation game. The race to zero continues.


----------



## touberornottouber (Aug 12, 2016)

I always love how they pretend they are concerned about our earnings. YEAH RIGHT!!! Practically every single change they have made in the last couple years has been to benefit themselves at the expense of drivers. These people are true jerks and it is obvious they think of us drivers as literally being like human garbage.



reg barclay said:


> Hope this isn't spreading, but i fear it might be. I actually got one of those messages that DF had been temporarily turned off, for the first time recently.
> 
> I don't know about others, but most of the time when I use DF it means that if not for the DF I wouldn't be online anyway. So taking it away won't really get me to take any rides I otherwise wouldn't have.
> 
> ...


They are just jerks and control freaks. Why did they work so hard to discourage tipping for so many years? Would it have hurt them any if the drivers got tipped an extra buck or two?

It just seems obvious that the people there at Uber aren't normal people with human empathy. They seem to think they are better than everyone else and that drivers are garbage who deserve to live in constant abject poverty and uncertainty. To them they probably think the Destination Filter is "too good for us" and that it probably "complicates the dispatch algorithm" too much to the point where it is an annoyance to their programmers.

Here in my market I often go 4-5 hours without a ping (while getting 12 pings from Lyft in that time). Why? What is in it for them to do that? The answer is the same: they are just jerks....


----------



## Ubergaldrivet (Feb 6, 2019)

Coachman said:


> I've always been one to speak favorably of Uber to riders. That changed today. I was on a roll.
> 
> I actually had a good day today. Five long airport rides. I was in downtown Dallas, 30 miles from home, and set my destination filter. I got two nice rides on the way home. A 20 mile ride and a 7 mile ride.


I agree, no more driving folks on my way to and from work anymore.


----------



## Rakos (Sep 2, 2014)

touberornottouber said:


> I always love how they pretend they are concerned about our earnings. YEAH RIGHT!!! Practically every single change they have made in the last couple years has been to benefit themselves at the expense of drivers. These people are true jerks and it is obvious they think of us drivers as literally being like human garbage.
> 
> 
> They are just jerks and control freaks. Why did they work so hard to discourage tipping for so many years? Would it have hurt them any if the drivers got tipped an extra buck or two?
> ...


When you realize that this is...

The result of allowing the AI...

to determine the operations...

and resultant solutions...8>O

The monkey predicts that one day...

Artificial Intelligence (a true oxymoron)...

Will one day be outlawed...8>O

Great idea butt lousy implementation...8>)

Kinda like self driving Uber cars...

Rakos


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Solid 5 said:


> Saw it today in Charlotte too.........just another reason as to why I quite rideshare...........


Thank you for the "heads up". This adds substance to our suspicions in Washington that it will go nationwide.



Nats121 said:


> If uber simply didn't care about the drivers it would be a big step up.


*^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^*



Nats121 said:


> In the beginning we had 6, then they cut it down to 2. Now I'm wondering if we'll get cut again.


Perhaps even Uber realises that it has cut our pay too much, FOR NOW. It has to cut SOMETHING. Perhaps this is the choice.



Rakos said:


> The monkey predicts that one day...Artificial Intelligence (a true oxymoron)...
> Will one day be outlawed..


Frank Herbert wrote about its being banned.


----------



## luckytown (Feb 11, 2016)

I wonder if Uber's IPO is somehow in Jeopardy


----------



## DriverMark (Jan 22, 2018)

Live 30 minutes south of Salt Lake and the airport. There is a large business complex with a lot of tech companies and other businesses. My start of EVERY day after 5:00 is DF to the airport. If they take that away, will cause serious issues. Getting a ride the opposite way from the airport KILLS my revenue for the night. As I now have to drive empty not only BACK to where I started, but if I don't get an airport ride or ride going north before 6:30, then I'm driving empty north toward downtown/airport.

Uber will not be turned on and will take my chances with Lyft DF. Seriously, I've gotten a 20-30 minute ride the wrong direction when I didn't use DF and I generally just call it a night and go back home as I have lost hour half to 2 hours of being profitable for 1 ride. Which means 1 more driver off the road where it's actually busy in the evenings.

And not even getting into concerts, sporting games, etc where it's very useful as well.


----------



## PlayLoud (Jan 11, 2019)

#professoruber said:


> The survey asked if you would be willing to take the destination filter at a reduced rate. This implies motive in my opinion.


This is what they're doing in Chicago. They are lowering rates for DF.


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

Another Uber Driver said:


> Thank you for the "heads up". This adds substance to our suspicions in Washington that it will go nationwide.
> 
> *^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^*
> 
> ...


I don' think you'll ever be able to ban something that makes money.


----------



## PlayLoud (Jan 11, 2019)

Do they not realize that if you take away DF, only the following things are likely to happen.


Drivers will switch to Lyft when a DF is needed.
If Lyft copies Uber, drivers will leave the app on and ignore pings getting to where they are going to keep the mileage deduction.
If Lyft copies Uber, drivers who don't want to be dishonest (artificial mileage deduction) will turn off the app completely.

How are any of these scenarios going to improve pickup times for riders?

With only two DFs available per day, I don't see how DFs are a problem. I use it to get home when I'm done driving, and I sometimes to get down into Dallas when I'm a good ways away.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

I would love to see the data that got them to do this. Funny how all across the land, drivers using DF has hurt other drivers so much all at the same time. I provided very colorful feedback and voted with my app, did Lyft yesterday after a concert, **** the flat rate surge and no DF. When Lyft copies them, I'm done with rideshare.

I used to get so many tax deductible miles with DF on, now I'll just leave the app on and let pings time out. How do we start a national movement to get folks to do that? Acceptance rate 0!


----------



## welikecamping (Nov 27, 2018)

I guess I don't understand how using a DF hurts other drivers. I would think that it actually benefits other drivers, that are willing to take the rides you missed because those rides are not going in your direction. If Lyft starts this, my response would be to either turn the app off, or, cancel rides that aren't going where I want to be.

Seems like Lyft/Uber would be losing revenue because of cancellations when this happens, but I suppose there are enough new drivers signing up that they don't need to worry about it.


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

welikecamping said:


> ...but I suppose there are enough new drivers signing up that they don't need to worry about it.


The typical driver drives about two months. Six months from now there will be very few drivers who even remember destination filter.


----------



## VanGuy (Feb 15, 2019)

I thought they were all about decreasing pollution and whatnot. Isn't that what pool was about? Wouldn't having DF on to go where you want to go amount to the same thing and less dead miles?


----------



## Howie428Uber (Mar 4, 2016)

How can they be a rideshare service if they have nothing in their system that allows people to share a ride to a destination?

Getting rid of destinations has an obvious dangerous side to it. I’m often using them when I’m aware that I’ll be getting tired soon.

It also destroys what’s left of their “flexibility” claims, since you’re left working without any ability to set an end time for your shift. Their assumption that we’re all using this feature maliciously and that we don’t have places to be and kids to pick up is more proof that they don’t consider us as people. And it’s yet another slap in the face for anyone who doesn’t happen to live in the center of their market.

This feature is the only thing about the system that I ever tell passengers about in positive terms.


----------



## TomTheAnt (Jan 1, 2019)

Coachman said:


> The typical driver drives about two months.


I've already beaten that. Yay! :biggrin:



Coachman said:


> Six months from now there will be very few drivers who even remember destination filter.


Exactly! I started a little after flat rate was introduced here in DFW, so I can't tell how much better times were before that.


----------



## IHmechanic (Jan 2, 2016)

Solid 5 said:


> Saw it today in Charlotte too.........just another reason as to why I quite rideshare...........
> 
> All the new ants U/L recruits will never ever know about this change. And that's how U/L likes it.


... and Raleigh-Durham


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

I can't stand to watch 13 minute videos with 90 seconds of content. The egos of some of these YouTubers are marvels to behold!

That said, it looks like Uber is evaluating two options -- no DF, and DF, but with reduced pay rates.

Unfortunately, neither of those options will have any *positive* effect (for Uber) with me. I use DF in two situations:

The most common is when I get a ride *out of my normal driving area* and want to move back to my normal area. In that case, I usually turn Lyft off, and get a series of 1-3 rides about 20 miles to within a few blocks of my DF setting
In that scenario, about my only option now will be to turn *Uber* off instead, and hope for the best with Lyft's sorry DF
Another option would be to cherry-pick and cancel anything that is not in the right direction, but I don't want to get started with that.
And finally, a better alternative might just be to cancel the out-of-area rides when I see where they are going.

The other situation is *on my way home*. I'm not really looking for rides much, but if someone wants to pay me to drive home, I'll take it.
In that scenario, frankly, I'll probably just go offline.

So for me, the most likely effect of either of those possibilities is that I drive for Uber less and drive more for Lyft...although I greatly prefer Uber.

This will be good for Lyft if they are smart enough to NOT copy it. Unfortunately, I doubt if they are smart enough.


----------



## TXUbering (May 9, 2018)

I took their survey about the change and told them that it would definitely be a safety issue for me as after some long days, I'd prefer to take someone towards my area so that I'm not forced to pick someone up that is taking me 30-40 miles further away from my house. The way I see it, if Uber wants to play it this way, I'll pick up a rider, see where they're headed, continue on my way home, and then cancel a few minutes later. This should irritate the rider to the point that they decide not to user Uber. 

If Uber wants to play it smart, all they have to do is give people "Destination filter" credits. For every 2 hours of driving, you're allowed 1 destination filter. This will prevent those people that are using the destination filter to drive to a bar on the other side of the city. Of course, Uber decides to have a knee jerk reaction to a few bad actors that are abusing the system. So typical of bad management.


----------



## Dice Man (May 21, 2018)

Lyft today removed the arrive on time feature in the DF.
just noticed now, I hope it is temporary!


----------



## Seamus (Jun 21, 2018)

You know that if Uber does this then Lyft is sure to follow the same path shortly.

I don't know how far this will spread or if it will ever affect lower population densities but it sounds like it certainly is going to hit every major city. This has been discussed over the last several days in the NYC forum. Drivers who are smart have learned to incorporate the DF as part of a strategy to make more money by taking better rides and avoid certain areas. For example, they can set a DF to mid town manhattan and not get sucked out to (and avoid) the outer boroughs where the rides may be crappier and traffic will kill you during commuter hours. Vice Versa, you can sit in mid town manhattan and set a DF for JFK airport and only accept pings that originate around mid town. There is a much higher likelihood of getting good rides to the airport, which could be 45+ minutes with traffic. I am sure there are similar variations in all major cities.

Bottom line is what used to separate seasoned drivers from ants was that they learned how to use strategy and the tools available (surge, DF,etc.)to make more money. I applaud those that figured out how too do better than the next guy.

More and more, strategy to be successful is becoming harder and harder to find. It is obvious that U/L want mindless ants that wonder aimlessly. They want you to just take the pings you get. This will cost people money no doubt.


----------



## Solid 5 (Aug 24, 2018)

Seamus said:


> You know that if Uber does this then Lyft is sure to follow the same path shortly.
> 
> I don't know how far this will spread or if it will ever affect lower population densities but it sounds like it certainly is going to hit every major city. This has been discussed over the last several days in the NYC forum. Drivers who are smart have learned to incorporate the DF as part of a strategy to make more money by taking better rides and avoid certain areas. For example, they can set a DF to mid town manhattan and not get sucked out to (and avoid) the outer boroughs where the rides may be crappier and traffic will kill you during commuter hours. Vice Versa, you can sit in mid town manhattan and set a DF for JFK airport and only accept pings that originate around mid town. There is a much higher likelihood of getting good rides to the airport, which could be 45+ minutes with traffic. I am sure there are similar variations in all major cities.
> 
> ...


Mindless ants.....100000000% spot on.

They know damn well the retention rate, they pray to God it gets even lower so they can get rid of ALL the smart drivers who know how to make money for themselves and take it from U/L.


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

Coachman said:


> I've always been one to speak favorably of Uber to riders. That changed today. I was on a roll.


me too... no longer!



luckytown said:


> I wonder if Uber's IPO is somehow in Jeopardy


One can only hope...


----------



## NWNJ (Feb 1, 2019)

They should give us 1 that can only be used to go to the address listed on your driver's license. If you cancel it before you get a ride it is gone. That would eliminate most of what they consider abuse and still let us use it to get home.

I would rather drive home empty rather than take a reduced rate. I'll just switch over to eats which isn't likely to get any pings at the times I go home. In the unlikely event I get one I can just decline.


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

FWIW, we have not gotten either of those notices in Miami so far. They are probably doing a test in several cities, but we haven't seen it.

Frankly, any driver who uses DF to avoid "certain areas" is really wasting a perfectly good DF. There are so many better ways to avoid "certain areas!"

But I don't believe for one minute that is the *real* reason for this proposed change. It's *just another pay cut* in a different form. As others have said, Uber is trying to chase the experienced drivers away so they can manipulate new ants.


----------



## jgiun1 (Oct 16, 2017)

1.5xorbust said:


> You'll just have to up your cancellation game. The race to zero continues.


Honestly to get airport trips in the morning it's actually easier to not use the DF. It zooms out too far and will try to give you after hour bars and 24/7 drink eating joints....they can take it away forever because atleast when I see it on the non DF map, it's easier to see pickup and decline decline and more DECLINE


----------



## kbrown (Dec 3, 2015)

Ok, so wait.... when you get to the rider, they aren't going to give you a destination? So how do you know where you're going? Or have Dallas drivers been given destinations at the time they receive their pings, and they are now going to make it so that they only get destinations once the trip starts?

Uber is so damn slick I'm not sure what I'm reading with this warning.


----------



## jgiun1 (Oct 16, 2017)

kbrown said:


> Ok, so wait.... when you get to the rider, they aren't going to give you a destination? So how do you know where you're going? Or have Dallas drivers been given destinations at the time they receive their pings, and they are now going to make it so that they only get destinations once the trip starts?
> 
> Uber is so damn slick I'm not sure what I'm reading with this warning.


You might put let's say airport destination in right in the middle of town. So let's say instead of a hotel person leaving for airport, uber could also match you up with a drunk person leaving a bar that's going towards the airport.

I'm telling you my opinion on the matter because it happening here. Uber is losing tons of drivers and think the quits are actually weighing heavier than the new drivers. This is Uber's way to balance out drivers and get rides to everyone.



PlayLoud said:


> Do they not realize that if you take away DF, only the following things are likely to happen.
> 
> 
> Drivers will switch to Lyft when a DF is needed.
> ...


Guaranteed lyft will follow...espically the 30% reduction to drivers fare if accepting....Lyft will smell the driver BBQ and join in.


----------



## ShibariLover (Mar 3, 2019)

I got this for Philadelphia too. The thing is, is it only going to be for big cities or for everywhere? As it is you can only use the DF 3x a day and now they want to reduce rates???? Why not simply be honest and just get rid of it all together???


----------



## Stav53 (Nov 9, 2017)

I’ll hate to lose the 2 DF per day. It’s my way to get back home with minimum empty miles.
This being said, I noticed today that Lyft gives us 6 !! yes 6 DF/day. That’s new to me , always thought we had 3/df. They do have a time-out parameter though, always did here in West Palm Beach.
Hope Lyft stays smart and doesn’t follow Uber’s stupid moves.


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

jgiun1 said:


> This is Uber's way to balance out drivers and get rides to everyone.


This has nothing to do with equalizing driver's pay or getting rides to everyone. This is an attempt to streamline their algorithm to force drivers to take more requests and shorten wait times for riders.

The destination feature serves no purpose for Uber or their goals. They figure after a few months everyone will forget about it.


----------



## ShibariLover (Mar 3, 2019)

I never get any rides when I use lyfts df. Oh well.



Coachman said:


> This has nothing to do with equalizing driver's pay or getting rides to everyone. This is an attempt to streamline their algorithm to force drivers to take more requests and shorten wait times for riders.
> 
> The destination feature serves no purpose for Uber or their goals. They figure after a few months everyone will forget about it.


If they want to shorten wait times then they should stop giving pings for 25 minute pickups with maybe, possibly, if the cow jumps over the moon and the sun sets in the east, premium pickups. How about a $10 incentive to get a rider that is more than 10 minutes away!!


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

ShibariLover said:


> If they want to shorten wait times then they should stop giving pings for 25 minute pickups with maybe, possibly, if the cow jumps over the moon and the sun sets in the east, premium pickups. How about a $10 incentive to get a rider that is more than 10 minutes away!!


Oh don't you know? The reason you get those 25 minute requests is because there are a half dozen drivers closer to the rider who all have their destination filter set to the airport.


----------



## mbd (Aug 27, 2018)

You might get free moneys when you go home without the destination filter.
Some person using destination filter takes away your rider, and you get 30%...


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Coachman said:


> Uber doesn't give a shit about their drivers. I'm so glad I kept that $82 mistake in my favor last month.
> 
> View attachment 304117


I like how they try to spin removing destination into a positive for drivers.

"We've seen lower earnings for some drivers who are not using destinations". So... removing destinations = higher earnings for drivers! Hilarious!

I always wondered what happened to Iraq's Minister for Information. It turns out he has been hired by Uber to write emails to drivers! Here he is talking about the US invasion force when it had reached the outskirts of Baghdad:


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

Stav53 said:


> I'll hate to lose the 2 DF per day. It's my way to get back home with minimum empty miles.
> This being said, I noticed today that Lyft gives us 6 !! yes 6 DF/day. That's new to me , always thought we had 3/df. They do have a time-out parameter though, always did here in West Palm Beach.
> Hope Lyft stays smart and doesn't follow Uber's stupid moves.


Lyft does give you 6 DFs per day, but there are a few problems with that:

Lyft's DF is junk. It doesn't work, so it really doesn't matter if they gave you 100
Lyft's DF only lasts 15 minutes or one ride. When the time expires, it's over and you have used one DF.
When Lyft's DF expires, they automatically put you OFFLINE without telling you. I'm not sure why they do that, other than to punish you for using their crappy DF.
In the unlikely event that you actually get a ride with Lyft's DF, now you have a LYFT RIDER  in your car.
It's a typical Lyft thing -- accurately represents the company's core values: it doesn't work, it's not what they say it is, it punishes the driver, and it results in a lower quality ride. Perfect...if you're Lyft.


----------



## hrswartz (Jan 4, 2019)

mbd said:


> You might get free moneys when you go home without the destination filter.
> Some person using destination filter takes away your rider, and you get 30%...


❓ 30% of what... Uber isn't going to give every driver online not using DF 30% of that fare... IT'S JUST A PAY CUT... PERIOD. just sayin'


----------



## Emp9 (Apr 9, 2015)

i cant imagine why anyone would still "partner" with them. dead miles home for some, and suppose you are hour away from home, now get a ride 20-30 min the other way? smh


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

Uber is hurting themselves as this will be another reason for me to stop taking airport trips. First they want to change the rates to less per mile and more for time. This will lower the profits on 45+ airport trips. When the rate change hits here I am already considering not taking airport trips. Now if they take away DF I'll be stuck driving in Miami and not back in my area. Damn shame because I am one of the few drivers in my area that like doing airport trips and I get a lot of them for that reason. Pretty soon no one in my area will be doing these trips. Uber customers will get screwed and will miss their flights over this.


----------



## kbrown (Dec 3, 2015)

ShibariLover said:


> I got this for Philadelphia too. The thing is, is it only going to be for big cities or for everywhere? As it is you can only use the DF 3x a day and now they want to reduce rates???? Why not simply be honest and just get rid of it all together???


Because it isn't about the destination filter. It's about squeezing drivers for as much money as they can.



Emp9 said:


> i cant imagine why anyone would still "partner" with them. dead miles home for some, and suppose you are hour away from home, now get a ride 20-30 min the other way? smh


The only thing one can do is kick them out of your car and tell them sorry, Uber took away my ability to work my way home, and I'm not able to take you. Had Uber left our destination filters alone, you would have gotten a driver that could go in your direction, and I would be halfway home. Now GTFO of my car.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

The Gift of Fish said:


> I like how they try to spin removing destination into a positive for drivers.
> 
> "We've seen lower earnings for some drivers who are not using destinations". So... removing destinations = higher earnings for drivers! Hilarious!
> 
> I always wondered what happened to Iraq's Minister for Information. It turns out he has been hired by Uber to write emails to drivers! Here he is talking about the US invasion force when it had reached the outskirts of Baghdad:


I wish I could give you 10 likes for this, best post of the day!


----------



## Solid 5 (Aug 24, 2018)

Over the last three weeks I have been liberated without having a single pax in my car. Reasons why are included here.


----------



## cumonohito (Feb 13, 2018)

I posted this in my local thread, but I think that Uber will eventually add DF as part of the Pro Rewards program for drivers. Talk about driver manipulation. PRO REWARDS = Carrot at end of stick.


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

kbrown said:


> The only thing one can do is kick them out of your car and tell them sorry, Uber took away my ability to work my way home, and I'm not able to take you. Had Uber left our destination filters alone, you would have gotten a driver that could go in your direction, and I would be halfway home. Now GTFO of my car.


Yep, that's probably going to be my approach to several situations -- on way home, or upon seeing that a ride is going to take me far out of my area with no acceptable way to DF back.

The key will be to be nice and apologetic to the pax. The messed-up situation is not the fault of the pax; they are just trying to get a ride from A to B. I'm going to simply explain that Uber took this tool away, and it made the whole system more difficult for both drivers and riders. Riders will understand that we don't want to do 20 mile empty trips, or be forced to accept regular fare rides to the pax for 30% less.

I also think this is something that is worth talking about on OTHER (non-driver) social media to give pax a heads up for the difficulties they may have with some rides.


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> If uber simply didn't care about the drivers it would be a big step up.
> 
> Uber holds the drivers in utter contempt.
> 
> ...


Agreed. Uber seems to hold us in contempt. I got a different notice than OP. Mine says "Lower earnings on Destination trips starting March 14. So they must be experimenting with different markets. Some get a pay cut for destination trips, and some lose it altogether. Just the fact that they would use that blatant wording "Lower earnings" is a slap in the face. I can just hear the boardroom conversation with someone saying "let's see how they like THAT".

I think that anyone in a market that has been switched to the paycut for destinations should simply stop using destinations and drive home off line. Don't let them ram a paycut through -JUST BECAUSE THEY CAN. If they stick it to me, I'm going to stick it right back and go offline.


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

ZenUber said:


> I think that anyone in a market that has been switched to the paycut for destinations should simply stop using destinations and drive home off line. Don't let them ram a paycut through -JUST BECAUSE THEY CAN. If they stick it to me, I'm going to stick it right back and go offline.


I think someone else had a better idea above.

*Stay ONline.* That way, your miles are all deductible business miles, AND you are covered by Uber/Lyft insurance.
*Decline ALL rides*. 
If the companies whine, tell them, "I can't take rides on the way home without the DF because I may get taken far off track. And I'm not driving for 30% lower pay. I don't carry Poop in my car for lower fares, and I'm damn sure not carrying anybody for 30% less."


----------



## jgiun1 (Oct 16, 2017)

Coachman said:


> Oh don't you know? The reason you get those 25 minute requests is because there are a half dozen drivers closer to the rider who all have their destination filter set to the airport.


Sad part about it....even with DF on, in our market, many drivers also call pax to make sure they are going to airport....I hear it over and over...people say they sound foreign with broken English. They tell me they say "me only working airport, sorry"

I noticed also that late night workers in town are getting smart and ordering rides from close near by hotels after leaving work....smart


----------



## New2This (Dec 27, 2015)

The Gift of Fish said:


> I like how they try to spin removing destination into a positive for drivers.
> 
> "We've seen lower earnings for some drivers who are not using destinations". So... removing destinations = higher earnings for drivers! Hilarious!
> 
> I always wondered what happened to Iraq's Minister for Information. It turns out he has been hired by Uber to write emails to drivers! Here he is talking about the US invasion force when it had reached the outskirts of Baghdad:


New head of Uber PR


----------



## The Entomologist (Sep 23, 2018)

It's begun, the signs are all here, I'm going to put on my Satan costume one of this days and ascend.

Boy oh boy!


----------



## uberist (Jul 14, 2016)

Coachman said:


> Uber doesn't give a shit about their drivers. I'm so glad I kept that $82 mistake in my favor last month.
> 
> View attachment 304117


Uber morons, so now instead of stayin online with df set people trying to get home will just Dead mile it and no chance of taking a ping.


----------



## Altimalady (Jan 1, 2019)

I rather drive home empty than let Uber use my car. No ? I’m not driving for less on my way home. #uberscammingdrivers


----------



## PioneerXi (Apr 20, 2018)

With 30% off DF, Id be leary that Uber, knowing where we live, would deliberately “take” us out of area to supplement other areas.


----------



## hulksmash (Apr 26, 2016)

The Gift of Fish said:


> I like how they try to spin removing destination into a positive for drivers.
> 
> "We've seen lower earnings for some drivers who are not using destinations". So... removing destinations = higher earnings for drivers! Hilarious!
> 
> I always wondered what happened to Iraq's Minister for Information. It turns out he has been hired by Uber to write emails to drivers! Here he is talking about the US invasion force when it had reached the outskirts of Baghdad:


They're saying drivers not using DF are earning less, which is true. If im only available for long rides going east, then that rider next to trying to go 2 miles west to Walmart gets passed off go the guy 10 minutes away, If we both have it on, then it goes to the ant 20 minutes away. Either the non-DF driver gets hosed with crap fare or the rider doesn't get picked up. Uber obviously wants that rider picked up, but they also don't want that clueless ant to quit so soon because he gets all the crap rides filtered out by others.


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

hulksmash said:


> They're saying drivers not using DF are earning less, which is true. If im only available for long rides going east, then that rider next to trying to go 2 miles west to Walmart gets passed off go the guy 10 minutes away, If we both have it on, then it goes to the ant 20 minutes away. Either the non-DF driver gets hosed with crap fare or the rider doesn't get picked up. Uber obviously wants that rider picked up, but they also don't want that clueless ant to quit so soon because he gets all the crap rides filtered out by others.


I've been doing this for 3.5 years and never once have I said to myself, "oh crap I'm getting screwed because all the good rides are going to DF drivers."

I normally use it once a day at most, when I'm going home. On rare occasions twice. If some other driver wants to use his DF's to get to the airport or to get back to town, why should I care?

This is all about Uber trying to maximize their profit. It doesn't benefit drivers one bit.


----------



## hulksmash (Apr 26, 2016)

Coachman said:


> I've been doing this for 3.5 years and never once have I said to myself, "oh crap I'm getting screwed because all the good rides are going to DF drivers."
> 
> I normally use it once a day at most, when I'm going home. On rare occasions twice. If some other driver wants to use his DF's to get to the airport or to get back to town, why should I care?


This is mostly a problem during high demand times, when everyone's trying to get to or avoid the same place. When far from the airport, I want rides going there. Too close to the airport I want to avoid going there. I also find when I don't use it at events I've gotten more short rides or beat case long rides going further from home. If i want a ride going a specific direction I better have my filter on since the guys pointed the same way will all get it if I don't.

Also, if you've been doing this enough, you know how to get out of unfavorable rides. A new driver will just take that long pickup request thinking he must be the closest driver and he should help the pax, but in reality there are closer drivers filtered to go the other way.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

hulksmash said:


> They're saying drivers not using DF are earning less, which is true. If im only available for long rides going east, then that rider next to trying to go 2 miles west to Walmart gets passed off go the guy 10 minutes away, If we both have it on, then it goes to the ant 20 minutes away. Either the non-DF driver gets hosed with crap fare or the rider doesn't get picked up. Uber obviously wants that rider picked up, but they also don't want that clueless ant to quit so soon because he gets all the crap rides filtered out by others.


Lol, no.

Example: I am 15 minutes away from a driver who has DF on and I am the closest car to that driver. A pax standing near that driver's car requests a min fare shorty ride going in the opposite direction to the one that driver wants to go in, so the ping goes direct to me. If I take the ping and drive 15 minutes to the pax for a min fare shorty, then I am not earning less because the other driver has DF on; I am earning less because I am a moron for driving 15 minutes to a ping.

Example: I am parked on 1st Ave downtown. One block over on 2nd Ave is a driver who has DF on to go north. A ping comes from a pax on 3rd Ave. The other driver is closer but the direction doesn't suit him so I get the ping. I earn more from the other driver having DF on because I get the ping, which I otherwise would not have.

From the above it is clear to see that DF benefits drivers because it partially removes the DF drivers from the driver pool. Anything that lowers driver availability benefits us drivers, and negatively affects Uber (and its pax). Therefore, as said by @Coachman, pitching the removal of DF to us as a benefit to drivers is false; it's designed to increase Uber's revenue.

As you get to know Uber more, you will see more evidence that Uber habitually, and cynically, tries to pitch changes that benefit Uber and harm us as beneficial to us. The classic example to date is "lower rates = higher earnings". In short, don't believe the hype; instead just think things through a little.


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

The Gift of Fish said:


> The classic example to date is "lower rates = higher earnings". In short, don't believe the hype; instead just think things through a little.


That is, indeed, classic!


----------



## hulksmash (Apr 26, 2016)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Lol, no.
> 
> Example: I am 15 minutes away from a driver who has DF on and I am the closest car to that driver. A pax standing near that driver's car requests a min fare shorty ride going in the opposite direction to the one that driver wants to go in, so the ping goes direct to me. If I take the ping and drive 15 minutes to the pax for a min fare shorty, then I am not earning less because the other driver has DF on; I am earning less because I am a moron for driving 15 minutes to a ping.
> 
> ...


Oh I don't disagree with anything you mention. For sure Uber is doing it for their benefit. My main point is that drivers who don't use DF generally earn less than drivers who do, because the non DF users are less likely to be strategic and efficient in their driving habits, and more likely fo take any ping that comes their way. And of course non DF users earn less cause they don't get paid for any mileage to return to a busy area or go home.

To piggyback what you are saying, yes DF limits driver availability. In Uber's perfect world where everyone takes every ride, the earnings among all drivers naturally are distributed more evenly. So in order for Uber to get to their Utopia, they need to take any advantage away from veteran drivers so that the pay among all drivers is equalized.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

And just now, I tried setting a destination filter and it let me. Did they fold on this one just one day later?


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

hulksmash said:


> My main point is that drivers who don't use DF generally earn less than drivers who do, because the non DF users are less likely to be strategic and efficient in their driving habits, and more likely fo take any ping that comes their way. And of course non DF users earn less cause they don't get paid for any mileage to return to a busy area or go home.


I don't think any of us have any way of knowing whether DF users or non-DF users are more strategic or earn more money. Those 200 drivers parked in the airport staging lot for hours on end probably believe they're being highly strategic, don't you think?


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

hulksmash said:


> My main point is that drivers who don't use DF generally earn less than drivers who do, because the non DF users are less likely to be strategic and efficient in their driving habits, and more likely fo take any ping that comes their way. And of course non DF users earn less cause they don't get paid for any mileage to return to a busy area or go home.


Faulty logic. Inequality of outcome does not equal unfairness.

Analogy:

I have three children. I give the older two allowance every week, but the youngest one refuses it. I then notice that the older two have more money than the youngest, and believing that this is unfair, I decide to "correct" the perceived issue by giving allowance to none of them. What's wrong with this? In reality, there was never any unfairness to the youngest child; they all received the same initial offer. All I did by withdrawing allowance from all is create unfairness to the older two who had the good sense to accept it.


----------



## Zaarc (Jan 21, 2019)

Coachman said:


> This has nothing to do with equalizing driver's pay or getting rides to everyone. This is an attempt to streamline their algorithm to force drivers to take more requests and shorten wait times for riders.
> 
> The destination feature serves no purpose for Uber or their goals. They figure after a few months everyone will forget about it.


But if everyone is deadheading at the end of their chosen shift, there will be that many fewer ants available to them.


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

Zaarc said:


> But if everyone is deadheading at the end of their chosen shift, there will be that many fewer ants available to them.


I'm sure they've included that in their calculation. If DF was making Uber money, they'd keep it.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Coachman said:


> That is, indeed, classic!


Here's another classic. "Hello. I'm from the government and I'm here to help you!!"


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Coachman said:


> I don't think any of us have any way of knowing whether DF users or non-DF users are more strategic or earn more money.


I think it's fair to say that DF users earn more money. In its quest to increase its take from drivers, Uber is moving from the general, across-the-board pay cuts (up front pricing) to cuts that are much more targeted. They're going after the experienced, strategic drivers who knew how to play the game and who took way too much money off what Uber sees as its table.

Example: My early morning rush hour strategy used to be to:

1) locate to a section of the city that surged like clockwork at the same time every day
2) wait for the surge to build to at least 2.5x
3) go online with a DF to another hot zone located an hour away, and decline every request that was not a 45+ minute trip. I'd often have to turn down 40 or 50 pings, or more, to get a 45+
4) After dropping the pax off I would go to a nearby guaranteed surge area and put DF on back to San Francisco and wait for another high surge 45+ ping

This would net me around $180 to $200 for around two hours' work. This strategy depended on three elements- high multiplier surge, destination filter, and high rate per mile. Uber has specifically targeted all three of these elements - flat rate surge replaced multiplier surge, destination filter is now going, and "rebalanced rates" further killed the attractiveness of long high speed trips. This strategy is now dead, and my earnings have dropped like a stone. Uber's still raking in the money on the high surge rides, but they have specifically targeted drivers who strategize - these recent changes completely change the playing field and tip it in Uber's favour.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Coachman said:


> Those 200 drivers parked in the airport staging lot for hours on end probably believe they're being highly strategic, don't you think?


Clueless is the word for that scenario in my opinion. Not strategic.


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

The Gift of Fish said:


> I'd often have to turn down 40 or 50 pings, or more, to get a 45+


And there's one reason they're doing away with destination filter. All you're doing is sitting there mucking up the system.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Coachman said:


> And there's one reason they're doing away with destination filter. All you're doing is sitting there mucking up the system.


Yes, I'd agree entirely. The legitimacy of driver strategizing all depends on one's point of view. Drivers who strategize and aim to concentrate on only rides that suit them see this as a sensible way to play the game. As ICs, we're in business to serve our own needs, not Uber's. Some of this rideshare lark is zero sum - either Uber takes the money on the table from the pax or we drivers do. In this sense it's adversarial and it's why we are not Uber's "partners".

On the other hand, Uber rightly sees some driver strategizing as harmful to their revenue; they are correct. If I were running Uber I would also want to ensure that the company's revenue and profit were maximised at the expense of drivers, exactly in the same way that I now want to maximise my revenue and profit without regard for Uber's.


----------



## MadTownUberD (Mar 11, 2017)

As a part time driver, DF comprises a HUGE percentage of my trips. On nights when my wife takes the kids to activities, and I have two or two and a half hours available, my routine goes like this:

- at the end of my regular work day, turn the app on.
- accept a ping, which usually takes me downtown.
- one hour before I need to be home, set the DF for home.

This is the only way I've found to reliably gross around $1/mile during non bartime. Bartime doesn't make sense for me because I'm a part timer and need to get up early.

If I am unable to use DF, it may be too risky for me to accept even the first ping, which means instead of getting a handful of rides from me pax will get NONE during that 2 hours period.

Another scenario is:

- done with work on one side of town
- meeting family on other side of town
- accept first ping, which usually takes me downtown
- DF to the place where I'm meeting my family.

If they get rid of DF in my market, the only time it will make sense for me to drive is when I can set aside several hours, like a shift. This doesn't happen very often given my multiple commitments, like once or twice a week, so Uber will be effectively killing my incentive to drive.

But then again maybe they're brilliant, and by discouraging me from the onesy twosey trips here and there, I well get more sleep so I will be refreshed do the long shifts on the weekends etc...

There's another obvious solution too: just live in your car! That way you'll never need to DF anywhere.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

ShibariLover said:


> I got this for Philadelphia too. The thing is, is it only going to be for big cities or for everywhere? As it is you can only use the DF 3x a day and now they want to reduce rates???? Why not simply be honest and just get rid of it all together???


They got rid of it in Dallas.



JimKE said:


> I can't stand to watch 13 minute videos with 90 seconds of content.


Excellent point.

That guy couldn't get to the point if his life depended on it.

I've seen a handful of his videos, and in every one I've seen he's made major errors, usually errors of omission.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

MadTownUberD said:


> As a part time driver, DF comprises a HUGE percentage of my trips. On nights when my wife takes the kids to activities, and I have two or two and a half hours available, my routine goes like this:
> 
> - at the end of my regular work day, turn the app on.
> - accept a ping, which usually takes me downtown.
> ...


So what you're saying is that you use Uber to share your ride with other people who are going in the same direction. Hmmm..... share your ride.... Ironic that the one practice that gives this business its name is being removed.


----------



## MadTownUberD (Mar 11, 2017)

The Gift of Fish said:


> So what you're saying is that you use Uber to share your ride with other people who are going in the same direction. Hmmm..... share your ride.... Ironic that the one practice that gives this business its name is being removed.


Shared ride is Rideshare....Rideshare is shared ride!!!!


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

It's a fools game trying to dissect every aspect of any of Uber's changes -- whether it's the recent pay changes in mileage/time, flat surge, DF, or whatever. Regardless of the issue, none of this is complex. It's all very simple.

NO Uber change has anything to do with riders. NO Uber change has anything to do with drivers.

*Any change Uber makes is made purely for the purpose of increasing Uber revenue. *No other reason -- none.

And changes are usually to the detriment of both riders and drivers. If you doubt that, just look at "upfront pricing" coupled with changing driver pay from a percentage to flat rates -- or changing surge from multiples for both rider and driver to multiples for riders and flat surge for drivers. Both hurt riders and drivers, but benefited Uber.

*Uber doesn't care about either riders or drivers*; they care only about the money.


----------



## Christinebitg (Jun 29, 2018)

JimKE said:


> *Stay ONline.* That way, your miles are all deductible business miles, AND you are covered by Uber/Lyft insurance.


The first part of this is inaccurate, and the second part is a bad idea.

If you're driving home from that drop off, those are deductible miles whether the app is on or not. Just make sure you capture them in your log.

Your personal insurance coverage is probably better than Uber's coverage when the app is on but you don't have a trip request.


----------



## Aquariusdaniel (Mar 15, 2019)

This is how the new rule will affect me (who drove a yellow cab from 1987 till 2015)
Cancelations will move from 1% to aprox 5%
(I’ll cancel if is too far out of my way)
Acceptance from 95% to 70%
(Experience with the location will suggest what direction the ride will take)
I’ll sign up with Lyft, to use their DF for as long as they keep it. (That will also get me a sign up bonus for me and a friend)
I’ll keep the app online even if I don’t intend to pick up rides, just to contribute to the overall percentage of online drivers in NYC. (Based on which the usage calculations are done yearly by the TLC)
I’ll be much less likely to accept Pool Rides (or as I call them CheapO-Shares)... as the majority of them take me to undesirable CheapO-Shares locations.
For Uber to screw with the most experienced drivers, is a losing game.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

JimKE said:


> It's a fools game trying to dissect every aspect of any of Uber's changes -- whether it's the recent pay changes in mileage/time, flat surge, DF, or whatever. Regardless of the issue, none of this is complex. It's all very simple.


Actually, it's very easy to see what Uber tries to accomplish with each of its tweaks to driver pay. Taking surge as an example, in order to increase their take they could simply have kept multiplier surge for driver pay, but reduced the multipliers. However, instead they chose to bring in flat surge. This wasn't random - its effect is to incentivise drivers to accept pings that are likely to be shorter trips.

Just one, easy, example.



Aquariusdaniel said:


> This is how the new rule will affect me (who drove a yellow cab from 1987 till 2015)
> Cancelations will move from 1% to aprox 5%
> (I'll cancel if is too far out of my way)


Exactly - this isn't the end of destination filter - it just means that there will be no DF built into the app. Drivers will still filter pax manually at pickup based on their destination.


----------



## Aquariusdaniel (Mar 15, 2019)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Actually, it's very easy to see what Uber tries to accomplish with each of its tweaks to driver pay. Taking surge as an example, in order to increase their take they could simply have kept multiplier surge for driver pay, but reduced the multipliers. However, instead they chose to bring in flat surge. This wasn't random - its effect is to incentivise drivers to accept pings that are likely to be shorter trips.
> 
> Just one, easy, example.
> 
> ...


Example.... especially for long trips... how many drivers would refuse a trip from NYC to Boston (10 hours round trip) if they were after the middle of their day shift?


----------



## FuberNYC (Jan 2, 2017)

Pretty simple, support Lyft until Uber learns not to mess with us


----------



## MyJessicaLS430 (May 29, 2018)

Coachman said:


> Uber doesn't give a shit about their drivers. I'm so glad I kept that $82 mistake in my favor last month.
> 
> View attachment 304117


Is Dara a descendant of Mr. Stalin? The way how natural selection works is survival of the fittest. Socialism is not going to work.


----------



## Transportador (Sep 15, 2015)

Use Waze and set yourself up for car pooling. Screw Uber.

Waze pays you for car pooling, LOL.



FuberNYC said:


> Pretty simple, support Lyft until Uber learns not to mess with us


The problem is Lyft follows Uber steps. Currently Lyft DF never works right.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

FuberNYC said:


> Pretty simple, support Lyft until Uber learns not to mess with us


So simple that it won't work.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

The Gift of Fish said:


> So what you're saying is that you use Uber to share your ride with other people who are going in the same direction. Hmmm..... share your ride.... Ironic that the one practice that gives this business its name is being removed.


Uber X has never been about rideshare, rather it is and always has been an unlicensed taxi service.


----------



## Mozzie (Dec 17, 2018)

What's next is they'll redistribute people who use DFs to people who don't. That's what they just did in Chicago. So if it's during a busy time like today, 30% pay cut if you use DF which is supposedly redistributed to people who don't use them. I'm only doing Lyft from now on

Lyft just updated their DF it's much better


----------



## mikes424 (May 22, 2016)

As usual, Uber is shooting themselves in the foot. They said one reason the change is to shorten wait times for the pax by keeping drivers on the app. 

Rule of Unintended Consequences applies.

If a driver wants to go home or wherever and cannot use the DF, the driver will either turn of the app or decline all requests. Therefore there would be fewer drivers available. It would be better to keep the DF and have accept the trips even if they accept only 25-30% of the requests.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

mikes424 said:


> As usual, Uber is shooting themselves in the foot. They said one reason the change is to shorten wait times for the pax by keeping drivers on the app.
> 
> Rule of Unintended Consequences applies.
> 
> If a driver wants to go home or wherever and cannot use the DF, the driver will either turn of the app or decline all requests. Therefore there would be fewer drivers available. It would be better to keep the DF and have accept the trips even if they accept only 25-30% of the requests.


I agree with your logic and would add that Uber has unintentionally forced more drivers to Lyft.


----------



## KenLV (Jun 23, 2017)

I see a huge uptick of phone calls to riders immediately after ping acceptance.

Unsurprisingly, there will also be an uptick in driver cancellations.

Contrary to Uber's claim, this will actually increase wait times for riders.

It'll do so in other ways too, for example...

I'm XL/Lyft XL ONLY, but I'll take X/Lyft is when I'm in destination mode at the end of the night.

At the end of every shift I get at least one X/Lyft headed in the right direction.

Now they (X rides) will wait longer since I'm not going to accept them ever.


----------



## NoPooPool (Aug 18, 2017)

Solid 5 said:


> Mindless ants.....100000000% spot on.
> 
> They know damn well the retention rate, they pray to God it gets even lower so they can get rid of ALL the smart drivers who know how to make money for themselves and take it from U/L.





JimKE said:


> It's a fools game trying to dissect every aspect of any of Uber's changes -- whether it's the recent pay changes in mileage/time, flat surge, DF, or whatever. Regardless of the issue, none of this is complex. It's all very simple.
> 
> NO Uber change has anything to do with riders. NO Uber change has anything to do with drivers.
> 
> ...


Spot on post,@JimKE.


----------



## PioneerXi (Apr 20, 2018)

I don't have the 30% off DF rate yet in San Diego. I set my DF at 0700 Friday morning to go south with inbound rush hour traffic, my next ride was north. (Who freakin knows why.) Sent an email to Rohit, got the following response, over 24 hours later:










Frustrating?

Working to improve matches by taking 30% off?

BS.

The Uber email essentially says that DF is inaccurate, at best, or at worst, non existent. And now you want to ding drivers 30% because your functionality is questionable?

You drivers with 30% off DF fares go right ahead and frustrate them. You got my support!!!!


----------



## BigBadDriver (Sep 12, 2017)

Pax Collector said:


> I guess this will be the last nail in the coffin? At least second to last?


Who's coffin?


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

Go to major Media Outlet or send email. Tag Line, " Uber doesn't care about the environment". 

Destination Filter might increase pickup times (Rider Request Times), But it reduces Deadmiles. Fewer deadmiles for drivers equals better vehicle utilization and less pollution in your city. 

Don't focus telling the Public about fewer deadmiles equals more money for Drivers (only we care about that). 

Focus on issues like " the environment and Uber more concerned about a few Seconds reduction in Pickup Times" and " Uber cares more about a few seconds improvement in Pick Up times over Traffic Congestion".

Whic issues does the public, media, and government care more about? 

Or, " Why doesn't Uber invest more in Driver Direction Filters that efficiently match Rider Destinations with Driver Destination". 

Also, if Directional Filters are removed, isnt Uber really saying, "Our Uber Drivers are mostly Full-time Employees with no Decision Making ability so we will tell them exactly where and how to drive"? Which Uber does. 

Verses, Uber using and wanting Part-time Drivers and therefore provide more In-App Tools that allow for Individual Decision Making"? But they do the Opposite.

Do believe what Uber PR says, believe what they do. 

Hmmmm....


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> My question here is even from a business point of view, how will taking away DF benefit them? Presumably Uber wants the max amount of drivers taking trips at any given time. Taking away DF will obviously make some drivers available for more trips, but conversely many drivers who would have used DF (e.g, those who only want to head home, or on a personal trip) will just stay offline. Even if they suspect the first factor outweighs the second, IMHO they could still modify how DF works rather than eliminate it.


Lots of drivers use it as a profit strategy, not to get home. Example - you're in a residential area at 8 am. In one direction is downtown hell, which means a 30 - 60 minute grind through gridlock for pennies per minute. Also, because it'll be downtown at 9am when you get there, nobody will be wanting a ride out so you'll be stuck there and will have to deadhead out through gridlock for no money. However, in the opposite direction is the airport - little traffic and $50 per hour earnings equivalent, plus you may get an airport rematch. You're going to set the DF to filter out all those pesky commuters downtown and catch the airporters instead. That's just an example; drivers also use DF all the time not so much to go to a specific destination, but to avoid getting sucked into a shit, black hole, destination.

Anyway, Uber's rationale is that by removing DF they can put an end to this strategising - they believe that the drivers who are still in the game and not wanting to go home will take the shit trips because they're better than nothing.

The solution to all this for Uber would be to allow drivers to send proof of their home address to Uber, and one geographical location of their choice. Uber can then set the geo location as the destination filter when they sign on to the app, and the home address as the destination when they press a "go home" button at the end of their shift.

At the end of the day, though, we have to keep this in perspective. If we were working regular jobs, we'd have to commute in and out each day to our work location at our own expense. If they take away DF then out commuting in and out each day to where there are rides is no different from anyone else's commute, except we don't have to worry about parking when we get there. It will still blow if they take it away, but it's not the end of the world.


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Lots of drivers use it as a profit strategy, not to get home. Example - you're in a residential area at 8 am. In one direction is downtown hell, which means a 30 - 60 minute grind through gridlock for pennies per minute. Also, because it'll be downtown at 9am when you get there, nobody will be wanting a ride out so you'll be stuck there and will have to deadhead out through gridlock for no money. However, in the opposite direction is the airport - little traffic and $50 per hour earnings equivalent, plus you may get an airport rematch. You're going to set the DF to filter out all those pesky commuters downtown and catch the airporters instead. That's just an example; drivers also use DF all the time not so much to go to a specific destination, but to avoid getting sucked into a shit, black hole, destination.


I use DF for two purposes -- to get home, and similar to this example, to _get where I want to be_ from a place _I don't want to be._

My specific place _I don't want to be _is Ft. Lauderdale. It's 45 miles from home, and I'm not familiar with the area, but I often get rides from Miami or Miami Beach to Ft. Lauderdale airport.

I don't work FLL, so I go offline and drive over to the beach south of Ft. Lauderdale. I set my DF for the very tip of South Beach (where I want to be) and head south.

I almost always get rides quickly, and in the direction I want to go. And quite frequently, I get to within a mile of my destination in 2-3 rides. My pickup drives are short, I am driving pax where they want to go, and I am not deadheading. Life is good.

I typically accept all DF pings, because my experience with the Uber DF is that I rarely get taken away from my desired direction of travel.
*I'm providing great service, and I'm happy.* If that upsets some cupcake in SFO eating catered lunches, I'm sorry. (Not really)



> Anyway, Uber's rationale is that by removing DF they can put an end to this strategising - they believe that the drivers who are still in the game and not wanting to go home will take the shit trips because they're better than nothing.


Nope. Strategizers gonna strategize!

If Uber removes the DF,* I'll just adjust. * If they want to charge me 30%-50% for the privilege of using DF, *I'll just adjust.*

*But Uber may not like the results *of my adjustments.

For one thing, I damn sure won't take rides to FLL!

I'm not going to cherry-pick rides. I'll drive to the pickup, find out where the pax is going, explain and apologize, and cancel no charge. Then, the pax can re-order a ride.

Sorry, I'm not taking a ride that takes me WAY away from where I want to be if I have *no reasonable way to get back*. Find another ant. And they will, but at least I won't waste my time.

I'm sorry if that inconveniences our customers, who I value greatly...seriously, I do. But if _Uber forces me to choose_ between the customer and myself, the customer loses.


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

JimKE said:


> I use DF for two purposes -- to get home, and similar to this example, to _get where I want to be_ from a place _I don't want to be._
> 
> My specific place _I don't want to be _is Ft. Lauderdale. It's 45 miles from home, and I'm not familiar with the area, but I often get rides from Miami or Miami Beach to Ft. Lauderdale airport.
> 
> ...


My brother from another state.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Lots of drivers use it as a profit strategy, not to get home. Example - you're in a residential area at 8 am. In one direction is downtown hell, which means a 30 - 60 minute grind through gridlock for pennies per minute. Also, because it'll be downtown at 9am when you get there, nobody will be wanting a ride out so you'll be stuck there and will have to deadhead out through gridlock for no money. However, in the opposite direction is the airport - little traffic and $50 per hour earnings equivalent, plus you may get an airport rematch. You're going to set the DF to filter out all those pesky commuters downtown and catch the airporters instead. That's just an example; drivers also use DF all the time not so much to go to a specific destination, but to avoid getting sucked into a shit, black hole, destination.
> 
> Anyway, Uber's rationale is that by removing DF they can put an end to this strategising - they believe that the drivers who are still in the game and not wanting to go home will take the shit trips because they're better than nothing.
> 
> ...


I use it to avoid crappy rides myself on occasion. For example if I want to do long trips and avoid NYC, I'll set a long filter in a different direction. That said, it's more important for me as a way to reduce wasted miles driving home. So I think they should at least implement some version of your idea, which was letting us use our home address and another address, rather than get rid of it completely. From other threads it seems they're toying with the idea of paying less on DF rides, and passing that on to drivers who don't use it. I'd still prefer that to losing it completely. One problem with that idea though, is that there are DF rides and DF rides. Sometimes I'll get 'slam dunk' DF rides which take me halfway home from a long trip with almost no hassle. At other times, they involve faffing around, going into a traffic area, just to take someone on a minimum fare. The first kind, I'd do for less if that were the only choice. The second kind I wouldn't.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

JimKE said:


> If Uber removes the DF,* I'll just adjust. * If they want to charge me 30%-50% for the privilege of using DF, *I'll just adjust.*


Lol, yeah. Rolling up to the pax and telling them no won't cost 30%. Every smart driver will simply implement a free manual destination filter not involving the app.


> But if _Uber forces me to choose_ between the customer and myself, the customer loses.


'Fraid so.



reg barclay said:


> From other threads it seems they're toying with the idea of paying less on DF rides, and passing that on to drivers who don't use it. I'd still prefer that to losing it completely.


Sounds like communism to me. Paying people for work others do is Looney Left tomfoolery. I don't think that'll fly.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Sounds like communism to me. Paying people for work others do is Looney Left tomfoolery. I don't think that'll fly.


You could frame it that way, but on the other hand you could say a company using calculations of profit and loss* to charge customers what they'll pay, and pay workers what they'll accept, is the epitome of free market capitalism. But anyway, I wasn't really discussing the moral, philosophical or political aspects of any proposed changes. Just the practical ramifications. Which for me, if I had no other choice, I'd prefer less pay for DF than no DF at all, if I could be assured the DF would work consistently well.

* Presumably that's the real reason behind any change, not because they suddenly read Das Kapital.


----------



## Christinebitg (Jun 29, 2018)

reg barclay said:


> and passing that on to drivers who don't use it


Yeah, right. I'll believe that when I see it.

I don't have any reason to believe that Uber is going to give me any kind of increase any time soon.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Howie428Uber said:


> How can they be a rideshare service if they have nothing in their system that allows people to share a ride to a destination?
> 
> Getting rid of destinations has an obvious dangerous side to it. I'm often using them when I'm aware that I'll be getting tired soon.
> 
> ...


They are not "rideshare services" anymore, and haven't been since they became legal/regulated. They are now Transportation Network Companies. "Rideshare" was a word bandied about to exploit a loophole in taxi laws for the TNCs, but not necessarily the drivers. This is why Uber used to foot the bill for legal representation when drivers got tickets for being illegal taxis and reimbursed for the fines levied before legalization/regulation.


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

There is a very key phrase in Uber's notification of the lower payments for DF rides, and it's NOT "lower pay" or "redistributed to other drivers."










In the second paragraph of the "How it will work" section above, please read the first 4 words. Then read them again. Then think about what they are saying.

The words are: *"During the evaluation phase..." *

What that means in plain English is that after the evaluation phase is over and they cram this down our throats, *Uber will **keep* the portion of the fares they withhold on DF rides.

This is a pay cut, pure and simple. Uber is raising the scepter of eliminating DF altogether to scare drivers into accepting a massive pay cut on DF rides.


----------



## New2This (Dec 27, 2015)

I unabashedly use DF. I do almost exclusively DF trips. I came up with a strategy that works (for me) getting primarily more lucrative longer trips in the direction I want to go.

Now Uber's going to (if/when this shit hits my market) punish me by having a system and either:

1. Take away DF entirely, meaning I will drive way less, especially in afternoon rush hour. The *only* way I do rush hour when I do is DF to avoid crosstown traffic trips. 

2. Take 30%-50% of my earnings and redistribute them to the White Earpiece wearing paper license plate crowd that doesn't have any strategy. I'm being penalized for using the tools that Uber gave us and working smarter.

We have a number of posters in my area that do Uber part-time, primarily DF to/from work. If it's a choice between no rides or a ride that will make them late for work, guess what? Their Uber app will stay off. Lyft DF might go on though...


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

New2This said:


> I unabashedly use DF. I do almost exclusively DF trips.


Are there markets where Uber doesn't limit DF to two a day? I wasn't aware of that.


----------



## New2This (Dec 27, 2015)

Coachman said:


> Are there markets where Uber doesn't limit DF to two a day? I wasn't aware of that.


I only get 2. I just learned the limitations of it. One limitation is there is no limit to the number of trips you can take on a DF.


----------



## sporadic (Jan 20, 2016)

New2This said:


> I only get 2. I just learned the limitations of it. One limitation is there is no limit to the number of trips you can take on a DF.


Love the "forever filter"!


----------



## Lana FTW (Nov 4, 2018)

JimKE said:


> I can't stand to watch 13 minute videos with 90 seconds of content. The egos of some of these YouTubers are marvels to behold!
> 
> That said, it looks like Uber is evaluating two options -- no DF, and DF, but with reduced pay rates.
> 
> ...


I prefer Uber as well for a number of reasons, one being that Lyft is not as popular in Ft Worth as it is in Dallas. But hopefully with this crazy DF removal, riders will be waiting even LONGER and will choose Lyft instead, therefore benefiting us all. Ugh!



ShibariLover said:


> I never get any rides when I use lyfts df. Oh well.
> 
> 
> If they want to shorten wait times then they should stop giving pings for 25 minute pickups with maybe, possibly, if the cow jumps over the moon and the sun sets in the east, premium pickups. How about a $10 incentive to get a rider that is more than 10 minutes away!!


Yes, because 9 times out of 10 the rider's destination is shorter than the amount of time you drove to pick them UP!



goneubering said:


> Clueless is the word for that scenario in my opinion. Not strategic.


Thought the same thing. I actually went to sit at DFW for an hour one day to see what it was about. There was hardly any movement except for the posse of male drivers standing there shootin' the shit. Can't imagine how they were making a living, much less what they were telling their wives they did all day. I think the same thing when I see them standing outside hotels.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

New2This said:


> I only get 2. I just learned the limitations of it. One limitation is there is no limit to the number of trips you can take on a DF.


No limit? I've done 4 or 5 trips on a DF but I've always assumed there's a time or quantity limit.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> you could say a company using calculations of profit and loss* to charge customers what they'll pay, and pay workers what they'll accept, is the epitome of free market capitalism.


Yes, profit above all else is indeed a capitalist ideal, but that's not relevant to my point that arbitrary redistribution of wealth is most certainly not. As I said, it's the polar opposite.


> But anyway, I wasn't really discussing the moral, philosophical or political aspects of any proposed changes. Just the practical ramifications. Which for me, if I had no other choice, I'd prefer less pay for DF than no DF at all, if I could be assured the DF would work consistently well.


No, the moral/philosophical/political aspects aren't of much interest. The reason I mentioned communism is because there is a parallel. Communism has been widely rejected because unearned redistribuion of wealth and equality of outcome is simply not a fair system. Neither is this DF malarkey, and I don't think drivers are going to tolerate Uber taking their earnings and donating them to other drivers. This is why I don't think this latest initiative of Uber's will be successful.

If they try to cut my DF pay by 30% - 50% then I'll just turn off Uber out of prinicple and just use Lyft for DF. Hopefully many other drivers feel the same way. I think they will.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Yes, profit above all else is indeed a capitalist ideal, but that's not relevant to my point that arbitrary redistribution of wealth is most certainly not. As I said, it's the polar opposite.


I disagree with the analogy on that count as well. Arbitrary redistribution would be Dave working 10 hours a day, while Steve works 2, but both get paid the same amount. In our case though, it isn't arbitrary at all. The other drivers are getting rewarded for not using DF, which helps the companies profits. So in essence, I think it's more akin to a company paying bonuses to workers who work at awkward or busier times etc. IMO the actual issue is how this would affect the independent contractor thing, since it's moving further away from what customers pay for the ride correlating with what drivers get from it.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> I disagree with the analogy on that count as well. Arbitrary redistribution would be Dave working 10 hours a day, while Steve works 2, but both get paid the same amount. In our case though, it isn't arbitrary at all. The other drivers are getting rewarded for not using DF, which helps the companies profits.


You're a bit hazy on what the word arbitrary means. From Webster's, it is both:

_1) marked by or resulting from the unrestrained and often tyrannical exercise of power _and_ 2)based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something_

And the word redistribution means taking from one person or group and giving to another person or group.

Thus, Uber telling drivers that they going to take their money that they earned and give it to other drivers is unquestionably arbitrary redistribution. There is no "agree with" or "disagree with" the definitions of these two words; they mean what they mean.



> So in essence, I think it's more akin to a company paying bonuses to workers who work at awkward or busier times etc.


No, bonuses do not involve taking earned money from workers. And no, using worker earnings to pay bonuses to other workers is not akin to a company paying a bonus. If Uber wants to pay bonuses for not using DF then that's fine but they need to pay for those bonuses.


> IMO the actual issue is how this would affect the independent contractor thing, since it's moving further away from what customers pay for the ride correlating with what drivers get from it.


As we all know, the IC claim is a sham. Each time they ratchet up the control that they have over workers, Uber moves further away from IC towards disguised employment.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

The Gift of Fish said:


> You're a bit hazy on what the word arbitrary means. From Webster's, it is both:
> 
> _1) marked by or resulting from the unrestrained and often tyrannical exercise of power _and_ 2)based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something_
> 
> ...


Well in this case, their to decision to take extra commission for DF rides is neither based on tyranny or individual preference. It isn't tyranny, because they don't force us to drive for them. They offer us terms which we are free to accept or tell them to bugger off. It isn't individual preference either. It is based on whatever calculation they made that this will benefit their business in some way (presumably by increasing their profits).



The Gift of Fish said:


> No, bonuses do not involve taking earned money from workers.


They are not technically taking money that we earned. They are charging a higher commission rate, so that we will never have earned that money in the first place. If they give it to someone they feel is more productive to their business, then I view that as more akin to a bonus. But, yes I agree that these kind of things make the relationship more akin to an employer/employee relationship.

In a capitalist system, a company runs as follows. The company produces good and services which it hopes will turn a profit. The owners pay each worker the amount they assess will help further maximise their profits. Workers who are more valuable, more productive or more in demand, will get higher wages than those who aren't. This is what Uber is proposing here, since workers who don't use DF are of more benefit to them in their quest to increase productivity and profits. So in this sense, I believe their decisions are more in line with Rand than with Marx.

(In fact if the US were a completely libertarian laissez faire capitalist country, then Uber /Lyft would have even more power to dictate the terms of our contracts, as long as they weren't forcing us to work for them. As there would really be no difference between employee and IC, as any business relationships that weren't made under force would be valid.)

Disclaimer: Non of the above is meant to be indicative of my own philosophical, economic, or moral views on the subjects. Just a discussion of the realities involved.


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

goneubering said:


> No limit? I've done 4 or 5 trips on a DF but I've always assumed there's a time or quantity limit.


At one time there was an hour time limit. I reached that once while trying to DF from Dallas to Fort Worth.


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

Coachman said:


> At one time there was an hour time limit. I reached that once while trying to DF from Dallas to Fort Worth.


My market there still is. I Leave the airport and just get far enough south that I won't get anymore pings from Miami-Dade county. I get an alert that no trips could be found and it kicks me off line. Lyft does the same thing often in less than 60 minutes.


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

FLKeys said:


> My market there still is. I Leave the airport and just get far enough south that I won't get anymore pings from Miami-Dade county. I get an alert that no trips could be found and it kicks me off line. Lyft does the same thing often in less than 60 minutes.


Lyft kicks you offline in 15 minutes. I've had Uber's DF time out once or twice, but I don't think it put me offline.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> Well in this case, their to decision to take extra commission for DF rides is neither based on tyranny or individual preference. It isn't tyranny, because they don't force us to drive for them.


No, you miss the point. Don't get bogged down on the word "tyranny"; the key idea here is that Uber is exercising its will and power (we all know how one-sided this partnership is) to force these changes through. Of course we are not forced to drive for them. Whether or not drivers decide to continue driving for Uber after Uber pushes through each of its unilaterally decided changes to "our" contract is a secondary point outside the scope of and unrelated to the point that contract changes are dictated by Uber. In the context of Uber and drivers working together in a relationship that nobody was forced into, Uber wears the trousers and pushes through whatever it wants. To believe otherwise would demonstrate a total lack of understanding of working conditions in this industry.


> It isn't individual preference either. It is based on whatever calculation they made that this will benefit their business in some way (presumably by increasing their profits).


Of course it's Uber's individual preference. You contradict yourself - if was not Uber's preference to cut pay on DF rides, then whose preference was it? Mine? Yours? Rakos'? No, as you go on to say, it is based on whatever calculation _Uber_ made. Regardless of their rationale for doing it, Uber prefers to redistribute the money and so it shall be. Don't confuse preference with whim.


> They are not technically taking money that we earned. They are charging a higher commission rate, so that we will never have earned that money in the first place.


Semantics/word games. Uber still charges the pax the same amount of money and money that previously would have been paid to DF drivers will now get redistributed to drivers who did not do the work. You can argue that the bonus money to be paid to the non-DF driver no longer belongs to DF driver, but that is missing the point. A standard tenet of fairness is that he who performs the work should be paid for it. The money in question is the fruit of the labour of the DF driver, whose time and effort certainly did belong to him. Again, the complaint of DF drivers is that arbitrary redistribution of this revenue, where the effort of one worker results in unearned income for another worker, is not fair play. But you're free to disagree with this complaint; Uber clearly does.


> If they give it to someone they feel is more productive to their business, then I view that as more akin to a bonus.


Again, it is indeed a bonus/windfall/etc for non-DF drivers, but generally bonus schemes are not payable without any meaningful performance target or requirement, and they are not funded directly from the work performed by other workers. And yes, Uber has clearly linked the windfalls to be paid to non-DF drivers directly to the work performed by DF drivers.


> In a capitalist system, a company runs as follows. The company produces good and services which it hopes will turn a profit. The owners pay each worker the amount they assess will help further maximise their profits. Workers who are more valuable, more productive or more in demand, will get higher wages than those who aren't. This is what Uber is proposing here, since workers who don't use DF are of more benefit to them in their quest to increase productivity and profits. So in this sense, I believe their decisions are more in line with Rand than with Marx.


No. Uber has said that the only requirement for drivers to receive the bonus/windfall will be to do one trip per week and not use DF. So no, there is no clear link between the value or productivity to Uber of a non-DF driver and that driver receiving higher wages. A driver could do one $4 trip for Uber and receive the bonus payout.


> (In fact if the US were a completely libertarian laissez faire capitalist country, then Uber /Lyft would have even more power to dictate the terms of our contracts, as long as they weren't forcing us to work for them. As there would really be no difference between employee and IC, as any business relationships that weren't made under force would be valid.)


Clearly. What's your point, though? We're talking about redistribution of wealth as carried out by Uber, not the sociopolitical structure of the United States.


> Disclaimer: Non of the above is meant to be indicative of my own philosophical, economic, or moral views on the subjects. Just a discussion of the realities involved.


So how come you said that in your opinion Uber is following Rand and not Marx? And that you think that if this country were more laissez-faire then x and y would happen. Are those not your own economic views of the situation? And the question of who owns the economic benefits produced by labour, which you gave your own clear opinion on, is very much a philosophical matter. You're a reasonably smart guy, but trying to "be smart" with comments like your "disclaimer" isn't what smart people do.

Finally, a question for you. Your boss at work tells you that he is going to make some changes and he would like everyone to volunteer to work one hour extra at the end of each day. The boss may or may not take people up on their offers to volunteer each day. Anyone who does not volunteer the extra hour will have their salary adjusted so that their pay will be reduced by the equivalent of one hour's work. So for example a worker who previously earned $150 per day would be paid $130 for the same amount of work. The proceeds netted from this bonus scheme will be given to the workers who did volunteer, regardless of whether or not they were called upon to so any extra hours' work. My question to you - do you think this would be fair? From your previous comments about the alleged legitimacy of companies doing what they need to do in their interests to make a profit, I predict that your answer will be yes.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

@The Gift of Fish I will summarise my viewpoint in short. A private company acting in it's own self interest to maximise profits for the company and its shareholders is capitalism. If the policies which the private company deems will maximise its profits incidentally involve some form of 'redistribution' on occasion, that doesn't make them communists. It means their capitalism lead them to the conclusion that that route would be more beneficial to their profits on those particular occasions.

IMO what it boils down to is this. Capitalism does not reward hard work per se. It rewards smartness and the ability to provide marketable goods, skills or services which are high on the demand chain. In the case of rideshare driving, some of us (and I dare include myself here) were able to use our smarts, and take advantage of things like traditional surge and DF, to make more money doing less work than an 'ant' taking every ping willy nilly would make. Now Uber is reducing our abilities to do that by implementing things like dollar surge and the potential DF change. But this is not because of some communist manifesto they have. On the contrary, it is precisely because their service (i.e, their app) is higher in the capitalist chain of marketable services than our own (i.e, the ability to maneuver a car around while people hop in and out). They are therefore able to put their own need for profits ahead of ours, take things like traditional surge and DF away, and implement systems they feel will benefit them and their shareholders more.

Whether I personally view this stuff as fair or not, or the broader issues involved, are not things I feel the want or need to discuss here. But I will say, that while I endeavour to be a fair person myself (not claiming to be perfect), I definitely don't expect or assume such from big companies etc.


----------



## Taksomotor (Mar 19, 2019)

My Lyft signs me off Destination mode if no ride comes along in 30 mins.

The best reason to use Destination mode for me is to go home and still be technically working, so that I can keep tracking those miles for tax write off. Usually by then I am already willing to just be done with riding and I like when no one requests a ride. But if they do, well, fine I will do the ride. So I am legit for tracking those miles.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> @The Gift of Fish I will summarise my viewpoint in short. A private company acting in it's own self interest to maximise profits for the company and its shareholders is capitalism. If the policies which the private company deems will maximise its profits incidentally involve some form of 'redistribution' on occasion, that doesn't make them communists.


No, and I didn't say that it did. What I said was that redistribution of wealth based on factors other than having earned that wealth _"sounds like communism"_. That is, obviously, not to say that those who practice this necessarily are communists. There are clearly other factors involved. Come on; I'm surprised that you would try to make such a shaky and unfounded deductive leap.

Anyway, unearned income redistribution is indeed a collectivist ideal. But that's common knowledge. Even Forbes knows that.












> IMO what it boils down to is this. Capitalism does not reward hard work per se. It rewards smartness and the ability to provide marketable goods, skills or services which are high on the demand chain. In the case of rideshare driving, some of us (and I dare include myself here) were able to use our smarts, and take advantage of things like traditional surge and DF, to make more money doing less work than an 'ant' taking every ping willy nilly would make. Now Uber is reducing our abilities to do that by implementing things like dollar surge and the potential DF change.


Correct, as I have posted elsewhere, these latest changes are aimed squarely at the experienced drivers who have worked out strategies to maximise their incomes, often to Uber's detriment. With these changes they will capture some of the money they are currently leaving on the table. They're counter strategies.


> But this is not because of some communist manifesto they have.


Agreed - I would not claim that Uber has a communist manifesto. That would be ludicrous. 


> On the contrary, it is precisely because their service (i.e, their app) is higher in the capitalist chain of marketable services than our own (i.e, the ability to maneuver a car around while people hop in and out). They are therefore able to put their own need for profits ahead of ours, take things like traditional surge and DF away, and implement systems they feel will benefit them and their shareholders more.


Yes, as I said earlier, Uber is in the position of dominance in the Uber:driver relationship. This allows them to act arbitrarily from their position of power and implement whatever changes they want to our contract.


> Whether I personally view this stuff as fair or not, or the broader issues involved, are not things I feel the want or need to discuss here.


Interesting. It appeared to me as if you were starting to expound on that, and I was interested to take that part of it further. Of course, I see your point. Defending an assumed Uber right to act the way they do (with justification based on capitalism or anything else) on an Uber driver's forum wouldn't go down well.


----------



## Taksomotor (Mar 19, 2019)

You are talking about Ubers drivers forum as if it was some sort of a labor union, which is socialist and therefore communist by nature.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Of course it's Uber's individual preference. You contradict yourself - if was not Uber's preference to cut pay on DF rides, then whose preference was it? Mine? Yours? *Rakos'*? No, as you go on to say, it is based on whatever calculation _Uber_ made. Regardless of their rationale for doing it, Uber prefers to redistribute the money and so it shall be. Don't confuse preference with whim.


Proper use of the Possessive!! I'm positively giddy!


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

SuzeCB said:


> Proper use of the Possessive!! I'm positively giddy!


I've seen some posters use 'paxes', is that grammatically correct?


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

You two arguing about the claimed "redistribution" of DF reductions to other drivers are missing one of the key points that is much more important than whether anyone considers it communistic or not...

Uber's own announcement says the "redistribution" will be "during the evaluation phase." After that, you can bet they will keep the reduction money.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

JimKE said:


> After that, you can bet they will keep the reduction money.


Maybe. Maybe not. It depends how drivers respond to it.


----------



## jazzapt (May 16, 2016)

JimKE said:


> You two arguing about the claimed "redistribution" of DF reductions to other drivers are missing one of the key points that is much more important than whether anyone considers it communistic or not...
> 
> Uber's own announcement says the "redistribution" will be "during the evaluation phase." After that, you can bet they will keep the reduction money.


Or, is the redistribution even happening? Has anyone in the test markets even seen any of this "redistribution" pay? If so, how is it being paid out? Asking for a friend...


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

reg barclay said:


> I've seen some posters use 'paxes', is that grammatically correct?


I use that for the plural. AFAIK, "pax" is a newish word as we use it here, so I think we can define it and set the rules for it. "Ax" or "axe" becomes "axes". OTOH, "ox" becomes "oxen"....

Maybe "paxen"? Or, as we used to call the more distasteful of them "pox", maybe "poxen"?


----------



## She Drives (Mar 22, 2019)

Coachman said:


> Uber doesn't give a shit about their drivers. I'm so glad I kept that $82 mistake in my favor last month.
> 
> View attachment 304117


I knew this would affect pay drastically. I had a ride that took me an 1 1/2 hours away from my home. I needed to get back in time to pick up my kids so I had to turn off my app. In the past I would have gotten at least 2 to 3 rides on my way home that would cover my cost for the return. This might be the end of my career as an UBER driver. What happened to "making money at every turn" I guess Uber was talking about themselves, while we pay the cost.


----------



## 90Days2Perfection (Nov 26, 2018)




----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

90Days2Perfection said:


> View attachment 306377


See...they DID redistribute to the non-DF drivers! Woo hoo!


----------



## Peter Mead (Mar 27, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> Hope this isn't spreading, but i fear it might be. I actually got one of those messages that DF had been temporarily turned off, for the first time recently.
> 
> I don't know about others, but most of the time when I use DF it means that if not for the DF I wouldn't be online anyway. So taking it away won't really get me to take any rides I otherwise wouldn't have.
> 
> ...


Here's the thing: you can always keep the app on instead of dead hauling. You can decline any ride that comes up if you want.


----------



## Christinebitg (Jun 29, 2018)

Peter Mead said:


> Here's the thing: you can always keep the app on instead of dead hauling. You can decline any ride that comes up if you want.


Sure, but the trip might be going the wrong direction.


----------



## TJH2 (Mar 15, 2019)

Coachman said:


> Uber doesn't give a shit about their drivers. I'm so glad I kept that $82 mistake in my favor last month.
> 
> View attachment 304117


I'm online half the amount of time now that they've done this. Get a fare to DFW wait in queue and end up in Ft. Worth 70 miles away from home past the time you wanted to quit. I don't log on when I'm going to the office nor when I'm going home anymore. Uber dosen't pay that much anyway. They do the minimum amount for the drivers they can get by with.



Peter Mead said:


> Here's the thing: you can always keep the app on instead of dead hauling. You can decline any ride that comes up if you want.
> [/QUOTE


but you don't know what the fare wants to go


----------



## UBro Man (Mar 21, 2019)

touberornottouber said:


> I always love how they pretend they are concerned about our earnings. YEAH RIGHT!!! Practically every single change they have made in the last couple years has been to benefit themselves at the expense of drivers. These people are true jerks and it is obvious they think of us drivers as literally being like human garbage.
> 
> 
> They are just jerks and control freaks. Why did they work so hard to discourage tipping for so many years? Would it have hurt them any if the drivers got tipped an extra buck or two?
> ...


All of this is why I was advocating that Drivers not accept POOL rides or rides consisting of more than two passengers. To do so completely devalues, you and your vehicle. Of they TRULY wanted us to earn more, they would implement a multi-rider rate. They conflate RIDES with TRIPS, which are not the same. Four people on one trip is four rides. If any of you think current conditions are becoming intolerable, just wait until them going public starts to bring on shareholder pressures and demands. Driver pay will plummet, in deference to guidance and EPS.

Smoke 'em, if you got 'em. D-Day cometh.


----------



## Uberexit (Mar 23, 2019)

#professoruber said:


> The survey asked if you would be willing to take the destination filter at a reduced rate. This implies motive in my opinion.


Hell no... rates are low and gas is going up.


----------



## LyftUberFuwabolewa (Feb 7, 2019)

I normally don't care too much about using destination mode in the start and beginning of my driving day but being able to work my way home is very important. I wish they would add a feature called "get me home" and it would not time-out. I would be a willing to trade destination mode for that. 

I find Lyft destination mode to be much less accurate and often send me in the wrong direction. I use that during the day when I want to get away from certain problematic areas.


----------



## @probablyuber (Mar 18, 2019)

ZenUber said:


> I don' think you'll ever be able to ban something that makes money.


Like the %1 paying taxes...

Uber telling me," hey you just drove for 10 hours and didn't cancel a single trip but now you are an hour and a half from home and you want to make money driving towards home? No!"

if 5 people in Dallas or a handful of people around the u.s. are ruining a program that makes the rest of us money cancel their contract. You are a multimillion-dollar company act like it.

We already know that if you have a low enough rating you get suspended or removed. so if you were using other programs logging off and driving to high rate areas and then signing back on or are using the DF in an abusive way, then you shouldn't be here. And if these drivers are a blemish on this company and the rest of us then just as a blemish they should be removed. Welcome to owning a company with employees, I mean contractors. What a joke.


----------

