# Uber To Increase Fares and Fees In Response to Prop 22



## MHR (Jul 23, 2017)

[HEADING=2]Uber rides and food deliveries will cost more in California to cover new driver protections​[/HEADING]
By Sara Ashley O'Brien, CNN Business
Updated 3:01 PM EST, Mon December 14, 2020​
(CNN Business)Uber (UBER) said Monday that customers in California will see prices increase this week for rides and food deliveries to help cover the costs of new benefits for its workers.

The new flat fees, which range from $0.30 to $2 depending on the service and location, will take effect Monday. The price hike comes as a controversial new gig economy law, which Uber and its peers spent millions pushing to pass, is set to take effect this week.

Californians voted in November to pass Proposition 22, or Prop 22, which exempts companies like Uber from having to classify their gig workers in the state as employees entitled to basic rights and protections such as workers' compensation, unemployment insurance, family leave, or sick leave.

Under the new law, Uber's drivers and delivery workers are independent contractors with some benefit concessions, including a minimum earnings guarantee based on "engaged time," when a driver is fulfilling a ride or delivery request, but not the time they spend waiting for a gig. In a blog post and an email to drivers about the changes, the company said, "If you earn less than the guaranteed minimum over 2 weeks, we'll pay you the difference automatically."

Drivers will receive $0.30 reimbursement per engaged mile, lower than the IRS' estimated $0.58 per mile cost of owning and operating a vehicle. Its workers will also be enrolled in an injury protection plan beginning this week. And starting next year, those with 15 on-trip hours per week will get a stipend for healthcare.

To fund these benefits, consumers will pay a "California Driver Benefits Fee" that varies by city, and by service, the company said. Rides will cost an extra $0.30 to $1.50. For food deliveries through Uber Eats, fees range from $0.99 per order in Los Angeles to $2 per order in San Francisco.

Uber had previously teased a number of drastic changes it may have had to make to remain in business in the state if the Prop 22 ballot measure had failed and the company was forced to classify its drivers as employees. The company said it might have had to downsize its fleet of drivers, shut down ridesharing in much of the state and tack on fees for riders to cover the more extensive benefits employees would receive in places it continued to operate.

Uber, along with Lyft (LYFT), DoorDash, Instacart and Uber-owned Postmates, spent more than $200 million pushing the ballot measure.

On an earnings call two days after its political win in California, Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said that execution of Prop 22 "may have some implication as it relates to rates," but that the company believes "any effect that it has on rates will not have a significant effect on trip volumes one way or the other based on the kinds of sensitivities that we've seen in the past."

Companies like DoorDash and Lyft have similarly said they expect to tack on some additional costs for customers associated with the changes for workers.

DoorDash spokesperson Taylor Bennett told CNN Business that rather than add a new fee, the company is exploring slight increases to existing service fees on California orders beginning Wednesday in response to new benefits associated with Prop 22.

Lyft notified drivers in an email last Friday that the minimum earnings and compensation for vehicle expenses associated with Prop 22 would go into effect on Wednesday. A spokesperson for Lyft said the company did not have anything to share regarding changes for riders.

Uber and Lyft have a long history of steep losses, and have said that they will achieve profitability on an adjusted basis next year. DoorDash, which went public last week, turned a rare quarterly profit during the pandemic before returning to a loss in the most recent quarter.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/14/tech/uber-prop-22-california-fees/index.html


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

well, of course. Uber et al were not going to 'eat' the increased costs. The biggest increased costs will be the benefits and insurance. Not sure how the min fares per 2 weeks will add much. Time will tell.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

That's funny, they raised the per mile rate card fares (and kept the driver pay the same) here in the RDU area just because they could, don't need to pretend we are partners anymore.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

SHalester said:


> well, of course. Uber et al were not going to 'eat' the increased costs. The biggest increased costs will be the benefits and insurance. Not sure how the min fares per 2 weeks will add much. Time will tell.


It's been said here, and there and everywhere ... over and over and over.
Companies do NOT PAY TAXES.
None, Zero.

They pass those costs on to the consumer as the cost of manufacturing, or of being in business.
If it costs $2.30 to make a widget then the company can afford to charge you $4.99.
If their cost goes up (energy, taxes, employment, whatever) to $2.68 they pass that $0.39 on to the buyer and mark it up, and charge $5.50. 
If the consumer is not able or willing to pay that, then fewer widgets are sold, and employees are laid off or robots are created to do the work cheaper, or the factory moves to a place that doesn't tax so much. The factory also consumes less materials to make their widget, so the steel companies sell less ... the lunch cafe down the street sells less lunches to the employees that are not there any more. The city collects less taxes; so the streets start to go to hell.
All started from "Tax those evil corporations."

Economics 101


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> They pass those costs on to the consumer as the cost of manufacturing, or of being in business.


D'oh? You made my point, tho not sure your reply had anything to do with reply. I think. Maybe. For certain.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

MHR said:


> [HEADING=2]
> Uber rides and food deliveries will cost more in California to cover new driver protections​[/HEADING]
> By Sara Ashley O'Brien, CNN Business
> Updated 3:01 PM EST, Mon December 14, 2020​
> ...


Not only are the fees a money-grabbing scam, these slimebag companies are once again throwing the drivers under the bus by making it appear that the extra money being paid by the pax is going into the pockets of the drivers, which is a big fat lie.

The consumer advocates and govt of California should be informed that this is a money-grabbing scam.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

man, we should strike. Take to the streets. Drivers lives Matter.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

SHalester said:


> D'oh? You made my point, tho not sure your reply had anything to do with reply.


That's ok, there's a few people here 'listening' to our conversation.
Some of them need to have this lesson repeated.
When they voting for a tax increase on 'those rich people' they really need to understand who that effects.
I will say it often.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

yeah, on this forum, still at a loss what a 'rich' person is. Seems to be no definite answer to that.

Think a whole bunch of readers confuse income & cash flow, methinks. 

My snarky answer is a rich person pays all their bills on time.  :thumbup:


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Had a snooty boss ask me once if I was rich.
I said, "I do what and who I want, whenever I want. Is that rich?"


----------



## Fusion_LUser (Jan 3, 2020)

UberBastid said:


> It's been said here, and there and everywhere ... over and over and over.
> Companies do NOT PAY TAXES.
> None, Zero.
> 
> ...


Very good and if anyone wants to know more about the cost of making widgets here's a great lesson on making them...


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> whenever I want


betcha your wife unit doesn't quite agree with that statement......


----------



## _Tron_ (Feb 9, 2020)

Nats121 said:


> Not only are the fees a money-grabbing scam, these slimebag companies are once again throwing the drivers under the bus by making it appear that the extra money being paid by the pax is going into the pockets of the drivers, which is a big fat lie.
> 
> The consumer advocates and govt of California should be informed that this is a money-grabbing scam.


In a way, I am glad to see them raise rates. The money to fund the new "benefits" had to come from somewhere, and I am glad to see that these features may not be adding to Uber's losses. And since the flat fees are theoretically funding the benefits it makes sense that Uber keeps 100% of that. That just makes sense.

That does not mean for one moment though that Uber is not a sneaky, patronizing, self-serving, entity with no scruples (gee, I just described most every large corporation in America). I just got a thank you from them for supporting the efforts to pass prop 22. I did no such thing. Every time I was inundated with one of those support prop 22 polls when going online, there were two choices, remember; YES and DISMISS (I forget what the exact wording was). But it was not YES or NO. I never once voted YES. So basically Uber denied drivers the ability to vote NO on their support for 22, resulting in Uber's completely erroneous claim the seventy something percent of drivers supported 22.

And, rather than receiving these questionable "benefits" I would have preferred to see Uber simply raise rates and pass the lion's share of the increased take to the drivers to spend as each one sees fit. I already have health insurance.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

_Tron_ said:


> In a way, I am glad to see them raise rates. The money to fund the new "benefits" had to come from somewhere, and I am glad to see that these features may not be adding to Uber's losses.


What flavor of Uber Kool Aid are you drinking?

You overlook the likelihood that Eats drivers, who are heavily dependent on tips will probably see a reduction in tips from some customers.

Let the costs (what little they actually are) go to Uber's alleged "losses". Why in the world would you care? You think the Uber bigwigs and investors give a rat's ass about your losses?



_Tron_ said:


> That does not mean for one moment though that Uber is not a sneaky, patronizing, self-serving, entity with no scruples (gee, I just described most every large corporation in America).


When Uber apologists are cornered, their last resort defense is that "every company mistreats their workers." BS.

As far as their mistreatment of their drivers, Uber and these other "gig" companies have few equals in the corporate world.


----------



## Paul Vincent (Jan 15, 2016)

Today is the 16th and the driver rates have not changed...... yay for now


----------



## Mole (Mar 9, 2017)

Paul Vincent said:


> Today is the 16th and the driver rates have not changed...... yay for now


They have changed we no longer get 75% of the cost of the trip minimum.


----------



## _Tron_ (Feb 9, 2020)

Nats121 said:


> You overlook the likelihood that Eats drivers, who are heavily dependent on tips will probably see a reduction in tips from some customers.


Just my opinion sir. But I do hear you on Eats.



Mole said:


> They have changed we no longer get 75% of the cost of the trip minimum.


Mole, I see you are in California. This could be huge, and everyone has been waiting for the other shoe to drop in CA. Have they changed the fare split? Is that what you are seeing? Do they no longer take a flat 25% from the fare (minus marketplace fee)?

Any other changes? Can you still see all the trip information prior to accepting the request?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Mole said:


> They have changed we no longer get 75% of the cost of the trip minimum.


That's correct, you get 75% of the pax "rate card" or "list price".

In 2018, Uber and Lyft raised the rate card prices in Florida, North Carolina, and some other markets but kept driver pay rates the SAME.

Thus, in those markets, drivers are being paid approximately 68% of rate card prices.


----------



## Mole (Mar 9, 2017)

_Tron_ said:


> Just my opinion sir. But I do hear you on Eats.
> 
> 
> Mole, I see you are in California. This could be huge, and everyone has been waiting for the other shoe to drop in CA. Have they changed the fare split? Is that what you are seeing? Do they no longer take a flat 25% from the fare (minus marketplace fee)?
> ...


So I did a test run today my first drive in a long time it looks like they have not started 22 pricing yet but I did notice I did not get 75% it was a little short. They gave me miles and minutes and a base rate then took out 25% I can still see where I'm going it also told me this ride was between $10-$11 net in my pocket.


----------



## _Tron_ (Feb 9, 2020)

Thanks for the screen shots. That looks pretty much like it's been since they instituted the new pricing model earlier in 2020. They are carving 25% off the fare earned from time and distance. (mine shows 20% due to driving an EV).

I might add that several times I have compared my ride earnings with what the pax actually paid. Although Uber is hiding what the pax paid, and that could bite us at any time if they raise rates, so far the numbers have matched up pretty good, with Uber only subtracting the marketplace fee. In other words, I was earning 80% of what the pax paid, minus the nominal marketplace fee.


----------



## Mole (Mar 9, 2017)

I’ll do another test run tomorrow we will see what it looks like then.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Paul Vincent said:


> oday is the 16th and the driver rates have not changed...... yay for now


so everybody who posted they would due to Prop 22....I hope their head is hanging down today; boy did they guess wrong....



Nats121 said:


> As far as their mistreatment of their drivers, Uber and these other "gig" companies have few equals in the corporate world.


whenever I see that here, I wonder if they have had any long term W2 job.......ever......¿


----------



## Jst1dreamr (Apr 25, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> Not only are the fees a money-grabbing scam, these slimebag companies are once again throwing the drivers under the bus by making it appear that the extra money being paid by the pax is going into the pockets of the drivers, which is a big fat lie.
> 
> The consumer advocates and govt of California should be informed that this is a money-grabbing scam.


You don't understand. Here in California if there is a scam then state government is most certainly in on it. This is how Uber got the prop 22 approved by the state AG to go on the ballot uncontested in the first place and got all labor lawsuits dropped by then DIR Labor Commissioner Julie Su in time to avoid the bad publicity at election time. California politicians wrote the book on corruption in government.


----------



## Paul Vincent (Jan 15, 2016)

SHalester said:


> so everybody who posted they would due to Prop 22....I hope their head is hanging down today; boy did they guess wrong....
> 
> 
> whenever I see that here, I wonder if they have had any long term W2 job.......ever......¿


Uber hasn't started paying for pick up yet (period 2)


----------



## _Tron_ (Feb 9, 2020)

Jst1dreamr said:


> You don't understand. Here in California if there is a scam then state government is most certainly in on it. This is how Uber got the prop 22 approved by the state AG to go on the ballot uncontested in the first place and got all labor lawsuits dropped by then DIR Labor Commissioner Julie Su in time to avoid the bad publicity at election time. California politicians wrote the book on corruption in government.


Do tell. If true, how did the state benefit from the deal; over the table or under the table?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

SHalester said:


> whenever I see that here, I wonder if they have had any long term W2 job.......ever......¿


I have, so now what?


----------



## Uber's Guber (Oct 22, 2017)

SHalester said:


> Drivers lives Matter.


Well, yeah.... but, only the black drivers.


----------



## Jst1dreamr (Apr 25, 2019)

_Tron_ said:


> Do tell. If true, how did the state benefit from the deal; over the table or under the table?


Not the state, just some corrupt politicians. You shouldn't say "do tell" it just sounds really dumb.


----------



## O-Side Uber (Jul 26, 2017)

_Tron_ said:


> In a way, I am glad to see them raise rates. The money to fund the new "benefits" had to come from somewhere, and I am glad to see that these features may not be adding to Uber's losses. And since the flat fees are theoretically funding the benefits it makes sense that Uber keeps 100% of that. That just makes sense.
> 
> That does not mean for one moment though that Uber is not a sneaky, patronizing, self-serving, entity with no scruples (gee, I just described most every large corporation in America). I just got a thank you from them for supporting the efforts to pass prop 22. I did no such thing. Every time I was inundated with one of those support prop 22 polls when going online, there were two choices, remember; YES and DISMISS (I forget what the exact wording was). But it was not YES or NO. I never once voted YES. So basically Uber denied drivers the ability to vote NO on their support for 22, resulting in Uber's completely erroneous claim the seventy something percent of drivers supported 22.
> 
> And, rather than receiving these questionable "benefits" I would have preferred to see Uber simply raise rates and pass the lion's share of the increased take to the drivers to spend as each one sees fit. I already have health insurance.


This move will be more money for the companies and less tips for us. I doubt there will be any meaningful increase to our bottom lines . If we work 40 hours , will we get a coupon for 25% off road side assistance or something equally meaningless ? Meanwhile Uber pockets the $2 increase in fares for themselves. Passing that proposition screwed all of us.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

did my first GH order today. AND found a new charge 'driver assistance'. Wut? well, it's the cost they believe is related to Prop 22. It is mentioned by the tip area too. They also modified the tip default to be a silly, low amount vs the 20% default that was there last week.

On a $28 food order, the charge was only a $1.50, but at least it is listed on it's own line. I tipped as normal. I just hope that entire $1.50 goes to the Prop 22 costs and doesn't become a profit center.......



Nats121 said:


> I have, so now what?


no difference. but I'd wonder if you really had a W2 job where you were 100% happy 100% of the time.

So, now what? <kersplat>



Paul Vincent said:


> Uber hasn't started paying for pick up yet (period 2)


...or they might include that in the calculation, which they will do every 2 weeks? Who knows, but doubtful they are NOT doing to pay for that period as the law requires.

I'm certainly not going online to test that theory, not until I get the first shot.


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

So I have a trip I took before Prop 22 and the estimate is still the same, I haven’t actually taken a trip since so not sure where the money to pay for Prop 22 is coming out of. It’s not free stuff they are giving drivers and it makes sense that they would have to raise prices to cover it, it’s still a lot cheaper then if they made us employees and I’m glad I’m not, those employee costs never end up in my pocket, they end up in everyone else’s pocket to say I have support that more then likely I never will use


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

SHalester said:


> no difference. but I'd wonder if you really had a W2 job where you were 100% happy 100% of the time.


C'mon, you know what I'm talking about.

This discussion isn't about perfection, it's about gig companies bending over their drivers with no lube 24/7 and always looking for additional ways to bend them over. And when they get thru bending them over they toss them away like used Kleenex.

My point stands that these gig companies have few equals in the corporate world in the way they mistreat their drivers.


----------



## GomerPyle (Dec 19, 2020)

Both Lyft and Uber have announced that Medicare premium costs will NOT be eligible for the Proposition 22 driver health cost reimbursement provision. In many cases, these costs are equal to or in excess of Covered California rates for younger drivers. They do not consider Medicare to be a "qualified health insurance plan." Expect the Sh-t to hit the fan. You do not want to piss off seniors, particularly those that have to drive 15-40 hours a week. If anyone knows a good labor attorney, you might want to alert them to this opportunity. As ironclad Proposition 22 is, unconsionable provisions, that were NEVER disclosed during the Yes on 22 campaign, will be contested.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

NicFit said:


> those employee costs never end up in my pocket, they end up in everyone else's pocket to say I have support that more then likely I never will use


Some of them do end up in your pocket, now (minimum wage) or later (50% FICA contribution)

In addition, some end up in your pocket if you get fired (Unemployment), some end up in your pocket if you get hurt on the job (Workers Comp).

Another benefit of employee status is receiving some degree of job security.

Because these gig companies are run by people without ethics and firing drivers costs them nothing, they toss away drivers like trash.

Employers on the other hand are cautious about firing workers because to do so raises their Unemployment Insurance premiums. Thus, employees receive at least some job security.

You may prefer alleged "IC" status, but there's no denying that employee status includes plenty of value for the worker.

It's a matter of personal preference.


----------



## _Tron_ (Feb 9, 2020)

GomerPyle said:


> Both Lyft and Uber have announced that Medicare premium costs will NOT be eligible for the Proposition 22 driver health cost reimbursement provision. In many cases, these costs are equal to or in excess of Covered California rates for younger drivers. They do not consider Medicare to be a "qualified health insurance plan." Expect the Sh-t to hit the fan. You do not want to piss off seniors, particularly those that have to drive 15-40 hours a week. If anyone knows a good labor attorney, you might want to alert them to this opportunity. As ironclad Proposition 22 is, unconsionable provisions, that were NEVER disclosed during the Yes on 22 campaign, will be contested.


Well surprise, surprise, surprise!


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

SHalester said:


> On a $28 food order, the charge was only a $1.50, but at least it is listed on it's own line. I tipped as normal. I just hope that entire $1.50 goes to the Prop 22 costs and doesn't become a profit center.......


"Only" $1.50? It is a profit center.

@The Gift of Fish did a layout of Prop 22 in which he showed with numbers that Prop 22 was carefully designed to make sure that few drivers would benefit from it.

Meanwhile, the customers are getting hit with hefty charges, the majority of which will probably end up in the bank accounts of these sleazy companies.


----------



## Fusion_LUser (Jan 3, 2020)

NicFit said:


> So I have a trip I took before Prop 22 and the estimate is still the same, I haven't actually taken a trip since so not sure where the money to pay for Prop 22 is coming out of. It's not free stuff they are giving drivers and it makes sense that they would have to raise prices to cover it, it's still a lot cheaper then if they made us employees and I'm glad I'm not, those employee costs never end up in my pocket, they end up in everyone else's pocket to say I have support that more then likely I never will use


I talked to a friend who is still driving (Bay Area) and Lyft sucks ass like always, nothing new there. There are long pick-up requests for short minimum fare rides. He will have to wait until next week or the following to see how Lyft pays out on the .30 a mile reimbursement and if he gets any "guarantee" money. He doubts he'll be that low.. he said he averages about $25 an hour even now (F/T on both apps, knows his game).


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> it's about gig companies bending over their drivers with no lube 24/7


I get that 'gigs' ain't for you and you are quite upset about what happened to you. No kidding. You can't get over it and you re-visit the butt hurt every single day. You would NEVER survive in a W2 job with that kind of attitude; just saying You would go insane.

The thing with gigs that you missed (or maybe not) they are easy to get into and even EASIER to get out of. Once one becomes THAT upset, you stop going online. Either switch to another gig, or go back to a W2 steady job. Neither will be perfect and both come with pro/cons.

Myself: I had a long career spent at the same company, different departments over 30+ years. Had a great boss of 25yrs and at times was very much not happy. I retired. Did some volunteer work for a few years, and then started RS as it is the perfect pt job for me. i knew exactly what I was getting into and knew exactly what the pay was (or could be). And, really, since I began there have been no pay cuts and only positive changes. But, even if things went backwards I'd be ok or I'd stop. That easy.

Nobody is forced to remain in a gig; even those that a gig is it for them; they have choices of WHICH gig and there are several to chose from.

Does Uber et al treat drivers all that different from an employee? Well, first, drivers are vendors (at best) not employees. They are treated as such. Heck, we aren't even paid by HR, we are paid via accounts payable. Because we ARE vendors.

Being an employee does not automatically mean you are treated so much better; it can mean you are treated exactly the same. Depends on the business/company/corporation.

Long post, shorter: being a real employee is not a magic pill compared to being a gig driver. And if one doesn't like either, they have choices. Always. Quit, or don't go online and find something else. Rarely does one go backwards to just complain about what they WERE doing. They move on.......hopefully.



Nats121 said:


> @The Gift of Fish did a layout of Prop 22 in which he showed with numbers that Prop 22 was carefully designed to make sure that few drivers would benefit from it.


and as noted Prop 22 is floor not a ceiling. Pointless to calculate the floor. Any driver is making less than the floor, really needs to evualate what the frak they are doing wrong. And now they will be rewarded by making a little more. Woohoo?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

SHalester said:


> I get that 'gigs' ain't for you and you are quite upset about what happened to you. No kidding. You can't get over it and you re-visit the butt hurt every single day. You would NEVER survive in a W2 job with that kind of attitude; just saying You would go insane.


I work a W2 job and have since I was 16 years old. I already stated that in a previous post. Either you didn't read it, you have reading comprehension issues, or you're accusing me of lying.

As far as "what happened to me" is concerned, I'm still driving for Eats, and while I'm not raking in big bucks I make better than average money for this job because I'm good at it. But I know I've left many thousands of dollars on the table due to the bad business practices of these companies, of which the hiding of destinations has had the largest impact on my wallet.

My beef with these companies is the way they treat people and their massive hubris.

I personally know good people who were unjustly fired and/or cheated by them as well as the many that have posted on this website and others. I'd feel this way even if I never drove for them.

As long as you get your tax write-off the other drivers can all go to hell in a handbasket as far as you're concerned. Prop 22 isn't a done deal and karma can be a *****.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> Either you didn't read it


ding ding. I have to say I see a post from you I fast scroll through it. Sorry, not sorry. One can only take 'these companies are so so mean, they should all be in hell' so many times, written only so many ways. Really.

And, no, I don't keep 'track' of the regulars backstories, specially when they change or morph over the months and/or they forget what they posted oh not so long ago.

So, you have a W2 job. Great. Are you happy there 100% of the time? And if not, would you leave for another job?

I get you are butt hurt and you want to revisit it over and over. That IS what this forum was created for; disgruntled drivers.

I happen to see either multiple sides or a the bigger picture more often. unlike you, the 2 RS gigs I'm with haven't treated me me 'badly' at all. Sure, if I started before the fare reductions, that might have an effect, but I didn't. I was deep into my career and really didn't give a hoot what was happening in the gig world.

With a gig, as stated, it is an easy in and it is an easy out. You either live with whatever has made you unhappy, or move on.

Karma? Prop 22? Oh, never mind, don't even want to know.....


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

Fusion_LUser said:


> I talked to a friend who is still driving (Bay Area) and Lyft sucks ass like always, nothing new there. There are long pick-up requests for short minimum fare rides. He will have to wait until next week or the following to see how Lyft pays out on the .30 a mile reimbursement and if he gets any "guarantee" money. He doubts he'll be that low.. he said he averages about $25 an hour even now (F/T on both apps, knows his game).


Lyft I'm disappointed with, to me they didn't do a thing to make me feel like an independent contractor throughout this whole thing. I'm only going to use them to cherry pick rides from, like you said most are garbage, long pickups with short fares. Uber has actually increased pay while lyft looks like they decreased pay. I think Uber said we need to make more money, so we raise prices and give drivers the same 75/25 cut, drivers can't complain and if riders do they'll just say you voted on it, where did you think the new benefits would come from. Around the bay riders will spend more, so Lyft needs to figure it out or I will stop driving for them


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

UberBastid said:


> It's been said here, and there and everywhere ... over and over and over.
> Companies do NOT PAY TAXES.
> None, Zero.
> 
> ...


I always love it when people come in with this argument because they don't understand how taxes work. If you're making that argument than no one pays taxes because we all pass along the cost of business to someone else.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Uber's Guber said:


> Well, yeah.... but, only the black drivers.


What if Uber black isn't available in my market?

Is it Comfort drivers lives matter?

I primarily drive in two areas, in one, comfort is the highest in the other, premier. On occasion I do go to a third, where they do have black.

Do i need a disclaimer?

Comfort drivers lives matter¹ ²

¹ only in Central Atlantic coast region

² in Miami or Orlando territory comfort lives do not matter.

What of I'm a black man who does drive Uber Black? Do I get priority in the matter pecking order?

Black black drivers mater more?

This is all so confusing. Life was so much simpler when i thought we were all equal



Paul Vincent said:


> Uber hasn't started paying for pick up yet (period 2)


And they aren't going to pay you for the pick up.


----------



## The Entomologist (Sep 23, 2018)

Lol, so they made the riders vote for prop 22 and they still screwed them with higher costs.

Git.
Shit.
On.


----------



## REX HAVOC (Jul 4, 2016)

Wasn't one of the biggest selling points to the public in defeating Prop 22 was to keep rates down and not have to raise fares to riders?


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

REX HAVOC said:


> Wasn't one of the biggest selling points to the public in defeating Prop 22 was to keep rates down and not have to raise fares to riders?


nope, at least not what I saw in the media or here. Pretty well known pax rates would go up to fund the additional costs. Anyone who **** the fares would stay the same were rather confused where the extra money was coming from. Shareholders certainly were not going to fund the total.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

SHalester said:


> Anyone who thought the fares would stay the same were rather confused where the extra money was coming from.


Some people (about half of us I think) have a lot of trouble with that concept.
That money has to actually COME from somewhere.
In order to GET something, one has to GIVE something (sooner or later).


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

UberBastid said:


> That money has to actually COME from somewhere.


certainly the extra $$ wasn't coming from the shareholders; so that means.......pax eat it. And they will, won't even notice it.

Well, on the food side the pax do see an extra charge for 'driver support'; a whopping $1.50 per order. Big deal.


----------

