# 5 Features For The LYFT/UBER App That Would Enhance Both Driver & Passenger Experience



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

Good article. You are right on the money. These companies could easily implement these zero-cost options, and more .


----------



## Talcire (May 18, 2016)

Good ideas. I always thought some kind of symbol or badge that indicates a rider / account holder tips on 51% of rides. That would help me decide to accept a ride that I might be hesitating on (due to distance away / traffic to location / opposite direction of civilization).


----------



## LIsuberman (Nov 12, 2018)

In your radius filter for drivers I would like to see an option to limit driver drop-off to a certain millage - distance wise - let the driver choose how far they are willing to go in miles. And lyft should be forced to add a town to their address when it finally reveals where you are going. Main street can be anywhere !


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

LIsuberman said:


> In your radius filter for drivers I would like to see an option to limit driver drop-off to a certain millage - distance wise - let the driver choose how far they are willing to go in miles. And lyft should be forced to add a town to their address when it finally reveals where you are going. Main street can be anywhere !


Yup. that is the second Radius (aka DESTINATION Radius Filter, described in the final paragraph under #4) I'd be perfectly fine only getting a few of these a day like the regular destination filter.



Mista T said:


> Good article. You are right on the money. These companies could easily implement these zero-cost options, and more .


I have heard it voiced internally from LYFT that many of these features have not been implemented due to the potential for DRIVERS SCAMMING them - particularly the Car Seat Instant-$5-Cancel fee (if parents have toddler and no car seat, but ping a driver in the hopes the driver will take them illegally).

I remain unconvinced with this argument, and would like to see it play out in the real world, and not the software-engineer-paranoia world.


----------



## Dammit Mazzacane (Dec 31, 2015)

Let me play devil’s advocate for a moment and say that many of these feature ideas could create service delays or gaps that TNCs do not want to see at any cost.
* The car seat option is worthwhile except for liability risks on the driver if it is installed incorrectly but represented as a safe car seat, or if the car seat exists but is damaged or “expired”.
* The driver rating limit is reasonable, but could create gaps in service if I’m in a rural area and won’t take under 4.9. It also can be manipulated to strike down passenger ratings “no cash tip? 3 stars!” “Tip in the app? Yeah right!”
* The passenger rating limit is highly executable, but invokes more fear in drivers about rating anxiety. Uber might already be tweaking the favoritism algorithm with its Uber Pro scheme, though, as you mone prong is you must have a 4.8 or higher to be eligible.
* The radius filters could create dead zones in neighborhoods. However, definitely appreciate the idea.
* The rematch idea could be manipulated, but not sure how.

This is all devil’s advocate commentary though.

and
* the green car option would not influence drivers to replace their vehicles with fuel-efficient vehicles if they are “running what they’ve got”. However, it seems like a reasonable zero-cost PR boost. It might cause dismay to some people who may now subconsciously consider the vehicle in rating the driver. “Well I really wanted a green car but none were available so I guess I’m riding with you in your Camry / Accord / Malibu / Fusion / etc. today... you inconsiderate jerk. I mean at least it’s quicker than MASS TRANSIT. Got an aux cord?”


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> Both ride hail companies have been bleeding Venture Capital money by the billions, each and every quarter.


You're incorrect.

The DRIVERS are the ones bleeding cash every quarter, NOT the investors.

Uber's been in business for approximately 10 years, and in that time frame, their investors have kicked in a total of around $17.3 billion, according to Bloomberg.

Being paid 1970s taxi rates since 2014 has cost the drivers VASTLY MORE than $17 billion in lost earnings, which means the drivers are the ones taking it on the chin, not the investors.

It's the investors who are looking at a potential $120 IPO windfall, NOT the drivers.



Kurt Halfyard said:


> I am not going to talk about money.


You're free to talk about whatever you want, but MONEY is far far far away the biggest concern of the drivers.

In many markets, including mine, drivers have been whacked yet again with a pay cut. That's in addition to the loss of surge pay, the virtual elimination of boost, and the slashed quests.


Kurt Halfyard said:


> And yet, in the past year, the number of Active Drivers on the road has gone up and up and up. There needs to be better way to nudge passengers towards the better Drivers, and Drivers' diligence and improvement to customer service to be rewarded.


Sorry, but I disagree with your use of ratings as the measuring stick of how "good" a driver is.

The ratings system is seriously flawed, and rewards drivers who play it safe and punishes drivers who are willing to give rides to high risk pax and/or work in low income areas.

KNOWING THE DESTINATIONS IN ADVANCE, which was not on your list, would be the GAME CHANGER for the drivers.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> KNOWING THE DESTINATIONS IN ADVANCE, which was not on your list, would be the GAME CHANGER for the drivers.


This point is interesting, because the RADIUS FILTERS I mention in the article would get around naked-destination-discrimination. LYFT/UBER wants to avoid because it would put us back (GAME CHANGE to the PAST) into the racial/social/class discrimination in the cabbie world. Specifically in picking put certain types of passengers going to certain neighborhoods, and not others. UBER has enough bad PR that they certainly do not want to go there.

This article was an attempt to get at a middle ground that would benefit drivers and passengers (and thereby scaling up to benefit to the mother-corporation) in kind of a win-win.

It was not about giving drivers pie-in-the-sky things that are NOT going to happen, (like increase in Rate Cards). The best way to increase drivers pay is to reward the good drivers and cull the bad-ants. Giving priority rides to higher rated drivers, and allowing drivers to more tune their driving to their schedule, and create the circumstances for great experiences on both sides of the driver/passenger equation would have the good drivers and good passengers come away from the service with the rando-casino type weirdness that happens due to unsophistication of Driver and Passenger App choices.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> This point is interesting, because the RADIUS FILTERS I mention in the article would get around naked-destination-discrimination, which is what LYFT/UBER want to avoid because it would put us back into the racial discrimination in the cabbie world about picking put certain types of passengers going to certain neighborhoods, and not others. UBER has enough bad PR that they certainly do not want to go there.


First of all, my vehicle is not public transportation, so I don't give a rat's ass about so-called destination discrimination.

Radius filters would not shield drivers from accusations of redlining, especially if a minority neighborhood is just outside the radius



Kurt Halfyard said:


> This point is interesting, because the RADIUS FILTERS I mention in the article would get around naked-destination-discrimination, which is what LYFT/UBER want to avoid because it would put us back into the racial discrimination in the cabbie world about picking put certain types of passengers going to certain neighborhoods, and not others. UBER has enough bad PR that they certainly do not want to go there.


Uber doesn't give a shit about discrimination.

Uber ENGAGED in redlining in the old days when they were offering decent boosts. Here in DC and other markets, boosts were nowhere to be found in minority wards in DC, causing frequent surges.

So uber's redlining of those areas resulted in the residents of those wards being forced to pay higher prices for their rides than pax from many other areas of the city.



Kurt Halfyard said:


> Giving priority rides to higher rated drivers


I've already pointed out the flaws of that policy.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> First of all, my vehicle is not public transportation, so I don't give a rat's ass about so-called destination discrimination.
> 
> I've already pointed out the flaws of that policy.


We can agree to disagree on this matter.


----------



## possibledriver (Dec 16, 2014)

1) Car seats...I drive a Scion XD. It has plenty of passenger space but very little luggage space. I'd lose a lot of good drives by carrying a car seat around. It's the parents' job to have a car seat with them. No car seat, no ride

4&5...I use mystro and filter by pax rating and time to pick up. It suto acceps the ride and logs you out of the other apps. When you drop off it logs you back in the other. I have both apps set for minimum pax rating of 4.70. Lyft always lies about pick up time so I have it filtered to no more than 5 minutes away. Uber is filtered to no more than 7 minutes away. Above those limits it gives you the ping but you choose to accept or not as usual.


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect (Jan 14, 2015)

Nope nope nope, Drop the Green vehicle . Period.

#5 On lyft, do you know just how many get 4*'ed cause they didn't leave tip ? But you would still take them again.!
So your belief is that no tip is a 5* Pax ?

#4 Although I like the idea of a radius filter. Discrimination laws will not let that happen.

#3 Probably not going to happen. We have all had a few that have been fine and wonder the why behind it, however, I would like to see in the pax app to encourage pax to tip to bring that up.

#2 I think Lyft is all ready doing this. There just not going to tell you. Here in the IE and at Ont Airport again I think Lyft skipped over a bunch of drivers (again) could be because of the IEHP trips we sometimes get. I have never turned one down and got matched with a severly handy capped person in a chair a couple of days ago, they had a helper with them though. I also think I get my fair share of 45+ cause have never turned one down.

#2a. Its been rumored and proven here that uber will skip over other drivers who are less than 4.90 Its happened to me once that I know of at JWA. Cause my rating happend to higher than that.

#1. I would like to see a release of Liability / no vault on the drivers part after invesigation, form on the pax app for them to sign. That's not going to happen though.

ps, 4yrs Uber, 3 yrs lyft.


----------



## Fargle (May 28, 2017)

Effective mechanism for dealing with feedback scammers and putting back ratings. Every Halloween and New Year these assholes do it.
If no feedback left by rider within 2 days, automatic 5 star or else not possible to leave feedback.
Hire support staff with a mental age of at least 20. Fire the functionally illiterate morons.
Increase rates to something just below cab rates.
Put the accept button back at the top of the screen. At the bottom results in lots of unwanted acceptances.
Follow the laws regarding defensive weapons rather than making up BS.
Stop hiding the cancel button.
Keep street names and maps accurate and up to date. If a street had a name change before Uber started in that town, that's a problem.
Fix the ridiculous destinations bugs. For instance, a hotel near a freeway where the pin drop is on the freeway, other side of the freeway, or a half mile away in the apartment complex on the other side of the block.
Stop encouraging bad behavior.


----------



## MarkR (Jul 26, 2015)

Good ideas here but impractical given the economic climate. I pickup low rated people so what, if the CC clears then I go. Never had an issue with car seats. The people I picked up in the past had their own. I personally don't want any more pull down menu things they are time consuming and most of them take up the whole screen. It's good side money but I certainly would never do it full time unless I got paid hourly for having the app on then get paid for doing pickups (like NY $15/hr for just having the app on). If NJ came up with something like that, I would definitely do this full time.

Here is a practical suggestion (UBER won't do it) I don't think they read this crap. Give us the WHOLE STORY.....

pickup:
going to :
accept? Y/N

WILL NEVER HAPPEN....I don't work for UBER I'm a private contractor so I should be able to choose if I go based on where I'm going to end up.

THE RATING SYSTEM SHOULD GO
Why should a rating drop because you don't tip? Why should a rating drop because you don't talk?

You're free to talk about whatever you want, but MONEY is far far far away the biggest concern of the drivers.

In many markets, including mine, drivers have been whacked yet again with a pay cut. That's in addition to the loss of surge pay, the virtual elimination of boost, and the slashed quests.

Sorry, but I disagree with your use of ratings as the measuring stick of how "good" a driver is.

The ratings system is seriously flawed, and rewards drivers who play it safe and punishes drivers who are willing to give rides to high risk pax and/or work in low income areas.

KNOWING THE DESTINATIONS IN ADVANCE, which was not on your list, would be the GAME CHANGER for the drivers.[/QUOTE]


*5. Passenger/Driver Rematch*

This feature would be invisible to both Passengers and Drivers, and baked into the Ping Selection Algorithm for Uber or Lyft. If a Driver rates a Passenger 5 Stars and the Rider rates the Driver 5 Stars then, in the future, there would be a priority-bias in the algorithm within perhaps 2-3 minute extra pick up time to re-match the passenger and rider in the future.

Both the Driver and Rider would be given a preferred, previously vetted, and potentially good future experience based on past behavior.

Good Drivers would happy to get extra pings (you could put a text on the Driver's Ping screen saying something along the lines of _'Great Passenger Re-Match,'_ and likewise on the Rider's app saying _'We have Re-Matched you with a preferred Driver._' I believe this already exists already in some form in the Lyft App, as I get a lot of re-matched Passengers (some times with 5+ minute pick ups) even though my neighborhood is saturated with many, closer drivers.

This is actually a great idea. I give my card out and sometimes I'll get a call back and I'll let them know when I'm near by then they ping. It works.


----------



## Jedi-Uber (Jun 16, 2018)

Bully!!! I agree and hope both apps incorporate these well thought of features.


----------



## GTADriver (Jan 24, 2019)

Here is a more practical change they can do. Tell us who tipped us on a shared ride. I gave this poor girl a low rating cuz I thought she was mad since I didn’t pull a u turn to picker up and she had to cross the street. After the shared ride was done I saw a tip in the trip but since there were 4 other people in that shared ride I didn’t know who. Emailed Lyft and got stoned walled by them citing privacy reasons we can’t tell you. Called Lyft and the rep told me. Changed her rating.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

*

1. The Car Seat Option *It's not the drivers responsibility to provide car seats. That's a parents responsibility. Installation and maintenance of those seats is a liability issue that shouldn't be put on drivers. Car seats are not a "one size fits all" issue. Smaller children require different size seats compared to larger size kids. A driver can't be expected to assume the responsibility of purchasing and maintaining all that equipment, especially considering the compensation that we receive.

*2. High Rated Driver Filter for Passengers *What is a "high rated" driver? For many ignorant passengers, a "high rated" driver would be anyone with a 4* or more rating, i.e. it would be totally useless. People want a quick, clean and safe ride to their destination. They don't give a rats ass about Uber's silly rating scam.

*3. Low Rated Passenger Filter for Drivers* We already have the ability to filter low rated passengers when we get ping requests. Rating too low for your tastes? Don't accept it.

*4. Radius Filters For Drivers* Just as you can filter low rated passengers, you can also refuse to accept pings from too far away. The only change needed is stopping Lyft from sending their irritating nag messages.

*5. Passenger/Driver Rematch* If this were implemented, I'd become even more picky about the rating I give riders, further filtering passengers based not only on trip experience, but also on whether or not I really want to drive a person again. If I have a short ride passenger with whom I had a fun conversation, I'd usually give them a 5* rating for the experience, but with this type system, the'd get a lower rating because I don't want repeat short rides, regardless of how nice they may have been.

*Green Vehicle Option in Passenger App *No thanks. The passenger can get their ass in the vehicle that shows up, or they can order a different service.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

Fozzie said:


> *1. The Car Seat Option *It's not the drivers responsibility to provide car seats. That's a parents responsibility. Installation and maintenance of those seats is a liability issue that shouldn't be put on drivers. Car seats are not a "one size fits all" issue. Smaller children require different size seats compared to larger size kids. A driver can't be expected to assume the responsibility of purchasing and maintaining all that equipment, especially considering the compensation that we receive.
> 
> *2. High Rated Driver Filter for Passengers *What is a "high rated" driver? For many ignorant passengers, a "high rated" driver would be anyone with a 4* or more rating, i.e. it would be totally useless. People want a quick, clean and safe ride to their destination. They don't give a rats ass about Uber's silly rating scam.
> 
> ...


I believe in your rush to cynicism, you missed my points, it's about making the system more tunable, and the user experience more efficient for all parties.


Lyft already has the dual car seat (small kids full car seat, bigger kids booster) in NYC, so why not have it available everywhere.
If I'm not going to accept them anyway, why not just NOT SEND ME THE PING based on my criteria. It would make the algorithm match PAX faster.
Same. If I'm never going to accept low rated drivers, why have the ping sent to me in the first place. Less distraction from the App while driving.
4.The Nag messages would never be triggered if LYFT/UBER knew my criteria of accepting pings. Efficient.
5. Isn't your comment a good thing?
GV - It's not hurting anyone to offer choice. I'd be using the GV, as it stands, for airport runs in toronto I use ECO RIDES which is a hail/booking service using only Teslas. If LYFT had the option of selecting a GV, I'd probably throw them more business as a PAX.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> I believe in your rush to cynicism, you missed my points, it's about making the system more tunable, and the user experience more efficient for all parties.
> 
> 
> Lyft already has the dual car seat (small kids full car seat, bigger kids booster) in NYC, so why not have it available everywhere.
> ...


1. I'm not in NYC, and am bound by different laws and regulations. Requiring drivers to eat the cost AND LIABILITY of passenger compliance is too big a price to expect of drivers. I drive in three different counties, all with different regulations. Do you really expect me to have to stop and "reconfigure" car seats to comply in each municipality? It's not our responsibility. Parents should bring their own compliant device, or accept the responsibility of transporting their children on their own.

2. What is a "high rated driver?" Many passengers think that a 4.0 rated driver is "high rated," while we know that the opposite is actually true. Until there is a universal understanding of these definitions, it's insufficient to to base business decisions on them. The driver should be making the business decisions, not the rideshare companies.

3. If things are slow, drivers may adjust their acceptance rate based on their individual business needs. The solution is to allow drivers flexibility in acceptance and cancellations, not abdicating all decisions to a cryptic rideshare algorithm that nobody understands.

4. The nag messages should NEVER be there to begin with. We're INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS, not compliant employees. If they want that type of control, they need to make drivers employees.

5. Again, it's about flexibility for drivers to choose their runs, not handing off all decisions to an algorithm that nobody understands.

Green Vehicles - You may be willing to pay a premium for a green vehicle, but the vast majority of riders aren't willing to pay extra for that service. They want quick and cheap above all else. If green vehicles meant so much to them, they'd be driving those vehicles themselves at home. (99% of them don't) Rideshare needs simplification, not more categories and complexity.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

Fozzie said:


> 1. I'm not in NYC, and am bound by different laws and regulations. Requiring drivers to eat the cost AND LIABILITY of passenger compliance is too big a price to expect of drivers. I drive in three different counties, all with different regulations. Do you really expect me to have to stop and "reconfigure" car seats to comply in each municipality? It's not our responsibility. Parents should bring their own compliant device, or accept the responsibility of transporting their children on their own.
> 
> 2. What is a "high rated driver?" Many passengers think that a 4.0 rated driver is "high rated," while we know that the opposite is actually true. Until there is a universal understanding of these definitions, it's insufficient to to base business decisions on them. The driver should be making the business decisions, not the rideshare companies.
> 
> ...


The car seat thing would only be for some drivers who wanted to get more pings and were willing to take on the risk (analagous Handicap Van). This would be a good option for parent PAX who do not own a car (and hence don't own car seats). I encounter this problem a lot in Mississauga, Ontario Canada.
These tools would put control into drivers hands. Drivers would be able to adjust the filters as their day/tolerance/etc. allows, and would not get distracted with pings they would not want to take anyway.
Agreed on the Nag Screens. Annoying and Offensive, considering UBER/LYFT business models.
Green Vehicles wouldn't come with a cost premium attached, only a slightly longer pick-up time for PAX, because there are fewer around, I'd happy wait 2 extra minutes to get a non-gasoline burning, quiet vehicle. As a bonus, it would be more pings for people who are not polluting the city air with exhaust fumes.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> The car seat thing would only be for some drivers who wanted to get more pings and were willing to take on the risk (analagous Handicap Van). This would be a good option for parent PAX who do not own a car (and hence don't own car seats). I encounter this problem a lot in Mississauga, Ontario Canada.
> These tools would put control into drivers hands. Drivers would be able to adjust the filters as their day/tolerance/etc. allows, and would not get distracted with pings they would not want to take anyway.
> Agreed on the Nag Screens. Annoying and Offensive, considering UBER/LYFT business models.
> Green Vehicles wouldn't come with a cost premium attached, only a slightly longer pick-up time for PAX, because there are fewer around, I'd happy wait 2 extra minutes to get a non-gasoline burning, quiet vehicle. As a bonus, it would be more pings for people who are not polluting the city air with exhaust fumes.


That's exactly my point. Under the current model(s), and absent additional compensation and TNC liability coverage, there is ZERO reason to take on additional risks. Would you really accept increased liability and risk for a $6 average fare? No!

As far as green vehicles, t sounds good in theory, but what type of zero emission vehicles do you expect to be running UberX? Next time you see a rideshare driver that makes $6k a year driving a $70k vehicle doing rideshare at under a dollar a mile, please let me know.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

Fozzie said:


> That's exactly my point. Under the current model(s), and absent additional compensation and TNC liability coverage, there is ZERO reason to take on additional risks. Would you really accept increased liability and risk for a $6 average fare? No!
> 
> As far as green vehicles, t sounds good in theory, but what type of zero emission vehicles do you expect to be running UberX? Next time you see a rideshare driver that makes $6k a year driving a $70k vehicle doing rideshare at under a dollar a mile, please let me know.


Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt, Mitsubishi iMiev. None of these are over US$35K. So basically a fully loaded Honda Accord. There are several of us up here in Canada doing ride share in Chevy Volts, because they cost almost ZERO to fuel (75% cheaper than gas), and have almost Zero maintenence (1 oil change per year on range extending engine, tires, wiperblades and wash)


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

People may be driving EV's there, but for the majority of markets, EV's represent a very small percentage of the cars being driven for rideshare. What kind of damn fool drives a $33k Volt, $30k Leaf, or even a 2 year old, $15k iMiev for UberX rates? For most, the constant charging down time, coupled with vehicle costs, limits their viability as a rideshare vehicle.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

Fozzie said:


> People may be driving EV's there, but for the majority of markets, EV's represent a very small percentage of the cars being driven for rideshare. What kind of damn fool drives a $33k Volt, $30k Leaf, or even a 2 year old, $15k iMiev for UberX rates? For most, the constant charging down time, coupled with vehicle costs, limits their viability as a rideshare vehicle.


There are a number of us fools out there that driver part time because the cost of doing so on an EV is very very cheap. Just because it is an option in the app for clean tech loving PAX, doesn't mean everyone has to use it, but it would be easy to code, and many would wait the extra 5 minutes for a greener, quieter, ride


----------



## Ishurue (Oct 20, 2018)

once Uber Pro launches 100% finished etc, and PAx can gain points.

give drivers option to TIP PAX with Points.


based on Drivers , time with company, rating, rides given, status etc etc.

Drivers have say 500 points a month and they can Tip PAX points ( Caps in place etc to avoid Gaming the system etc )

PAX are aware that their drivers can Tip them with points which in the long run will Save PAX MONEY etc .

I think this will encourage PAX to be on best behavior, as well as encourage immediate tipping & 5 star ratings.

PAX entitlement , egoism etc. 

UBER has contest for PAX with Highest points, wins free uber rides for life up to (35 miles a day), and all expense paid trip to bahamas etc. 

Your telling me something like that wont encourage PAX to wana take an uberpool a few bucks across the street ? 

Driver: have good day 
PAX : You were awesome Driver, 5 stars $1 tip
Driver, same and added 3 points for ya, ty for choosing uber .


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

Uber finally took the smallest (and most cynical of steps, charging the rider a premium, and keeping half the premium for themselves) of steps towards GREENING of the Driver Pool. They should have gone further, and took less, considering this is costing nobody anything to prioritize green rides.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

2.5 Years later, and all of these options are still relevant (albeit the GREEN option was implemented by Uber only, and in a halfassed manner.)


----------



## NauticalWheeler (Jun 15, 2019)

While I am a fan of some effort to keep drivers in an hourly earnings "range", there has to be a better way than experiencing the feast and famine over a period of a few hours.

Sitting in a parking lot for 50 minutes, within 1 minute of a dozen Eats restaurants, with no requests just because I made over $20/hr during dinner rush the night before, is stupid.


----------



## NauticalWheeler (Jun 15, 2019)

Drivers don't like feeling like Uber is mocking the amount of time they are putting in.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

NauticalWheeler said:


> Drivers don't like feeling like Uber is mocking the amount of time they are putting in.


That is what Uber does: THEY EXCEL IN EXPLOITING VULNERABLE DRIVERS


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

I worked my butt off to learn the best spots to be to get the most pings, learned a lot of nuances in the app to work to my advantage. Now it all means nothing since they seem to be sharing the wealth among all drivers and not sending the nearest driver.

If I choose to drive when no other drivers want to drive I get the pings. Now when drivers decide they want to venture out I get throttled so they can catch up in earnings. Reward the lazy drivers and punish the go getters.


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

FLKeys said:


> I worked my butt off to learn the best spots to be to get the most pings, learned a lot of nuances in the app to work to my advantage. Now it all means nothing since they seem to be sharing the wealth among all drivers and not sending the nearest driver.
> 
> If I choose to drive when no other drivers want to drive I get the pings. Now when drivers decide they want to venture out I get throttled so they can catch up in earnings. Reward the lazy drivers and punish the go getters.


If this is true, then it is just another way that Uber exploits its driver pool.


----------



## IDriveGNV (Mar 10, 2018)

What do you think of installing a button to show the driver's preference for masks? You know that soon they'll be changing the mask requirement one way or the other. During a transition some drivers may be more comfortable continuing to require masks for everyone. I personally am not comfortable unmasking in this environment while we are still learning the unexpected effects of the new vaccines. I think the passenger would appreciate seeing the status of the driver they are requesting. What do you think of that?


----------



## Kurt Halfyard (Dec 13, 2017)

IDriveGNV said:


> What do you think of installing a button to show the driver's preference for masks? You know that soon he'll be changing the mask requirement one way or the other. During a transition some drivers may be more comfortable continuing to require masks for everyone. I personally am not comfortable unmasking in this environment while we are still learning the unexpected effects of the new vaccines. I think the passenger would appreciate seeing the status of the driver they are requesting. What do you think of that?


Why over complicate this. It's a blanket policy, just keep it that way until the blanket policy goes away. Saves confusion and misunderstanding if it is one rule for everyone. I mean, it is a very enclosed space, a car. This also covers Uber from liability.


----------



## Nightdriver27 (Aug 27, 2016)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> First off, let us be clear that this is not about increasing Driver pay, or lowering Passenger cost. Uber and Lyft are not going to pay their Drivers more money. Both ride hail companies have been bleeding Venture Capital money by the billions, each and every quarter. They are constantly looking for ways to grow revenue (read: entice Passengers) and minimize cost (read: pay Drivers less).
> 
> I am not going to talk about money.
> 
> ...


I am 100% for pax rating filter. I'm sick of always getting riders with 3.0 to 3.9 ratings and having them rate 1* for no reason.


----------



## NauticalWheeler (Jun 15, 2019)

Nightdriver27 said:


> I am 100% for pax rating filter. I'm sick of always getting riders with 3.0 to 3.9 ratings and having them rate 1* for no reason.


Is that affable Canadian Kurt perma-banned? It's been a while.

He was once a moderator.


----------



## 星光行者 (6 mo ago)

不正当竞争。低于成本价订单的强制推送。不接就要接受盲单。推送一个只有2英里行程的订单给距离上车地点10英里以外的司机。还附加条件要你接。这是市场行为吗？就没人提出过疑问？


----------



## painfreepc (Jul 17, 2014)

Feature number six can I opt out of picking up women from 10:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. add that to your f**** feature list


----------



## Jedi-Uber (Jun 16, 2018)

Kurt Halfyard said:


> First off, let us be clear that this is not about increasing Driver pay, or lowering Passenger cost. Uber and Lyft are not going to pay their Drivers more money. Both ride hail companies have been bleeding Venture Capital money by the billions, each and every quarter. They are constantly looking for ways to grow revenue (read: entice Passengers) and minimize cost (read: pay Drivers less).
> 
> I am not going to talk about money.
> 
> ...


Under no circumstances will I carry a car seat for a child. If an accident occurs I am still liable as if I accepted a ride without a car seat. No your liabilities.


----------



## painfreepc (Jul 17, 2014)

FLKeys said:


> they seem to be sharing the wealth among all drivers and not sending the nearest driver.


i have had a few passangers that see this going on and made comments and asked me why is uber doing this.


----------

