# Don't allow greedy companies to hide destinations



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.

Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.

Instead, only one party (fuber,etc) has the info and hides it from the other party (the drivers) .

This yet another example of the ways we're treated like poorly paid employees who get no benefits rather than ICs.

Combine this with the bad pay and overall disrespect we get, and something's gotta be done.

An important point to remember is that hiding destinations enables these scumbag companies to pay garbage rates.

Knowing destinations in advance would FORCE these companies to pay decent pay rates.

Along with knowing destinations in advance, as ICs we should be able to accept or decline trips WITHOUT penalty.

We can do something. Contact your local, state,county, and federal government representatives and the news media, and let them know what the hell is going on in this corrupt industry.

Enough is enough.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.


I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


----------



## yrret (Jun 10, 2018)

uber has its own twisted rules which are in fact illegal in many cases. their strategy is to bull their way into localities disregarding any laws and see what happens. in most cases they get away with what they are doing. their uber app can access your email, camera, microphone, messages and sensors. of course you have to give them permission to do so in order to use the uber app. they can track everything you do. what happened to privacy. the day of doom will soon come to uber that is why the remain a private company that lost 4.4 billion usd last year and their self driving cars have been a disaster along with facing many discrimination lawsuits. why do you think the founder of uber will have nothing to do with the company after the board asked him to resign.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


Apples and oranges.

We're not fuber's customers.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> Apples and oranges.
> 
> We're not fuber's customers.


I didn't say we were. Either Uber or the pax, are our customers. Maybe they don't legally have to tell us all the pertinent info to the job, but at the same time we have the right to not work for them if they don't.

For the record, I agree with you that driver rates in general are too low (in case I get accused of being a shill). I'm just not sure your argument about telling us the destination is correct.


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> We can do something. Contact your local, state,county, and federal government representatives and the news media, and let them know what the hell is going on in this corrupt industry.
> 
> Enough is enough.


Who have you contacted?

How did you go about it?

What did you say?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Cableguynoe said:


> Who have you contacted?
> 
> How did you go about it?
> 
> What did you say?


I plan to contact govt and media, but it's gonna take MANY drivers all over the country to create change.

Are you willing to?



reg barclay said:


> I didn't say we were. Either Uber or the pax, are our customers. Maybe they don't legally have to tell us all the pertinent info to the job, but at the same time we have the right to not work for them if they don't.
> 
> For the record, I agree with you that driver rates in general are too low (in case I get accused of being a shill). I'm just not sure your argument about telling us the destination is correct.


A potential customer who calls for service and refuses to give info would get hung up on.

I believe as ICs we have a right to pertinent info, and if by chance fuber has a legal loophole out of telling us, that loophole should be closed.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

I get this. I'm in a small city of 300k in a somewhat rural and poor area. I went 14 miles outside of the city into the woods. Picked up an old woman at the store and took her across the street to the trailer park (no tip) for $2.74 and drove back empty. I'm sort of forced to take a money loser.


----------



## Yulli Yung (Jul 4, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


 Yet, another one of these post about the evils of Uber and all other related rideshare companies. My simple question to you is, "what has changed since the time you agreed to the operating procedures with Uber?" If you knew then that the destination would not be given yet agreed to Drive then why do you think you should have that information now?

So, stop complaining, and either continue driving or stop driving for Uber and find another profession!!


----------



## pearl east (May 19, 2018)

Uber should raise minimum pay to driver to $5.00 per trip. I have been driving for Uber only 2 month and already feel the pain - driving 9 minutes to pick up and only got paid $2.47 (less than 1 mile ride). Want to make money from Uber? No way! Now I am only doing 0 - 2 rides per day, for fun only.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Yulli Yung said:


> Yet, another one of these post about the evils of Uber and all other related rideshare companies. My simple question to you is, "what has changed since the time you agreed to the operating procedures with Uber?" If you knew then that the destination would not be given yet agreed to Drive then why do you think you should have that information now?
> 
> So, stop complaining, and either continue driving or stop driving for Uber and find another profession!!


While I agree with the premise here I would question the legality of how you can be deactivated for refusing a ride when you find out it's a loser, or declining/not accepting trips that will be or most likely be losers. That would make you an employee.


----------



## jgiun1 (Oct 16, 2017)

It is true....what network of sub contractors, using their own tools, materials & time around the globe would accept jobs based on no information given and no dollar amounts. 

Just hope and pray theory


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

pearl east said:


> Uber should raise minimum pay to driver to $5.00 per trip. I have been driving for Uber only 2 month and already feel the pain - driving 9 minutes to pick up and only got paid $2.47 (less than 1 mile ride). Want to make money from Uber? No way! Now I am only doing 0 - 2 rides per day, for fun only.


I agree here. I exercise my right not to work weekdays when (here in my area) it's all you get. If enough people did that the pay would go up. In the far past 30 years ago I had some friends who owned a bunch of Burger Kings in a huge rent resort area. They could not get help at 6 an hour. PERIOD. They had choices...to pay 10 an hour, make the burgers themselves, or close. (there was not the immigration back then) They paid 10.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

jgiun1 said:


> It is true....what network of sub contractors, using their own tools, materials & time around the globe would accept jobs based on no information given and no dollar amounts.
> 
> Just hope and pray theory


Uber drivers apparently.

In other IC industries, the IC has more power and leverage as they have the supply and theres demand for their skill set, which is specialized .

An uber driver is not a specialist skill. Anyone with a pulse over thenage of 21 with no criminal history can be an uber driver within 1 week. No training, no certificate, no experience...

If You want transportation leads, you abide by the narrow and one sided contract. If You do not agree with that contract, you can take your IC and shop for other companies to contract with. Unfortunately, theres not many options in the industry.


wallae said:


> While I agree with the premise here I would question the legality of how you can be deactivated for refusing a ride when you find out it's a loser, or declining/not accepting trips that will be or most likely be losers. That would make you an employee.


You are not being fired. Your access to the Uber Transportation Lead Generator app is just deactivated.

Canceling on paying customers makes the business look bad and they are entitled to stop sending leads to a contractor that makes their business look bad.


wallae said:


> I agree here. I exercise my right not to work weekdays when (here in my area) it's all you get. If enough people did that the pay would go up. In the far past 30 years ago I had some friends who owned a bunch of Burger Kings in a huge rent resort area. They could not get help at 6 an hour. PERIOD. They had choices...to pay 10 an hour, make the burgers themselves, or close. (there was not the immigration back then) They paid 10.


As Nats121 will soon point out, and i agree with, is the oversaturation of immigrant workers that come to America and have no job qualifications that will happily driver Uber for peanuts.

Many of these types of workers are probably renting out a 1 bedroom with 10 people living in it to keep expenses low.

But Uber is not the only industry affected like this. Atlanta has a huge population of Mexican immigrants, most of which work in the construction industry. I once lived in an apartment complex where the one bedrooms had a half dozen workers jammed into it.

These guys are amazing framers and would travel all the way past nashville tn to do week long framing jobs. Its crazy how far past Atlanta they go to do framing jobs but they do it fast, cheap, good work and without complaint that American framers just cant compete. They send out about 8 framers in an Ecoline van and They crash in a small no tell motel for the week.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

jgiun1 said:


> It is true....what network of sub contractors, using their own tools, materials & time around the globe would accept jobs based on no information given and no dollar amounts.
> 
> Just hope and pray theory


Again I'm new... but I use the tools I can. 11-15 minutes away and a 4.5 rating I decline the trip. 
What sucks with Uber as opposed to Lyft is the rating system. With Uber I have to rate before I see if they tip. 
With Lyft I can wait 24 hours. Great guy no tip. You get a 4. Now if I see less than a 5 I can decline.

My city/town is small. I see people twice and remember.. One guy... Newman...no kidding...sort of a grouch...I went a long way to get him. Maybe 14 minutes. Then a 5 dollar 17 minute ride in traffic. He was a guy who could afford it but no tip. Next week I accepted a ping and then saw him .. 
I Canceled 

Yesterday the same happened but it was a 3 time surge so I took him. Work the system



steveK2016 said:


> Uber drivers apparently.
> 
> You are not being fired. Your access to the Uber Transportation Lead Generator app is just deactivated.
> 
> ...


Here I would disagree. I don't have a law degree but I have been a lawyer in two civil court cases and won. Lots of study involved 
I would argue that being deactivated is being fired. 
I would love to see a real lawyers opinion on this and would bet some would agree with me. A few years ago this may have won in the Supreme Court of the United States...maybe not so much now



steveK2016 said:


> Uber drivers apparently.
> 
> In other IC industries, the IC has more power and leverage as they have the supply and theres demand for their skill set, which is specialized .
> 
> ...


BTW- I agree 100% on the supply demand theory


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

wallae said:


> I get this. I'm in a small city of 300k in a somewhat rural and poor area. I went 14 miles outside of the city into the woods. Picked up an old woman at the store and took her across the street to the trailer park (no tip) for $2.74 and drove back empty. I'm sort of forced to take a money loser.





wallae said:


> While I agree with the premise here I would question the legality of how you can be deactivated for refusing a ride when you find out it's a loser, or declining/not accepting trips that will be or most likely be losers. That would make you an employee.


You are free to not accept trips as much as you like, Uber doesn't deactivate drivers' accounts for low acceptance (i.e, ignoring requests), they only do so for high cancellations (i.e, accepting then cancelling). If you like you can limit yourself to accepting rides that are close by, and only accept ones that are far away when they have a 45+ minute ride notification.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

reg barclay said:


> You are free to not accept trips as much as you like, Uber doesn't deactivate drivers' accounts for low acceptance (i.e, ignoring requests), they only do so for high cancellations (i.e, accepting then cancelling).


I think this would make an excellent court case. A winner in Ca at least


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

wallae said:


> I think this would make an excellent court case. A winner in Ca at least


IIRC there was a court case in CA about these things, and that's one of the reasons we are free to reject rides today, and why Uber doesn't deactivate accounts for low acceptance rates.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

reg barclay said:


> IIRC there was a court case in CA about these things, and that's one of the reasons we are free to reject rides today, and why Uber doesn't deactivate accounts for low acceptance rates.


Thanks. I was worried but noticed something and sort of assumed that. > free to reject rides today
Did they also specifically decide Uber can deactivate you for a cancellation rate?


----------



## jgiun1 (Oct 16, 2017)

steveK2016 said:


> Uber drivers apparently.
> 
> In other IC industries, the IC has more power and leverage as they have the supply and theres demand for their skill set, which is specialized .
> 
> ...


So then one could bring up the "trade contractor" compared to "subcontractors"

Then why are forced, reminded from Lyft/Uber to use "trade dress decals" on our cars. From what I gather, local governments consider it a "trade" if they are using the terms "proper trade dress"


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

reg barclay said:


> You are free to not accept trips as much as you like, Uber doesn't deactivate drivers' accounts for low acceptance (i.e, ignoring requests), they only do so for high cancellations (i.e, accepting then cancelling). If you like you can limit yourself to accepting rides that are close by, and only accept ones that are far away when they have a 45+ minute ride notification.


2 of the rides I canceled were 43 miles (86 round trip) on a 2 lane highway with lots of curves, lights, wrecks and sometimes brutal beach traffic. The ride could be 2 hours round trip or 6 hours hours round trip and zero chance of a ride coming back. The passengers were quoted 50. I asked. My fuel would have been $14. If I was unethical I could have said I'll take 50 cash but I didn't. The local cab here charges 120 driver gets 1/2 cause they know...
Just a gamble I'm not willing to take. I would take it if there was a set rate for my time. I see it as a loss for UBER



jgiun1 said:


> So then one could bring up the "trade contractor" compared to "subcontractors"
> 
> Then why are forced, reminded from Lyft/Uber to use "trade dress decals" on our cars. From what I gather, local governments consider it a "trade" if they are using the terms "proper trade dress"


I just saw this partners are not required to display an Uber decal (also referred to as trade dress) when online and accepting trips. While it is not required when online, you will need it in order to operate at Tampa International Airport and St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

wallae said:


> 2 of the rides I canceled were 43 miles (86 round trip) on a 2 lane highway with lots of curves, lights, wrecks and sometimes brutal beach traffic. The ride could be 2 hours round trip or 6 hours hours round trip and zero chance of a ride coming back. The passengers were quoted 50. I asked. My fuel would have been $14. If I was unethical I could have said I'll take 50 cash but I didn't. The local cab here charges 120 driver gets 1/2 cause they know...
> Just a gamble I'm not willing to take. I would take it if there was a set rate for my time. I see it as a loss for UBER
> 
> I just saw this partners are not required to display an Uber decal (also referred to as trade dress) when online and accepting trips. While it is not required when online, you will need it in order to operate at Tampa International Airport and St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport.


Trade dress is only a requirement by local government not Uber. I only wore a trade dress when I picked up at the airport, the only time it was legally required by the state to do so.

Trade dress is just a fancier, legaleze word for Logo. The state just requires you to identify yourself as an Uber driver to operate in certain areas. When You are online and taking trips, you are an extension and representation of Uber as a company.

As far as cancelling, compare it to an organization that manages several plumbers as IC. Lets say its Plumbers.com the website is so popular everyone ordes plumbers from it. Now plumbers.com sends you a lead. You accept and when you arrive, you decide to cancel. Whatever the reason. Now that customer is upset and has to wait on the next plumber. This tarnishes the reputation of Plumbers.com. why would they want to keep a plumber that has a high rate of cancellation?

Now imagine they have an overabundance of plumbers, too much in fact. Why give leads to a plumber that may tarnish your reputation when you have so many plumbers willing to do jobs as given?

Do they fire the plumber? Is the plumber fired? No, he just no longer can access the plumber.com app and no longer recieves plumber leads from them, nore have any coverage by Plumber.com against local laws or insurance liability. He can still be a plumber but he'll have to get his own leads himself.


----------



## ThrowInTheTowel (Apr 10, 2018)

That is a terrible example to use for comparison. Most plumbers working for a online company getting leads are paid a fair wage. They may only be required to offer the customer a free estimate according to the terms of agreement. The independent contractor or the customer are free to walk away at any time before a contract is signed. No independent contractor would be required to accept a job before assessing what the true costs would be. Uber determines what the true costs will be and hides it from the contractor until after they accept the trip. Terrible business practice.


----------



## jgiun1 (Oct 16, 2017)

ThrowInTheTowel said:


> That is a terrible example to use for comparison. Most plumbers working for a online company getting leads are paid a fair wage. They may only be required to offer the customer a free estimate according to the terms of agreement. The independent contractor or the customer are free to walk away at any time before a contract is signed. No independent contractor would be required to accept a job before assessing what the true costs would be. Uber determines what the true costs will be and hides it from the contractor until after they accept the trip. Terrible business practice.


Yep. They probably pay a lot of money to political people for the "trade" status from local governments but a shallow definable "partner" subcontractor using the app.


----------



## Uber_Yota_916 (May 1, 2017)

The algorithm is your friend. Discrimination based on destination will get you round filed.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

pearl east said:


> Uber should raise minimum pay to driver to $5.00 per trip. I have been driving for Uber only 2 month and already feel the pain - driving 9 minutes to pick up and only got paid $2.47 (less than 1 mile ride). Want to make money from Uber? No way! Now I am only doing 0 - 2 rides per day, for fun only.


$5 isn't enough, not for the some of the garbage trips I've gotten stuck with.

Nothing less than $8 net (after fuber's cut).

Remember, unlike taxis, we can't do street hails, we have to drive (sometimes 10 minutes or more) to pick pax up.



steveK2016 said:


> Trade dress is only a requirement by local government not Uber. I only wore a trade dress when I picked up at the airport, the only time it was legally required by the state to do so.
> 
> Trade dress is just a fancier, legaleze word for Logo. The state just requires you to identify yourself as an Uber driver to operate in certain areas. When You are online and taking trips, you are an extension and representation of Uber as a company.
> 
> ...


Too fornicating bad for plumbers.com.

Like fuber, a plumbers.com type of outfit that uses so-called ICs has one hell of a nerve making big promises of reliability when their workforce is supposed to be ICs.

If a company wants to offer rock solid reliability to their customers, put the workers on the payroll as employees.

Fuber goes even further in the "hell of a nerve" department.

Not only do they promise employee-style reliability to their customers, they promise it with poorly paid drivers whom they expect to dutifully grind along at garbage pay rates.

I'll also state it's one thing for you to play the part of devil's advocate analyst and attempt to see deactivation of drivers as not being fired through the lens of fuber.

But you're actually trying to convince people on this blog that deactivated drivers haven't been fired.

If they haven't been fired, then NO ONE has been fired from their jobs.

Walmart didn't fire the professional cashier this morning, they simply told him he can't ply his occupational skill on their "platform" anymore. He's free to ply his skills on another "platform".

You know fuber's claim is total bullshit.


----------



## MyJessicaLS430 (May 29, 2018)

wallae said:


> I get this. I'm in a small city of 300k in a somewhat rural and poor area. I went 14 miles outside of the city into the woods. Picked up an old woman at the store and took her across the street to the trailer park (no tip) for $2.74 and drove back empty. I'm sort of forced to take a money loser.


This is not worth it. Uber does not pay us for pick up


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

steveK2016 said:


> Uber drivers apparently.
> 
> In other IC industries, the IC has more power and leverage as they have the supply and theres demand for their skill set, which is specialized .
> 
> ...


Your definitive statement about "amazing" Mexican framers is not correct.

There are good AND bad Mexican framers.

I've seen BOTH good and shoddy workmanship done by them.

They work cheap and usually don't complain (except when their scumbag bosses stiff them out of their full wages).

Those are the only consistently accurate points you can say about them.



Nats121 said:


> Your definitive statement about "amazing" Mexican framers is not correct.
> 
> There are good AND bad Mexican framers.
> 
> ...


For a guy who supposedly a businessman, you make a lot of uninformed statements.

It's not how "easy" rideshare is that's responsible for the poor pay rates, it's the abundance of Third World immigrants eager to drive for a living that's responsible.

Being a cashier at McDonalds may be "easy", but if no one is willing to work there, pay rates will have to be high to get people to work there.

Nursing is unquestionably a highly skill profession, but if there's a zillion nurses available in a given market, pay rates will be low.



ThrowInTheTowel said:


> That is a terrible example to use for comparison. Most plumbers working for a online company getting leads are paid a fair wage. They may only be required to offer the customer a free estimate according to the terms of agreement. The independent contractor or the customer are free to walk away at any time before a contract is signed. No independent contractor would be required to accept a job before assessing what the true costs would be. Uber determines what the true costs will be and hides it from the contractor until after they accept the trip. Terrible business practice.


It's long overdue that we get either genuine enforcement of independent contractor regulations and/or major reform.

More and more companies are scamming their way out of treating their employees AS employees.

It's not just rideshare. Falsely classified ICs are in many occupations, including IT.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Your definitive statement about "amazing" Mexican framers is not correct.
> 
> There are good AND bad Mexican framers.
> 
> ...


Perhaps the crew(s) that get pulled up to TN were the A team of the bunch then, while the B team were delegated to secondary projects further south.

The statement is not mutually exclusive, youre not saying anything different than I am. If Uber wasnt so easy to get into, the abundance of immigrants to take to Uber would be a none issue. Its clearly a combination of both that causes the issue.

Its both a positive and negative of the Uber/ gig economy model. The ease to get into it means saturation in the supply.


----------



## Old BUF Guy (Feb 28, 2018)

The real reason Uber will not show us the destination is because of political correctness and racism / discrimination. Although I am first and foremost concerned with my own safety, there are many out there who would accuse me of being racist for not taking fares in the 'hood. I see no reason to accept fares in the 'hood, and would prefer not to take fares from elsewhere to the 'hood either. Why? Try daily shootings for one thing.

I don't really care what color my fares are, as long as they are reasonable and pay, and maybe even tip. Money is money! But my personal safety comes first.

If Uber gave us the destination info BEFORE we accepted the fare, how many of us would accept them into known unsafe areas? I know I would be very likely to decline most if not all of them. Why? Because the risks are not worth the pitiful rewards. $3.66 vs maybe getting shot? No thanks.

So, what happens if most Uber drivers begin refusing rides from, AND into the hood? You can bet that the righteous adulterer and his tax deadbeat friend Al would be showing up and crying racism and discrimination for all to see. Forget the fact that you are concerned for your own safety, - no, you're just some racist prick!

And that is why Uber & Lyft will never show us the destination BEFORE accepting the fare.


----------



## JAnightrider (Jun 25, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


Thanks. Well said. we all need to do something about this .Totally unfair to us.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Old BUF Guy said:


> The real reason Uber will not show us the destination is because of political correctness and racism / discrimination. Although I am first and foremost concerned with my own safety, there are many out there who would accuse me of being racist for not taking fares in the 'hood. I see no reason to accept fares in the 'hood, and would prefer not to take fares from elsewhere to the 'hood either. Why? Try daily shootings for one thing.
> 
> I don't really care what color my fares are, as long as they are reasonable and pay, and maybe even tip. Money is money! But my personal safety comes first.
> 
> ...


Wrong. It's about the money, plain and simple.

If drivers know destinations ahead of time, they'll demand more money to take crappy rides.

Fuber doesn't give a shit about racism.

Here in DC, they practice their own form of discrimination by refusing to offer boosts in black neighborhoods.

The result is pax in black areas of DC have to pay surge rates quite often.



steveK2016 said:


> Perhaps the crew(s) that get pulled up to TN were the A team of the bunch then, while the B team were delegated to secondary projects further south.
> 
> The statement is not mutually exclusive, youre not saying anything different than I am. If Uber wasnt so easy to get into, the abundance of immigrants to take to Uber would be a none issue. Its clearly a combination of both that causes the issue.
> 
> Its both a positive and negative of the Uber/ gig economy model. The ease to get into it means saturation in the supply.


We're not saying the same thing.

You frequently babble about how super easy and mindless rideshare is, and in your post directly linked it with the bad pay drivers get.

Rideshare was just as easy and mindless in 2012-13 when pay rates were quadruple what they are now.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

_Wrong. It's about the money, plain and simple.If drivers know destinations ahead of time, they'll demand more money to take crappy rides._

I agree although I know in some areas I will never get a tip so I stay away. If I never get a tip its not worth driving which is why I only drive weekends and stay in the money area. The cabs make you go into the bad areas. At one company I know, at one time every driver has been the victim of an armed robbery. In one case they called a cab, the robber came out the front door and the home occupant denied knowing who it was.

I'm 60 days new but I know my market and area. I avoid long pickups. If there is a surge I avoid leaving the area for a non surge pickup. 
Weekdays = 5.88 an hour.
Bad weekends with no or only 1 or 2 small tips and no surge= 1o to 11 an hour.
Average weekends with 1 out of 4 a tip and 1 out of 4 a surge = 20-22.
Great weekend 25 an hour.
All numbers are after fuel costs but not including tires brakes ect.
** *I'm always in by 10:30 so I could make more but I'm not dealing with drunks.

So... I only work weekends. Its that simple. I work on my terms and if others did the same...you would make more. Supply vs Demand


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

wallae said:


> While I agree with the premise here I would question the legality of how you can be deactivated for refusing a ride when you find out it's a loser, or declining/not accepting trips that will be or most likely be losers. That would make you an employee.


In NJ, destination discrimination is against the law, for TNC and taxis alike.


----------



## ThrowInTheTowel (Apr 10, 2018)

SuzeCB said:


> In NJ, destination discrimination is against the law, for TNC and taxis alike.


I do not consider refusing a ride because you know it will not be profitable or possibly lose money the same as destination discrimination. Refusing to take rides to certain neighborhoods because of high crime or a high population of a certain race would be destination discrimination. Just my opinion.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

SuzeCB said:


> In NJ, destination discrimination is against the law, for TNC and taxis alike.


If you sit in Short Hills NJ waiting for a ride and refuse to pickup in Newark is that destination discrimination?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> In NJ, destination discrimination is against the law, for TNC and taxis alike.


That's one of those transportation regulations that "we're not a transportation company" fuber not only supports, but in some locales actually crafted.

Fuber walks, quacks, and flies like a duck but calls itself a rhino.

They're hoping they'll be able to continue this charade until the SDCs are ready, in which case they won't have to pretend anymore.


----------



## mrpjfresh (Aug 16, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Wrong. It's about the money, plain and simple.


Exactly. It's not rocket science here. Driver base rates and minimums are so pathetically low that they must resort to tricking drivers into taking rides that they _know_ are money losers for their "partners" in the name of good customer service. They bank on the average driver being too much of a pushover to refuse a ride once someone is in the car or take a "premium" pickup. Does anyone _really_ think Uber's self driving cars will drive 20 miles to take an old lady and her groceries around the block for $3?? I think not.

And I don't destination discriminate. I cannot take this long trip because I have to watch my sister's kids in an hour, I have a sick grandma that I need to remain near to, I have explosive diarrhea or any other white lie my inner Samoir has told. " Unfortunately, Uber does not show us the destination prior to starting the trip. I will have to cancel but make sure you do not get charged". Customers *do not care* that you are losing money on a trip; put it on Uber. Don't understand why so many drivers make this mistake. Every homeless bum I've ever met has had a sob story. They don't hold a sign up that says " Haven't made enough money yet today".


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

wallae said:


> If you sit in Short Hills NJ waiting for a ride and refuse to pickup in Newark is that destination discrimination?


That would be a pickup location, not a destination.



Nats121 said:


> That's one of those transportation regulations that "we're not a transportation company" fuber not only supports, but in some locales actually crafted.
> 
> Fuber walks, quacks, and flies like a duck but calls itself a rhino.
> 
> They're hoping they'll be able to continue this charade until the SDCs are ready, in which case they won't have to pretend anymore.


In NJ and NY, the law goes back further than Uber. Cabs don't get the destination until they pick up, either.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> That would be a pickup location, not a destination.
> 
> In NJ and NY, the law goes back further than Uber. Cabs don't get the destination until they pick up, either.


If the regulation includes TNCs, then it's been revised.

And if it's been revised, there's a good chance fuber's fingerprints are all over it.

Taxi drivers have the benefit of much higher pay rates and have a limited service area.

Fuber drivers not only don't know the destination, they have much lower pay rates than taxis.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> If the regulation includes TNCs, then it's been revised.
> 
> And if it's been revised, there's a good chance fuber's fingerprints are all over it.
> 
> ...


Eh, not anymore. Cab comoanies lowered the amount they pay the drivers, too.

And the law was there for taxis, and was also included in the separate law for TNCs.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> You are free to not accept trips as much as you like, Uber doesn't deactivate drivers' accounts for low acceptance (i.e, ignoring requests), they only do so for high cancellations (i.e, accepting then cancelling). If you like you can limit yourself to accepting rides that are close by, and only accept ones that are far away when they have a 45+ minute ride notification.


We're "free" to not accept trips because fuber changed their policy in response to the California lawsuit.

The fact fuber did this without any court order can credibly be interpreted as a tacit admission on fuber's part that not only their case but their entire business model is on shaky ground.



SuzeCB said:


> Eh, not anymore. Cab comoanies lowered the amount they pay the drivers, too.
> 
> And the law was there for taxis, and was also included in the separate law for TNCs.


I don't know about NJ taxis, but here in Virginia and most other parts of the US taxi drivers lease or own their cabs and keep all the fares.

Are you saying taxi drivers don't lease or own their own cabs in NJ? What are the pay rates?

I addressed your point about the revised or separate law for TNCs.

Not only does fuber support and hide behind that law, there's a good chance they wrote it.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> We're "free" to not accept trips because fuber changed their policy in response to the California lawsuit.
> 
> The fact fuber did this without any court order can credibly be interpreted as a tacit admission on fuber's part that not only their case but their entire business model is on shaky ground.
> 
> ...


Some companies lease the cars, some take a percentage of the fare. The current going rate for my local company is 35% to the driver. Owner will reimburse gas up to 10% of the total take. Oh, and he uses an app. Drivers don't have any idea where the pickup is until they accept, let alone destination.

And like I said, the law was in place for taxis long before Uber existed. When 3695 was written, that part was going in whether written by Uber or the state. NYC demands it too, and Uber certainly didn't write that law.


----------



## 123dragon (Sep 14, 2016)

SuzeCB said:


> Eh, not anymore. Cab comoanies lowered the amount they pay the drivers, too.
> 
> And the law was there for taxis, and was also included in the separate law for TNCs.


It's also illegal in DC and has always been for cabs and TNC. It makes sense, since you are operating in a locality the locality can require as a reasonable expectation you service the whole area in order to be allowed to operate there. VIA was almost booted for not servicing all of DC.


----------



## BiggestScamInHistory (Jan 19, 2016)

steveK2016 said:


> Uber drivers apparently.
> 
> In other IC industries, the IC has more power and leverage as they have the supply and theres demand for their skill set, which is specialized .
> 
> ...


Blaming the poor working conditions & shitty business deal that is TNC on immigrants is ignoring just how pathetic many homegrown Americans of all backgrounds are when it comes to valuing their work & time & property, & how big a role they have in the TNC workforce now.


----------



## UberCheese (Sep 3, 2017)

Uber uses a business model that other industries use. For example, prostitution.

Say the pump finds the "lead," the prostitute, similar to uber drivers, has no idea how long or hard the ride will be, how the lead behaves, or what the pay is until after the ride has ended.

The pimp, like Uber is free to tell the *****, similar to uber driver, that the lead (or john) was dissatisfied and refunded. The pimp keeps the fees and the tips. If the prostitute has a problem, they're met with indifference and a deactivating pimp slap/beating, much like you are.



ThrowInTheTowel said:


> That is a terrible example to use for comparison. Most plumbers working for a online company getting leads are paid a fair wage. They may only be required to offer the customer a free estimate according to the terms of agreement. The independent contractor or the customer are free to walk away at any time before a contract is signed. No independent contractor would be required to accept a job before assessing what the true costs would be. Uber determines what the true costs will be and hides it from the contractor until after they accept the trip. Terrible business practice.


----------



## BurgerTiime (Jun 22, 2015)

reg barclay said:


> I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


Would you drive 20 miles away to mow a lawn 20x20? You would if the land had 20 acres though right? Also the visa -versa is true if you had plans and didn't want to spend all day on so much land. You should be able to determine you work load by the job YOU choose to accept. I've had contractors say the job was to small for their crew and I've had contractors say they didn't have enough man power for the job.


----------



## rosco78 (Mar 5, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


You're not forced to take a ride anymore than the next driver. If you don't like the destination, cancel the trip....it's that simple. I've turned down rides for long distance, lack of an infant car seat, too much luggage....and simply not being a moving truck in my Corolla. So, if the trip doesn't work for you, saddle up and let the rider know what they can do to avoid having their next driver cancel on them.


----------



## Uberbrent (Mar 22, 2016)

rosco78 said:


> You're not forced to take a ride anymore than the next driver. If you don't like the destination, cancel the trip....it's that simple. I've turned down rides for long distance, lack of an infant car seat, too much luggage....and simply not being a moving truck in my Corolla. So, if the trip doesn't work for you, saddle up and let the rider know what they can do to avoid having their next driver cancel on them.


So...when you cancel a trip because it's somehow beneath you, what reason do you use? I'm surprised you haven't been removed from the system for excessive cancellations.


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

First of all, I don't think drivers have a right to destination discrimination. Taxis don't. And most of them are "independent contractors", too. Says so on their door. But what you CAN do is 1* the lazy asses that make you drive 20 minutes to get to them to take them a whopping mile.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

BurgerTiime said:


> Would you drive 20 miles away to mow a lawn 20x20? You would if the land had 20 acres though right? Also the visa -versa is true if you had plans and didn't want to spend all day on so much land. You should be able to determine you work load by the job YOU choose to accept. I've had contractors say the job was to small for their crew and I've had contractors say they didn't have enough man power for the job.


Agreed, and I assume the contractors have a legal right to refuse jobs if the customer refuses to tell them how big or small the job is. In the same vein we have a legal right not to work for ridesharing companies if they don't want to tell us this before we accept. The main difference is that since most of their customers presumably tell them the size of the job before they accept, the contractors can afford to refuse if they don't. We, on the other hand, only have rideshare companies that don't tell us this, if we did, we could choose to work for those that do over the ones that don't. As a side note, we now know if a ride is estimated to be more or less than 45 minutes long, so you can choose to only drive more than a certain distance to pax if the ride is tagged as 45+ minute.



SuzeCB said:


> In NJ, destination discrimination is against the law, for TNC and taxis alike.


Telling us the destination beforehand would probably end up contravening this, presumably people would end up discriminating based on which town/city the ride was going to. However, it's conceivable that they could let us know the length/distance of the ride without the destination.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


You can decline gigs without penalty.


----------



## homelesslawnmowers (May 25, 2018)

they'll never show destination but they should least show what the approx fare & direction destination is

$4, 3 miles north east.

would be most efficient i mean there plenty of cockroaches apparently happy taking less than 10 mile rides that don't pay, if its least heading in a direction they want...

while im sure some people avoid certain neighborhoods, every area has its locals more than happy to get their neighbors money....

nothing matters till drivers gross least $10 on minimum trips & uber almost 3 times less that lmao

so i already destination discriminate, uses to be 7 minutes away now with gas prices i ignore every pick up 5+ minutes away, i ignore all 4.7s or less since theres a 1% chance they'll tip, most 5s are now minors or previously banned so ignored, 4.8-4.9s 40% chance at a tip, i leave app on but ignore every ping 30 miles less to the airport, i moved to the best uber ride near a bunch of hotels 30+ miles away from the airport

its designed for 96% to fail if you dont live or move to a good location the odds are against you

i don't care where or what a pax is just want least $10 for my time & gas so acceptance rate less than 10% cancel rate round 20% ignoring 100s of rides a week oh well

1 star the bad trips request unmatch frim them & never share oxygen with the thieves again is all yoy you can do, they not ever going to help the drivers, the system knowningly sends blank contracts that dont cover costs almost 80+% of the time its calculated evil, evolve adapt or go extinct


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

wallae said:


> I get this. I'm in a small city of 300k in a somewhat rural and poor area. I went 14 miles outside of the city into the woods. Picked up an old woman at the store and took her across the street to the trailer park (no tip) for $2.74 and drove back empty. I'm sort of forced to take a money loser.


All you had to do was not accept the trip.



reg barclay said:


> Agreed, and I assume the contractors have a legal right to refuse jobs if the customer refuses to tell them how big or small the job is. In the same vein we have a legal right not to work for ridesharing companies if they don't want to tell us this before we accept. The main difference is that since most of their customers presumably tell them the size of the job before they accept, the contractors can afford to refuse if they don't. We, on the other hand, only have rideshare companies that don't tell us this, if we did, we could choose to work for those that do over the ones that don't. As a side note, we now know if a ride is estimated to be more or less than 45 minutes long, so you can choose to only drive more than a certain distance to pax if the ride is tagged as 45+ minute.
> 
> Telling us the destination beforehand would probably end up contravening this, presumably people would end up discriminating based on which town/city the ride was going to. However, it's conceivable that they could let us know the length/distance of the ride without the destination.


They want you to pickup all the pax. You seem to think you have some moral right to cherrypick. Uber disagrees with you.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

Rat said:


> They want you to pickup all the pax. You seem to think you have some moral right to cherrypick. Uber disagrees with you.


I have no idea where in any of my post you got that idea from. Here are my words again please tell me which of them implied this:


reg barclay said:


> Agreed, and I assume the contractors have a legal right to refuse jobs if the customer refuses to tell them how big or small the job is. In the same vein we have a legal right not to work for ridesharing companies if they don't want to tell us this before we accept. The main difference is that since most of their customers presumably tell them the size of the job before they accept, the contractors can afford to refuse if they don't. We, on the other hand, only have rideshare companies that don't tell us this, if we did, we could choose to work for those that do over the ones that don't. As a side note, we now know if a ride is estimated to be more or less than 45 minutes long, so you can choose to only drive more than a certain distance to pax if the ride is tagged as 45+ minute.
> 
> Telling us the destination beforehand would probably end up contravening this, presumably people would end up discriminating based on which town/city the ride was going to. However, it's conceivable that they could let us know the length/distance of the ride without the destination.


----------



## rosco78 (Mar 5, 2018)

Uberbrent said:


> So...when you cancel a trip because it's somehow beneath you, what reason do you use? I'm surprised you haven't been removed from the system for excessive cancellations.


I'm almost 2400 rides in with a 4.96 rating......my cancellation rate is very low and I gave examples of why you should cancel. There's no such thing as a ride that's beneath me but if doesn't work in terms of safety or the logistics of it (no car seat, too much luggage) I'll let them cancel or have the ride time out and cancel for the fee. Again, this is not something that usually comes up with me as I take due diligence to be professional.....so if it's a tough pick-up area I'll contact the party to let them know where I'm at or to see if they'll be ready when I get there.....but I always try to work with the pax as much as possible. A lot of problems can be mitigated by knowing your surrounding areas well and not driving weekend nights (bar crowd)....haha


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

wallae said:


> While I agree with the premise here I would question the legality of how you can be deactivated for refusing a ride when you find out it's a loser, or declining/not accepting trips that will be or most likely be losers. That would make you an employee.


You get deactivated for cancelling too many trips. So you can still cancel some. Remember, Uber get its money from serving the pax, not the driver.


----------



## excel2345 (Dec 14, 2015)

Yulli Yung said:


> Yet, another one of these post about the evils of Uber and all other related rideshare companies. My simple question to you is, "what has changed since the time you agreed to the operating procedures with Uber?" If you knew then that the destination would not be given yet agreed to Drive then why do you think you should have that information now?
> 
> So, stop complaining, and either continue driving or stop driving for Uber and find another profession!!


Hi Yulli, let's see, what has changed.
1.Uber used to take 20-25% of the fare plus their booking fee and fare meant what the passenger paid. Then they changed it to flat time and mileage with no relationship to what was paid, thereby determining a wage. Upfront fares and flat rates completely changed the dynamic of the job. Uber gets more, the driver gets less.
2.Uber added binding arbitration meaning a group(class) could not sue uber if they felt there was a legal issue. With the low rates there is no way a driver on his own could afford an attorney to through this process (at the time Travis was in charge and I doubt many opted out for fear of reprisal)
3.Uber arbitrarily and substantially cut rates. If you decided on this job based on original rates your business plan was seriously screwed.

These changes came in the form of a new agreement you had to agree to right then or you couldn't access the platform. How long does it take to find a job? Days, weeks,Months? You still have car payments rent etc so you work more and more hours, limiting the time you can look for another position.

That's what changed since I signed on.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

reg barclay said:


> I have no idea where in any of my post you got that idea from. Here are my words again please tell me which of them implied this:


The whole thing.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

Rat said:


> The whole thing.


Please provide at least one sentence of my post which implied we have a moral right to cherry pick.

Okay I'll start with the first bit:


reg barclay said:


> Agreed, and I assume the contractors have a legal right to refuse jobs if the customer refuses to tell them how big or small the job is. In the same vein we have a legal right not to work for ridesharing companies if they don't want to tell us this before we accept.


Hmmm, don't see any moral right to cherry pick so far in that part of the post, only an observation that Uber drivers can quit driving for Uber if they don't like the fact that Uber doesn't tell them trip destinations.

Okay, next part:


reg barclay said:


> The main difference is that since most of their customers presumably tell them the size of the job before they accept, the contractors can afford to refuse if they don't. We, on the other hand, only have rideshare companies that don't tell us this, if we did, we could choose to work for those that do over the ones that don't.


Hmmm, still don't see any moral right to cherry pick implied. I just said that some contractors can afford to decline customers who don't tell them the entire job, as they have other choices. Rideshare drivers on the other hand can't, as we only (usually) have two companies to choose from. Otherwise, in theory, if a rideshare company popped up, which gave us all the info every time we got a ping, we could choose to work for them. Again, no implication of moral right to cherry pick so far in this post which "The whole thing", according to you, was implying this.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

ThrowInTheTowel said:


> That is a terrible example to use for comparison. Most plumbers working for a online company getting leads are paid a fair wage. They may only be required to offer the customer a free estimate according to the terms of agreement. The independent contractor or the customer are free to walk away at any time before a contract is signed. No independent contractor would be required to accept a job before assessing what the true costs would be. Uber determines what the true costs will be and hides it from the contractor until after they accept the trip. Terrible business practice.


Uber doesn't set the costs. They don't determine the pickup, destination, your mileage. Plumbers are few and far between. There are plenty of drivers who are willing to accept Uber's policy.



reg barclay said:


> Please provide at least one sentence of my post which implied we have a moral right to cherry pick.
> 
> Okay I'll start with the first bit:
> 
> ...


Perhaps "whole thing" is beyond your understanding. As a "whole", you imply a obligation by Uber to give you the information you want to cherrypick .


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

Rat said:


> Perhaps "whole thing" is beyond your understanding. As a "whole", you imply a obligation by Uber to give you the information you want to cherrypick .


Well I went through half my post so far with you, and didn't find any such obligation implied. If anything the gist of my post was the opposite. My supposition was that Uber has no obligation to give as that info, we have no obligation to work for them if they don't. (I was also only talking from a legal point of view, as I assumed that was the discussion and never mentioned morals at all). But again, if you saw anything in my post that did imply such an obligation then please enlighten me.


----------



## pearl east (May 19, 2018)

JimS said:


> First of all, I don't think drivers have a right to destination discrimination. Taxis don't. And most of them are "independent contractors", too. Says so on their door. But what you CAN do is 1* the lazy asses that make you drive 20 minutes to get to them to take them a whopping mile.


Taxis drivers all know the rider's destination before pick up. Also, Taxis has a minimum startup fee that great then $2.17 , which is the lowest pay I got from Uber for a trip that cost me total 20 minutes. Because Uber provided me with a wrong street address (one block over), I had to drive additional 5 minutes to find the customer. Unfortunately, the ride was only .97 mile. I argued with Uber "If I canceled the trip, I still got $3.75". But they rejected me. Okey, my protest is not driving for 3 days. So far I still don't feel I want to drive because I never need this little money to survive. Lets see who lost more.


----------



## Dice Man (May 21, 2018)

When I get a long trip without notification on ping.
I ask the passenger to leave my car and cancel the trip.
Passengers leave, no problem.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> Agreed, and I assume the contractors have a legal right to refuse jobs if the customer refuses to tell them how big or small the job is. In the same vein we have a legal right not to work for ridesharing companies if they don't want to tell us this before we accept. The main difference is that since most of their customers presumably tell them the size of the job before they accept, the contractors can afford to refuse if they don't. We, on the other hand, only have rideshare companies that don't tell us this, if we did, we could choose to work for those that do over the ones that don't. As a side note, we now know if a ride is estimated to be more or less than 45 minutes long, so you can choose to only drive more than a certain distance to pax if the ride is tagged as 45+ minute.
> 
> Telling us the destination beforehand would probably end up contravening this, presumably people would end up discriminating based on which town/city the ride was going to. However, it's conceivable that they could let us know the length/distance of the ride without the destination.


I agree. Provide total drive distance (combined drive to pick up and drop off) and an estimated upfront earning for the whole endeavor without revealing pick up location or destination before a driver accepts the trip.
That way the market will truly set an equilibrium rate for what earnings drivers consider to be reasonable for their work.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Rat said:


> All you had to do was not accept the trip.
> 
> They want you to pickup all the pax. You seem to think you have some moral right to cherrypick. Uber disagrees with you.


1) I didn't know. I though they deactivated
2) I din't know they would send you on a trip that loses money. (they know where the pax is going)
3) ) I do have a right to cherrypick. And I will 



JimS said:


> First of all, I don't think drivers have a right to destination discrimination. Taxis don't. And most of them are "independent contractors", too. .


In my town the taxi gets with driver taking 50% and no car maintenance but pays the gas :
Taxi Start (Normal Tariff) 3.00 $ 3.00-3.00---------- I get .90
Taxi 1 mile (Normal Tariff) 2.10 per mile------------ I get 64 cents
Taxi 1 hour Waiting (Normal Tariff) 22.50 -------------- I get 5 bucks

If they leave the city limit into the next town, which I did on my 2.74 ride its a $12 or $24 flat rate depending. One direction is limited how far you go by the ocean.
A ride I canceled in a cab was $120 (cause they know you come back empty) My pax was quoted $50 total.

Last every cab driver was the victim of an armed robber.

I not not going for 5.88 an hour. Driving at a loss after gas and maintenance. Profit or nothing is my new motto


----------



## ThrowInTheTowel (Apr 10, 2018)

Bro Olomide said:


> I agree. Provide total drive distance (combined drive to pick up and drop off) and an estimated upfront earning for the whole endeavor without revealing pick up location or destination before a driver accepts the trip.
> That way the market will truly set an equilibrium rate for what earnings drivers consider to be reasonable for their work.[/QUOTE


This is exactly how it should be. When a driver sees he total time invested (including coming back empty) is 65 minutes for a total payout of $8.10 after Uber takes half, he can politely decline. No other information about the trip is needed and will protect from discrimination. It is truly sad to see so many Uber shills trying to defend this behavior. Who ever said it was ok for Uber to tell their so called partner what the rules should be? Why is it take it or leave it when our vehicles keep them in business? This is why there will never be progress when clueless people enjoy being made a fool.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

ThrowInTheTowel said:


> This is exactly how it should be. When a driver sees he total time invested (including coming back empty) is 65 minutes for a total payout of $8.10 after Uber takes half, he can politely decline. No other information about the trip is needed and will protect from discrimination. It is truly sad to see so many Uber shills trying to defend this behavior. Who ever said it was ok for Uber to tell their so called partner what the rules should be? Why is it take it or leave it when our vehicles keep them in business? This is why there will never be progress when clueless people enjoy being made a fool.


I get that...it's their right to set the rules of their game.

It's our right to chose not to play.

I exercise it. No weekdays when I keep getting 2.74 rides. Just surge/tip days.

If enough others did this...guess what Dara Khosrowshahi will have to get out of the office and drive...or close shop

I guess everyone's different. Some don't mind turning car equity into cash. Some may need a write-off while grabbing cash. Some may just need cash no matter what the cost and some may just be stupid


----------



## ThrowInTheTowel (Apr 10, 2018)

I'm sorry but I disagree. It is not their right. Like any other business they are held to a certain code of conduct. What if Walmart didn't have any prices on the shelf tags and you had to wait until you got to the register to find out how much everything would costs? Would that be acceptable? Just take your business to a store that's shows the prices? Absolutely not!! There are minimum standards for every business in order to stay in business. Only Uber can get away with these tactics.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

ThrowInTheTowel said:


> I'm sorry but I disagree. It is not their right. Like any other business they are held to a certain code of conduct. What if Walmart didn't have any prices on the shelf tags and you had to wait until you got to the register to find out how much everything would costs? Would that be acceptable? Just take your business to a store that's shows the prices? Absolutely not!! There are minimum standards for every business in order to stay in business. Only Uber can get away with these tactics.


Try working at a car dealer....

Sell a car for 12,000 you personally took in trade a month before for 7g and told no profit on that one.  Here is the 50 buck minimum (no commission

I think Walmart legally could do that. And I would go elsewhere.... unless they had stupid clerks who sold stuff below cost.

>>Only Uber can get away with these tactics.
If drivers refused to drive they could not get away with it. You can't outlaw stupid. Start a Union


----------



## Butterdog (Apr 12, 2018)

mrpjfresh said:


> Exactly. It's not rocket science here. Driver base rates and minimums are so pathetically low that they must resort to tricking drivers into taking rides that they _know_ are money losers for their "partners" in the name of good customer service. They bank on the average driver being too much of a pushover to refuse a ride once someone is in the car or take a "premium" pickup. Does anyone _really_ think Uber's self driving cars will drive 20 miles to take an old lady and her groceries around the block for $3?? I think not.


Exactly..When they start using their own vehicles you will see the minimum ride charge soar.


----------



## jtd617 (Jun 23, 2016)

If it's not 5 boroughs, Nassau/Westchester counties or Newark airport we have right to refuse and should see destination beforehand.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> Well I went through half my post so far with you, and didn't find any such obligation implied. If anything the gist of my post was the opposite. My supposition was that Uber has no obligation to give as that info, we have no obligation to work for them if they don't. (I was also only talking from a legal point of view, as I assumed that was the discussion and never mentioned morals at all). But again, if you saw anything in my post that did imply such an obligation then please enlighten me.


It seems only fuber defenders have a constant need to remind everyone in virtually every rideshare discussion that drivers are "free to leave fuber at any time"

Big fornicating deal.

Slavery was abolished in 1865.

EVERY worker in this country is free to leave their jobs any time they want, too.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

reg barclay said:


> I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


Rarely is lawn mowing done that way. It's impractical.

The contractor can SEE the lawn and figure it out himself. No lawn guy is going to take the job sight unseen without the "typical lot/corner lot price is" caveat and if he shows up and you have an acre, the price is renegotiated. He doesn't have to worry about cancel % if he tells you he can't/won't cut it.

All we need is a point on a map, an estimate of mileage, SOMETHING. It doesn't have to be absolutely precise. Absolute measurements are not necessary in most small jobs, as they're not worth the hassle.

Now if you're building an extension on a house, yes, $1000s and the price quote should spell out all the particulars.

Even then, it's STILL an estimate.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> It seems only fuber defenders have a constant need to remind everyone in virtually every rideshare discussion that drivers are "free to leave fuber at any time"
> 
> Big fornicating deal.
> 
> ...


I tell my youngest son to get a skill to sell. Not rely on a higher minimum wage that does zero for those who can't get a job. Life is supply and demand. 15 an hour at McDonald's does zero when you are replaced with a kiosk.
Too many drivers puts Uber in the power position.

Start a Uber Union


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Old BUF Guy said:


> The real reason Uber will not show us the destination is because of political correctness and racism / discrimination. Although I am first and foremost concerned with my own safety, there are many out there who would accuse me of being racist for not taking fares in the 'hood. I see no reason to accept fares in the 'hood, and would prefer not to take fares from elsewhere to the 'hood either. Why? Try daily shootings for one thing.
> 
> I don't really care what color my fares are, as long as they are reasonable and pay, and maybe even tip. Money is money! But my personal safety comes first.
> 
> ...


Uber could not care less if we're racist. They just want us to pick up every pax. But it's not about race.

I would argue their boosts etc primarily in the busy high income areas discriminate more than any driver could.



mrpjfresh said:


> Exactly. It's not rocket science here. Driver base rates and minimums are so pathetically low that they must resort to tricking drivers into taking rides that they _know_ are money losers for their "partners" in the name of good customer service. They bank on the average driver being too much of a pushover to refuse a ride once someone is in the car or take a "premium" pickup. Does anyone _really_ think Uber's self driving cars will drive 20 miles to take an old lady and her groceries around the block for $3?? I think not.
> 
> And I don't destination discriminate. I cannot take this long trip because I have to watch my sister's kids in an hour, I have a sick grandma that I need to remain near to, I have explosive diarrhea or any other white lie my inner Samoir has told. " Unfortunately, Uber does not show us the destination prior to starting the trip. I will have to cancel but make sure you do not get charged". Customers *do not care* that you are losing money on a trip; put it on Uber. Don't understand why so many drivers make this mistake. Every homeless bum I've ever met has had a sob story. They don't hold a sign up that says " Haven't made enough money yet today".


When 3 out of 4 trips are not worth it you can't cancel them all.


----------



## Squirming Like A Toad (Apr 7, 2016)

Rideshare will not be successful with such a system, because the greediest drivers will cherry pick the best rides and leave the rest for less greedy drivers, who will be forced to become greedy if they want to make money. The result of that will be passengers who have low value rides will be stranded at their pickup destinations, Uber will get a reputation as an unreliable service and people will stop using it. Then we all fail. 

Instead, think of your pings as a card game, with losing hands mixed in with the winning ones, but all the hands have to be played. You cannot expect every hand to be a winner. You can adjust your waiting and ride acceptance strategy to maximize the chance of winning hands (also knowing that some rides will be a loser for you but a winner for someone else) but if you allow players to look at the cards before they decide to play them some hands will never be played and you can't have a game. In rideshare that equates to Uber or Lyft becoming known as a service that will take you somewhere, but you risk being left to sleep in the bushes overnight, or in bad weather, or a dangerous area, and once that happens we're dead, passengers might as well call a taxi and wait 2 hours for the guy to wake up and smoke another bowl before coming to get them.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

ThrowInTheTowel said:


> I'm sorry but I disagree. It is not their right. Like any other business they are held to a certain code of conduct. What if Walmart didn't have any prices on the shelf tags and you had to wait until you got to the register to find out how much everything would costs? Would that be acceptable? Just take your business to a store that's shows the prices? Absolutely not!! There are minimum standards for every business in order to stay in business. Only Uber can get away with these tactics.





123dragon said:


> It's also illegal in DC and has always been for cabs and TNC. It makes sense, since you are operating in a locality the locality can require as a reasonable expectation you service the whole area in order to be allowed to operate there. VIA was almost booted for not servicing all of DC.





wallae said:


> I tell my youngest son to get a skill to sell. Not rely on a higher minimum wage that does zero for those who can't get a job. Life is supply and demand. 15 an hour at McDonald's does zero when you are replaced with a kiosk.
> Too many drivers puts Uber in the power position.
> 
> Start a Uber Union





123dragon said:


> It's also illegal in DC and has always been for cabs and TNC. It makes sense, since you are operating in a locality the locality can require as a reasonable expectation you service the whole area in order to be allowed to operate there. VIA was almost booted for not servicing all of DC.


Rideshare companies are NOT legally required to hide destinations from drivers in DC.

There is no such law on the books


----------



## Soulless_senpai (Mar 10, 2018)

You know who complains more than women? 
Rideshare drivers


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Rarely is lawn mowing done that way. It's impractical.
> 
> The contractor can SEE the lawn and figure it out himself. No lawn guy is going to take the job sight unseen without the "typical lot/corner lot price is" caveat and if he shows up and you have an acre, the price is renegotiated. He doesn't have to worry about cancel % if he tells you he can't/won't cut it.
> 
> ...


The OP's lawn scenario was ridiculous and totally unrelated to rideshare.

If a person called a landscape company to get their lawn mowed, they'd be asked to provide the approximate size of the land.

If the person lacked the knowledge to give even a rough estimate of the land size, the company may or may not decide to send someone out to take a look at the property.

If the person REFUSED to tell the company the size of the property, the landscape company would tell the person not to waste their time and would hang up on them.

In any case, the scenario is irrelevant to rideshare.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Squirming Like A Toad said:


> Rideshare will not be successful with such a system, because the greediest drivers will cherry pick the best rides and leave the rest for less greedy drivers, who will be forced to become greedy if they want to make money. The result of that will be passengers who have low value rides will be stranded at their pickup destinations, Uber will get a reputation as an unreliable service and people will stop using it. Then we all fail.
> 
> Instead, think of your pings as a card game, with losing hands mixed in with the winning ones, but all the hands have to be played. You cannot expect every hand to be a winner. You can adjust your waiting and ride acceptance strategy to maximize the chance of winning hands (also knowing that some rides will be a loser for you but a winner for someone else) but if you allow players to look at the cards before they decide to play them some hands will never be played and you can't have a game. In rideshare that equates to Uber or Lyft becoming known as a service that will take you somewhere, but you risk being left to sleep in the bushes overnight, or in bad weather, or a dangerous area, and once that happens we're dead, passengers might as well call a taxi and wait 2 hours for the guy to wake up and smoke another bowl before coming to get them.


You are treating Fuber's greed as an inalienable right; drivers just have to adapt to it. When mass unreliability becomes the norm, they will have no choice but to share those price increases with drivers, or else riders will make alternative arrangements .


----------



## pearl east (May 19, 2018)

I still think the best solution is to raise minimum fare per ride to $5-8, or transfer the $2.20 to drivers. Uber have plenty opportunity to make money on longer trips, why be so greedy? In St. Louis minimum trip to driver is only $2.17, which is really an insulting to drivers.


----------



## bostonwolf (Mar 25, 2016)

wallae said:


> I get this. I'm in a small city of 300k in a somewhat rural and poor area. I went 14 miles outside of the city into the woods. Picked up an old woman at the store and took her across the street to the trailer park (no tip) for $2.74 and drove back empty. I'm sort of forced to take a money loser.


Have a limit for the amount of distance you're going to drive for a ride. I personally won't go much farther than two miles, but I live in an urban area.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Squirming Like A Toad said:


> Rideshare will not be successful with such a system, because the greediest drivers will cherry pick the best rides and leave the rest for less greedy drivers, who will be forced to become greedy if they want to make money. The result of that will be passengers who have low value rides will be stranded at their pickup destinations, Uber will get a reputation as an unreliable service and people will stop using it. Then we all fail.
> 
> Instead, think of your pings as a card game, with losing hands mixed in with the winning ones, but all the hands have to be played. You cannot expect every hand to be a winner. You can adjust your waiting and ride acceptance strategy to maximize the chance of winning hands (also knowing that some rides will be a loser for you but a winner for someone else) but if you allow players to look at the cards before they decide to play them some hands will never be played and you can't have a game. In rideshare that equates to Uber or Lyft becoming known as a service that will take you somewhere, but you risk being left to sleep in the bushes overnight, or in bad weather, or a dangerous area, and once that happens we're dead, passengers might as well call a taxi and wait 2 hours for the guy to wake up and smoke another bowl before coming to get them.


Your scenario is the type of bullshit scare tactic fuber WANTS drivers to believe.

Knowing destinations in advance would force fuber to RAISE pay rates to a high enough level that drivers would accept virtually all rides.

Not knowing destinations LOWERS pay rates because drivers don't know a ride is garbage until AFTER they accept it, and screening rides leads to firing.

Fuber, gryft, doordash, and postmates didn't hide destinations until AFTER they cut driver pay.

Rideshare's been around for less than 10 years, and people somehow, someway got to where they going before fuber existed.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> Your scenario is the type of bullshit scare tactic fuber WANTS drivers to believe.
> 
> Knowing destinations in advance would force fuber to RAISE pay rates to PREVENT cherry picking.
> 
> ...


Drivers know the destination in advance of accepting the ride. When you arrive to pickup pax ask them the destination, and if you don't want to drive there, cancel the ride. It's never going to be any other way, and it shouldn't be.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Demon said:


> Drivers know the destination in advance of accepting the ride. When you arrive to pickup pax ask them the destination, and if you don't want to drive there, cancel the ride. It's never going to be any other way, and it shouldn't be.


Your post is illogical to say the least.

You say it "shouldn't be" as far as drivers knowing destinations in advance, then you proceed to say drivers should waste time and gas driving to the pax and ask them when you arrive, and to cancel if you don't like the destination.

Not only is that a dumb alternative to knowing the destination in advance, it'll get drivers fired in a hurry.

After a few pax report a driver for doing what you recommend, they'll be fired.

You need to think it through before you post.


----------



## Squirming Like A Toad (Apr 7, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Your scenario is the type of bullshit scare tactic fuber WANTS drivers to believe.
> 
> Knowing destinations in advance would force fuber to RAISE pay rates to a high enough level that drivers would accept virtually all rides.
> 
> ...


Yes, and that would be a high enough level that people wouldn't use the service. Besides there are at least two competing services in almost all markets, which one of them is supposed to raise their rates first and lose all their business to the other? It's like a street with 2 gas stations, one raises his price a dime and he can forget about selling any gas.

How would they get where their going? Driving drunk, of course.

So now they've raised the rates, fewer people requesting rides, and as many or more drivers competing for fewer rides. Where's the benefit in that? You don't think Uber & Lyft have set their rates to maximize what they can get out of customers already, that they are giving them cheap rides out of charity? I'll stick with what we've got. It's a system that rewards drivers who are smart and work hard, and those who are something else, well maybe it won't work out well for them. Darwinian principles apply to everything.



Demon said:


> Drivers know the destination in advance of accepting the ride. When you arrive to pickup pax ask them the destination, and if you don't want to drive there, cancel the ride. It's never going to be any other way, and it shouldn't be.


Deactivated.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> It seems only fuber defenders have a constant need to remind everyone in virtually every rideshare discussion that drivers are "free to leave fuber at any time"
> 
> Big fornicating deal.
> 
> ...


I'm not defending anything, just pointing out what I imagine the law is. IMO the main problem with Uber is that the rates are too low, not the fact that they don't tell us all the details of the trip before we accept it.


----------



## hulksmash (Apr 26, 2016)

Squirming Like A Toad said:


> Rideshare will not be successful with such a system, because the greediest drivers will cherry pick the best rides and leave the rest for less greedy drivers, who will be forced to become greedy if they want to make money. The result of that will be passengers who have low value rides will be stranded at their pickup destinations, Uber will get a reputation as an unreliable service and people will stop using it. Then we all fail.
> 
> Instead, think of your pings as a card game, with losing hands mixed in with the winning ones, but all the hands have to be played. You cannot expect every hand to be a winner. You can adjust your waiting and ride acceptance strategy to maximize the chance of winning hands (also knowing that some rides will be a loser for you but a winner for someone else) but if you allow players to look at the cards before they decide to play them some hands will never be played and you can't have a game. In rideshare that equates to Uber or Lyft becoming known as a service that will take you somewhere, but you risk being left to sleep in the bushes overnight, or in bad weather, or a dangerous area, and once that happens we're dead, passengers might as well call a taxi and wait 2 hours for the guy to wake up and smoke another bowl before coming to get them.


There is no need for any ride to be a losing ride. The problem isnt that shorter rides pay less than longer ones. It's that the shorter rides are literally losers in and of themselves. Raise the pay so that every ride nets a reasonable return relative to the time and effort needed for it, and drivers won't ever have to feel used again. I may not like that I only made $10 for a 5 minute trip (instead of a $100 monster) but at least I was compensated fairly for the time I did spend.

Lastly, most pax don't consider how little the driver makes when they see what they pay. Higher level platforms exist for a reason. Select, Premier, Lux, etc all hace higher minimums and pay drivers better. I lol when I see pax trying to feversishly order base X or XL, when a higher level car is right there waiting to take you.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Squirming Like A Toad said:


> Yes, and that would be a high enough level that people wouldn't use the service. Besides there are at least two competing services in almost all markets, which one of them is supposed to raise their rates first and lose all their business to the other? It's like a street with 2 gas stations, one raises his price a dime and he can forget about selling any gas.
> 
> How would they get where their going? Driving drunk, of course.
> 
> ...


More bullshit.. Both Fuber and Gryft have raised their rates and kept the rate increase to themselves..
Do you ever read all those booking fee update notifications?
Just how do you think the base X fare rise from 5 to 7 dollars while the driver earns the same (thus a lower percentage of the fare) and the TNC keeps half ( sometimes more) for short rides?
The whole "higher prices will chase away riders" red herring is disingenuous.. Give it up already.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> I'm not defending anything, just pointing out what I imagine the law is. IMO the main problem with Uber is that the rates are too low, not the fact that they don't tell us all the details of the trip before we accept it.


There's no such law in Virginia and DC

Your other point is incorrect as well.

Our rates are too low BECAUSE they hide the destinations.

If drivers knew the destinations in advance, they would REFUSE to accept the unprofitable rides.

Fuber would then be FORCED to offer INCENTIVES or GOOD PAY RATES to get drivers to accept those very same rides.

Fuber NEEDS to hide destinations to get drivers to accept unprofitable rides.

Bottom line... low pay rates and hiding destinations go hand in hand.



Squirming Like A Toad said:


> Yes, and that would be a high enough level that people wouldn't use the service. Besides there are at least two competing services in almost all markets, which one of them is supposed to raise their rates first and lose all their business to the other? It's like a street with 2 gas stations, one raises his price a dime and he can forget about selling any gas.
> 
> How would they get where their going? Driving drunk, of course.
> 
> ...


Fares are ALREADY much higher than they were before upfront pricing, and ridership is as high as or higher than ever.

The only difference is that fuber is keeping all the extra loot for themselves and stiffing the drivers.


----------



## pearl east (May 19, 2018)

hulksmash said:


> There is no need for any ride to be a losing ride. The problem isnt that shorter rides pay less than longer ones. It's that the shorter rides are literally losers in and of themselves. Raise the pay so that every ride nets a reasonable return relative to the time and effort needed for it, and drivers won't ever have to feel used again. I may not like that I only made $10 for a 5 minute trip (instead of a $100 monster) but at least I was compensated fairly for the time I did spend.
> 
> Lastly, most pax don't consider how little the driver makes when they see what they pay. Higher level platforms exist for a reason. Select, Premier, Lux, etc all hace higher minimums and pay drivers better. I lol when I see pax trying to feversishly order base X or XL, when a higher level car is right there waiting to take you.


I will like very much if I could make $10 for a 5 minutes trip. This won't happen in St Louis. For 5 minutes trip, I can only make around $3.00. I know once I got $2.17 for 3 minutes trip.


----------



## Karen Stein (Nov 5, 2016)

Imagine if Wal Mart screened customers at the door, letting them enter only if they spent $500 for that visit.


----------



## hulksmash (Apr 26, 2016)

Squirming Like A Toad said:


> Yes, and that would be a high enough level that people wouldn't use the service. Besides there are at least two competing services in almost all markets, which one of them is supposed to raise their rates first and lose all their business to the other? It's like a street with 2 gas stations, one raises his price a dime and he can forget about selling any gas.
> 
> How would they get where their going? Driving drunk, of course.
> 
> ...


You forget that drivers are customers too. When one company suppresses surge at a busy event and the other doesn't, who do you think has more available drivers? Many pax have mentioned Lyft was cheaper but more difficult to get, so they went Uber. There's some scabs willing to drive for less, but they don't always meet demand.

And I do think they do give charity rides sometimes. It's why you see them throw up boost zones in busy areas. They are willling to pay surge out of pocket just to flood the area with drivers to keep rates for pax artificially low. They know if they don't, natural market forces will drive the rates up much higher. This is how they deprive drivers of income.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Karen Stein said:


> Imagine if Wal Mart screened customers at the door, letting them enter only if they spent $500 for that visit.


Poor analogy.. Walmart has sole discretion on setting prices for different merchandise they carry in their retail outlets based on profitability, market improvement strategy etc..
Drivers don't. Fuber/Gryft set the prices; drivers option is to accept or don't use the app..
Seeing as how Uber dumped exchange leasing as it was a money loser, you really think they would have such low prices if they used their own fleet that they were responsible for maintaining?


----------



## hulksmash (Apr 26, 2016)

Karen Stein said:


> Imagine if Wal Mart screened customers at the door, letting them enter only if they spent $500 for that visit.


Not the same thing. Everything inside Walmart is priced to sell at a reasonable markup, so the store still profits. Small spenders may not make them as much money as the big spenders, but at least they don't lose them money.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> Your post is illogical to say the least.
> 
> You say it "shouldn't be" as far as drivers knowing destinations in advance, then you proceed to say drivers should waste time and gas driving to the pax and ask them when you arrive, and to cancel if you don't like the destination.
> 
> ...


I apologize that you don't have the background knowledge or thinking skills to follow logic.

You're a business, you have an overhead. If I need someone to paint my house they need to come out and see my house before they can quote me a price, and after they give me a price I can say no thank you, so the painter would walk away with nothing. I can also suggest a price to the painter and he can tell me if he can do it at that price or not.

A driver doesn't have to waste gas and time by not accepting the ride, they can accept 100% of rides if they choose to do some, although in some places it's illegal to decline a ride based on location. It would also be illegal to decline based on destination because that could violate the riders civil rights.

Things don't become illogical because you don't like them.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> There's no such law in Virginia and DC


I didn't mean the law about discrimination. I meant the thing you said before:


Nats121 said:


> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.


that Uber is legally obligated to tell us all the details of every job, because we're contractors. I don't believe such a law exists.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Demon said:


> I apologize that you don't have the background knowledge or thinking skills to follow logic.
> 
> You're a business, you have an overhead. If I need someone to paint my house they need to come out and see my house before they can quote me a price, and after they give me a price I can say no thank you, so the painter would walk away with nothing. I can also suggest a price to the painter and he can tell me if he can do it at that price or not.
> 
> ...


You're the one who said we shouldn't be allowed to see destinations in advance.

Instead, you said drivers should drive to the pax location and cancel if we don't like the destination. That's just plain illogical.

It wastes the drivers gas and time as well as the pax' time and could result in the driver being fired.

Your painter analogy doesn't apply. We don't need to drive to the pax location to determine whether or not we want to go to a particular destination.

Unless someone can provide proof to show otherwise, I don't believe there's any locales that mandate fuber hides the destinations from the drivers.

In the unlikely event such a place exists, it's a good bet fuber lobbied to get that regulation on the books.

The govt would have to prove a driver deliberately discriminated on the basis of race in refusing a ride, which is not easy to do.



Karen Stein said:


> Imagine if Wal Mart screened customers at the door, letting them enter only if they spent $500 for that visit.


You're really grasping at straws here with that analogy lol


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

reg barclay said:


> I'm not defending anything, just pointing out what I imagine the law is. IMO the main problem with Uber is that the rates are too low, not the fact that they don't tell us all the details of the trip before we accept it.


I disagree. Rates never went down since I started driving. What did change was over saturation of drivers. The current rate and 2016 surges, pre upfront pricing, was sustainable. It wasnt making me rich but i was earning close to $400 with tips on a Friday night.

Back then, I always had stacked rides and surges were plentiful. Then it started going where I could sit empty for 20 min at a time. Thats what killed it and a largr part of that is immigration explosion as Nat points out.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> I didn't mean the law about discrimination. I meant the thing you said before:
> 
> that Uber is legally obligated to tell us all the details of every job, because we're contractors. I don't believe such a law exists.





pearl east said:


> I still think the best solution is to raise minimum fare per ride to $5-8, or transfer the $2.20 to drivers. Uber have plenty opportunity to make money on longer trips, why be so greedy? In St. Louis minimum trip to driver is only $2.17, which is really an insulting to drivers.


$2.17 minimum? It's incredible that anyone would drive for so little.


reg barclay said:


> I didn't mean the law about discrimination. I meant the thing you said before:
> 
> that Uber is legally obligated to tell us all the details of every job, because we're contractors. I don't believe such a law exists.


I didn't claim anything pertaining to destinations was on the books.

Obviously the regulation books would be a mile thick if they tried to cover every scenario.

My point is hiding destinations is something that an employee might expect but not an IC, who's supposed to be a business owner.

I also said if loopholes exist that allow such things they should be closed.


----------



## Ardery (May 26, 2017)

this has been discussed. this isn't anything new. they're not hiding the destination.

back when they showed the destination, drivers would cherry pick. take all the good rides and ignore the short rides. 

those cherry pickers are the ones that ruined it for everyone else.

we ALL want good long rides. I prefer all long rides, but I guess we gotta take the short ones too.


----------



## NUBER-LE (Jul 21, 2017)

Uber will never show destination. Cherry pickers all over and people taking short rides would not get a driver to take them. People would stop using uber, we would have a crap load of drivers and no more pings.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

NUBER-LE said:


> Uber will never show destination. Cherry pickers all over and people taking short rides would not get a driver to take them. People would stop using uber, we would have a crap load of drivers and no more pings.


You're arguing with s straw man.
My suggestion is we demand they show us the following info on each ping:
Total distance. ( to include drive to pick up plus drive to drop off)
Estimated time ( to include time to pick up and drop off)
Estimated earnings.
They can keep the destination secret. 
Then let drivers decide based on the above if the ride request is worth it.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

IMO Uber hides destinations so we won't cherry pick and end up with certain rides/destinations not being served. Even if they quadrupled rates, but told drivers the destinations, I think drivers would still cherry pick, albeit to a lesser degree. For example, I prefer trips to Newark airport than to JFK. If Uber were to quadruple the rates I would still choose a 4x Newark ride over a 4x JFK ride, and I'd reject JFK rides if I knew there was a reasonable chance I could wait a bit and get a Newark ride,. The only difference being that if there were slim chances of other pings, I would take the 4x JFK ride, whereas at current rates I would reject it completely. Which is why I said that raising the rates would lessen cherry picking but not eliminate it. 

IMHO the only thing that could work in this regard, that would improve things for drivers, would be if drivers could set a certain distance range for the ride requests they receive. For example a driver who wants to do short distance could set it for rides between 0-5 miles, and one who wants long distance rides could set it longer. That way, drivers would only be filtering out certain lengths of ride, but not specific destinations. I think it would also help if the mile/minute rate for the first so many miles/minutes of a ride were higher than later, so that shorter rides would be more profitable.


----------



## koyotemohn (Mar 15, 2017)

Via doesn’t hide my destination when I accept the ride. 

Destinations should be provided and if you can’t take it upon yourself to use the other methods of transport available to you....like your feet on those five block trip requests..., then you should pay a surge price or a surging pool and just make do....or take a bus, train, walk, or ride a bike.

The rates need to be higher.

You can choose to lose the cherry picker and keep the shufflers or show destinations and let the surge flow. You can also set a general diameter filter that starts with you home address and filters out all destinations beyond a radius and Vice versa. There are plenty of people driving who would rather not leave their neighborhood and focus on those short rides for quest.


----------



## Friendly Jack (Nov 17, 2015)

reg barclay said:


> I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


A better example as related to rideshare, I think, would be the potential customer not telling the independent contractor *where the lawn is located. *How many ICs would take that job?



reg barclay said:


> IIRC there was a court case in CA about these things, and that's one of the reasons we are free to reject rides today, and why Uber doesn't deactivate accounts for low acceptance rates.


And, in my opinion, this is the only reason Uber shows us the distance and estimated time to pickup. Otherwise, they would not be able to deactivate drivers for cancellations either. You know that Uber would also like to keep pickup distance and time hidden from drivers if they could.



Yulli Yung said:


> Yet, another one of these post about the evils of Uber and all other related rideshare companies. My simple question to you is, "what has changed since the time you agreed to the operating procedures with Uber?" If you knew then that the destination would not be given yet agreed to Drive then why do you think you should have that information now?
> 
> So, stop complaining, and either continue driving or stop driving for Uber and find another profession!!


What has changed? A lot. Since I first agreed to the operating procedures, as you call them, Uber has changed them 3 times and given drivers no advance notice or choice about accepting the new "operating procedures". I think that drivers -- after gaining experience and a better understanding of those procedures -- have just as much right as Uber to want changes. Sadly, you are right, at the moment drivers have no recourse other than quitting to exercise a measure of control. That doesn't mean that we can't wish for something better and consider how to make it happen.



Old BUF Guy said:


> The real reason Uber will not show us the destination is because of political correctness and racism / discrimination. Although I am first and foremost concerned with my own safety, there are many out there who would accuse me of being racist for not taking fares in the 'hood. I see no reason to accept fares in the 'hood, and would prefer not to take fares from elsewhere to the 'hood either. Why? Try daily shootings for one thing.
> 
> I don't really care what color my fares are, as long as they are reasonable and pay, and maybe even tip. Money is money! But my personal safety comes first.
> 
> ...


Probably true, but they could show us the distance and estimated time of the ride. Why don't they do that?


----------



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

reg barclay said:


> I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


The sensible lawn mower would have a call-out/minimum charge, say 75 bucks. We also have a minimum call out charge, which is 4 bucks here.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Friendly Jack said:


> A better example as related to rideshare, I think, would be the potential customer not telling the independent contractor *where the lawn is located. *How many ICs would take that job?
> 
> And, in my opinion, this is the only reason Uber shows us the distance and estimated time to pickup. Otherwise, they would not be able to deactivate drivers for cancellations either. You know that Uber would also like to keep pickup distance and time hidden from drivers if they could.
> 
> ...


It would lead to cherry picking and all the drivers would be out of a job.



Nats121 said:


> You're the one who said we shouldn't be allowed to see destinations in advance.


Correct. It would be bad for drivers, passengers and the companies. The driver still finds out the destination before the accept the ride. 


Nats121 said:


> Instead, you said drivers should drive to the pax location and cancel if we don't like the destination. That's just plain illogical.


It actually makes sense. Again, just because you don't like something, doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. 


Nats121 said:


> It wastes the drivers gas and time as well as the pax' time and could result in the driver being fired.


 Then accept the ride. Drivers can't be fired, they're independent contractors, remember?


Nats121 said:


> Your painter analogy doesn't apply. We don't need to drive to the pax location to determine whether or not we want to go to a particular destination.


 Yes, they do need to get to the pax to find out the destination. You seem to be a big fan of logic, so let's play this out logically. Logically the pax will learn that there are some places drivers won't show up to take them to, and some places drivers will fight over them to get to. In that case the pax would just put in a destination that would make the driver arrive on scene, only then to reveal their true destination. There would be no penalty assessed to the pax for doing so, so there's no reason for them not to. So even if the TNC told you the destination, there's no guarantee that's where the pax is really going. 


Nats121 said:


> Unless someone can provide proof to show otherwise, I don't believe there's any locales that mandate fuber hides the destinations from the drivers.
> 
> In the unlikely event such a place exists, it's a good bet fuber lobbied to get that regulation on the books.


Never said there are any locales that do this. 


Nats121 said:


> The govt would have to prove a driver deliberately discriminated on the basis of race in refusing a ride, which is not easy to do.


 Uber would have data on this so it would actually be very easy to show.


----------



## Friendly Jack (Nov 17, 2015)

Squirming Like A Toad said:


> Rideshare will not be successful with such a system, because the greediest drivers will cherry pick the best rides and leave the rest for less greedy drivers, who will be forced to become greedy if they want to make money. The result of that will be passengers who have low value rides will be stranded at their pickup destinations, Uber will get a reputation as an unreliable service and people will stop using it. Then we all fail.
> 
> Instead, think of your pings as





Demon said:


> It would lead to cherry picking and all the drivers would be out of a job.


No, it would eliminate rides that drivers lose money on, Uber would have to raise the minimum fare, and pax would have to pay more -- or Uber take less -- on certain rides.

Imagine if this worked in reverse and pax had no idea of what they were going to pay until after the ride was started. Uber would very quickly have very few riders.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Friendly Jack said:


> No, it would eliminate rides that drivers lose money on, Uber would have to raise the minimum fare, and pax would have to pay more -- or Uber take less -- on certain rides.
> 
> Imagine if this worked in reverse and pax had no idea of what they were going to pay until after the ride was started. Uber would very quickly have very few riders.


It would lead to cherry picking. No matter what the price or how much the TNC keeps some rides are going to be more profitable than others. What would keep drivers from passing on the less profitable rides to wait out a more profitable one?


----------



## KekeLo (Aug 26, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> I plan to contact govt and media, but it's gonna take MANY drivers all over the country to create change.
> 
> Are you willing to?
> 
> ...


Count me in


----------



## NUBER-LE (Jul 21, 2017)

Show destination=sitting for an endless amount of time because all other drivers wants long trips.....


----------



## moJohoJo (Feb 19, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


Believe me we are all on your side but it ain't going to happen . I gotta tell you that recently i had some trips dissapear on me with, Uber . I'm telling all drivers to not just assume that Uber is accurately keeping track of all your trips . Keep a hand written note of each and every trip you take . This is why they keep stating " trips being calculated " and that is so you'll lose track of all your trips .


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Friendly Jack said:


> No, it would eliminate rides that drivers lose money on, Uber would have to raise the minimum fare, and pax would have to pay more -- or Uber take less -- on certain rides.
> 
> Imagine if this worked in reverse and pax had no idea of what they were going to pay until after the ride was started. Uber would very quickly have very few riders.


Amen.. Upfront fares for riders, upfront total distance, time plus earnings info for "driver partners" for each ping.. ( but no destination - to avoid cherry picking/ discrimination).
This is what we should demand going forward. 
The back and forth about revealing destination in the ping is a distraction..


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> IMO Uber hides destinations so we won't cherry pick and end up with certain rides/destinations not being served. Even if they quadrupled rates, but told drivers the destinations, I think drivers would still cherry pick, albeit to a lesser degree. For example, I prefer trips to Newark airport than to JFK. If Uber were to quadruple the rates I would still choose a 4x Newark ride over a 4x JFK ride, and I'd reject JFK rides if I knew there was a reasonable chance I could wait a bit and get a Newark ride,. The only difference being that if there were slim chances of other pings, I would take the 4x JFK ride, whereas at current rates I would reject it completely. Which is why I said that raising the rates would lessen cherry picking but not eliminate it.
> 
> IMHO the only thing that could work in this regard, that would improve things for drivers, would be if drivers could set a certain distance range for the ride requests they receive. For example a driver who wants to do short distance could set it for rides between 0-5 miles, and one who wants long distance rides could set it longer. That way, drivers would only be filtering out certain lengths of ride, but not specific destinations. I think it would also help if the mile/minute rate for the first so many miles/minutes of a ride were higher than later, so that shorter rides would be more profitable.


With high pay rates, your JFK/Newark scenario is about making good money at Newark and even better money at JFK, but either way the driver does well.

Contrast that with the garbage rates we get now. With bad pay rates, a scenario such as the one above most likely would come down to JFK being profitable and Newark a bust.

Remember that right now, with destinations being hidden, LOTS of places don't get served.

I also believe drivers should be able to pick a radius they choose to work in case they desire to stay close to home or their job.



moJohoJo said:


> Believe me we are all on your side but it ain't going to happen . I gotta tell you that recently i had some trips dissapear on me with, Uber . I'm telling all drivers to not just assume that Uber is accurately keeping track of all your trips . Keep a hand written note of each and every trip you take . This is why they keep stating " trips being calculated " and that is so you'll lose track of all your trips .


It really sucks that because these companies are so sleazy, we have to go thru the hassle of screenshotting everything to protect ourselves from getting ripped off.



Ardery said:


> this has been discussed. this isn't anything new. they're not hiding the destination.
> 
> back when they showed the destination, drivers would cherry pick. take all the good rides and ignore the short rides.
> 
> ...


You're flat out wrong on all your points.

Fuber, lyft, doordash, and postmates started hiding destinations AFTER they cut the driver's pay rates.

They did it because they knew the bad pay rates would cause drivers to decline UNPROFITABLE trips.

They didn't hide the destinations when the pay rates were higher because cherry picking wasn't a problem when ALL rides were profitable.

Hiding destinations is an enforcement weapon used to force drivers into doing unprofitable rides.

Not all drivers prefer long rides. Some prefer short rides, especially if the pay rates are high.

Don't blame the drivers. Blame the greedy, slimy companies.


----------



## over & done (Jun 25, 2017)

But then I would never have gotten to drive 100 miles into the projects ?
Over


----------



## Howie428Uber (Mar 4, 2016)

The key to making this work is an idea I’ve suggested to Uber and that passengers I’ve discussed it with really like… Passenger Selected Surge. Give the passenger the option to increase their own surge rate. At very least passengers should have the option to match any current surge that is within range of where they are.

The current system is unfair to customers who happen to find themselves at the edge of a surge area. They don’t have the choice of paying the same amount that someone a few miles down the street can offer.

If passengers can increase their own surge rate then passengers who are in an undesirable location and are requesting a short trip would have the choice of making their trip more attractive. You could also increase the range that the system pings cars at based on how much passengers increase their own surge, e.g. Flat is less than 10 minutes, 1.5 up to 15, 2 up to 20, etc.

I’d also give drivers the option to set a minimum surge level they are currently prepared to respond to. In my normal work hours that would be the Flat rate, but for 3x surge I’d get out of bed and come drive you somewhere.

For me this is how you make rideshare a nationwide reliable service, because passengers could always get a car if they are prepared to pay enough.

As far as I can tell Uber should be all over this idea, because in their robocar world they will have a hard time justifying surge. However, if a passenger volunteers to pay more then it’s reasonable that they should go to the front of the line.


----------



## Butterdog (Apr 12, 2018)

What Uber needs to do is give the booking fee to the driver on short trips. This way the riders don't see an increase in fares and we can still make a few bucks. Under the current system Uber always wins regardless of the distance and they should take the stance of we win some we lose some on the shorter rides. I know this will never happen but it seems to me to be the best outcome we could hope for.


----------



## Karen Stein (Nov 5, 2016)

Maybe a better title for this thread would be: "Clever Utopian Finds Fake Issue to Sow Dissention and Spread Misery "

I swear, if Uber mailed everyone a $100 bill, someone would start a thread about all the germs money can carry


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Karen Stein said:


> Maybe a better title for this thread would be: "Clever Utopian Finds Fake Issue to Sow Dissention and Spread Misery "
> 
> I swear, if Uber mailed everyone a $100 bill, someone would start a thread about all the germs money can carry


?????


----------



## kbrown (Dec 3, 2015)

Yulli Yung said:


> Yet, another one of these post about the evils of Uber and all other related rideshare companies. My simple question to you is, "what has changed since the time you agreed to the operating procedures with Uber?" If you knew then that the destination would not be given yet agreed to Drive then why do you think you should have that information now?
> 
> So, stop complaining, and either continue driving or stop driving for Uber and find another profession!!


We were given the locations for their destination when we started. You must be a noob (no disrespect intended). At some point, they started masking destinstions.



Old BUF Guy said:


> The real reason Uber will not show us the destination is because of political correctness and racism / discrimination. Although I am first and foremost concerned with my own safety, there are many out there who would accuse me of being racist for not taking fares in the 'hood. I see no reason to accept fares in the 'hood, and would prefer not to take fares from elsewhere to the 'hood either. Why? Try daily shootings for one thing.
> 
> I don't really care what color my fares are, as long as they are reasonable and pay, and maybe even tip. Money is money! But my personal safety comes first.
> 
> ...


Nope. Uber and Lyft don't show destinations anymore so we don't cherrypick. It could be cherrypicking for any reason.

Now, if you're cherrypicking based on race, then you're being racist and that has to do with political correctness when they prevent you from seeing the destinations. I don't care about race. I care about money. I want the highest surfe and the longest trip. But who knows the length of the trip until after you swipe them in? Bogus.


----------



## Poorfreddie (Jun 12, 2018)

reg barclay said:


> I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


Your statement makes absolutely no sense! Your analogy is between TWO PRIVATE parties. the premise presented has a third party who is intentionally withholding pertinent information that the potential customer WILLINGLY DISCLOSED. If you haven't studied something, remain quiet.


----------



## Karen Stein (Nov 5, 2016)

A challenge for the self- proclaimed experts and armchair lawyers:

If you're so sure you're right, why don't you sue / file a complaint / act on your assertion. Post back with your results. 

Otherwise, save your hot air for the Reno balloon race, where it might do some good.


----------



## koyotemohn (Mar 15, 2017)

Karen Stein said:


> A challenge for the self- proclaimed experts and armchair lawyers:
> 
> If you're so sure you're right, why don't you sue / file a complaint / act on your assertion. Post back with your results.
> 
> Otherwise, save your hot air for the Reno balloon race, where it might do some good.


Or we could just post receipts and compare notes here and now. Show us weekly statements and profitable trips. Show us how you do when you don't cherry pick, surge **** or shuffle.

Not as a pissing contest.

As a way of actively showing the cost of driving as a means of earning a living...and how blind trust in a service provider contrasts to careful trip screening selection and ready administrationof that noshow cancel to cover the rising cost of gas.

And if you can't do something as plain and simple as that...which would really help move the conversation forward....then respectfully people taking potshots at the original poster should get back to work.


----------



## Emp9 (Apr 9, 2015)

Karen Stein said:


> Maybe a better title for this thread would be: "Clever Utopian Finds Fake Issue to Sow Dissention and Spread Misery "
> 
> I swear, if Uber mailed everyone a $100 bill, someone would start a thread about all the germs money can carry


anyone risking operating at a loss, is not to smart.


----------



## Friendly Jack (Nov 17, 2015)

Howie428Uber said:


> The key to making this work is an idea I've suggested to Uber and that passengers I've discussed it with really like&#8230; Passenger Selected Surge. Give the passenger the option to increase their own surge rate. At very least passengers should have the option to match any current surge that is within range of where they are.
> 
> The current system is unfair to customers who happen to find themselves at the edge of a surge area. They don't have the choice of paying the same amount that someone a few miles down the street can offer.
> 
> ...


I have suggested something similar: an up-front guaranteed tip amount presented along with the ride request. This would make it much easier for riders in out-of-the-way places to get a ride.


----------



## dave_guy (Aug 2, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


----------



## koyotemohn (Mar 15, 2017)

Friendly Jack said:


> I have suggested something similar: an up-front guaranteed tip amount presented along with the ride request. This would make it much easier for riders in out-of-the-way places to get a ride.


Yes this is a good idea.


----------



## Amoore500 (Jan 13, 2018)

Uber does show you the destinations. Well at least they just started to a few days ago on mine


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

kbrown said:


> We were given the locations for their destination when we started. You must be a noob (no disrespect intended). At some point, they started masking destinstions.
> 
> Nope. Uber and Lyft don't show destinations anymore so we don't cherrypick. It could be cherrypicking for any reason.
> 
> Now, if you're cherrypicking based on race, then you're being racist and that has to do with political correctness when they prevent you from seeing the destinations. I don't care about race. I care about money. I want the highest surfe and the longest trip. But who knows the length of the trip until after you swipe them in? Bogus.


Yep. Calling it "cherry picking" is just a way to demonize it. But it, whatever you call it, is a critical piece of the free market, and without it, the price does not truly reflect the value. Because drivers cannot "cherry pick", some trips are far better for the driver financially than others, because Uber is setting the price of the trip based on ignorance of the driver. If the driver had knowledge of the destination, they would know whether or not the price Uber is offering for the trip is worth it to them. By rejecting Uber's offers that aren't worth it, Uber would naturally have to raise the price on the offers that are getting rejected (and likewise the offers that always get accepted would naturally come down). This process naturally results in an equilibrium where all trips are priced at the market value for them. Basically a short trip 20 miles away would be priced such that it gets accepted just as much as a 50 mile trip one mile away. I don't know what those prices would be, because the market has to do it's thing to determine them. But we will never know those market prices because Uber doesn't want drivers "cherry picking". The result is actually kind of like a casino, where overall the house always wins, and the players put up with loses because the adrenaline rush of a big payout keeps them playing the game. It's a business of exchanging money, but that's not free market pricing at all.


----------



## koyotemohn (Mar 15, 2017)

Amoore500 said:


> Uber does show you the destinations. Well at least they just started to a few days ago on mine


You must be confusing the data that is being presented to you. Your pickup point isn't your destination upon starting the trip.


----------



## VictorD (Apr 30, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


Invalid comparison. Uber is our contractor, not our customer. The pax are Uber's customers and are _required _to provide a destination _before _Uber agreees to subcontract the job to its drivers.


----------



## Amoore500 (Jan 13, 2018)

koyotemohn said:


> You must be confusing the data that is being presented to you. Your pickup point isn't your destination upon starting the trip.


Why do you guys continue to talk out of your ass on here? My next request I will screen shot.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Amoore500 said:


> Uber does show you the destinations. Well at least they just started to a few days ago on mine


Meaning what?



Amoore500 said:


> Why do you guys continue to talk out of your ass on here? My next request I will screen shot.


Sure. Lets see it


----------



## Amoore500 (Jan 13, 2018)

Skepticaldriver said:


> Meaning what?


It shows their exact location. I'm at the airport now will screenshot in about 30 min


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Exact location of what? Their pickup. ?

If thats what u mean, then you are on the wrong thread


----------



## Amoore500 (Jan 13, 2018)

Skepticaldriver said:


> Exact location of what? Their pickup. ?
> 
> If thats what u mean, then you are on the wrong thread


Their final destination


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Did u see it on the ping request screen?

Because thats all that matters


----------



## Amoore500 (Jan 13, 2018)

Skepticaldriver said:


> Did u see it on the ping request screen?


Yes, I just said Uber is showing it now. I will screen shot it here in a minute


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Ok. Love to see it.


----------



## Uberbrent (Mar 22, 2016)

Emp9 said:


> anyone risking operating at a loss, is not to smart.


The irony is strong with this one...to, too, two


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

I guess photoshopping takes a little longer than expected


----------



## Amoore500 (Jan 13, 2018)

Skepticaldriver said:


> I guess photoshopping takes a little longer than expected


I just said I'm at the airport idiot


----------



## Amoore500 (Jan 13, 2018)




----------



## koyotemohn (Mar 15, 2017)

Amoore500 said:


> View attachment 236453


Wow that's news to all of us!

New2This UberPotomac 3.75 yankdog

Y'all see anything like this on your airport trip requests?


----------



## New2This (Dec 27, 2015)

koyotemohn said:


> Wow that's news to all of us!
> 
> New2This UberPotomac 3.75 yankdog
> 
> Y'all see anything like this on your airport trip requests?


Not last one I did. I'll check when I get back and take some trips.


----------



## 3.75 (Sep 29, 2017)

koyotemohn said:


> Wow that's news to all of us!
> 
> New2This UberPotomac 3.75 yankdog
> 
> Y'all see anything like this on your airport trip requests?


Not at all. I don't even get a 45 minute warning, but I do get the 60 minute one.

All I get is the terminal and door number. If I got it, I'd never take a DC trip again.


----------



## UberPotomac (Oct 8, 2016)

New2This said:


> Not last one I did. I'll check when I get back and take some trips.


Never. It be great if it was on al trips we get.!!!


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Amoore500 said:


> View attachment 236453


Okay. Whats the deal. Why do u have that? Obviously i stand corrected. And i didnt see the part about waiting for a ping at the airport.

Hmmm

Weird format. I fugure a non specific graphical representation would be better sort of like a lyft scheduled ride But whatevs uber.

So why do you think you have that. ??


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Friendly Jack said:


> I have suggested something similar: an up-front guaranteed tip amount presented along with the ride request. This would make it much easier for riders in out-of-the-way places to get a ride.


Those suggestions of yours are tools that could be used as a COMPANION to knowing destinations in advance, NOT as a SUBSTITUTE for.

It's about more than just the money, it's about having full CONTROL over where I choose to work.

The only way to have full control is knowing where I'm going BEFORE I accept the job offer, and NOT being penalized for declining job offers.



Bro Olomide said:


> You're arguing with s straw man.
> My suggestion is we demand they show us the following info on each ping:
> Total distance. ( to include drive to pick up plus drive to drop off)
> Estimated time ( to include time to pick up and drop off)
> ...


I disagree with your suggestion of keeping the destination secret.

Knowing the destination is IMPORTANT.

It's more than just the money, it's about having FULL CONTROL over where we choose to work.



reg barclay said:


> Well I went through half my post so far with you, and didn't find any such obligation implied. If anything the gist of my post was the opposite. My supposition was that Uber has no obligation to give as that info, we have no obligation to work for them if they don't. (I was also only talking from a legal point of view, as I assumed that was the discussion and never mentioned morals at all). But again, if you saw anything in my post that did imply such an obligation then please enlighten me.


They do have the obligation to give us that info if the courts and/or regulators deem it as something that can be reasonably expected for a business owner to make intelligent business decisions.

Once again, someone feels it necessary to remind us that we drivers are actually free to quit driving for fuber if we so choose.

Should we bow down and thank fuber for letting us quit?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

These points bear being repeated....

These scumbag companies CANNOT pay garbage rates AND maintain any semblance of reliable service unless they HIDE the destinations.

In other words, hiding destinations ENABLES these companies to pay garbage rates.

Hiding destinations was implemented AFTER these companies cut driver pay rates.

KNOWING destinations in advance AND not being penalized for declining trips would FORCE fuber to pay drivers good pay rates and/or offer hefty incentives to entice drivers to accept undesirable trips.

Knowing destinations would also allow drivers to choose WHERE they want to work, which in itself is important.

It all boils down to this....

Fuber and gryft use poor pay as a weapon of CONTROL over the drivers by forcing them to work MORE hours than they want to.

They know that well paid drivers would choose to work LESS in order to spend more time with their families.



reg barclay said:


> Great, if you sincerely believe that then how do we go about changing things? Do you think another 8 pages of comments on this thread will help that? I'm sure the winds of change are already blowing in Uber HQ after the first 8.


RIF (reading is fundamental)

I covered your point in my opening post.

I said it's gonna require drivers to contact their govt officials and the news media to educate them on how poorly the drivers are treated by these companies.


----------



## Karen Stein (Nov 5, 2016)

"IF" is the biggest word in our language. Heck, if the Queen had balls, she'd be King!

But the courts haven't, and the regulators don't exist. Therefore, "the law" has none of the alleged requirements.

BTW, this is America, where all authority is proscribed by The Constitution. That fine document bans governmental meddling in contracts. That might explain why we lack some of that interference that enslave other countries.

The regulations some advocate would simply recreate the Taxi business. It's one thing to advocate from the innocence of theory - but why imitate an arrangement that pleases none and is an economic failure?

I can tell these advocates are intelligent, because they use lots of big words and long sentences. Thus, I am forced to conclude that they know following their advice leads to misery.

Why do these unhappy folks strive to share their depression? Why won't they choose the paths proven to lead to happiness?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Karen Stein said:


> "IF" is the biggest word in our language. Heck, if the Queen had balls, she'd be King!
> 
> But the courts haven't, and the regulators don't exist. Therefore, "the law" has none of the alleged requirements.
> 
> ...


There are IC lawsuits in the courts right now

Up to this point, the govt has chosen to look the other way at blatant violations of IC regulations

Of course there are regulators. Check out how heavily regulated fuber is in NYC

Govt doesn't meddle in the writing of contracts, but it certainly meddles in the enforcement of them

Got news for you. For all intents and purposes, we ARE radio taxi drivers.

Fuber's voluntary elimination of acceptance rate requirements can be credibly interpreted as acknowledgement that their entire business model is on shaky ground.


----------



## NGOwner (Nov 15, 2016)

Amoore500 said:


> View attachment 236453


Amoore500 must be special. I'm in the KC market as well (that's Kansas City International there). Been driving Uber for one month shy of 2 years. And I was at the airport yesterday as well. None of my requests have ever included dropoff locations. Ever. Not at the airport. Not elsewhere in the metro. Including yesterday.

[NG]Owner


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Soulless_senpai said:


> You know who complains more than women?
> Rideshare drivers


You get a lot of women complaining?


----------



## Karen Stein (Nov 5, 2016)

Anyone can assert anything in a lawsuit. Let's see the results. Let's see the Appellate ruling that binds the theory to other cases. 

What's never explained is how withholding destinations makes more money for the greedy company, or how the desire to profit is evil. 

Make more money by serving more customers? Increase total profit by making more sales at a lower markup? Works for Wal-Mart.

Do you drive for charity? If not, then why should Uber?

Don't like something? Then don't take the trip. It's your choice - no reason to create false outrage over your decision.


----------



## koyotemohn (Mar 15, 2017)

Amoore500 said:


> View attachment 236453


What's that Chinese writing in the background you scratched over anyway?


----------



## New2This (Dec 27, 2015)

Karen Stein said:


> What's never explained is how withholding destinations makes more money for the greedy company


Because if I see that a ride is going to go across town in gridlock traffic and I know I'd get $4 for 25 minutes sitting in mind-numbing traffic I wouldn't accept it in the first place. Some of the minimum fare short rides Uber/Lyft make 50% on them.



Karen Stein said:


> how the desire to profit is evil.


I must be Satan incarnate because I don't take *any* ride that I don't make money on. Usually I can chip away at what Uber/Lyft make and either put them in the red or make the 'Uber receives' statement a dollar or less. Long live Longhauling.


----------



## melusine3 (Jun 20, 2016)

reg barclay said:


> I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


Your premise doesn't also add that the customer locks the lawn mower into the deal, yet the gig is 100 miles away.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

melusine3 said:


> Your premise doesn't also add that the customer locks the lawn mower into the deal, yet the gig is 100 miles away.


I wasn't going into the practical business side of things. My main point was, that from a legal point of view, AFAIK a customer isn't obligated to tell the contractor the entire job description before he accepts it. Obviously if the customer doesn't want to tell them, then the contractor can (and likely will in many scenarios) tell him to take a hike, but that still doesn't mean the customer is legally obliged to.


----------



## moJohoJo (Feb 19, 2017)

steveK2016 said:


> Trade dress is only a requirement by local government not Uber. I only wore a trade dress when I picked up at the airport, the only time it was legally required by the state to do so.
> 
> Trade dress is just a fancier, legaleze word for Logo. The state just requires you to identify yourself as an Uber driver to operate in certain areas. When You are online and taking trips, you are an extension and representation of Uber as a company.
> 
> ...


Go West, young man . Mostly in the West we come dressed as we are . In California there is no silly dress codes and i doubt there is anywhere in the whole State where your required to dress in a certain way to enter an establishment whether it be a restaurant or night club . In, Georgia it's totally different but that's why i live out West instead of back East, South or the Midwest .


----------



## alaex (Mar 28, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> I plan to contact govt and media, but it's gonna take MANY drivers all over the country to create change.
> 
> Are you willing to?


NO.

Uber is great to work with. Made tons of money, set aside for taxes. Vehicle is rented, so no worries about the car.

Please calm down and don't stir the pot.

P.S. Many McDonald's are hiring full time now.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


Uber will never do that because if they did no driver would ever accept a shorty and every pax trying to go on a shorty would have to wait 30 min to get a car.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

moJohoJo said:


> Go West, young man . Mostly in the West we come dressed as we are . In California there is no silly dress codes and i doubt there is anywhere in the whole State where your required to dress in a certain way to enter an establishment whether it be a restaurant or night club . In, Georgia it's totally different but that's why i live out West instead of back East, South or the Midwest .


Not one time did i mention clothing any given person wears....


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

iheartuber said:


> Uber will never do that because if they did no driver would ever accept a shorty and every pax trying to go on a shorty would have to wait 30 min to get a car.


Fuber wouldn't do it voluntarily, it would require govt intervention or the threat of govt intervention.



alaex said:


> NO.
> 
> Uber is great to work with. Made tons of money, set aside for taxes. Vehicle is rented, so no worries about the car.
> 
> ...


The 96% of fuber drivers who quit every year don't agree with your assessment of fuber.


----------



## LoveTheBlues (Jun 2, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Apples and oranges.
> 
> We're not fuber's customers.


Actually, despite Uber's previous statements that they were simply acting as billing agents, that isn't true. With the advent of upfront pricing Uber sells transportation services to riders and contracts services with us. If it were otherwise, the rate Uber pays us would need to be connected to what they charge. But that ended with Upfront pricing over 13 months ago.


----------



## Friendly Jack (Nov 17, 2015)

Karen Stein said:


> Anyone can assert anything in a lawsuit. Let's see the results. Let's see the Appellate ruling that binds the theory to other cases.
> 
> What's never explained is how withholding destinations makes more money for the greedy company, or how the desire to profit is evil.
> 
> ...


I think it's very simple for anyone to see how withholding destinations makes more money for Uber. No one needs to be particularly insightful to realize this. Certainly the desire to profit is not evil, for Uber or any other company; that's why they are in business. It is, however, in my opinion very evil to profit unethically at the expense of others as Uber does. Hidden destinations and up-front pricing are certainly not intended to benefit drivers or deal with them fairly. Drivers have just as much of a desire to be profitable as Uber, but you seem to be painting many of us here as greedy drivers for discussing the subject.

And along with every rate cut over the past four years hasn't it been Uber telling drivers that lower rates mean more business and more earnings? You may notice that they stopped using that mantra since they increased booking fees and instituted up-front pricing. I don't remember... did they give us a choice about that? Or just change the terms without warning and force us to accept?

There are many drivers who don't like "many somethings" and many would not take the trip if they could see the destination and other information along with the request. Sadly, the only way for drivers to get some of that information and not take the trip as you suggest is to cancel after acceptance. We all know what this leads to if repeated too often.

Yes, we can all quit (i.e., stop driving) and most of us will sometime soon as the majority of drivers do. That fact does not make many of Uber's practices any more ethical or acceptable. Dara can spray as much perfume as he wishes on the Uber business model, but it still stinks in many ways.


----------



## RideshareGentrification (Apr 10, 2018)

I agree the problem is if they disclosed all. Of the information half the rides would get turned down by most drivers. They would have to enforce acceptance rates and maybe even always have consecutive ride bonuses all the time.


----------



## LoveTheBlues (Jun 2, 2016)

While I doubt the courtroom will be the place to find the answer to this, Uber can begin to address some of these driver complaints if they really want to. Some drivers want to know the destination because they have a limit to how far they can travel at a given time or want to make a reasonable financial decision on accepting a far off ping. Making a driver cancel only after accepting and starting the ride simply leads to poorer customer service. On the other hand, some drivers are playing a surge game hoping for the whale or trying to avoid "certain neighborhoods" that puts Uber afoul of City regulators. That is a big issue in Chicago and other cities. They will likely never please the second group but the first could be accommodated and make the service better and more inclusive.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

RideshareGentrification said:


> I agree the problem is if they disclosed all. Of the information half the rides would get turned down by most drivers. They would have to enforce acceptance rates and maybe even always have consecutive ride bonuses all the time.


Knowing destinations in advance means nothing if drivers aren't allowed to decline trips without penalty.

That's why I've stated on more than one occasion that knowing destinations in advance MUST be accompanied by being able to decline trips WITHOUT PENALTY.

If fuber is truly concerned about customer service, they would need to pay the drivers well enough to ensure as many rides as possible would be accepted.



LoveTheBlues said:


> While I doubt the courtroom will be the place to find the answer to this, Uber can begin to address some of these driver complaints if they really want to. Some drivers want to know the destination because they have a limit to how far they can travel at a given time or want to make a reasonable financial decision on accepting a far off ping. Making a driver cancel only after accepting and starting the ride simply leads to poorer customer service. On the other hand, some drivers are playing a surge game hoping for the whale or trying to avoid "certain neighborhoods" that puts Uber afoul of City regulators. That is a big issue in Chicago and other cities. They will likely never please the second group but the first could be accommodated and make the service better and more inclusive.


While money is the biggest reason drivers need to know destinations in advance, it's not the only one.

It's also about drivers being able to choose WHERE they work.

For example, some drivers may prefer to gives rides in an area close to home.



LoveTheBlues said:


> Actually, despite Uber's previous statements that they were simply acting as billing agents, that isn't true. With the advent of upfront pricing Uber sells transportation services to riders and contracts services with us. If it were otherwise, the rate Uber pays us would need to be connected to what they charge. But that ended with Upfront pricing over 13 months ago.


The whole "rideshare" model as presently constituted is built on lies.

Fuber is a TAXI DISPATCH SERVICE, not a "technology company"

What we do is NOT rideshare, it's radio taxi work.

Rideshare is carpooling and sluglines, not driving miles out of our way to pick up pax and driver them 1/2 of a mile.

We're nothing more than badly underpaid taxi drivers.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

alaex said:


> NO.
> 
> Uber is great to work with. Made tons of money, set aside for taxes. Vehicle is rented, so no worries about the car.
> 
> ...


Let's say you work 8 hrs a day and make about $160. You spend $50/ day to rent the car and $20/day for the gas.

So now you make $90 a day. Set $30 a day aside for taxes and you're left with $60 for the day.

For 8 hours of work.

That's less than $10/ hr

Less than min wage.

You think that's "tons of money"??? LOL


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Karen Stein said:


> Anyone can assert anything in a lawsuit. Let's see the results. Let's see the Appellate ruling that binds the theory to other cases.
> 
> What's never explained is how withholding destinations makes more money for the greedy company, or how the desire to profit is evil.
> 
> ...


I've clearly explained more than once on this thread how hiding destinations adds LOTS of money to fuber's bottom line and takes LOTS of money out of the pockets of the drivers.


----------



## Netpay (May 10, 2018)

Time for a "stand off" .
Everyday at 12:00 we turn our phones off to reboot. Power up at the same time in each time zone. That should get their attention. 
What do you think? Protest in waves. We have the power.


----------



## melusine3 (Jun 20, 2016)

reg barclay said:


> I wasn't going into the practical business side of things. My main point was, that from a legal point of view, AFAIK a customer isn't obligated to tell the contractor the entire job description before he accepts it. Obviously if the customer doesn't want to tell them, then the contractor can (and likely will in many scenarios) tell him to take a hike, but that still doesn't mean the customer is legally obliged to.


What country do you live in that a service provider doesn't have to know where the job will be? Have you EVER worked in private industry?


----------



## yankdog (Jul 19, 2016)

koyotemohn said:


> Wow that's news to all of us!
> 
> New2This UberPotomac 3.75 yankdog
> 
> Y'all see anything like this on your airport trip requests?


Nope. Never seen it.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

melusine3 said:


> What country do you live in that a service provider doesn't have to know where the job will be? Have you EVER worked in private industry?


Again you are conflating two different things, the practical and the legal. AFAIK a customer has the legal right to offer you job in a mystery location that they wrote on a piece of paper stuffed inside a hat, and won't reveal the location until you accept, you have the legal right to tell them to bugger off (as I'm guessing would happen in a large part of the private industry you describe).


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

reg barclay said:


> I wasn't going into the practical business side of things. My main point was, that from a legal point of view, AFAIK a customer isn't obligated to tell the contractor the entire job description before he accepts it. Obviously if the customer doesn't want to tell them, then the contractor can (and likely will in many scenarios) tell him to take a hike, but that still doesn't mean the customer is legally obliged to.


The relationship between a homeowner and a landscape company is unrelated and irrelevant to our relationship with fuber.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> The relationship between a homeowner and a landscape company is unrelated and irrelevant to our relationship with fuber.


That doesn't negate the point the poster is making.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Doesnt negate the point of the dide with the screenshot So hes got the ability apparently



Amoore500 said:


> View attachment 236453


So. Wow. There it is.


----------



## Netpay (May 10, 2018)

iheartuber said:


> Uber will never do that because if they did no driver would ever accept a shorty and every pax trying to go on a shorty would have to wait 30 min to get a car
> 
> What does Uber drivers everywhere... consider what a short fare is in $$$?


----------



## Julescase (Mar 29, 2017)

ThrowInTheTowel said:


> That is a terrible example to use for comparison. Most plumbers working for a online company getting leads are paid a fair wage. They may only be required to offer the customer a free estimate according to the terms of agreement. The independent contractor or the customer are free to walk away at any time before a contract is signed. No independent contractor would be required to accept a job before assessing what the true costs would be. Uber determines what the true costs will be and hides it from the contractor until after they accept the trip. Terrible business practice.


Perfect analogy and very well stated!!


----------



## Emp9 (Apr 9, 2015)

Amoore500 said:


> Uber does show you the destinations. Well at least they just started to a few days ago on mine


 really? wow i hope that comes to dc area, ,if they want to be consider us contractors its only fair to know the job before.


----------



## Mole (Mar 9, 2017)

Yulli Yung said:


> Yet, another one of these post about the evils of Uber and all other related rideshare companies. My simple question to you is, "what has changed since the time you agreed to the operating procedures with Uber?" If you knew then that the destination would not be given yet agreed to Drive then why do you think you should have that information now?
> 
> So, stop complaining, and either continue driving or stop driving for Uber and find another profession!!


What had changed since I started uber is it went from 200,000 drivers to 1,000,000 drivers. Uber use to be mostly for long trips to the airport and to another town or city it has evolved in to a short trip menu so with this type of change it is time we have the information to make a wise choice since they say we are not employees they must now disclose this information I'm sure this will end up in the courts and will change for the better. Uber was forced to stop penilizing drivers for not accepting rides and they can no longer disgard a drive for declining rides as the company has evolved so must the rules and information they give the drivers.


----------



## kbrown (Dec 3, 2015)

Amoore500 said:


> View attachment 236453


Whoa!

You must have a glitch h kn your app. Never, ever, EVER update your app. EVER.

What version app do you have?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Accepting trips without knowing where they're going is flat out asinine.

I'm sure I'm speaking for virtually every driver when I say that since I started doing rideshare, I've had "buyer's remorse" on many rides.

I can't even guess how many times I've thought "if I had known the destination of this piece of shit ride, I never would have accepted it"

And fuber, gryft, doordash, postmates, etc want it to stay that way.

There's no such thing as "loss leaders" for rideshare drivers, just losses.

For drivers, a money losing ride is money lost, period.

Fuber, gryft, Walmart, supermarkets etc use "loss leaders" as TOOLS to MAKE MONEY, while drivers cannot.

They use the power of leveraging MASSIVE SALES VOLUME to make money, while drivers cannot.

And of course they have the power to SET THEIR PRICES, while drivers cannot.


----------



## Karen Stein (Nov 5, 2016)

Sounds like someone needs a new line of work.

I've never regretted a trip, whatever the length or destination, with rideshare. I've yet to meet a sour customer.
.
What you describe does match my experience driving taxi. In the cab I had calls go sour for a variety of reasons, most often relating to money. I had one guy call for the specific purpose of murdering the driver. I had a bank robber call me for his getaway. 

Loss leaders? Make it up in volume? That's not business, that's an old joke.

It's ironic that all the solutions would imitate the taxi model, as cab drivers don't know the destination in advance either. Indeed, taxi authorities usually have a rule that specifically forbid a driver refusing a trip for that reason. 

Today I had several short rides connect in a nice streak. With minimum fares, I did better than had it just been one long ride 

If you feel the customer is a POS, you need to stop driving - now!


----------



## alaex (Mar 28, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> I'm sure I'm speaking for virtually every driver when I say that since I started doing rideshare, I've had "buyer's remorse" on many rides.


 No, you are not. 
Most of the drivers are quite happy with the current system. Naturally, they have nothing to whine about, so you won't see them on these forums.


----------



## Carblar (Sep 1, 2016)

alaex said:


> No, you are not.
> Most of the drivers are quite happy with the current system. Naturally, they have nothing to whine about, so you won't see them on these forums.


That is completely false. Uber knows most drivers are unhappy that's why the ill fated "180 days of change", new Uber CEO promising better driver treatment (a lie), just hired a new Driver Product guy to supposedly help relations, etc.

New member = Uber shill. No one is buying it pal. Not even your bosses at corporate.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Yeah Amoore500 posted a screen shot that clearly shows uber is not only able to show you destination on ping but that they do for some people.

Now. They need to start doing that for everyone because this uber driving doesnt have to be the game that it is. Theres more bs than a failed milton bradley game.

Once people connect The rider and driver. There shouldnt be any issues. But there will always be issues. However. Pairing people who both want the said trip to happen shouldnt be one of those issues.

This doesnt pay enough for someone to do a trip that would severely mess up their day. But there are always the right people for the trip. Provided that the right people get paired. The fact that the pay is less becomes way less of an issue if it takes the driver somewhere he wants to go anyway. That can only happen with all the trip details on the ping screen.

Uber has had way too long to make and implement these changes.

So. Its really time.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

View attachment 237516
Seriously though. If uber doesnt implement these changes on their own. Then pretty soon its time for someone to publicly drop the hack for not only destination after accept (which is easy). But also the destination on ping. Which is moderately easy.

Uber will have to man up. Do the right thing. Or have it done for them.

Clocks really ticking.

As a passenger as well, im hella tired of texting drivers to give them the heads up on my trip destination. Even when i tip them, there are some who slowly die inside when they start the trip and see where were going. Obviously the uber slogan of control when you work falls short. Oh. You thought you were on the last 30 minutes of your driving. Well. You just got blind sided by an extra hour and a half of driving.

Which is bs from either stand point because the right driver should have been given that trip, one who wanted it but that couldnt happen unless the driver knows what theyre getting into. Before they commit to a passenger.

Half the time. They get the text 5 minutes into our trip. ( thanks uber computers)

Uber people are probably reading this. Saying. We can fix the problem by making sure theres no delay in text messages. Lol

But were alreadybeyond that

If uber doesnt do the right thing and just show the freaking destination on the accept screen willingly. Like they are in this photo above that amoore posted. So drivers know what theyre getting into. Good for pax.

Then

Drivers will just have to do it themselves.

Seriously though. Its not that hard to force them to do the right thing.

And take what should be yours anyway.

All it takes is a spare phone to dedicate to ubering. (60-80$) and about an hours time.

And presto. You can have what they should be giving anyways.

It shouldnt even have to come to this though.

Uber. Tell people the destination willingly on the ping screen.

Or people will disseminate the knowledge themselves.

Up until now. Its really just been given out discretely. For a profit.

But here very soon. I have this gut feeling that its going to be given out freely. Just out of spite.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

alaex said:


> No, you are not.
> Most of the drivers are quite happy with the current system. Naturally, they have nothing to whine about, so you won't see them on these forums.


I meet drivers all the time who've never heard of this forum and tell me what a piece of shit uber is.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> I meet drivers all the time who've never heard of this forum and tell me what a piece of shit uber is.


I couldnt agree more elvis. This forums dissatisfied users make up a small fraction of dissatisfied users worldwide.

Nothing works right on uber. Their destination filter. The long trip notifications. The countdown timer. Their navigation.

Its all really unreliable.

They could solve so many problems by just showing the trip info. All of the trip info. On the ping screen. Then. Its on the drivers whether to share their ride or not to. Simple. So bloody simple.

Best believe the end is nigh.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> View attachment 237520
> View attachment 237516
> Seriously though. If uber doesnt implement these changes on their own. Then pretty soon its time for someone to publicly drop the hack for not only destination after accept (which is easy). But also the destination on ping. Which is moderately easy.
> 
> ...


Are you saying the hack is out there? What driver wouldn't pay for that?


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Totally. Its easy to do both. But thats not the point. Amoore500 posted a screenshot showing uber doing it willingly though.

Thats what needs to happen. For all drivers.

However. If it doesnt. Yes. Pretty soon you wont have to buy it.

It will be freely available for all.

Uber can just build a new app if they want to stop it then. Not this facade of a new app which is really an update with a facelift.

Im a passenger just as much as im a driver. And its always a pain in the rump. Me trying to give drivers the heads up on our trip.

Because i dont want to be that guy who abducts them to somewhere they cant go due to their own life constraints. But even then. Its such a headache. My texts to them never get through on time.

When i call them. Theyre driving so dont pick up. Or they peg me as a whiny pax whose gonna be ten blocks away from the pin. And want them to bend over.

But im trying to save us both time. I want to make sure they can do the trip so i only have to wait for a driver once.

But yeah. Both hacks exist.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> Totally. Its easy to do both. But thats not the point. Amoore500 posted a screenshot showing uber doing it willingly though.
> 
> Thats what needs to happen. For all drivers.
> 
> ...


Yes I got what he posted. But if seeing the destination can be done, why is it not readily available?


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Uber wants to tell you what you have to do. Not offer things that youre willing to do. 

Theyre hiding behind dated laws of cabbie redlining where you cant refuse trips to certain areas.

But technology has solved tgat as have the oversupply of drivers. Now. Since there are passive ubers everywhere, just because some dont want a trip going to certain areas doesnt mean that the pax wont be serviced. How often to ubers drive ten minutes to a pax? Because there arent centralized uber hangouts like cabs, if the dispatched ping just got broadcast and even if it had to bounce of ten different phones before hitting the phone of a driver who really wanted to go to that area, atleast its a win win for all parties involved. 


Uber is saying that this would lead to unreliability. But in fact, it would make things extremely reliable.

Lets say a driver is nearing the wnd of their shift, and they drive to a ping and then they get surprised that person wants to go 44 minutes south of where he is. But driver lives 1 hr north of where they are currently. So driver is what.... going to drive 44 minutes south. And then hes going to drive north 1 Hr and 44 minutes??? 

Even cabbies can refuse ... and not on destination. But on the grounds of time. 

It goes way past the end of their shift. Any cabbie or uber person would be well within their rights to invoke end of shift.



So math time.

Ping goes out. Each driver sees a ping for what ten seconds. So maybe it takes 15 screens to find the guy who wants to do tgat trip. Not for more money in fare. But just because he wants to go that way anyway. So hed be willing to do it. 

So 15 screens. At 10 sec per. In only takes 2 1/2 min to find the right driver for that pax. 

And then. Theres no surprises. 

No disappointment on either side. 

And only one driver has to go to that rider. 



They say that riders will wait longer. But thats a lie.


Im a rider. And i wait long times if i request a trip at base and then it starts to surge and my ping bounces around because nearby drivers are waiting for a surge ping. 

Same is true as a driver. Im in surge. And i get hit up by a base ping tgats bern bouncing around for a while.



If i knew where the trip was going. I would be way more inclined to accept it. 

Example. Oh. Look at this ping. Its 1.2 miles south of me. Its going north 5 miles. Oh snap. That shopping center is there and i could grab a coffee there after i do this trip. Ill do it. 

Or. Look at this trip. Its ten minutes away from me near the movie theatre. Ugh. But. Theyre going west 6 miles. And my girl lives out there. Sweet. Ill do this trip. 


People are way more inclined to do trips when they get a heads up.


Uber will learn this one way or another.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> Uber wants to tell you what you have to do. Not offer things that youre willing to do.
> 
> Theyre hiding behind dated laws of cabbie redlining where you cant refuse trips to certain areas.
> 
> ...


I don't mean available from uber. You sure wrote a lot to tell me what I already know.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Well. I wasnt really responding to you solely. 


Im talking to uber too 

You having this ability. Doesnt really help me as a rider. But all drivers having this ability. Helps me as a rider.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> Well. I wasnt really responding to you solely.
> 
> Im talking to uber too
> 
> You having this ability. Doesnt really help me as a rider. But all drivers having this ability. Helps me as a rider.


You're not understanding the question. Never mind.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

I do. You want to know how to see on ping. Im not prepared to give it to you today. Im intrigued by amoores screen shot. Im curious as to whether that will be the norm.


If it doesnt become the norm very soon. 



The how-to wont be too hard to find.


Ok


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

As for the argument that drivers would refuse pings if they knew destination. That’s ridiculous af. There are plenty of better reasone to refuse pings.

Too far away ping. Is the number one. Pickup premiums havent incentivized up to this point.


Also. Non surge pings being refused during intense surge. Also a good reason pings are ignored. Lol. Because pings will bounce around for twenty minutes. As it is. Because of where they are ( not where theyre going). Especially if its base and surge has grown around that area. That person has no chance if they dont cancel and rerequest under surge conditions. Heck, knowing that its a shortie or a trip going to a place thats lit would help not hurt the chances of having the ride completed.

Kind of makes me realize why passengers always get in like “ thank you. Thank you”.


Cuz they know. 



If anything. Everyone seeing the whole trip info. Would actually incentivize picking them up over the latter.

But this all stems from ubers own doing. The second they made this less like a straight up gig and more like some bs board game with all of tgese hoops to jump through and secret unwritten rules and factors tgat affect how trips are doled out.

Its sickening.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

So if they dont show every driver the destination info.


Then i guess we will

Also. Ubers doling of trips is so rigged. Its not even funny. Its criminal behavior. Its shows a clear conspiracy to deceive and defraud.

Any federal agency who has their tech people examine the app.


Will benefit from examining the app.

Thereexists secret files. Tons. Thats obvious. Just like how apple got duped by the io kit. But got geofenced out of knowing it.

Anyway. There are secret files.


Heres one.


Variables have been covered up. But it shows how the app is designed to assign certain things.

And you can wait with your thimb up your rear til the end of time and it wont matter


Because the deck is rigged and they do all of the shuffling and they deal from the bottom of the deck.


I do hope the feds get them.

As it happens across state lines.

It all comes down to math and programming.


More bs variables that decide if youre even offered the ping.

Everything is micromanaged to control, confuse and manipulate you.


Uber hates you. But they should fear you.

Conspiracy. Defrauding drivers. Drivers may agree to drive for crap rates. But never did drivers agree to some bottom dealing bs. Theyve been specifically told that its straight up. Obviously experience makes you realize thats a lie. But the smoking guns are clear as day if you know how to look and where to look. 


But if the right people would just look into these things. Theyd deal uber the death blow.


----------



## jfinks (Nov 24, 2016)

steveK2016 said:


> Uber drivers apparently.
> 
> In other IC industries, the IC has more power and leverage as they have the supply and theres demand for their skill set, which is specialized .
> 
> ...


Ug, I bet that room smelled lovely. lol



reg barclay said:


> I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


Uber did this rematch thing where it would switcharoo a rider, I haven't seen it in a while so I think they don't do it anymore.

Lyft does it though and I consider it breach of contract. Imagine the class lawsuit with possible treble damages? I had a Primetime ride switched to a non prime time rider the other day. I canceled.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

It is. A breach. Just like a glitchy df. Thats someone going in clearly a different direction.

Its absolutely a breach and you should document them all.


Thats the companies telling you that you HAVE to take a trip that you clearly made it known you didnt want as you accepted in good faith.


Deception runs rampant.

The real issue is that either it will come down to lawyers. Or government agencies and their lawyers/tech people. Combing through this garbage.

Someone always goes down for this


----------



## jfinks (Nov 24, 2016)

Oh I have it documented. In my first inquiry they didn't even mention the original rider. When I mentioned her name, then they all the sudden knew there was a switcharoo. Now they are saying primetime can fade by the time you get to the rider and it will no longer be a prime ride. Uber doesn't even stoop that low.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Uber stoops way lower. Believe you me. 



Open the app up and see for yourself. Ios. Android. 

Whoevers in charge Whoever signed the code or instructed someone else to. 

That intentionally rigged the system. 

Theyll get the gift


----------



## Carblar (Sep 1, 2016)

Skepticaldriver said:


> As for the argument that drivers would refuse pings if they knew destination. That's ridiculous af. There are plenty of better reasone to refuse pings.
> 
> Too far away ping. Is the number one. Pickup premiums havent incentivized up to this point.
> 
> ...


Well put. If Uber simply was fair instead of constant manipulation and sneakiness it would be better for both driver and pax.

They literally care about no one but themselves.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


I don't know why a few people are so concerned about destinations. I highly doubt any politician cares. It all seems like a huge waste of time and energy to fight over something when Uber will not change.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Skepticaldriver said:


> Yeah Amoore500 posted a screen shot that clearly shows uber is not only able to show you destination on ping but that they do for some people.
> 
> Now. They need to start doing that for everyone because this uber driving doesnt have to be the game that it is. Theres more bs than a failed milton bradley game.
> 
> ...





goneubering said:


> I don't know why a few people are so concerned about destinations. I highly doubt any politician cares. It all seems like a huge waste of time and energy to fight over something when Uber will not change.


Are you claiming that only a few drivers care about knowing destinations in advance? If you are making that claim, you're clueless.

It's doubtful most politicians or the general public know destinations are hidden from the drivers.

Knowing destinations in advance is very important not only for making more money, but also for making the job more pleasant for the drivers, and is worth the fight to achieve.


----------



## Butterdog (Apr 12, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> Are you claiming that only a few drivers care about knowing destinations in advance? If you are making that claim, you're clueless.
> 
> It's doubtful most politicians or the general public know destinations are hidden from the drivers.
> 
> Knowing destinations in advance is very important not only for making more money, but also for making the job more pleasant for the drivers, and is worth the fight to achieve.


Take a look at this and tell me how knowing the destination doesn't matter. Drove 5 min for this pick up.


----------



## jfinks (Nov 24, 2016)

Butterdog said:


> Take a look at this and tell me know the destination doesn't matter. Drove 5 min for this pick up.


Lol, At least it was only 5 minutes. You got screwed on the min fare of 2.66 though. That is the bigger issue.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> Are you claiming that only a few drivers care about knowing destinations in advance? If you are making that claim, you're clueless.
> 
> It's doubtful most politicians or the general public know destinations are hidden from the drivers.
> 
> Knowing destinations in advance is very important not only for making more money, but also for making the job more pleasant for the drivers, and is worth the fight to achieve.


Good luck. You'll need a ton.


----------



## Butterdog (Apr 12, 2018)

jfinks said:


> Lol, At least it was only 5 minutes. You got screwed on the min fare of 2.66 though. That is the bigger issue.


5 min is my max.


----------



## BiggestScamInHistory (Jan 19, 2016)

rosco78 said:


> You're not forced to take a ride anymore than the next driver. If you don't like the destination, cancel the trip....it's that simple. I've turned down rides for long distance, lack of an infant car seat, too much luggage....and simply not being a moving truck in my Corolla. So, if the trip doesn't work for you, saddle up and let the rider know what they can do to avoid having their next driver cancel on them.


And expect to be fired for that. Moronic answer.


----------



## 58756 (May 30, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


There has to be a hack that can allow destination to be seen. Surely info in transit to driver can be seen or decoded.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Butterdog said:


> Take a look at this and tell me how knowing the destination doesn't matter. Drove 5 min for this pick up.


Some trips are winners and some trips are losers. That's life. The reason Uber took away the destination info from us is because of drivers abusing the system. A few bad apples ruined it for everyone else


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> I couldnt agree more elvis. This forums dissatisfied users make up a small fraction of dissatisfied users worldwide.
> 
> Nothing works right on uber. Their destination filter. The long trip notifications. The countdown timer. Their navigation.
> 
> ...


Showing the trip destination is 100% the wrong thing to do. Uber is an awful company, but this is one thing they actually get right.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Ozzyoz said:


> There has to be a hack that can allow destination to be seen. Surely info in transit to driver can be seen or decoded.


There are. Theres one for after accept and more importantly. Before Accept.

Thats not the point though. Amoore posted uber doing it themselves.

So uber can choose to just do it.

Or uber can deal with it becoming publicly and freely available here soon.



Demon said:


> Showing the trip destination is 100% the wrong thing to do. Uber is an awful company, but this is one thing they actually get right.


No. When it comes to pings bouncing off of different phones.

The likelihood of pings getting accepted by the right person instead of forced down the wrong drivers throat would be solved.

Im thinking as a passenger tight now btw.

As a driver. I have both. But my drivers that pick me up dont.

I explained the reasons. In great detail. Ad nauseum


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Skepticaldriver said:


> There are. Theres one for after accept and more importantly. Before Accept.
> 
> Thats not the point though. Amoore posted uber doing it themselves.
> 
> ...


If Amoore was telling the truth, where's the additional screenshots?

Like him, the screenshots are nowhere to be found.

If that screenshot is legit, which I doubt, the destination was shown due to a glitch by fuber.

As far as I'm concerned, he's a troll



goneubering said:


> Some trips are winners and some trips are losers. That's life. The reason Uber took away the destination info from us is because of drivers abusing the system. A few bad apples ruined it for everyone else


Either you or someone else has already posted the same nonsense.

Fuber started hiding destinations in order to make more money by slashing driver pay.

Fuber knew if they cut driver pay, drivers would refuse to take unprofitable rides.

So their solution was to hide the destinations, while at the same time enforcing strict limits on cancellations.

What you consider "abuse" was not the reason they started hiding destinations.

Fuber's GREED ruined it for everyone.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> Fuber's GREED ruined it for everyone.


I suppose GREED equals making a PROFIT in your mind.


----------



## rosco78 (Mar 5, 2018)

BiggestScamInHistory said:


> And expect to be fired for that. Moronic answer.


If educating passengers on what options are available to them along with making decisions about what's in my best interest are moronic....then I'll continue to make moronic decisions. My 4.97 rating over 2400 rides speaks for itself.


----------



## Butterdog (Apr 12, 2018)

goneubering said:


> Some trips are winners and some trips are losers. That's life. The reason Uber took away the destination info from us is because of drivers abusing the system. A few bad apples ruined it for everyone else


Some are winners and some are losers is exactly what Ubers position should be. On some trips they win and on others they lose.

On short trips like this I should have received the booking fee or at least half of it. There should never be ride where Uber makes more than the driver.



goneubering said:


> I suppose GREED equals making a PROFIT in your mind.


So it's okay for Uber to make a profit but not me??


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Butterdog said:


> So it's okay for Uber to make a profit but not me??


You guys are arguing about things that were decided long ago. Do I like the current pay structure? No but it still works for me. If Uber doesn't bring you a profit then you should be looking into another job or career.


----------



## driver85 (Jan 3, 2018)

Even home contractors do analysis on projects to determine the amount of money it would cost for a project.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Ive got screenshots of before accept. And after accept. But theyre hacks.

Amoore500 had a screenshot showing uber doing it themselves

If they dont start doing it soon

Ive already stated that it will be easy for everyone to find.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

goneubering said:


> I suppose GREED equals making a PROFIT in your mind.


Trying to make a profit isn't greed, but trying to make a profit at the expense of ethics IS greed.

The word unethical fits both companies to a tee.



Skepticaldriver said:


> Ive got screenshots of before accept. And after accept. But theyre hacks.
> 
> Amoore500 had a screenshot showing uber doing it themselves
> 
> ...


Are you saying you have the ability to see destinations before starting the trip?

Without proof, I'm skeptical.

In the unlikely event you have that ability, you must be making big money due to the fact you can cherrypick your trips.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Imho. Everyone needs this ability. As ive said. Im a passenger a ton. Sometimes i go short distances. Sometimes i go far. Sometimes i go medium. I know for a fact that people who pick me up probably werent the ideal match for my trips. Even though i tried to give them the heads up while they were on their way to me. 

I want someone looking for that long ish trip or medium trip to pick me up when i take such trips. I do t want to abscond some driver working their way home to have to do it. 

And vice versa when its just ten minutes away Id prefer that the person who picks me up be down for a short ride. And plenty of people want that due to being about done or wanting to stay local ish. 

And under the current conditions, the proper matches can never happen. 


Uber has created an adversarial relationship but they have the ability to do better and when rider and driver are actually paired, they both atleast need to know what their in for once they commit to one another. 

Period


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> Trying to make a profit isn't greed, but trying to make a profit at the expense of ethics IS greed.
> 
> The word unethical fits both companies to a tee.
> 
> ...


By that definition what you're proposing is unethical.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Skepticaldriver said:


> Imho. Everyone needs this ability. As ive said. Im a passenger a ton. Sometimes i go short distances. Sometimes i go far. Sometimes i go medium. I know for a fact that people who pick me up probably werent the ideal match for my trips. Even though i tried to give them the heads up while they were on their way to me.
> 
> I want someone looking for that long ish trip or medium trip to pick me up when i take such trips. I do t want to abscond some driver working their way home to have to do it.
> 
> ...


I'm confused.

Are you a driver or just a rider?

If you're a driver, do you have some kind of device or software to see destinations in advance?


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

No. It wouldnt be unethical. Imagine he rewrote that. And said. Wow. With that ability. You could contribute to this rideshare thing within the confines and purview of your schedule. Able to contribte on the trips that he can. And opting out or not opting in to the trips that hes not a good match to share his trip with.

Demon. You are out of your depth.



Nats121 said:


> I'm confused.
> 
> Are you a driver or just a rider?
> 
> If you're a driver, do you have some kind of device or software to see destinations in advance?


I do both. More riding recently. Im in europe visiting family right now. Definitely not driving right now.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Skepticaldriver said:


> No. It wouldnt be unethical. Imagine he rewrote that. And said. Wow. With that ability. You could contribute to this rideshare thing within the confines and purview of your schedule. Able to contribte on the trips that he can. And opting out or not opting in to the trips that hes not a good match to share his trip with.
> 
> Demon. You are out of your depth.
> 
> I do both. More riding recently. Im in europe visiting family right now. Definitely not driving right now.


Do you have the ability to know destinations before starting the trip?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> No. It wouldnt be unethical. Imagine he rewrote that. And said. Wow. With that ability. You could contribute to this rideshare thing within the confines and purview of your schedule. Able to contribte on the trips that he can. And opting out or not opting in to the trips that hes not a good match to share his trip with.
> 
> Demon. You are out of your depth.
> 
> I do both. More riding recently. Im in europe visiting family right now. Definitely not driving right now.


Imagine there being no Uber or Lyft, that's pretty much what you're advocating here.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Ok. Ill stop you there.

First off. The world was fune before them.

World will be fine after them

Secondly, thats a fallscious statement you just made. So i wont dignify it with an argument.

Because theres no point.



Nats121 said:


> Do you have the ability to know destinations before starting the trip?


Before starting is way too easy. Before accepting. Thats so much better. And that took us time.

But uber can just show it on their own.

No real need to dexx it. Yet


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> Ok. Ill stop you there.
> 
> First off. The world was fune before them.
> 
> ...


I fully agree, you have no point to make here.
You're attacking a strawman instead of what I wrote. I never claimed the world wouldn't be fine, just that you're advocating for Uber & Lyft not to exist.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

This isnt just about people trying to wait for those whale rides.

This is about being in the uber driver signup on vermont street 4 yrs ago.

Hearing those goons espouse to other people signing up.

That its cool. Choose the how. Oh. You want to drive part time mrs. so and so. No problem. Oh. We think its best if you stay around your neighborhood.

Knowing darn well that some ping was gonna cone and make that lady drive hecka far away. And put her in a situation that they told her she wouldnt be put in.

I dont even know that lady. But this is about the lies.



Demon said:


> I fully agree, you have no point to make here.
> You're attacking a strawman instead of what I wrote. I never claimed the world wouldn't be fine, just that you're advocating for Uber & Lyft not to exist.


Tgats not what im advocating either. Re read. If you can

What i said is literally right above and never did i say that.

You are concluding tgat all drivers having the destination would be the wnd of uber and lyft.

However, thats an assumption you are touting as fact.

You havent made such case nor has anyone.

Period


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> This isnt just about people trying to wait for those whale rides.
> 
> This is about being in the uber driver signup on vermont street 4 yrs ago.
> 
> ...


The title of the thread is pretty much "Waiting for whale rides & why can't I cherry pick?", so yes, that is what this is about.

If it's about being lied to, don't work for this company. Why would you work for a company that lied to you & then you expect them to tell you the truth?


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

No. The title of the thread isnt that. And thats definitely NOT whats been discussed on the last four pages of this thread. 


Seriously. Now youre just lying. 


And being all reactionary about conclusions youve no logical reason to jump to.



Rabble rouse elsewhere!


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> Tgats not what im advocating either. Re read. If you can
> 
> What i said is literally right above and never did i say that.
> 
> ...


You need to read what you wrote because you are literally advocating for the end of Uber/Lyft. If drivers are going to cherry pick rides then TNC's become unreliable for most people and people will stop using TNC's & TNC's will cease to exist. For the TNC's to work, they must be reliable.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Were done. Because when youre not making bad conclusions. 

Youre just flat out lying.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> No. The title of the thread isnt that. And thats definitely NOT whats been discussed on the last four pages of this thread.
> 
> Seriously. Now youre just lying.
> 
> ...


No need to lie or make anything up. The only reason a driver would want the destination known before picking up the pax is so they could cherry pick. If there's another reason to know the destination before arriving at pick up I'd love to hear it. I look forward to your response.



Skepticaldriver said:


> Were done. Because when youre not making bad conclusions.
> 
> Youre just flat out lying.


You were done when I first responded to you, you've done nothing but avoid discussing the points I've brought up.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Youve failed to show how seeing destination on ping will falter reliability.

Too many drivers waiting.

Someone will always want the trip for a variety of reasons.

Id rather it be the right man or woman for the job.



Demon said:


> No need to lie or make anything up. The only reason a driver would want the destination known before picking up the pax is so they could cherry pick. If there's another reason to know the destination before arriving at pick up I'd love to hear it. I look forward to your response.
> 
> You were done when I first responded to you, you've done nothing but avoid discussing the points I've brought up.


Seriously. You havent substantiated your points.

You are so full of it.

Arguing just for the sake.

Your bs argument and fallacies are clear as day.

For everyone to read.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> Youve failed to show how seeing destination on ping will falter reliability.
> 
> Too many drivers waiting.
> 
> ...


I've literally shown you and asked you to discuss it, you keep running away. I asked a very straight forward question which you refuse to address. Why besides cherry picking does a driver need to know the destination before arriving at pick up?



Skepticaldriver said:


> Seriously. You havent substantiated your points.
> 
> You are so full of it.
> 
> ...


You've quoted the points I've made and refuse to respond to them and everyone can see you. I'm willing to have a conversation on the topic and you keep threatening to run away.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

I did. Actually. I did. I quoted my experience as a rider

Explained how the right person needs to be dispatched to me. 


Not someone lied to who probably has a filter set the other direction who accepted my trip in good faith only to be tricked by uber and they wouldnt have accepted it knowing that. 


Also. The right driver will always want that trip. Because there are so many driving wanting all sorts of trips 


That shows how knowledge beforehand could help. 




Also. That obscure trip heading god knows where would irritate the heck out of most except the drivers wanting to go to that region. 

They would snatch that trip up but they need to know that it is such. 


And wont unless they know before hand.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> I did. Actually. I did. I quoted my experience as a rider
> 
> Explained how the right person needs to be dispatched to me.
> 
> ...


The "right" person and most reliable ride are two very different things, and no, there isn't a driver for every ride.

A pax is at an airport, but is only making a short trip to a nearby hotel. No one at the airport is going to want it because it's a short ride, drivers not at the airport won't want to drive to the airport for a short trip, so this pax gets no driver. This is just one example. The bottom line is that drivers neat the pax won't want short rides, and drivers not near the pax don't want to drive to get a pax for a short ride.

You still haven't answered my question.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

ALso. I can tell by your argument. That you fear such things. You think your bottom line will be affected , you think that you already have a system that helps you swim while others sink lol. And thaT you can drive under these conditions fine now so why on earth would you want something out tgere to give other drivers peace of mind. I mean you want them to be discouraged.

A few problems. One. Youre transparent Af. You dont think that would be the end of uber lyft. You think that you wont make as much because it will hurt your ssystem. And other people out driving will be encouraged to drive more instead of heading home for the day. Too bad.

Second. The ability to do both already exist. You dont have them. But others do.

Its coming out either way. Soon. If its not uber it will just be a group of people posting how just to see chaos and turmoil.



Demon said:


> The "right" person and most reliable ride are two very different things, and no, there isn't a driver for every ride.
> 
> A pax is at an airport, but is only making a short trip to a nearby hotel. No one at the airport is going to want it because it's a short ride, drivers not at the airport won't want to drive to the airport for a short trip, so this pax gets no driver. This is just one example. The bottom line is that drivers neat the pax won't want short rides, and drivers not near the pax don't want to drive to get a pax for a short ride.
> 
> You still haven't answered my question.


Yeah. Im sure that no single person would want that trip. Someone wants to gtfo of the pig pen.

But how about the 99% of the trips not at a fifo lot.

In 2018. Airport trips constitute a very very small percentage of the trips taken.

This isnt 2014 where most trips involve airports.

Also. There were very few drivers and passengers then.

Now. Passive drivers and riders everywhere.

All the stats show this. As does the experience of being in any midsized town or city.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Skepticaldriver said:


> ALso. I can tell by your argument. That you fear such things. You think your bottom line will be affected , you think that you already have a system that helps you swim while others sink lol. And thaT you can drive under these conditions fine now so why on earth would you want something out tgere to give other drivers peace of mind. I mean you want them to be discouraged.
> 
> A few problems. One. Youre transparent Af. You dont think that would be the end of uber lyft. You think that you wont make as much because it will hurt your ssystem. And other people out driving will be encouraged to drive more instead of heading home for the day. Too bad.
> 
> ...


You're really wrong. Driving for Uber & Lyft is always a money losing proposition, so I don't do it. Uber & Lyft are also awful companies, so I don't use either as a pax, and I advocate that everyone avoid these two companies.

But holding the destination until the driver arrives at pick up is the one thing that they got right and they're not going to give up that information because they know that in some places it would put them and the driver in a legal situation and they would be out of business if they did because drivers would cherry pick.



Skepticaldriver said:


> Yeah. Im sure that no single person would want that trip. Someone wants to gtfo of the pig pen.
> 
> But how about the 99% of the trips not at a fifo lot.
> 
> In 2018. Airport trips constitute a very very small percentage of the trips taken.


So why would someone want to leave the staging area on a ride that's not profitable?
The airport was just one example, you don't seem to understand how this process works. Drivers aren't going to take rides that aren't profitable, or the percentage of drivers that do take losing rides will be so small the system becomes unreliable. You don't seem to want to address this point. It doesn't matter if it's the airport, a local bar, a downtown area or a residential area, this thread is all about wanting to cherry pick rides.



Skepticaldriver said:


> All the stats show this. As does the experience of being in any midsized town or city.


Show us those stats.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

And aS for a slight delay in finding drivers for pax in the real world. Non in fifo lots.

A non surged ping amidst surge already proves such delays exist yet youre not crying about that.

No drivers accept pings like that. And thats why the request time in thise trips is twenty minutes before any driver accepts it. But knowing the info. Could change that.

People are more willing to do something if they have a heads up. Know what theyre getting into.

Youre conditioned to only see it one way. The way uber says it should be.

Think about the ludicrous nature of it all. Car pulls up for a ping. Has no clue about the whereabouts of where pax is going. And theyre sharing a ride?

That car probably was ten minutes away when they got ping. Drove to person

So within a ten minute radius of that person. How many other drivers do you think were there ?

Dollars to donuts someone wanted tgat trip. And wanted to be closer to the paxs destination.

If the right people were paired. Thats the core tenet of reliability. Unless you view reliability as the worst match up taking place.



Demon said:


> You're really wrong. Driving for Uber & Lyft is always a money losing proposition, so I don't do it. Uber & Lyft are also awful companies, so I don't use either as a pax, and I advocate that everyone avoid these two companies.
> 
> But holding the destination until the driver arrives at pick up is the one thing that they got right and they're not going to give up that information because they know that in some places it would put them and the driver in a legal situation and they would be out of business if they did because drivers would cherry pick.
> 
> ...


You dont drive. Then GO AWAY.


----------



## REX HAVOC (Jul 4, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


In the TOS agreement we all agreed to I believe it mentions something called "Destination Discrimination" which is Uber's policy when it comes to not accepting a ride based on destination. Here's what Uber says, "Discriminating against riders based on their destination is prohibited by our Community Guidelines and is also prohibited by many city and state regulations. Repeated instances of cancelling trips due to rider's destination can lead to permanent deactivation of an Uber partner's account."

Here's the problem I have with this policy. The city and state regulations were written for cabs in mind. But since most cabs are based out of a large city it only pertains to rides within the cab company's city limits. So Uber decided to apply this regulation to their rides but they left out one huge caveat. What is the maximum distance we are required to accept on a ride? Well, I never got a clear answer to that because I don't think Ubers has one. So if you pick up a pax and they want you to drive them 3 hours and you have that much time left on your daily clock and tell them no and cancel the ride you may get kicked off the platform if the pax complains. So I think this policy needs more clarification by Uber so there are no misunderstandings.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

REX HAVOC said:


> In the TOS agreement we all agreed to I believe it mentions something called "Destination Discrimination" which is Uber's policy when it comes to not accepting a ride based on destination. Here's what Uber says, "Discriminating against riders based on their destination is prohibited by our Community Guidelines and is also prohibited by many city and state regulations. Repeated instances of cancelling trips due to rider's destination can lead to permanent deactivation of an Uber partner's account."
> 
> Here's the problem I have with this policy. The city and state regulations were written for cabs in mind. But since most cabs are based out of a large city it only pertains to rides within the cab company's city limits. So Uber decided to apply this regulation to their rides but they left out one huge caveat. What is the maximum distance we are required to accept on a ride? Well, I never got a clear answer to that because I don't think Ubers has one. So if you pick up a pax and they want you to drive them 3 hours and you have that much time left on your daily clock and tell them no and cancel the ride you may get kicked off the platform if the pax complains.


Good points.

It's yet another example of how cynical fuber is in trying to hide behind taxi regulations as justification for a scummy policy.

This from a company that's always fought AGAINST being subject to taxi regulations such as fingerprinting.

With the possible exception of NYC, there are few if any cities that prohibit "destination discrimination" by rideshare drivers.

Hiding destinations means more money for fuber and less money for drivers, that's what it boils down to.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

One last thing. Ill add.

Obviously youve never been on lyft. From a driving perspective .... if you go under scheduled trips... when theyre there, you can see all of the pertiment info of those jobs. Both general area pickup and general area drop off.

Those trips always go fast. Drivers snatch the heck out of them. Be it small short jobs. Or lengthy long ones.

BecaUse people like the heads up. They respect and appreciate that.

Thats a fact. And no driver is blindsided. Ergo happy pax. Happy driver. Thats sustainable. Reliable.

If these companies dont get with 2018 and technology.

Transparency.

Then people will do it for them.

I dont want to force anyone to pick me up who doesnt want the trip. And has life stuff in the way of them being able to complete the trip.

Uber touts itself as a gig that anyone can do in their spare time but unless proper pairing happens, thats a bold faced lie.

Theres too many drivers now for that to still happen.

These aRent street hails were talking about. This is me paying uber for them to find me the right person. Not for them to lie and force the wrong person to cone pick me up under false pretenses



REX HAVOC said:


> In the TOS agreement we all agreed to I believe it mentions something called "Destination Discrimination" which is Uber's policy when it comes to not accepting a ride based on destination. Here's what Uber says, "Discriminating against riders based on their destination is prohibited by our Community Guidelines and is also prohibited by many city and state regulations. Repeated instances of cancelling trips due to rider's destination can lead to permanent deactivation of an Uber partner's account."
> 
> Here's the problem I have with this policy. The city and state regulations were written for cabs in mind. But since most cabs are based out of a large city it only pertains to rides within the cab company's city limits. So Uber decided to apply this regulation to their rides but they left out one huge caveat. What is the maximum distance we are required to accept on a ride? Well, I never got a clear answer to that because I don't think Ubers has one. So if you pick up a pax and they want you to drive them 3 hours and you have that much time left on your daily clock and tell them no and cancel the ride you may get kicked off the platform if the pax complains. So I think this policy needs more clarification by Uber so there are no misunderstandings.


Csr has already replied back to decline apologize and cancel

Also. End of shift based on time already is protected.

But all of this bs is unnecessary.

Read the website. There are drivers wanting every type of trip under the sun. For various reasons.

Why not let them pair accordingly.

Anyway. How reliable is a network when you have cars driving from city a to pick up in city b and city b to pick up in city a. When theres dozens of cars in between.

Their bottom dealing pairing algo is already suspect af.

Just like being parked outside of a bar as people request. As you watch them. And never get their ping.

Experienced this as a rider and driver.

Real reliability there right
?

Im sure glad that the engineers behind life saving technology dont have ubers skewed sense of reliability.

Facts.


----------



## Carblar (Sep 1, 2016)

What some call cherry picking others realize is actually making an informed business decision. Can you imagine other independent contractors being left in the dark like this? A painter: "hey bring your supplies and drive to the house 7am sharp. Now you may be painting the entire house all day for 300 bucks or you may be painting just one side wall for 20 minutes and 10 bucks, we'll tell you after you start painting".

Lots of reasons a driver should know destination up front: cost calculation, time calculation, safety (a big issue) and others.

I know why Uber doesn't allow it but if they paid a decent amount for short rides the problem is almost entirely solved. Their policies and pay encourage things worse than so called cherry picking. Now you have drivers cancelling at pickup, calling ahead, leaving pax stranded and frustrated.

Same with the fact a driver gets paid more for a cancel fee than short rides. Drivers are tempted to hide out and not pick up pax for an easy $4.50 because chances are they'll make less on acually driving them.

Make the minimum pay on any trip $5 and you solve the cancel issue, the short trip issue and you could show destination. But Uber doesn't want to do that they simply do not care about either the pax or the driver.


----------



## UberCheese (Sep 3, 2017)

Yes, rideshare is like late 1940s thru 1970s TV.

You have the big two or three, then you have others in varying markets.

What we need is a cable TV like rideshare landscape.



reg barclay said:


> Please provide at least one sentence of my post which implied we have a moral right to cherry pick.
> 
> Okay I'll start with the first bit:
> 
> ...


----------



## jaystonepk (Oct 30, 2017)

Transparency is a good thing. The more information drivers have to make a business decisions the better. As an IC, we should know the scope of the "work" before we accept the job. Anything less than that we are employees. That totally changes the rules for Uber if that happens. Uber doesn't want employees.

Showing destinations, higher minimum fares, and better rates in general would solve nearly all of these problems. Claiming unreliability is nonsense. Uber has an endless supply of new drivers willing to accept any and every ping they get. That is until they figure out that doing so is not good for their business. Heck I would even settle for simply knowing the general DIRECTION of the ride. As long as I know I won't be taken further AWAY from a hot spot or AWAY from my house when I'm finishing up at 3am, I would gladly accept that ride. Driving 20 minutes to a drop at 4 am, only to wind up needing to drive 45 minutes back home knowing full well I can't get another rider is horseshit. However, if that destination is shown, I decline that trip and the person that actually wants to drive that way can accept it.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

jaystonepk said:


> Transparency is a good thing. The more information drivers have to make a business decisions the better. As an IC, we should know the scope of the "work" before we accept the job. Anything less than that we are employees. That totally changes the rules for Uber if that happens. Uber doesn't want employees.
> 
> Showing destinations, higher minimum fares, and better rates in general would solve nearly all of these problems. Claiming unreliability is nonsense. Uber has an endless supply of new drivers willing to accept any and every ping they get. That is until they figure out that doing so is not good for their business. Heck I would even settle for simply knowing the general DIRECTION of the ride. As long as I know I won't be taken further AWAY from a hot spot or AWAY from my house when I'm finishing up at 3am, I would gladly accept that ride. Driving 20 minutes to a drop at 4 am, only to wind up needing to drive 45 minutes back home knowing full well I can't get another rider is horseshit. However, if that destination is shown, I decline that trip and the person that actually wants to drive that way can accept it.


Keep flogging a dead horse!! I'm sure Uber management will read your post and change their policy.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Carblar said:


> What some call cherry picking others realize is actually making an informed business decision. Can you imagine other independent contractors being left in the dark like this? A painter: "hey bring your supplies and drive to the house 7am sharp. Now you may be painting the entire house all day for 300 bucks or you may be painting just one side wall for 20 minutes and 10 bucks, we'll tell you after you start painting".
> 
> Lots of reasons a driver should know destination up front: cost calculation, time calculation, safety (a big issue) and others.
> 
> ...


The driver has all the pertinent information before they accept the ride.



Skepticaldriver said:


> And aS for a slight delay in finding drivers for pax in the real world. Non in fifo lots.
> 
> A non surged ping amidst surge already proves such delays exist yet youre not crying about that.
> 
> ...


You keep making stuff up and can't say anything to back up your outrageous claims. Why would drivers knowingly take a ride that is going to lose them money? I've asked this at least twice and you refuse to answer it yet insist that drivers will knowingly take a money losing ride.

There's no reason for a pax to wait 10 minutes for a pick up when there are drivers closer. You're suggesting a situation where the pax loses, & the driver loses which illustrates my point that you're advocating for the financial death of Uber & Lyft.


----------



## jaystonepk (Oct 30, 2017)

Demon said:


> You're really wrong. Driving for Uber & Lyft is always a money losing proposition, so I don't do it. Uber & Lyft are also awful companies, so I don't use either as a pax, and I advocate that everyone avoid these two companies.





Demon said:


> The driver has all the pertinent information before they accept the ride.
> 
> There's no reason for a pax to wait 10 minutes for a pick up when there are drivers closer. You're suggesting a situation where the pax loses, & the driver loses which illustrates my point that you're advocating for the financial death of Uber & Lyft.


In one reply you're advocating for people not to use these platforms in any manner, yet in your next post you're arguing against a policy that in your eyes would help put both companies out of business. If you're advocating for non-usage let them make all the bad decisions they want.

Riders are going to get picked up one way or the other so how exactly are they losing by a driver accepting a ride he or she actually wants to do since they know the destination? That sounds more like win-win to me. My acceptance rate hasn't been above 50% since the 2nd month I started driving. That was about the time I learned that accepting every ride given based on the current information provided will yield some losing rides. I would absolutely accept more rides if know ahead of time where I would be when the ride was finished. That SHOULD be what the DF is used for but with only 2 per day that's only viable for starting or ending your day, if it even works at all. Everything in between is taking a gamble.


----------



## REX HAVOC (Jul 4, 2016)

jaystonepk said:


> Transparency is a good thing. The more information drivers have to make a business decisions the better. As an IC, we should know the scope of the "work" before we accept the job. Anything less than that we are employees. That totally changes the rules for Uber if that happens. Uber doesn't want employees.
> 
> Showing destinations, higher minimum fares, and better rates in general would solve nearly all of these problems. Claiming unreliability is nonsense. Uber has an endless supply of new drivers willing to accept any and every ping they get. That is until they figure out that doing so is not good for their business. Heck I would even settle for simply knowing the general DIRECTION of the ride. As long as I know I won't be taken further AWAY from a hot spot or AWAY from my house when I'm finishing up at 3am, I would gladly accept that ride. Driving 20 minutes to a drop at 4 am, only to wind up needing to drive 45 minutes back home knowing full well I can't get another rider is horseshit. However, if that destination is shown, I decline that trip and the person that actually wants to drive that way can accept it.


They do this because they only care about not inconveniencing their customers and they don't consider their Driver Partners their customers.


----------



## uberinatltrafficsux (Apr 21, 2018)

I would rather get a 4.50 cancel pay than a 5 dollar ride.


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Id rather every driver that pucks me up be able to lnow what theyre in for. Be it long trip. Short trip. Whatever. 


Theres absolutely no freaking reason for some adversarial relationship based on the destination and how much time it will take and the effects on both of our schedules.

Without an app. Id agree. That itd be slightly difficult to find such person. If say we were walking up to cars to ask them. 


But were not. We both have an app



Theres no excuse.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

jaystonepk said:


> In one reply you're advocating for people not to use these platforms in any manner, yet in your next post you're arguing against a policy that in your eyes would help put both companies out of business. If you're advocating for non-usage let them make all the bad decisions they want.
> 
> Riders are going to get picked up one way or the other so how exactly are they losing by a driver accepting a ride he or she actually wants to do since they know the destination? That sounds more like win-win to me. My acceptance rate hasn't been above 50% since the 2nd month I started driving. That was about the time I learned that accepting every ride given based on the current information provided will yield some losing rides. I would absolutely accept more rides if know ahead of time where I would be when the ride was finished. That SHOULD be what the DF is used for but with only 2 per day that's only viable for starting or ending your day, if it even works at all. Everything in between is taking a gamble.


Just because I don't like Uber or Lyft doesn't mean I can't hope the drivers force them to make positive changes.

You bring up a point that's been soundly refuted. If drivers know the destination ahead of time riders are not going to get picked up, or if they do get picked up it will take so long to get picked up the system becomes unreliable and the number of riders will dwindle so low the companies will collapse.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Demon said:


> Just because I don't like Uber or Lyft doesn't mean I can't hope the drivers force them to make positive changes.
> 
> You bring up a point that's been soundly refuted. If drivers know the destination ahead of time riders are not going to get picked up, or if they do get picked up it will take so long to get picked up the system becomes unreliable and the number of riders will dwindle so low the companies will collapse.


How about these suggestions?



Bro Olomide said:


> You're arguing with s straw man.
> My suggestion is we demand they show us the following info on each ping:
> Total distance. ( to include drive to pick up plus drive to drop off)
> Estimated time ( to include time to pick up and drop off)
> ...





Bro Olomide said:


> Amen.. Upfront fares for riders, upfront total distance, time plus earnings info for "driver partners" for each ping.. ( but no destination - to avoid cherry picking/ discrimination).
> This is what we should demand going forward.
> The back and forth about revealing destination in the ping is a distraction..


Hard to argue that I'm discriminating against Tyrone whose destination is in a bad path of town when what I really care for is how much I'm getting paid for the total drive time/mileage ( to include pick up/drop off).

This is a reasonable compromise; I'm surprised it's not being seriously discussed. Instead we have an animated debate based on a false narrative of " 
drivers want to discriminate based on destination,"on the one hand, and, " Fuber saves the day by hiding the destinations prior to drivers starting trips," on the other.

Implementing the above will force Uber to admit to drivers that majority rides are money losers for the drivers but good for passengers and Uber.

Let's see how the Uber shills try to sidestep the above very reasonable suggestions.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Bro Olomide said:


> How about these suggestions?
> 
> Hard to argue that I'm discriminating against Tyrone whose destination is in a bad path of town when what I really care for is how much I'm getting paid for the total drive time/mileage ( to include pick up/drop off).
> 
> ...


You still want cherry picking and it would put you out of work.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Demon said:


> You still want cherry picking and it would put you out of work.


BS. As a contractor, whose main costs revolve around time and mileage, I have a right to know what my earnings relative to effort put in are prior to accepting the trip. My suggestions simply present this information in a succinct manner to help the driver decide. Should the drive r choose not to take the trip, it means that the total estimated trip time and mileage (combined pick up drop off), isn;t worth the pay.

Here are a few examples:

Pick up is 8 miles away (20 minutes), destination is only 1 mile and a half from pick up. (6 minutes). For a total of 26 minutes, and 9 1/2 miles, driver earns only 6 bucks. I'd decline any such trip - as would any reasonable independent contractor - if the ping summary displayed this info. Multiple drivers declining such money losing trips would force Uber to share more of the increased rates they are currently charging riders with the driver who do the actual work.

On the other hand, a trip that would have takers would be:

pick up - 1.5 mile away - 6 minutes
Destination - 8 miles away - 20 minutes
Estimated Total Time: 26 min to 1/2 hour
Estimated earnings - $14. (Could be better, but ill take that for almost half hour of effort)

Why cant't I get upfront earnings estimate the same way that riders get upfront fare? That way we both know what we are getting into. Are riders cheery picking? They sure are, based on cost, and drivers should have the right to based on cost.

Are you saying that the only way Uber can succeed is by tricking drivers into accepting money losing trips? And it is their right to make money of such trips at the drivers' expense?

Keep in mind that the riding public had ways of getting around before Uber and it can have one should Uber fall apart.

As for putting me out of work, I do just fine by my main job, Uber is just a side hustle. That being said, I don't want to subsidize money losing rides using earnings form my other job.

Perhaps you are concerned that entitled passengers wouldn't be able to get cheap rides at the drivers' expense? Or that Uber will price fares accordingly and the whole house of cards will tumble, costing investors a lot of money?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

goneubering said:


> Keep flogging a dead horse!! I'm sure Uber management will read your post and change their policy.


You keep posting the same thing again and again.

If we choose to flog a dead horse, why do care? Are you on fuber's payroll?

Tell your bosses at fuber I'm gonna keep advocating for full info disclosure for each trip offer BEFORE accepting the offer, as well as penalty-free refusal of trip offers.



Bro Olomide said:


> How about these suggestions?
> 
> Hard to argue that I'm discriminating against Tyrone whose destination is in a bad path of town when what I really care for is how much I'm getting paid for the total drive time/mileage ( to include pick up/drop off).
> 
> ...


I disagree with your compromise.

I refuse to give away the kind of CONTROL that a true independent contractor business owner is supposed to have because some drivers may choose to discriminate on the basis of race.

Got news for you. It happens right now, even with fuber hiding destinations.

The vast majority of discrimination that takes place is based on money, not race.

While money is the biggest factor in demanding control of our work, it's not the only thing.

There are times that I and other drivers may choose to limit our work area to certain part of town or a certain radius, and we should be able to.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Bro Olomide said:


> BS. As a contractor, whose main costs revolve around time and mileage, I have a right to know what my earnings relative to effort put in are prior to accepting the trip. My suggestions simply present this information in a succinct manner to help the driver decide. Should the drive r choose not to take the trip, it means that the total estimated trip time and mileage (combined pick up drop off), isn;t worth the pay.
> 
> Here are a few examples:
> 
> ...


You say BS but then you do nothing but prove my point, you want to cherry pick rides.

You're already getting all the information you're asking for before you accept the ride. No one is tricking anyone into accepting rides, if you don't want to take a ride, cancel it, which you say you already do. I have no problem with the public getting around without TNC's. Passengers can't cherry pick.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> If we choose to flog a dead horse, why do care? Are you on fuber's payroll?
> 
> Tell your bosses at fuber I'm gonna keep advocating for full info disclosure for each trip offer BEFORE accepting the offer, as well as penalty-free refusal of trip offers.
> 
> ...


Go for it. That destination bridge was crossed and burned a long time ago but please continue with your futile battle if it makes you happy. I prefer to focus on reality.


----------



## jmcnana91911 (Jun 23, 2018)

wallae said:


> Again I'm new... but I use the tools I can. 11-15 minutes away and a 4.5 rating I decline the trip.
> What sucks with Uber as opposed to Lyft is the rating system. With Uber I have to rate before I see if they tip.
> With Lyft I can wait 24 hours. Great guy no tip. You get a 4. Now if I see less than a 5 I can decline.
> 
> ...


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Thats a horrible system. 5 star s could also mean theyre brand new. And 4.8 could be one jaded drivers feedback.

Seriously. A very flawed system.


----------



## Frontier Guy (Dec 27, 2015)

reg barclay said:


> I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


In the trucking industry, it is a legal requirement that IC's know every last bit of information before they accept the load: Origination, Destination, type of load, weight, HAZOURDOUS or not. Since Uber runs Uber freight, they are well aware of this requirement. I speculate it would not be much of a stretch to make the case that this should happen for regular Uber as well.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Frontier Guy said:


> In the trucking industry, it is a legal requirement that IC's know every last bit of information before they accept the load: Origination, Destination, type of load, weight, HAZOURDOUS or not. Since Uber runs Uber freight, they are well aware of this requirement. I speculate it would not be much of a stretch to make the case that this should happen for regular Uber as well.


Uber & Lyft already do that.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Demon said:


> Uber & Lyft already do that.





Demon said:


> Uber & Lyft already do that.


They don't you fool. Repeating over and over that they do doesn't make it so. They should provide that info along with the prospective rider's rating at the time they send the ping. Let it linger upto a minute for the driver to review and consider if the trip is worthwhile.

At present they only provide destination info once you arrive at the pick top spot and start the ride, at which point its to late to cancel. Perhaps if drivers started massively screening accepted pings to find out destination, Uber will cave in as they'll have to deactivate way more drivers than they can replace.


----------



## Sl0re10 (May 7, 2018)

reg barclay said:


> I haven't studied employment/contracting laws, but I'm not sure we have a legal right to know all pertinent information. Imagine someone is an independent lawn mower and a potential customer asks him to mow his lawn for say $1 per square foot, but won't tell him how big the lawn is. Presumably the lawn mower can refuse the job due to lack of info, but who says the potential customer has to give him that info?


They can't block you from checking out the lawn before you sign a contract with them....


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Bro Olomide said:


> They don't you fool. Repeating over and over that they do doesn't make it so. They should provide that info along with the prospective rider's rating at the time they send the ping. Let it linger upto a minute for the driver to review and consider if the trip is worthwhile.
> 
> *At present they only provide destination info once you arrive at the pick top spot *and start the ride, at which point its to late to cancel. Perhaps if drivers started massively screening accepted pings to find out destination, Uber will cave in as they'll have to deactivate way more drivers than they can replace.


It being a fact and you saying it does make it so. Take a look at what I bolded, you're agreeing that you get the destination BEFORE you start the ride and you can cancel when you learn the destination. You can't make any argument otherwise.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Demon said:


> It being a fact and you saying it does make it so. Take a look at what I bolded, you're agreeing that you get the destination BEFORE you start the ride and you can cancel when you learn the destination. You can't make any argument otherwise.


I want to know my estimated earnings and total distance (total pick up plus dropp) upfront before I accept a ping, not after I have accepted ( and have a threat of deactivation over my head should I cancel too often - as defined by Uber- after I call to find out how far someone is going and concluding that a ride is a big money losers) and drove to the pick up.

Much like the rider doesn't pay a dime to find what a ride will cost them before they accept it.

Why is it so hard for this to sink into your thick fiendish skull?

What's good for the rider (upfront pricing) should also be good for the driver (upfront estimate of earnings and total distance)


----------



## jaystonepk (Oct 30, 2017)

Demon said:


> It being a fact and you saying it does make it so. Take a look at what I bolded, you're agreeing that you get the destination BEFORE you start the ride and you can cancel when you learn the destination. You can't make any argument otherwise.


That is wrong. Drivers have to BEGIN THE TRIP before we are given the FINAL destination. Too many cancellations is frowned upon and can result in deactivation. If you've already driven to the pickup location, that LAST thing a driver wants to do start, then immediately cancel the ride. We've lost both time and money driving to the pickup location for ZERO compensation.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

jaystonepk said:


> That is wrong. Drivers have to BEGIN THE TRIP before we are given the FINAL destination. Too many cancellations is frowned upon and can result in deactivation. If you've already driven to the pickup location, that LAST thing a driver wants to do start, then immediately cancel the ride. We've lost both time and money driving to the pickup location for ZERO compensation.


We'll put.. Demon seems to 
a) have a reading comprehension issue or
b) deliberately play stupid to troll this forum
or
c) both.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Bro Olomide said:


> I want to know my estimated earnings and total distance (total pick up plus dropp) upfront before I accept a ping, not after I have accepted ( and have a threat of deactivation over my head should I cancel too often - as defined by Uber- after I call to find out how far someone is going and concluding that a ride is a big money losers) and drove to the pick up.
> 
> Much like the rider doesn't pay a dime to find what a ride will cost them before they accept it.
> 
> ...


I totally get it, you want to cherry pick rides, screw over other drivers, and put the TNC's out of business. You've made those points crystal clear. That's not what we're discussing at the moment.

Please take a look at what you & I have written on this subject. You don't accept a ride until after you arrive at the pickup point, learn the destination, allow the pax into your car and start the ride. So, you're already getting everything you asked for in your post. You're an independent contractor and as an IC you have the right to accept or turn down as much work as you want. If you're suddenly saying you can be deactivated because you turn down rides, then your story is changing.

What you're proposing is good for neither rider or driver.



Bro Olomide said:


> We'll put.. Demon seems to
> a) have a *reading comprehension* issue or
> b) deliberately play stupid to troll this forum
> or
> c) both.


Not a wise choice of words.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

Demon said:


> *
> I totally get it, you want to cherry pick rides, screw over other drivers, and put the TNC's out of business. You've made those points crystal clear. That's not what we're discussing at the moment. *
> 
> Please take a look at what you & I have written on this subject.* You don't accept a ride until after you arrive at the pickup point, learn the destination, allow the pax into your car and start the ride. So, you're already getting everything you asked for in your post. You're an independent contractor and as an IC you have the right to accept or turn down as much work as you want. If you're suddenly saying you can be deactivated because you turn down rides, then your story is changing. *
> ...


 *Rebuttal to first bolded point.*
Hardly drivers fault that TNC's business model depends on keeping drivers in the dark about a potential contract's (potential ride's cost) unless they accept a ping, only after which can they contact a rider to find out the destination (against Uber's rules, and at risk of deactivation) drive to the destination, (time, money anyone). This only works well for Uber and the rider who both know what they will earn (in Uber's case) or pay (in the rider's case) once the rider places a ride request. A for the driver, it's simply a game of "guess what's behind door number 2." The high turnover rate of drivers and need to constantly replenish driver ranks with fresh clueless ants who dutifully accept every ping speaks to this deceitful gambit being the bedrock of TNC success.

The problem isn't the driver's wanting rides priced fairly to account for total drive distance/drive time; rather, the problem is Uber/Lyft playing out their price cuts wars (and subsequent price increases after upfront pricing with them capturing all the price gains, while passing little to none to the driver) while cynically using the drivers' capital investments (driver's cars).

They are free to get into their price wars all they want if they use their own fleets, at their own expense, of course, but we already know that they would never willingly accept such low rates if they didn't have angel money periodically poring in to salvage their balance sheets, and they were responsible for fleet fueling and maintenance costs.

*As to the second bolded part of your statement, *I'll just say you are deliberately playing stupid just to be annoying. I'll say it again, I want to see all that info displayed with the ping and I can decide whether to accept it or not. It's not a fundamental right for riders to move from A to B to the financial detriment of a driver, nor is it a fundamental right for TNC to exist if it exploits drivers.

What i am proposing is good for drivers, and can be good for riders if they are willing to pay the true market price for their ride given such factors as availability of drivers nearby, total distance driven, all factors which are critical to the financial stability of a an independent contractor, as opposed to inane things as a price war with lyft for market share.


----------



## jaystonepk (Oct 30, 2017)

Demon said:


> Please take a look at what you & I have written on this subject. You don't accept a ride until after you arrive at the pickup point, learn the destination, allow the pax into your car and start the ride.


Wrong! Have you ever driven before? Because it seems you aren't understanding the request/accept/pickup/drop-off paradigm.

Drivers receive REQUESTS where ever they are, whether it is 2 minutes or 22 minutes from the PICKUP. The request shows pax rating, estimated time to PICKUP location, and surge multiplier, THAT'S IT.



Demon said:


> So, you're already getting everything you asked for in your post.


Wrong! There is no final destination on the REQUEST ping. AFTER the driver arrives, they STILL DON'T know the destination until they start the trip, usually AFTER the pax has entered the car. If the driver then decides they can't perform the contracted work, they are then in the uncomfortable position of telling the pax they need to get out of their car.



Demon said:


> You're an independent contractor and as an IC you have the right to accept or turn down as much work as you want. If you're suddenly saying you can be deactivated because you turn down rides, then your story is changing.


Partially correct! Nobody said you can be deactivated for not ACCEPTING rides. My acceptance rate is routinely sub 40%. However, you CAN BE deactivated for cancelling too many rides. ACCEPTING a ride, then not performing said work is cancelling. Drivers are ACCEPTING having only been given the PICKUP location, not the DROP-OFF location. Which circles back to the whole point of the thread, show the destinations on the REQUEST screen.



Demon said:


> I totally get it, you want to cherry pick rides, screw over other drivers, and put the TNC's out of business. You've made those points crystal clear. That's not what we're discussing at the moment.
> 
> What you're proposing is good for neither rider or driver.


The rider is getting picked up regardless. They are not losing out on anything. If it takes 5 extra minutes to get a driver well boo-frickin-who! They are paying significantly less than a taxi and usually receiving much better service.

Seeing a DROP-OFF location gives all drivers a chance to determine how profitable that ride will be. No driver has an advantage to screw over another driver if they all see the DROP-OFF location. Driving 10 or more minutes for a 2 minute trip = losing money. Driving 2 minutes for a 10 or more minute trip = earning money. What's the best way to entice drivers to take shorter trips to ensure the system maintains its integrity, increase the rates.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

jaystonepk said:


> Wrong! Have you ever driven before? Because it seems you aren't understanding the request/accept/pickup/drop-off paradigm.
> 
> Drivers receive REQUESTS where ever they are, whether it is 2 minutes or 22 minutes from the PICKUP. The request shows pax rating, estimated time to PICKUP location, and surge multiplier, THAT'S IT.
> 
> ...


Once again, well put. Watch him come back deliberately playing stupid by regurgitating his devilish retorts that show his ignorance if how things currently work.


----------



## pearl east (May 19, 2018)

What's wrong with cherry-pick? Uber drivers are not employees. They can accept any jobs they want. Also, if everyone does cherry-pick, Uber has to raise the minimum base rate. I drove for Uber for two months. I don't need this money to survive. But $2.17 minimum pay is insulting to me. So I quit.


----------



## Certain Judgment (Dec 2, 2016)

Pipe dreams. Their whole system would collapse if they told us the destination before we accepted the ride. People would turn down minimum fair rides all the time.

In addition, certain locations would pretty much lose service entirely. I already don't pick up from the hood if I can help it, and if I could avoid ever driving to it to drop somebody off, I most certainly would. This sub minimum wage job is not worth getting shot for.


----------



## airportsedan (Sep 24, 2015)

Certain Judgment said:


> Pipe dreams. Their whole system would collapse if they told us the destination before we accepted the ride. People would turn down minimum fair rides all the time.
> 
> In addition, certain locations would pretty much lose service entirely. I already don't pick up from the hood if I can help it, and if I could avoid ever driving to it to drop somebody off, I most certainly would. This sub minimum wage job is not worth getting shot for.


UBER should show destinations on ping requests. If they have difficulty getting areas serviced then UBER should provide a car/driver on THEIR dime to get it covered.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Certain Judgment said:


> Pipe dreams. Their whole system would collapse if they told us the destination before we accepted the ride. People would turn down minimum fair rides all the time.
> 
> In addition, certain locations would pretty much lose service entirely. I already don't pick up from the hood if I can help it, and if I could avoid ever driving to it to drop somebody off, I most certainly would. This sub minimum wage job is not worth getting shot for.


It would only collapse if they refused to pay drivers a decent pay rate.

If the money is good, virtually all rides will be accepted.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Bro Olomide said:


> *Rebuttal to first bolded point.*
> Hardly drivers fault that TNC's business model depends on keeping drivers in the dark about a potential contract's (potential ride's cost) unless they accept a ping, only after which can they contact a rider to find out the destination (against Uber's rules, and at risk of deactivation) drive to the destination, (time, money anyone). This only works well for Uber and the rider who both know what they will earn (in Uber's case) or pay (in the rider's case) once the rider places a ride request. A for the driver, it's simply a game of "guess what's behind door number 2." The high turnover rate of drivers and need to constantly replenish driver ranks with fresh clueless ants who dutifully accept every ping speaks to this deceitful gambit being the bedrock of TNC success.
> 
> The problem isn't the driver's wanting rides priced fairly to account for total drive distance/drive time; rather, the problem is Uber/Lyft playing out their price cuts wars (and subsequent price increases after upfront pricing with them capturing all the price gains, while passing little to none to the driver) while cynically using the drivers' capital investments (driver's cars).
> ...


I strongly disagree with you, drivers do play a major part in how low the rates are. If drivers would stop driving at low rates or TNC's high percentage of the ride, the TNC's would have to make some concessions. So long as the TNC's have enough drivers, they'll be no need for the TNC's to make any changes. 


Bro Olomide said:


> *As to the second bolded part of your statement, *I'll just say you are deliberately playing stupid just to be annoying. I'll say it again, I want to see all that info displayed with the ping and I can decide whether to accept it or not. It's not a fundamental right for riders to move from A to B to the financial detriment of a driver, nor is it a fundamental right for TNC to exist if it exploits drivers.
> 
> What i am proposing is good for drivers, and can be good for riders if they are willing to pay the true market price for their ride given such factors as availability of drivers nearby, total distance driven, all factors which are critical to the financial stability of a an independent contractor, as opposed to inane things as a price war with lyft for market share.


Now you're just calling names because you can't offer a rebuttal to the points I've raised. Again, it is a lose-lose-lose situation for everyone if TNC's revealed the destination before the driver arrives at pickup, and there is no other IC that knows everything about their job before they ever get to the job site.



Nats121 said:


> It would only collapse if they refused to pay drivers a decent pay rate.
> 
> If the money is good, virtually all rides will be accepted.


They already refuse to pay driver's a decent rate and TNC's are growing.



jaystonepk said:


> Wrong! Have you ever driven before? Because it seems you aren't understanding the request/accept/pickup/drop-off paradigm.
> 
> Drivers receive REQUESTS where ever they are, whether it is 2 minutes or 22 minutes from the PICKUP. The request shows pax rating, estimated time to PICKUP location, and surge multiplier, THAT'S IT.


I've never said otherwise. 


jaystonepk said:


> Wrong! There is no final destination on the REQUEST ping. AFTER the driver arrives, they STILL DON'T know the destination until they *start the trip*, usually AFTER the pax has entered the car. If the driver then decides they can't perform the contracted work, they are then in the uncomfortable position of telling the pax they need to get out of their car.


So after all that, you're agreeing with me, the driver knows the destination before they start the trip. There's no argument you can make otherwise. If your procedures allow the pax into your car before you know the destination that's on you. Other drivers have different procedures, like arriving to the pax with doors locked & a window down, and confirming pax's identity & destination before they get in the car. Even if they are in the car it doesn't change the point I've made.



jaystonepk said:


> Partially correct! Nobody said you can be deactivated for not ACCEPTING rides. My acceptance rate is routinely sub 40%. However, you CAN BE deactivated for cancelling too many rides. ACCEPTING a ride, then not performing said work is cancelling. Drivers are ACCEPTING having only been given the PICKUP location, not the DROP-OFF location. Which circles back to the whole point of the thread, show the destinations on the REQUEST screen.


Bro Olimde did say he would run the risk of deactivation if he didn't pick up passengers. You should really address that with him.



jaystonepk said:


> The rider is getting picked up regardless. They are not losing out on anything. If it takes 5 extra minutes to get a driver well boo-frickin-who! They are paying significantly less than a taxi and usually receiving much better service.


 This has been soundly refuted several times and it really shows you don't understand how TNC's work. You also totally defeated any point you tried to make when you said the pax doesn't lsoe out but then said they have to wait longer. If they have to wait longer they are losing out. The PAX may not get picked up, and even if they do they've now had to wait longer to get to their destination. There is only so long a pax will wait before they just won't use TNC's anymore because they view the system as unreliable, and once the system is seen as unreliable TNC's will go under. 


jaystonepk said:


> Seeing a DROP-OFF location gives all drivers a chance to determine how profitable that ride will be. No driver has an advantage to screw over another driver if they all see the DROP-OFF location. Driving 10 or more minutes for a 2 minute trip = losing money. Driving 2 minutes for a 10 or more minute trip = earning money. What's the best way to entice drivers to take shorter trips to ensure the system maintains its integrity, increase the rates.


Seeing a drop off before ever moving to the pax allows drivers to cherry pick, which hurts other drivers, hurts passengers and hurts the TNC, to say nothing of the legal ramifications. I agree with you that rates are too low, but so long as drivers are willing to drive at these low rates and lose money the TNC's are going to keep the rates low.


----------



## jaystonepk (Oct 30, 2017)

Demon said:


> So after all that, you're agreeing with me, the driver knows the destination before they start the trip. There's no argument you can make otherwise. If your procedures allow the pax into your car before you know the destination that's on you. Other drivers have different procedures, like arriving to the pax with doors locked & a window down, and confirming pax's identity & destination before they get in the car. Even if they are in the car it doesn't change the point I've made.
> 
> Bro Olimde did say he would run the risk of deactivation if he didn't pick up passengers. You should really address that with him.
> 
> ...


Nope! Destination is given AFTER starting the trip. Accept ping, drive to pick, start trip, destination displayed. Don't know how many times this can be said by multiple people. If the driver cancels too many times after accepting, but not completing the trip, they can be deactivated. I don't need to check with Bro as I know how the accept/cancel game works.

I roll up to pickups with doors locked and a window down every time. Once I know their name I unlock but I don't start moving until I see where we're going. Haven't ejected a rider yet as when I'm out I actually WANT my wheels to turn as that's where I earn a profit.

Show me the proof then. You keep saying its been refuted. Prove it. I'm the one still driving so I know how the system operates. I know what works for me and what doesn't. I drive at the time of day/night and a vehicle that makes me profitable. Yet I'm here telling you I would positively accept more trip requests if I were able to make decisions about the ride beforehand.

Drivers ALREADY cherry pick. If they weren't, acceptance rates would be close to 100%. They aren't. Riders are still going to get where they want to go. I had a driver cancel on me this weekend because he got a request from the other platform before he got to me. I had a driver, then after 5 minutes the app was back to searching for a driver. If the system is working so great already why would I see 17-19 minute pickups for an XL ride? Those should be snatched up every time as their profit margin is 40-45% higher than an X ride.

The one thing we agree it that rates are shit. Increased rates would help with riders getting picked up, every time. Cancel fees should never be higher than a minimum fare. Changing that would go a long way to keep their system reliable.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

jaystonepk said:


> Nope! Destination is given AFTER starting the trip. Accept ping, drive to pick, start trip, destination displayed. Don't know how many times this can be said by multiple people. If the driver cancels too many times after accepting, but not completing the trip, they can be deactivated. I don't need to check with Bro as I know how the accept/cancel game works.
> 
> I roll up to pickups with doors locked and a window down every time. Once I know their name I unlock but I don't start moving until I see where we're going. Haven't ejected a rider yet as when I'm out I actually WANT my wheels to turn as that's where I earn a profit.


You didn't read what I wrote. I specifically addressed this. Drivers can ask the pax BEFORE they allow the pax in the car at the pick up point what their destination is. Bro is the one who brought up being deactivated, not me. 


jaystonepk said:


> Show me the proof then. You keep saying its been refuted. Prove it. I'm the one still driving so I know how the system operates. I know what works for me and what doesn't. I drive at the time of day/night and a vehicle that makes me profitable. Yet I'm here telling you I would positively accept more trip requests if I were able to make decisions about the ride beforehand.


The proof is in the logic. If the closest driver doesn't want the trip because they don't like the profit, there's less of a chance a driver farther away would want the ride because it net them even less. I've proposed the question time and again to people on this forum and everyone of them has run away from it: why would a driver knowingly take a ride that would lose them money? Logic stands to reason that they won't.

There's also the proof that the pax now has to wait longer for a driver to accept the ride and then for that driver to make a longer trip to their pick up point.

There's also the legal reasons that TNC's do not show the destination. 


jaystonepk said:


> Drivers ALREADY cherry pick. If they weren't, acceptance rates would be close to 100%. They aren't. Riders are still going to get where they want to go. I had a driver cancel on me this weekend because he got a request from the other platform before he got to me. I had a driver, then after 5 minutes the app was back to searching for a driver. If the system is working so great already why would I see 17-19 minute pickups for an XL ride? Those should be snatched up every time as their profit margin is 40-45% higher than an X ride.


Just because drivers don't take every ride doesn't mean they're cherry picking, they may be, but there isn't enough data to know for sure. Some drivers don't pick up at schools because there's a high chance the pax will be an unaccompanied minor, this is one example, there are many. My argument is not that the system is working great as it is, I would strongly argue there are lots of ways to improve how TNC's work. 


jaystonepk said:


> The one thing we agree it that rates are shit. Increased rates would help with riders getting picked up, every time. Cancel fees should never be higher than a minimum fare. Changing that would go a long way to keep their system reliable.


This is what drivers should be focusing on.


----------



## jaystonepk (Oct 30, 2017)

Demon said:


> You didn't read what I wrote. I specifically addressed this. Drivers can ask the pax BEFORE they allow the pax in the car at the pick up point what their destination is. Bro is the one who brought up being deactivated, not me.


No they can't. Uber will slap your pee-pee for doing this. That is a cancellation, not the same as saying "No thanks" at the request ping. You can say no thanks all day long, accepting and cancelling or calling to ask destination is an Uber no-no. They could simply share that information so there is no need for the driver to do so but, here we are.



Demon said:


> The proof is in the logic. If the closest driver doesn't want the trip because they don't like the profit, there's less of a chance a driver farther away would want the ride because it net them even less. I've proposed the question time and again to people on this forum and everyone of them has run away from it: why would a driver knowingly take a ride that would lose them money? Logic stands to reason that they won't.
> 
> There's also the proof that the pax now has to wait longer for a driver to accept the ride and then for that driver to make a longer trip to their pick up point.
> 
> There's also the legal reasons that TNC's do not show the destination.


Asking that question is like asking would you rather be mauled by a bear or lion. Nobody wants to be mauled by an animal just as much as no driver wants to lose money on a ride.

Maybe I'm different, but if the trip if profitable I'll take it. Not every ride is going to be a whale, just like not every ride is going to be a shortie. Long pickups without knowing SOMETHING about my potential earnings causes a lot of these problems of riders not being able to get a driver. How can I be sure of that without knowing the details though? I can't so I "cherry-pick" aka, screen rides, based on the minimal info provided. XL pickup from a laundromat 10 minutes away. Nope! Guaranteed that is a minimum ride. Not worth the time.

So how exactly do we get better pay for drivers?


----------



## 123dragon (Sep 14, 2016)

Demon said:


> There's also the legal reasons that TNC's do not show the destination.


I brought this up earlier. In places where you have to get a TNC license at least you are required to comply with the law.

https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/commercial/#tnc/partner.asp



> TNC partners are required to comply with all applicable laws regarding nondiscrimination against passengers or potential passengers and to comply with the* TNC's policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of a passenger's points of departure and destination.*
> 
> TNC partners must comply with all applicable laws relating to accommodation of service animals.


----------



## Bro Olomide (Sep 1, 2017)

123dragon said:


> I brought this up earlier. In places where you have to get a TNC license at least you are required to comply with the law.
> 
> https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/commercial/#tnc/partner.asp


That is why a few posts earlier I mentioned that those insisting on knowing a destination in advance should accept the following changes:

*Current set-up
*
A ping/request comes displaying only the following:

-Distance to pick up
-Rider's rating
-Where appropriate, whether a long distance fee may or does apply (It doesn't show what that fee is despite Uber knowing the distance/estimated time to pick up)
-Where appropriate, it shows long trip request (45 min +), but nothing about just how far (mileage wise the trip is).
-Where appropriate, if the ride was previously scheduled. (a rather meaningless feature for drivers, but it sure is a good marketing tool to reel in riders)

This displays for about 10 seconds, *and the driver can only know the pick up destination if he/she accepts the trip based on the above limited information. The actual drop-off destination, is not known by the driver until said driver, upon accepting the ride, follows through by spending time and gas to pick up the passenger, then starting the ride. *

The downsides to the driver of this currents et-up are obvious to all but Demon

*Proposed set up for ride requests*

When a ping (request) is sent to a driver, it should contain the following:

-Distance/time to pick-up
*- Total ride distance (pick up plus drop off)
-Estimated total time (pick-up drop off)*
-*Total earnings for the effort.
-Rider's rating.*

Let the above display linger for one minute to allow the driver to decide if the ride is worth it.

Notice I have purposefully excluded destination to avoid being accused of discrimination.

So far devilshit (Demon ) is going around in circles conflating my proposals with those that insist on knowing destination prior to pick-up. He still hasn't explained why the above proposals which don't insist on a knowing a riders destination prior to starting a trip are bad.

All he does is talk out of his fiendish ass claiming (erroneously) that driver's are already provided with the above info prior to accepting the ride, which, as anyone who drives already knows isn't the case.

Also realize that TNC laws in most states were written by Uber and adapted verbatim by respective state legislatures after lawmakers were bribed (campaign donation anyone?), so it's no surprise that such "laws" mirror TN's Terms of Service.


----------



## jaystonepk (Oct 30, 2017)

https://uberpeople.net/threads/inco...fore-you-accept-the-ride.268550/#post-4071880


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

123dragon said:


> I brought this up earlier. In places where you have to get a TNC license at least you are required to comply with the law.
> 
> https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/commercial/#tnc/partner.asp


Classic example of rent-seeking corruption, when the govt allows businesses to write the laws.

The use of the term "PARTNER" shows fuber WROTE THE LAW

The "nondiscrimination" part was a clever way for fuber to hide behind taxi regulations.

HOWEVER, there is NOTHING in the law that prohibits KNOWING THE DESTINATION IN ADVANCE

The law is so BROAD and VAGUE that it's virtually unenforceable in all but the most flagrant cases.

Technically, according to that law, an acceptance rate of less than 100% is illegal, except under very rare circumstances.


----------



## Fabrice Janson (Jun 26, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


People really need to stop complaining. The reason why we don't know the destination is simple and clear. If we did, then we could just reject the jobs - just as taxi drivers have been doing forever - Uber came along to give customers a better way to travel and one which is fairer, as they know that there will always be a way to get home. Either close or far. Get over yourself.. seriously. At least we have a way of making money. People are never satisfied. Seriously..


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Fabrice Janson said:


> People really need to stop complaining. The reason why we don't know the destination is simple and clear. If we did, then we could just reject the jobs - just as taxi drivers have been doing forever - Uber came along to give customers a better way to travel and one which is fairer, as they know that there will always be a way to get home. Either close or far. Get over yourself.. seriously. At least we have a way of making money. People are never satisfied. Seriously..


Save the shill, and/or troll, and/or fanboy routine for the rideshare guy.

Your points are flat out wrong.

Fuber used to show the destinations, and because driver pay rates were up to 5x what they are now, acceptance rates were HIGH, because ALL rides were profitable.

Then fuber decided to give the drivers a nice one-two punch. They cut driver pay to the garbage rates they are now, and STOPPED showing destinations.

Fuber knew by hiding destinations, and firing drivers for low acceptance rates (they stopped doing that out of fear of lawsuit) and cancelling rides, they could trap drivers into accepting garbage unprofitable rides.

You used the word "fairer". This system is certainly not "fair" to the drivers.

Funny that you should compare us to taxis, when fuber and gryft have furiously maintained that we aren't taxi drivers.

Of course when it suits them, they hide behind taxi regulations.



Bro Olomide said:


> That is why a few posts earlier I mentioned that those insisting on knowing a destination in advance should accept the following changes:
> 
> *Current set-up
> *
> ...


While money is the biggest reason drivers need to know destinations, it isn't the only one.

Having CONTROL over where and when we work is also important.

There are times when for one reason or another drivers may choose to stay close to home, or maybe stay in a particular area. They can't do that unless they know WHERE they're going, not just how far they're going.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> Save the shill, and/or troll, and/or fanboy routine for the rideshare guy.
> 
> Your points are flat out wrong.
> 
> ...


You of course have cites to back all this up, right?



jaystonepk said:


> No they can't. Uber will slap your pee-pee for doing this. That is a cancellation, not the same as saying "No thanks" at the request ping. You can say no thanks all day long, accepting and cancelling or calling to ask destination is an Uber no-no. They could simply share that information so there is no need for the driver to do so but, here we are.


I addressed this point earlier. If drivers are really IC's then they can reject/cancel all day long with no penalties. I would argue that drivers fit the definition of employees. If TNC's did show destination drivers would be in legal trouble in some places for not taking a ride just based on the ping, so that's one of the reasons TNC's hide the destination.



jaystonepk said:


> Asking that question is like asking would you rather be mauled by a bear or lion. Nobody wants to be mauled by an animal just as much as no driver wants to lose money on a ride.


 But it needs to be addressed. If no one takes the shorties the TNC's are going to lose too many customers to be able to sustain their business. No one wants the shorties, but for the companies to exits, someone has to take them, another reason why TNC's hide the destination. 


jaystonepk said:


> Maybe I'm different, but if the trip if profitable I'll take it. Not every ride is going to be a whale, just like not every ride is going to be a shortie. Long pickups without knowing SOMETHING about my potential earnings causes a lot of these problems of riders not being able to get a driver. How can I be sure of that without knowing the details though? I can't so I "cherry-pick" aka, screen rides, based on the minimal info provided. XL pickup from a laundromat 10 minutes away. Nope! Guaranteed that is a minimum ride. Not worth the time.


be as discriminating as you want when it comes to how far you'll travel for a pick up. 


jaystonepk said:


> So how exactly do we get better pay for drivers?


 Enough drivers in a city need to not drive from 5:30pm-7:30pm.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> Save the shill, and/or troll, and/or fanboy routine for the rideshare guy.
> 
> Your points are flat out wrong.
> 
> ...


Even a direction and approximate trip length (mileage, not time) would work for us. I live 20 miles SW of Houston. I once took a couple home who had been canceled on 3 times as no one wanted to go out there with little hope of a trip back to town.

I was tired, ready to head home. Dropped them off 2 miles from my house.

If I was in the same situation the chances are the trip would have been rejected without acceptance by the other drivers and accepted by me. But the riders would not have had drivers call/show up etc and then cancel.

I have also had to cancel because the rider wanted to go to IAH. It's an hour drive from my house. I had to be somewhere and couldn't do a 2 hour round trip, half dead miles back. Another driver would have been happy to take it and probably was after I pissed off the rider by canceling on arrival and asking the destination when I saw the luggage.

At that point I would have rejected any long mileage trip. I simply didn't have time. And to stop working 2 or 3 hours early "just in case" is silly. (45 minutes is not enough of a warning, and it's frequently wrong in traffic, anyway). This was before the 45 minute warning existed btw. But mileage is more useful.


----------



## jaystonepk (Oct 30, 2017)

Demon said:


> I addressed this point earlier. If drivers are really IC's then they can reject/cancel all day long with no penalties. I would argue that drivers fit the definition of employees. If TNC's did show destination drivers would be in legal trouble in some places for not taking a ride just based on the ping, so that's one of the reasons TNC's hide the destination.


So Uber wants to call us one thing (IC), but treat us like another (employee). Just like Uber is a technology company in the taxi business skirting the law as much as possible. Great, classify us as employees, give us benefits and show full pickup, destination, mileage and profit on every request. Or, leave the IC label and remove the cancel penalty. The latter seems more palatable than the former. But at least give us SOMETHING to help know where we can expect to end up once a ride is over.



Demon said:


> But it needs to be addressed. If no one takes the shorties the TNC's are going to lose too many customers to be able to sustain their business. No one wants the shorties, but for the companies to exits, someone has to take them, another reason why TNC's hide the destination.


The link I posted above had the destination shown. It's not impossible. And I do take the shorties. Profit is profit. I've gotten tips ranging from $5-$12 on shorties before. If someone rejects/cancels a shortie after having only driven for 2 minutes to the pickup that's stupid.



Demon said:


> Enough drivers in a city need to not drive from 5:30pm-7:30pm.


I already do that. Have never been online during that time actually. Let's go ants, who else is with me!

The points the Fuzzy King made are great and I've already said that destination of trip after pickup and mileage would be extremely helpful for drivers without needing to show full drop-off location. However, destinations would almost completely eliminate the situation he described. Every rider would know that the driver that accepted the request saw where he was going and WANTED to go in that direction. If Uber marketing spins that right, they could claim that drivers cancelling on pickup would, at least in theory, be eliminated. Every rider paired with a driver that wanted to perform that ride. Sounds like a PR win to me.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Demon said:


> You of course have cites to back all this up, right?
> 
> I addressed this point earlier. If drivers are really IC's then they can reject/cancel all day long with no penalties. I would argue that drivers fit the definition of employees. If TNC's did show destination drivers would be in legal trouble in some places for not taking a ride just based on the ping, so that's one of the reasons TNC's hide the destination.
> 
> ...






More than one poster has told you that drivers are not allowed to ask pax their destination in advance.

Last October, CBS LA did an undercover news story about drivers calling pax and canceling short rides out of LAX.

After the story aired, 100 drivers were fired.

All it takes is a few pax complaints to fuber about a driver asking destinations, and drivers can get fired.

You can go on and on about how ICs are allowed to do that, but the reality is fuber FIRES drivers for doing that.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> More than one poster has told you that drivers are not allowed to ask pax their destination in advance.
> 
> 
> Nats121 said:
> ...


There's no reason for you to bring this up in response to what I asked you as it has nothing to do with me asking you for proof. Do you have any proof to back up the claims you made, yes or no?


----------



## jaystonepk (Oct 30, 2017)

Demon said:


> There's no reason for you to bring this up in response to what I asked you as it has nothing to do with me asking you for proof. Do you have any proof to back up the claims you made, yes or no?


Dude now you're just trolling for the sake of trolling. He's shown you proof, which is also in the driver TOS, that drivers CANNOT do what you claim they can unless they want to run the risk permanent deactivation (read FIRED).


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

jaystonepk said:


> Dude now you're just trolling for the sake of trolling. He's shown you proof, which is also in the driver TOS, that drivers CANNOT do what you claim they can unless they want to run the risk permanent deactivation (read FIRED).


Sorry, I'm not trolling, it's actually him that's trolling. I asked him to prove his claims and he changed the topic to something that no one was talking about. Has anyone said that drivers shouldn't be removed for calling ahead and asking the destination?


----------



## Skepticaldriver (Mar 5, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> Classic example of rent-seeking corruption, when the govt allows businesses to write the laws.
> 
> The use of the term "PARTNER" shows fuber WROTE THE LAW
> 
> ...


But funny enough. This started out as a private service. Not some public utility. Guaranteed to all


----------



## goodmania (Mar 3, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


postmates show the destinations.


----------



## Ardery (May 26, 2017)

Skepticaldriver said:


> But funny enough. This started out as a private service. Not some public utility. Guaranteed to all


"PARTNER" 
lol


----------



## JJUberman (Nov 14, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> Enough is enough of these scumbag companies including Uber, Lyft, doordash, postmates, etc hiding destinations from supposed independent contractor drivers.
> 
> Each trip we take is a business deal, and as supposed ICs, we have a right to know the pertinent information BEFORE agreeing to the deal.
> 
> ...


Two words; Destination Discrimination. I personally don't see any legal argument against destination obfuscation holding water. As a driver, you're not supposed to cherry pick. Not my opinion on the matter. I do it all the time. Just talking from any attempts at a "legal" argument. Hell, if I remember correctly a cab driver HAS to transport ANY damn where they please by law. So, also IMO, keep *****ing and THAT is where WE will wind up.


----------



## Dan2miletripguy (Nov 3, 2018)

When it comes to this issue my feeling is that U/L need to make short trips attractive to drivers which of course means paying more for them. Putting myself in the customer's shoes I would honestly understand that I would need to pay a minimum fee for any ride. So you want to go 6 blocks? No problem, but you will be paying a convenience fee that is somewhat substantial. 7-11 charges more than your large grocery store for convenience. There are many analogies but this is my feeling.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

JJUberman said:


> Two words; Destination Discrimination. I personally don't see any legal argument against destination obfuscation holding water. As a driver, you're not supposed to cherry pick. Not my opinion on the matter. I do it all the time. Just talking from any attempts at a "legal" argument. Hell, if I remember correctly a cab driver HAS to transport ANY damn where they please by law. So, also IMO, keep @@@@@ing and THAT is where WE will wind up.


Even though lots of big cities ban destination discrimination, shitloads of taxis do it 365 days a year.

It's difficult to prosecute and prove, so very few taxi drivers get in trouble for doing it.

It should come as a surprise to no one that despite the fact fuber and gryft have done everything under the sun to exempt themselves from taxi regulations, they lobbied to include rideshare in the law banning destination discrimination.


----------



## Wild Bill Yahoo (Jan 22, 2018)

In Uber Pro they somewhat tell you the destination. If it says the trip is 2 min SE you can be pretty sure it is a minumum fare ride and what direction it is. If it says 18 min NE you can guess that one as well.

So it definately isn't against the law to give out the destination in advance, as they already do.


----------



## JJUberman (Nov 14, 2018)

Wild Bill Yahoo said:


> In Uber Pro they somewhat tell you the destination. If it says the trip is 2 min SE you can be pretty sure it is a minumum fare ride and what direction it is. If it says 18 min NE you can guess that one as well.
> 
> So it definately isn't against the law to give out the destination in advance, as they already do.


1. They still don't give you the destination. "This trip may take 45+ minutes" is NOT the destination
2. I never even suggested it would be "illegal" for them to do so. Like, ever..
3. I stated that cabbies engaging in destination discrimination IS illegal and that, given the recent rideshare regulatory creep here in CT, it might become a legal sticking point for RS drivers as well



Dan2miletripguy said:


> When it comes to this issue my feeling is that U/L need to make short trips attractive to drivers which of course means paying more for them. Putting myself in the customer's shoes I would honestly understand that I would need to pay a minimum fee for any ride. So you want to go 6 blocks? No problem, but you will be paying a convenience fee that is somewhat substantial. 7-11 charges more than your large grocery store for convenience. There are many analogies but this is my feeling.


I agree. The long pickup "premium" is a fkn JOKE. Got a whopping .28 yesterday. That'll never happen again


----------



## Wild Bill Yahoo (Jan 22, 2018)

JJUberman said:


> 1. They still don't give you the destination. "This trip may take 45+ minutes" is NOT the destination
> 2. I never even suggested it would be "illegal" for them to do so. Like, ever..
> 3. I stated that cabbies engaging in destination discrimination IS illegal and that, given the recent rideshare regulatory creep here in CT, it might become a legal sticking point for RS drivers as well
> 
> I agree. The long pickup "premium" is a fkn JOKE. Got a whopping .28 yesterday. That'll never happen again


You must not live in a City that has the new reward program Uber Pro. On the Platinum and Diamond levels of Uber Pro it gives you the trip length and direction of the trip on EVERY ping. So yes, I know the how long the trip is and the direction on EVERY trip request.

It's a pretty cool function.


----------



## JJUberman (Nov 14, 2018)

Seeing a drop off before ever moving to the pax allows drivers to cherry pick, which hurts other drivers, hurts passengers and hurts the TNC, to say nothing of the legal ramifications. I agree with you that rates are too low, but so long as drivers are willing to drive at these low rates and lose money the TNC's are going to keep the rates low.[/QUOTE]
A bit late to this particular party, but how much better is it to have BOTH pax and Guber suffer through X minutes to pick up and hustle pax and bags into car only to have Guber cxl upon being notified of destination upon trip start ? I routinely get pax going to certain airports ( which I'm fully willing to take ) within a certain time-frame ( 45+ minutes ) while getting other trips that I am not ( like New Hampshire, Vermont, etc. Yes, they happen here ). So without notice and without the ability to call ahead ( still frowned upon ? not sure ) I get to drive to them hoping that 45+ minute warning means JFK/LGA and not Dover NH, etc. ( this just happened and I guarantee I'm not the only driver that cxl'd in his driveway ) Which is really great when you have a 10 minute+ pick up. And I'm NOT driving 3+hours in ANY direction ( let alone 6+ hours round-trip ) on UberX because who knows what's gonna happen with traffic, weather, etc. So, which is better ? Having the pax wait a bit longer in the comfort of their home until being matched with a driver that will with 100% certainty take their trip, or what I described above ? I'm in favor of a filter feature that allows drivers to set what rides they will/will not, can/cannot take in order to much more efficiently and appropriately match clients to contractors. And no, this isn't "part of the cost of doing business" when you're a single driver and not car #8 of a 10 car fleet where the other 9 cars will offset a loss on any single given trip. We're not a cab company or a limo service after all. Allow driver/partners ( LOL ) to literally sign up for it in advance. I know there are those who'd rather stay put and only take short rides as there are those who only want the long rides and then guys like myself who need the flexibility promised when I signed up.


----------



## Wild Bill Yahoo (Jan 22, 2018)

JJUberman said:


> Seeing a drop off before ever moving to the pax allows drivers to cherry pick, which hurts other drivers, hurts passengers and hurts the TNC, to say nothing of the legal ramifications. I agree with you that rates are too low, but so long as drivers are willing to drive at these low rates and lose money the TNC's are going to keep the rates low.


A bit late to this particular party, but how much better is it to have BOTH pax and Guber suffer through X minutes to pick up and hustle pax and bags into car only to have Guber cxl upon being notified of destination upon trip start ? I routinely get pax going to certain airports ( which I'm fully willing to take ) within a certain time-frame ( 45+ minutes ) while getting other trips that I am not ( like New Hampshire, Vermont, etc. Yes, they happen here ). So without notice and without the ability to call ahead ( still frowned upon ? not sure ) I get to drive to them hoping that 45+ minute warning means JFK/LGA and not Dover NH, etc. ( this just happened and I guarantee I'm not the only driver that cxl'd in his driveway ) Which is really great when you have a 10 minute+ pick up. And I'm NOT driving 3+hours in ANY direction ( let alone 6+ hours round-trip ) on UberX because who knows what's gonna happen with traffic, weather, etc. So, which is better ? Having the pax wait a bit longer in the comfort of their home until being matched with a driver that will with 100% certainty take their trip, or what I described above ? I'm in favor of a filter feature that allows drivers to set what rides they will/will not, can/cannot take in order to much more efficiently and appropriately match clients to contractors. And no, this isn't "part of the cost of doing business" when you're a single driver and not car #8 of a 10 car fleet where the other 9 cars will offset a loss on any single given trip. We're not a cab company or a limo service after all. Allow driver/partners ( LOL ) to literally sign up for it in advance. I know there are those who'd rather stay put and only take short rides as there are those who only want the long rides and then guys like myself who need the flexibility promised when I signed up.[/QUOTE]

So I guess you just want to ignore the fact that Destination info is being rolled out to the top two tiers of Uber Pro?

See my previous comments.


----------



## JJUberman (Nov 14, 2018)

So I guess you just want to ignore the fact that Destination info is being rolled out to the top two tiers of Uber Pro?

See my previous comments.[/QUOTE]

Ok. Obviously my reply above wasn't to you. But that having been said; Distance and direction are still not destination, are they ? And no, I don't care that "well, one can determine by" etc. Are they telling you John Doe is going to terminal X at JFK ? If not, then they're not giving you the destination, are they ?
* with that having been said; A test program doesn't exactly "prove" anything is "being rolled out"


----------



## Wild Bill Yahoo (Jan 22, 2018)

JJUberman said:


> So I guess you just want to ignore the fact that Destination info is being rolled out to the top two tiers of Uber Pro?
> 
> See my previous comments.


Ok. Obviously my reply above wasn't to you. But that having been said; Distance and direction are still not destination, are they ? And no, I don't care that "well, one can determine by" etc. Are they telling you John Doe is going to terminal X at JFK ? If not, then they're not giving you the destination, are they ?
* with that having been said; A test program doesn't exactly "prove" anything is "being rolled out"[/QUOTE]

You are never going to get that level of detailed info.


----------



## UberBeemer (Oct 23, 2015)

A key reason they designate us as contractors is so they can have us agree to the terms of their contract. This relieves them from the expectations and regulations that apply to employees. It isn't good that they hide destination info. But we agreed to the contract, and in fact, if you read it, we do so again each time we login to use their dispatch app to drive their customers. And, according to contract law, it is legal for them to offer these terms. It meets the criteria. The activity is legal, there is consideration, and both parties agreed. You might argue that it isn't fair. But fairness isn't a legal requirement. What is are (1) *offer*; (2) *acceptance*; (3)*consideration*; (4) mutuality of obligation; (5) competency and capacity.

Whether or not they lobbied to write laws or even just change them, is also legal. The supreme court says so. Companies do so routinely.

And the kicker, the contract which we accept everytime we go online, states that they can change it anytime.

In order for this to change, political pressure is required to be applied to lawmakers where uber and lyft do business. Even if drivers strike successfully, there are always more to keep taking rides, and it does not change anything, because the rules are still in their favor.

If you want change, organize. Once you organize, educate. Once you educate, you raise the level of competency and have offered something of value for legislators to recognize and respectfully contend with.

Then the door opens a crack, and you keep working your way inside.

Just calling a strike isn't gaining any political capital. And is easy to deflect. You need to go at them ftom the angle of our elected officials. Lawsuits, are super expensive. Class actions don't get certified that easily, and usually only benefit lawyers. But make an association where you are making people better drivers, has dual benefits. You network with drivers, and you get recognition from legislators who otherwise see you as an unruly, and unable to provide them any influence in your group.

Its too easy to dismiss us otherwise.


----------

