# Uber sues California



## donurs (May 31, 2015)

https://www.sfchronicle.com/busines...s-sue-California-over-California-14940425.php


----------



## Steve appleby (May 30, 2015)

It’s about to get ugly next year....


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

This will end up in the US Supreme Court


----------



## Steve appleby (May 30, 2015)

Cold Fusion said:


> This will end up in the US Supreme Court
> 
> https://www.sfchronicle.com/busines...s-sue-California-over-California-14940425.php


Oh yeah there is no doubt in my mind that this is going to go all the way to the Supreme Court And you can bet your ass that Uber is going to put all their chips on the table for this one


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

One think U/L cannot stop. Starting January 1 2019 U/L driver have rights to form the Union
WE DRIVE PROGRESS


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

donurs said:


> https://www.sfchronicle.com/busines...s-sue-California-over-California-14940425.php


O.M.G. !

UBER SUES CALIFORNIA.

GOVERNOR DARA !


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Next Week : " UBER IS A KNOWN CARCINOGEN IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA "!


----------



## nonononodrivethru (Mar 25, 2019)

donurs said:


> https://www.sfchronicle.com/busines...s-sue-California-over-California-14940425.php


You can't be a technology company and take half the fare.

PERIOD.


----------



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

donurs said:


> https://www.sfchronicle.com/busines...s-sue-California-over-California-14940425.php


"Irrational", ROFLMAO :roflmao:&#129315;:big grin:

I'll try that next time I get pulled over.

- "Your tail light's out"
- "Stopping a vehicle for a broken tail light is irrational"
- "Sign here. You have 28 days to pay"


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

they expect the same CA Supreme Court that created the ABC test which is what AB5 is to overturn basically their own law that they practically created ? lol

ya right


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

The US Supreme Court is located in Washington DC
1 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20543 &#128077;

https://www.supremecourt.gov/


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

nonononodrivethru said:


> You can't be a technology company and take half the fare.
> 
> PERIOD.


Yup, there are REAL tech companies in the industry.

But it's very easy to tell centrodyne from the cab and black car companies.

Never hear of centrodyne?

That's because they aren't a transportation company they are a tech company.

They actually do what Uber pretends to do...


----------



## peteyvavs (Nov 18, 2015)

tohunt4me said:


> Next Week : " UBER IS A KNOWN CARCINOGEN IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA "!


Uber is the National pimp.


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

nonononodrivethru said:


> You can't be a technology company and take half the fare.
> 
> PERIOD.


A true tech company should only be a payment processor...and not a payment, fare, and regulation dictator.



Cold Fusion said:


> The US Supreme Court is located in Washington DC
> 1 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20543 &#128077;
> 
> https://www.supremecourt.gov/


No, it's located in Antarctica. -o:


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

peteyvavs said:


> *Uber is the National pimp.*


..........What does that make the drivers?


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> they expect the same CA Supreme Court that created the ABC test which is what AB5 is to overturn basically their own law that they practically created ? lol
> 
> ya right


Not the CA court. The US Supreme Court.

*In Monday's complaint, Uber, Postmates and one driver from each company who are also plaintiffs said they want a judge to block A.B. 5 from being implemented. They alleged that the law violates guarantees of equal protection afforded by both the U.S. Constitution and the California Constitution.*

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/uber-postmates-sue-california-block-001742648.html


----------



## peteyvavs (Nov 18, 2015)

Cold Fusion said:


> ..........What does that make the drivers?


A bunch of hoes.


----------



## ubergrind (May 23, 2017)

The reality is Uber relies on mostly immigrants, minorities , seniors , and unskilled white males to make up it's work force .










That chart doesn't have a date on it but if memory serves me correctly that was a from few years ago. From a casual riders perspective I'd say the driving group has become more black/ brown/ yellow and gray since this chart came out.

The collective bargaining and lobbying power is virtually zero when compared to uber / Lyft. The on demand nature / and decentralized work model all but eliminates any meaningful labor organization or protest about conditions .

Uber corporate looks vastly different.









If someone came in to uber corporate and took away the stock options cut the pay by 50 % you'd have a revolt on your hand and the workers would file lawsuit after lawsuit .

I may not be for unionization but I'm not for exploitation on any level. Uber has pushed the free market narrative for too long and bought and paid lobbyist to do their biddings. In my opinion, Uber/ Lyft is nothing by a massive wealth transfer and pay day loan scam that requires regulation so their blatant lies can no longer exist. AB5 while far from perfect , it's at least gotten the conversation started about what is equal and how do we maintain workers rights alongside capital so it's not just The winners and everyone else.


----------



## Uberdriver2710 (Jul 15, 2015)




----------



## 25rides7daysaweek (Nov 20, 2017)

goneubering said:


> Not the CA court. The US Supreme Court.
> 
> *In Monday's complaint, Uber, Postmates and one driver from each company who are also plaintiffs said they want a judge to block A.B. 5 from being implemented. They alleged that the law violates guarantees of equal protection afforded by both the U.S. Constitution and the California Constitution.*
> 
> https://finance.yahoo.com/news/uber-postmates-sue-california-block-001742648.html


If it goes to trumps supreme court things wont go well for ab5.
I never wanted to be an 
employee anyway..


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

25rides7daysaweek said:


> If it goes to trumps supreme court things wont go well for ab5.
> I never wanted to be an
> employee anyway..


Even if AB5 somehow gets overturned, the California legislature will not allow Uber and Lyft to go back to their business as usual scam of freeloading off the taxpayers while paying the drivers shit rates. Strict and costly regulations would follow including being required to pay rideshare drivers vastly higher rates.


----------



## Uberdriver2710 (Jul 15, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> Even if AB5 somehow gets overturned, the California legislature will not allow Uber and Lyft to go back to their business as usual scam of freeloading off the taxpayers while paying the drivers shit rates. Strict and costly regulations would follow.


Taxation is theft.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

Uberdriver2710 said:


> Taxation is theft.


Yeah, I hate having to pay for the roads I drive on.


----------



## Uberdriver2710 (Jul 15, 2015)

Disgusted Driver said:


> Yeah, I hate having to pay for the roads I drive on.


And, having to pay for the killing of kids overseas, too. I hate that.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Uberdriver2710 said:


> Taxation is theft.


The costly regulations I was referring to are vastly higher pay rates for rideshare drivers.

Uber and Lyft's garbage pay rates means that most full time Uber drivers qualify for public assistance, costing the taxpayers a fortune.

Thus the taxpayers end up subsidizing these multi-billion dollar companies.



Uberdriver2710 said:


> And, having to pay for the killing of kids overseas, too. I hate that.


What are you talking about?


----------



## Uberdriver2710 (Jul 15, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> What are you talking about?


Oh, just the endless wars and civilian casualties...you know, little stuff like that.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Uberdriver2710 said:


> Oh, just the endless wars and civilian casualties...you know, little stuff like that.


Civilians get killed all the time in those places without our involvement.


----------



## Uberdriver2710 (Jul 15, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> Civilians get killed all the time in those places without our involvement.


So that makes it, OK?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Uberdriver2710 said:


> So that makes it, OK?


I'm not going to get into a long debate about it here. I'll simply say that killing civilians isn't "OK" but it's an unfortunate part of war.

Whether or not the US should get involved in those places can be debated, but there's no question that civilians are being killed all the time by savages in those places.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

25rides7daysaweek said:


> If it goes to trumps supreme court things wont go well for ab5.
> I never wanted to be an
> employee anyway..


Not a fan of taking this to the Supreme Court. The State made a law of the land based off the majority of its citizens opinion. The People don't need a big brother.


----------



## itsablackmarket (May 12, 2015)

Cold Fusion said:


> This will end up in the US Supreme Court
> 
> https://www.sfchronicle.com/busines...s-sue-California-over-California-14940425.php


Good. They will lose spectacularly.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

itsablackmarket said:


> Good. They will lose spectacularly.


a Trump packed US Supreme Court (the one in DC)
will vote in favor of AB5 &#128514;&#129315;&#128514;&#129315;&#128517;

U started the New Years celebration early &#129396;&#129314;&#129326;


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Not a fan of taking this to the Supreme Court. The State made a law of the land based off the majority of its citizens opinion. The People don't need a big brother.


Uber could get the law thrown out because it's so badly written. Even the Cali Supreme Court might rule that way.


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

Polomarko said:


> One think U/L cannot stop. Starting January 1 2019 U/L driver have rights to form the Union
> WE DRIVE PROGRESS


------------------------
Your thought is correct but the year is 2020


----------



## Escoman (Jun 28, 2016)

nonononodrivethru said:


> You can't be a technology company and take half the fare.
> 
> PERIOD.


Didn't you get the updated contract they are now a lead generation service


----------



## itsablackmarket (May 12, 2015)

Cold Fusion said:


> a Trump packed US Supreme Court (the one in DC)
> will vote in favor of AB5 &#128514;&#129315;&#128514;&#129315;&#128517;
> 
> U started the New Years celebration early &#129396;&#129314;&#129326;


Uh no they won't.


----------



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

Nats121 said:


> Civilians get killed all the time in those places without our involvement.


This has more than a whiff to it of "other drivers do it".

And as I say to pax, "Yeah, maybe so. What's that got to do with anything?"


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

Escoman said:


> Didn't you get the updated contract they are now a lead generation service


Well how convenient is THAT!? Now, they need to give up some of the control of everything else.


----------



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

Escoman said:


> Didn't you get the updated contract they are now a lead generation service


And I'm now an attack helicopter.

CHOPPACHOPPACHOPPACHOPPA


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

ubergrind said:


> The reality is Uber relies on mostly immigrants, minorities , seniors , and unskilled white males to make up it's work force .
> 
> View attachment 395267
> 
> ...


The high level of education of most drivers goes against the idea that it is unskilled whites driving. Less than a third of the drivers on the chart have no degree. It seems like most everyone these days has a degree yet the best job you can get is Uber driver because degrees are a dime a dozen.


----------



## nonononodrivethru (Mar 25, 2019)

Escoman said:


> Didn't you get the updated contract they are now a lead generation service


If that were the case, we would be allowed to pick up passengers on our own without the app after we have used both platforms for their generated leads.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Yup, there are REAL tech companies in the industry.
> 
> But it's very easy to tell centrodyne from the cab and black car companies.
> 
> ...


centrodyne makes taximeters right?


----------



## mrpjfresh (Aug 16, 2016)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Not a fan of taking this to the Supreme Court. The State made a law of the land based off the majority of its citizens opinion. The People don't need a big brother.


Well, there is their planned ballot initiative as well in 2020. Free Uber rides to the polls to vote against AB5 and free food delivery while you wait in line. See how wonderful this all is? Why would we ever want to change it? Love, Dara


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

Correction, paying 1970s mileage rates is irrational. Check yourself Dara!

There is a way where it's not fully controlled by government or by private industry...

We can't strike because there is no factory to form a picket line. I'm thinking a hybrid, as in government helps enforce reasonable negotiations between local chapters and uber reps. If reasonable demands aren't met, government shuts down uber in the region temporarily until both sides are satisfied.

A good compromise is where neither side is 100% happy but happy enough to make a deal.


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

The gig-economy was formed largely because of the loss of good permanent jobs as a result of the Great Recession...along with the increasing cost of living and the affordability of housing, education, healthcare, and child care. Currently, the only side that matters is the tech side. It will be interesting to see if gig workers start to get ANY protections in the next few years.


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

I was just watching a documentary on the great depression. One of the biggest factors of coming out of it, before the war, was the emergence of unions. 

Once again it is time to organize and retaliate against slave wages, it has already begun.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

got a p said:


> Once again it is time to organize


unions are for employees, yeah? Organzie drivers? better luck herding wild bunnies.


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

SHalester said:


> unions are for employees, yeah? Organzie drivers? better luck herding wild bunnies.


It's a new age, time for new solutions. Can't think of it in those binary terms if we are going to be able to move forward with success. Ab5 will not be good for the blue collar worker or for the corporations that do the white collar stuff. We need to create a new age type of union that works for this new gig economy.

We need people who can think outside the box.

Btw your post sounds an awful lot like Miami kids posts when Californians protested before the ipo. He said it would be ineffective or easier to herd wild bunnies. Now we have ab5.

Back then i said a small protest is enough. Just make the news and liberal law makers will take notice, even if it's mainly for brownie points, but it still will be very effective.

Go back and look at the protest thread from March. Everything i said went just as i said it would. Then come back and tell me gig economy unionization is impossible.

Maybe it's your style to roll over in submission...that's you and that's fine. Be a defeatist.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

got a p said:


> Ab5 will not be good for the blue collar worke


AB5 is not for those currently with real W2 jobs. And not everybody is thrilled to death with AB5. Many or most of us don't want to be employees again. Being an employee means loss of freedom and CONTROL. Not such 'bigger' bucks. sheesh.


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

Lol. Ab5 isn't good. You know why? The woman who wrote it isn't thinking outside the box. She's thinking in binary terms just like you.

Once again, we need people who can think outside the box. Don't worry little guy, you will reap the benefits of those who did the work even though you're fine with the status quo, and you would be fine bending over even more no doubt. You don't even care if they use lube or not.

Anyway, ignore time. First time I'm doing this to someone simply because they are a pessimist. Enjoy your half empty glass.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

got a p said:


> Don't worry little guy


Little guy? Not for AB5. What many who really haven't had a real job don't get is with being an employee you become 'supervised'. They also have the silly idea there will be a giant pay raise, benefits, blah blah etc etc. Flip side is control and loss of freedom. No thanks. However, do look forward to getting the full ping info and nice the AR display is gone.


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

Maybe I'm wrong, but Uber/Lyft supervise EVERYTHING you do. They tell you how much you'll make per ride and they can deactivate you at the drop of a hat for any reason or for no reason at all. They can also tinkle on you...I mean....drop your pay...and tell you it's raining.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

ABC123DEF said:


> Maybe I'm wrong, but Uber/Lyft supervise EVERYTHING you do


Have you had a traditional job? RS is nothing like it. RS you go online when you want. You go offline when you want. You drive where you want. You work days you want. Are you under the impression that, in calif, when we are employees all those will remain exactly the same? Just saying there is a 'flip' side to suddenly becoming an employee.


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

ABC123DEF said:


> Maybe I'm wrong, but Uber/Lyft supervise EVERYTHING you do. They tell you how much you'll make per ride and they can deactivate you at the drop of a hat for any reason or for no reason at all. They can also tinkle on you...I mean....drop your pay...and tell you it's raining.


tbh i'm pretty sure they're on the spying on you whenever they please bandwagon. so hearing them talk about constitutionality is laughable.

what would be SUPER awesome would be a whistleblower with balls who would leak some inside stuff about the cringy, disgusting uber practices and very possibly illegal practices that go on in the shadows at uber...maybe to wikileaks. i dunno, they got anyone working there at market street that has the real scoop on their intentions that has moral and ethical standards that supercede his/her allegiance to uber/lyft? it's in the realm of possibility, gotta be superstealth to pull it off.


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

SHalester said:


> Have you had a traditional job? RS is nothing like it. RS you go online when you want. You go offline when you want. You drive where you want. You work days you want. Are you under the impression that, in calif, when we are employees all those will remain exactly the same? Just saying there is a 'flip' side to suddenly becoming an employee.


Yes, I actually work two traditional jobs. I'm one of the fortunate ones who doesn't have a boss micromanaging everything that I do. I make myself valuable and I'm treated like an adult. I never once said that I wanted to be an Uber employee. DID I?


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

ABC123DEF said:


> doesn't have a boss micromanaging everything that I do


pretty sure if Uber and such lose all the court cases they will be your 'boss' and the freedoms will go bye bye. Not all honey and butterflies as a bunch of confused IC's in calif believe. The best bosses don't micromanage, fyi.


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

You don't say? Maybe that's why I don't work for bosses that micromanage.


----------



## Hopindrew (Jan 30, 2019)

25rides7daysaweek said:


> If it goes to trumps supreme court things wont go well for ab5.
> I never wanted to be an
> employee anyway..


Us Supreme Court probably won't even hear the case

Uber/have already lost this


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

I don’t think most of y’all understand. The most probable outcome for Uber is that it goes bankrupt.

There will be no Union because Uber isn’t going to be a lasting company. In the bigger scheme of things, Uber not Lyft has been around long.

You guys aren’t going to have a career driving around your neighbors. It’s a job/gig while it’s here but sooner than later this will be done.

Will there be remnants of this giant company called Uber yes, will all these “drivers” drive no. 80% of the drivers at minimum will have to find a new occupation.

AB5 is ultimately irrelevant if Uber can’t turn a profit the venture capital era is done.


----------



## jfinks (Nov 24, 2016)

AB5 is going about this totally the wrong way. Keep it simple. Just limit the percentage that Uber and Lyft can take out of the total. Come to an agreement at like 30% or so. 25% would be better, but with all the 40 and 50%+ rapes, 30% would be great. This includes short trips. Uber/Lyft would just have to find a way to split the "booking (rape) fee" with the driver. No ride should be less than $5 to the driver. AB5 as it is now uproots what little there is left to like about driving rideshare.


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

No ride should be less than TEN dollars for the driver!


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

goneubering said:


> Not the CA court. The US Supreme Court.
> 
> *In Monday's complaint, Uber, Postmates and one driver from each company who are also plaintiffs said they want a judge to block A.B. 5 from being implemented. They alleged that the law violates guarantees of equal protection afforded by both the U.S. Constitution and the California Constitution.*
> 
> https://finance.yahoo.com/news/uber-postmates-sue-california-block-001742648.html


then this lawsuit will be even easier to beat since there are no Federal issues

no idea why the Federal judge slapped an injunction on the law...he will get overruled on appeal and AB5 will be back in business

this judge just wants his name in the news


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

&#129315;
Judge Won't Force Uber to Treat California Drivers as Employees
https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-wont-force-uber-to-treat-california-drivers-as-employees/


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

jfinks said:


> AB5 is going about this totally the wrong way. Keep it simple. Just limit the percentage that Uber and Lyft can take out of the total. Come to an agreement at like 30% or so. 25% would be better, but with all the 40 and 50%+ rapes, 30% would be great. This includes short trips. Uber/Lyft would just have to find a way to split the "booking (rape) fee" with the driver. No ride should be less than $5 to the driver. AB5 as it is now uproots what little there is left to like about driving rideshare.


AB5 simply put into law the simple terms that the CA Supreme Court already spelled out. AB5 will be the law of the land in CA as soon as the appeals court rules on the injunction.

There are literally 0 Federal issues with this law. States have a right to create labor law.

It will be back in business on appeal.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-wont-force-uber-to-treat-california-drivers-as-employees/Fed tops State all day LONG&#128077;
Judge Won't Force Uber to Treat California Drivers as Employees

Tic Tok
This just in_: "US Supreme Court has Struck Down California AB 5"_


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Cold Fusion said:


> &#129315;
> Judge Won't Force Uber to Treat California Drivers as Employees
> https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-wont-force-uber-to-treat-california-drivers-as-employees/


thats part of the existing lawsuit

whats going to happen is a state judge will have to slap the injunction not a Federal judge



Cold Fusion said:


> https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-wont-force-uber-to-treat-california-drivers-as-employees/Fed tops State all day LONG&#128077;
> Judge Won't Force Uber to Treat California Drivers as Employees


You don't know what you are talking about nor does it even apply to this case.

The funny thing is Uber's only argument is that the law is unconstitutional but there is literally no exact argument as to how it is unconstitutional. lmao

The supposed Equal Protection argument is absurd. Uber is being treated equally as any other "employer" is.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

Right &#128077;
&#128514;&#129315;&#128517;

Tic Tok
This just in_: "US Supreme Court has Struck Down California AB 5"_


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

They dont want to be treated equally, they want favorable treatment and that's not going to happen.



Cold Fusion said:


> Right &#128077;
> &#128514;&#129315;&#128517;
> 
> Tic Tok
> This just in_: "US Supreme Court has Struck Down California AB 5"_


Not only has the US Supreme Court not taken up the case, but they won't even hear the case since there is nothing for them to hear.


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

Right 👍
😂🤣😅
Tic Tok sweetie


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> The supposed Equal Protection argument is absurd. Uber is being treated equally as any other "employer" is.


Are you a lawyer?


----------



## gooddolphins (Apr 5, 2018)

peteyvavs said:


> Uber is the National pimp.


And we're Ubers hoes


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

goneubering said:


> Are you a lawyer?


He's barely a driver


----------



## Clothahump (Mar 31, 2018)

peteyvavs said:


> A bunch of hoes.


Huh?


----------



## Dome (Feb 10, 2019)

Quite a coincidence these companies found 2 drivers to go along with their lawsuit. Foolish minded individuals. Wonder who's paying for their lawyers?


----------



## njn (Jan 23, 2016)

it looks like truckers are also exempt. the feds have entered the game.

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/b...porarily-blocks-ab5-enforcement-in-california


----------



## troothequalstroll (Oct 12, 2019)

ABC123DEF said:


> No ride should be less than TEN dollars for the driver!


$5 was a pre 1995 minimum cab fare it was $6.50 in 95 & driver didn't pay maintenance among keeping 100%

It amazes me "adults" can be pleading for $5 and accepting eats orders at $3-8 quite mind boggling

Anything less than $10 I've pretty much drove by cancelling & waiving at the same Damm time for a good 4+ years lol gets more disgusting by the day sho glad those airport rides pay a legal wage cuz none of the others do

I'm not a child the $2 loss worth the bad rider experience & the $2+ loss I'd be "paid" completing the trip

Then to have the audacity to try & threaten me if I don't work for free lol hey you can't be knowing 3rd grade math that's against our terms of service geez

Show me the contract details and I'm content it's 100% fraud at this point I don't see them ever doing right by drivers at this point they owe every driver $5 for every ride they've given you'd have to confiscate all Travis k & coward camps billions for that & that ain't happening

They still don't even charge $10+ so until that happens literally impossible to profit charging less than actual costs

Then you take 50-90% of fares & still lose $ every trip LMAO

Enron & Madoff had a baby


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

goneubering said:


> Are you a lawyer?


It's like talking to tomatopaste

I always knew you were a shill, it's good to see your true colors



njn said:


> it looks like truckers are also exempt. the feds have entered the game.
> 
> https://www.freightwaves.com/news/b...porarily-blocks-ab5-enforcement-in-california


"temporarily" blocks...since there are no federal issues with AB5 there is no way the US Supreme Court will even look at it


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

Polomarko said:


> One think U/L cannot stop. Starting January 1 2019 U/L driver have rights to form the Union
> WE DRIVE PROGRESS


Now why exactly as of 1 Jan 2020 have they not collectively done this to date?

Just asking for a friend


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Cynergie said:


> Now why exactly as of 1 Jan 2020 have they not collectively done this to date?
> 
> Just asking for a friend


drivers werent legally employees yet


----------



## pengduck (Sep 26, 2014)

nonononodrivethru said:


> You can't be a technology company and take half the fare.
> 
> PERIOD.


You did mean PIMP!, right!


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

goneubering said:


> Uber could get the law thrown out because it's so badly written. Even the Cali Supreme Court might rule that way.


The Cali Supreme Court themselves created the ABC test that AB5 was created on.

You really need to read more articles if you want to have any credibility.

Let me help you out.

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=93559144-c7fe-4933-962f-4d9be7d24010


ABC123DEF said:


> Maybe I'm wrong, but Uber/Lyft supervise EVERYTHING you do. They tell you how much you'll make per ride and they can deactivate you at the drop of a hat for any reason or for no reason at all. They can also tinkle on you...I mean....drop your pay...and tell you it's raining.


that's why we need a union contract to go along with AB5...we will get great pat, great benefits and a right to bargain



uberdriverfornow said:


> They dont want to be treated equally, they want favorable treatment and that's not going to happen.
> 
> 
> Not only has the US Supreme Court not taken up the case, but they won't even hear the case since there is nothing for them to hear.


Just to remind people, Uber's only argument against AB5 is violation of the Equal Treatment clause which is absurd. Just a vain plead for relief against a law that prevents worker exploitation.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> It's like talking to tomatopaste
> 
> I always knew you were a shill, it's good to see your true colors
> 
> ...


You didn't answer the question.

So I guess you're not a lawyer.

Nice try with the shill deflection though.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

goneubering said:


> You didn't answer the question.
> 
> So I guess you're not a lawyer.
> 
> Nice try with the shill deflection though. :wink:


Don't need to become a lawyer to know the law. The only person shilling is those shilling for Uber like you and tomatopaste.


----------



## MasterAbsher (Oct 16, 2019)

Uberdriver2710 said:


> Oh, just the endless wars and civilian casualties...you know, little stuff like that.


He doesn't know


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

MasterAbsher said:


> He doesn't know


just little stuff that has nothing to do with this thread and only serves to derail it...yep


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

njn said:


> it looks like truckers are also exempt. the feds have entered the game.
> 
> https://www.freightwaves.com/news/b...porarily-blocks-ab5-enforcement-in-california


Excellent. Thx for posting.

*"We felt like this was an overreach from day one," LaBar added. "We felt like this was done with a complete disregard on how this impacted interstate commerce."*



25rides7daysaweek said:


> If it goes to trumps supreme court things wont go well for ab5.
> I never wanted to be an
> employee anyway..


I will never understand drivers who claim they hate Uber yet they want all of us to become Uber employees.



jfinks said:


> AB5 is going about this totally the wrong way. Keep it simple. Just limit the percentage that Uber and Lyft can take out of the total. Come to an agreement at like 30% or so. 25% would be better, but with all the 40 and 50%+ rapes, 30% would be great. This includes short trips. Uber/Lyft would just have to find a way to split the "booking (rape) fee" with the driver. No ride should be less than $5 to the driver. AB5 as it is now uproots what little there is left to like about driving rideshare.


Uber should be able to turn a profit by taking 20% off the top. They're taking a higher % from us than they deserve and then wasting hundreds of millions on SDC and flying car fantasies.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

goneubering said:


> Excellent. Thx for posting.
> 
> I will never understand drivers who claim they hate Uber yet they want all of us to become Uber employees.


it's just a temporary restraining order that applies only to truckers that will be overturned on appeal

and drivers are happy to have the opportunity to have a union contract with the ability to fight any and all unjust deactivations or firings and to have employee protections and benefits, it's a no brainer


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

jfinks said:


> AB5 is going about this totally the wrong way. Keep it simple. Just limit the percentage that Uber and Lyft can take out of the total. Come to an agreement at like 30% or so. 25% would be better, but with all the 40 and 50%+ rapes, 30% would be great. This includes short trips. Uber/Lyft would just have to find a way to split the "booking (rape) fee" with the driver. No ride should be less than $5 to the driver. AB5 as it is now uproots what little there is left to like about driving rideshare.


Limiting Uber's cut to 25% is fine, but that alone isn't enough to protect the drivers from getting clobbered by rate cuts / price wars.

From June 2014 - February 2016, Uber and Lyft slashed fares three times, which decimated driver earnings and turned rideshare into a low-paying job. During that period, drivers were still on the alleged 75-80% rate (minus the ever-increasing booking fee).

So despite the fact that drivers were getting the alleged 75-80% rate, their earnings plummeted due to the massive fare cuts.

This is why in addition to capping Uber's cut of the total fare at 25% (including booking and any other fees they create), drivers need to be paid a minimum of 75% of local taxi rates.

Tying driver pay rates to taxi rates will ensure that any fare cuts, discounts, free rides, etc will be paid for by Uber and Lyft, NOT the drivers.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Limiting Uber's cut to 25% is fine, but that alone isn't enough to protect the drivers from getting clobbered by rate cuts/price wars.
> 
> From June 2014 - February 2016, Uber and Lyft slashed fares three times, which decimated driver earnings and turned rideshare into a low-paying job. During that period, drivers were still on the alleged 75-80% rate (minus the ever-increasing booking fee).
> 
> ...


people like goneubering and his sister account Cold Fusion aka tomatopaste seem to think Uber and Lyft will never lower rates again without AB5 in place


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> Limiting Uber's cut to 25% is fine, but that alone isn't enough to protect the drivers from getting clobbered by rate cuts / price wars.
> 
> From June 2014 - February 2016, Uber and Lyft slashed fares three times, which decimated driver earnings and turned rideshare into a low-paying job. During that period, drivers were still on the alleged 75-80% rate (minus the ever-increasing booking fee).
> 
> ...


That would be helpful. And probably much better than AB5 forcing us all to become employees.



uberdriverfornow said:


> it's a no brainer


Sometimes jokes just write themselves.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

goneubering said:


> That would be helpful. And probably much better than AB5 forcing us all to become employees.
> 
> 
> Sometimes jokes just write themselves. :smiles:


I don't want to be an employee, but I can understand why many drivers do, especially full-timers.

Most full timers are working 50-90 hours per week for terrible pay, zero benefits, and zero job security.

Not only are they poorly paid, they don't qualify for Workers Comp if they get injured on the job. And if those two things aren't bad enough, they get the double whammy of a greater likelihood of being fired and no unemployment insurance in the event they do get fired.

Because Uber and Lyft are evil entities that don't have to pay into the Unemployment Insurance Pool AND they're not subject to California employee protection laws, it costs them nothing to fire drivers. As a result, many drivers have been unjustly fired.

Even without AB5, California could pass regulations that dramatically increase driver pay and protect drivers from unjust firings.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> I don't want to be an employee, but I can understand why many drivers do, especially full-timers.
> 
> Most full timers are working 50-90 hours per week for terrible pay, zero benefits, and zero job security.
> 
> ...


Yes. Drivers who put in those long hours should benefit.

I'm just a lowly part-timer who wants to be left alone and do my own thing whenever I feel like it.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

goneubering said:


> Yes. Drivers who put in those long hours should benefit.
> 
> I'm just a lowly part-timer who wants to be left alone and do my own thing whenever I feel like it.


None of us are being left alone to do our own thing.

Uber is an absolute dictator that makes all the rules, changes them whenever they feel like it, pays us whatever they feel like paying us, spies on us, interferes with how we do our jobs, etc. The app is our boss that has the power to feed or starve any driver.

The ONLY thing that keeps me doing this job is the flexible hours, but by no means does that qualify as doing my own thing.


----------



## jfinks (Nov 24, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Limiting Uber's cut to 25% is fine, but that alone isn't enough to protect the drivers from getting clobbered by rate cuts / price wars.
> 
> From June 2014 - February 2016, Uber and Lyft slashed fares three times, which decimated driver earnings and turned rideshare into a low-paying job. During that period, drivers were still on the alleged 75-80% rate (minus the ever-increasing booking fee).
> 
> ...


By just capping the percentage they take from the fare will benefit them to raise rates. Increase the size of the pie and their 30% slice gets bigger. Or 25%, whatever that amount is. The "root cause" of them not making money is the rates are too low and this makes the pie so small that nobody is making enough money, driver and company and the rider usually is astounded the ride is so cheap compared to cabs. The companies are literally giving away rides in a lot of cases.

Keep it simple, AB5 just severely complicates the whole thing. Nobody really wants to be employees with schedules and such. AB5 should be about directly tying the rate the rider pays to what percentage the driver gets. No more of this 50/50 stuff or worse.

Nothing about existing Taxi Business is needed or wanted, it just complicates matters on a global scale. This isn't just about California.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

jfinks said:


> By just capping the percentage they take from the fare will benefit them to raise rates. Increase the size of the pie and their 30% slice gets bigger. Or 25%, whatever that amount is. The "root cause" of them not making money is the rates are too low and this makes the pie so small that nobody is making enough money, driver and company and the rider usually is astounded the ride is so cheap compared to cabs. The companies are literally giving away rides in a lot of cases.
> 
> Keep it simple, AB5 just severely complicates the whole thing. Nobody really wants to be employees with schedules and such. AB5 should be about directly tying the rate the rider pays to what percentage the driver gets. No more of this 50/50 stuff or worse.


Uber hasn't even offered anything by way of rate or commission changes and they never will without a union.

It's not going to change without a union contract. Period.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

UberTaxPro said:


> centrodyne makes taximeters right?


Them and Pulsar,


----------



## jfinks (Nov 24, 2016)

uberdriverfornow said:


> Uber hasn't even offered anything by way of rate or commission changes and they never will without a union.
> 
> It's not going to change without a union contract. Period.


It can happen if the law is set right. Once the percentage is fixed the only way they can make more money is increasing the pie, make more surge, then optimize their business. They gotta find ways to reduce disputes, stop blindly just refunding. Instead of refunding give a 20% discount on the riders next ride. Nobody rides for free, if they got to the destination and didn't die, they are paying.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

jfinks said:


> It can happen if the law is set right. Once the percentage is fixed the only way they can make more money is increasing the pie, make more surge, then optimize their business. They gotta find ways to reduce disputes, stop blindly just refunding. Instead of refunding give a 20% discount on the riders next ride. Nobody rides for free, if they got to the destination and didn't die, they are paying.


none of that is possible, the ball is already rolling, Uber lost its chance


----------



## jfinks (Nov 24, 2016)

uberdriverfornow said:


> none of that is possible, the ball is already rolling, Uber lost its chance


Maybe in CA, a large market, but a small percentage of the total business.

Another thing I think should be part of it is Drivers pay their own insurance and select the amount of deductible they are comfortable with. I guarantee the companies are profiting off of the "booking fee" that is supposed to cover insurance costs. Get rid of that profit and require drivers to have their own insurance. Commercial insurance can be had for about $1200 per year.

Think about this, lets say a full time driver does 400 rides a month. So 400x12months is 4800 rides per year in this example. 3$ of each ride is charged to the rider as booking fee. That is $14,400 a year that they make off of just the booking fee per full time driver. They negotiate with the insurance company probably $1000 per driver a year, but this is variable since some drivers don't drive that much and some do a lot more. That is around $13000 difference between what they "take" and what a commercial policy would cost each driver.

Just another thing the law should look at. They monetize every aspect of this game and the driver takes the hit and worse yet they still lose billions a year. The only winners in this is the riders getting cheap rides, and they ***** about that cost...


----------



## njn (Jan 23, 2016)

jfinks said:


> Another thing I think should be part of it is Drivers pay their own insurance and select the amount of deductible they are comfortable with. I guarantee the companies are profiting off of the "booking fee" that is supposed to cover insurance costs. Get rid of that profit and require drivers to have their own insurance. Commercial insurance can be had for about $1200 per year.


NYC TLC drivers already have to purchase commercial insurance and it's closer to 5k/yr.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

jfinks said:


> Maybe in CA, a large market, but a small percentage of the total business.
> 
> Another thing I think should be part of it is Drivers pay their own insurance and select the amount of deductible they are comfortable with. I guarantee the companies are profiting off of the "booking fee" that is supposed to cover insurance costs. Get rid of that profit and require drivers to have their own insurance. Commercial insurance can be had for about $1200 per year.
> 
> ...


I like how you think.

That booking fee is a joke.

A profitable joke that benefits Uber.


----------



## Funky Monkey (Jul 11, 2016)

Steve appleby said:


> Oh yeah there is no doubt in my mind that this is going to go all the way to the Supreme Court And you can bet your ass that Uber is going to put all their chips on the table for this one


I hope Uber et al blow up FOR GOOD. Their only position is to deny that drivers are contractors or they're done. Self-driving cars could be a while



ubergrind said:


> The reality is Uber relies on mostly immigrants, minorities , seniors , and unskilled white males to make up it's work force .
> 
> View attachment 395267
> 
> ...


It's a reverse mortgage on your car until it has ZERO value, plain and simple. Good advice is never to use a vehicle with any remaining value


----------



## Hopindrew (Jan 30, 2019)

jfinks said:


> AB5 is going about this totally the wrong way. Keep it simple. Just limit the percentage that Uber and Lyft can take out of the total. Come to an agreement at like 30% or so. 25% would be better, but with all the 40 and 50%+ rapes, 30% would be great. This includes short trips. Uber/Lyft would just have to find a way to split the "booking (rape) fee" with the driver. No ride should be less than $5 to the driver. AB5 as it is now uproots what little there is left to like about driving rideshare.


Uber /Lyft made their own bed. They put themselves in this position. They were given the golden key to anything they wanted and used it to fail. Rideshare's done. AB5 became a necessity because of this.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Hopindrew said:


> Uber /Lyft made their own bed. They put themselves in this position. They were given the golden key to anything they wanted and used it to fail. Rideshare's done. AB5 became a necessity because of this.


No. Rideshare's definitely not done.


----------



## Hopindrew (Jan 30, 2019)

goneubering said:


> No. Rideshare's definitely not done.


Whatever makes you feel better. There's a reason Travis sold all his stock and split. The investors are done giving them money because they're taking big losses and that's the only way travis made money off Uber. Travis didn't make a penny off Uber's product just investors giving it to him.


----------



## Funky Monkey (Jul 11, 2016)

Hopindrew said:


> Uber /Lyft made their own bed. They put themselves in this position. They were given the golden key to anything they wanted and used it to fail. Rideshare's done. AB5 became a necessity because of this.


One word: hubris. Would like to see them punished


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Funky Monkey said:


> One word: hubris. Would like to see them punished


Why do you think AB5 happened?


----------



## Funky Monkey (Jul 11, 2016)

goneubering said:


> Why do you think AB5 happened?


I can't recall anything like this (this degree of hubris). Maybe Enron?


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Funky Monkey said:


> I can't recall anything like this (this degree of hubris). Maybe Enron?


I don't know about Enron. I've heard it was very bad (maybe even criminal?) but I don't know all the details.

With Uber it goes back to TK saying Uber would be a $200 Billion company and his wild behavior thinking he was going to conquer the whole world. It didn't work out that way and he eventually got kicked out of the company he built. With Dara running the show Uber has the needed professional management in place but there's still a huge amount of remaining hubris in my opinion.


----------



## Hopindrew (Jan 30, 2019)

Uber/Lyft will owe billions in back pay to drivers and the drivers should get everything they have coming to them. Ab5 came about because of “independent contractor” with no minimum pay was used to do just that pay very little and sometimes nothing or loses to the drivers and the drivers not having any rights. Uber/Lyft used this as a tool and now ab5 happened because of it. They also don’t let the drivers be “independent contractors” when Uber/Lyft doesn’t feel it benefits themselves. Drivers should know where the passengers are going before they pick them up and be able to charge what they want. Independent contractors are supposed to be running their own business Uber/Lyft doesn’t allow drivers to make their own business decisions.


----------



## Funky Monkey (Jul 11, 2016)

Hopindrew said:


> Uber/Lyft will owe billions in back pay to drivers and the drivers should get everything they have coming to them. Ab5 came about because of "independent contractor" with no minimum pay was used to do just that pay very little and sometimes nothing or loses to the drivers and the drivers not having any rights. Uber/Lyft used this as a tool and now ab5 happened because of it. They also don't let the drivers be "independent contractors" when Uber/Lyft doesn't feel it benefits themselves. Drivers should know where the passengers are going before they pick them up and be able to charge what they want. Independent contractors are supposed to be running their own business Uber/Lyft doesn't allow drivers to make their own business decisions.


And I suppose Mr. Kalanick is free and clear. Wonder sometimes "some country we've got here." Still the best or one of the best I'd like to think but JEEZ


----------



## Hopindrew (Jan 30, 2019)

Oh yep he's free and clear and he probably laughed all the way to the bank. Our state legislature's really need to answer for what has happened but that's very very unlikely. Big money hurt the people with no say in anything.



goneubering said:


> I don't know about Enron. I've heard it was very bad (maybe even criminal?) but I don't know all the details.
> 
> With Uber it goes back to TK saying Uber would be a $200 Billion company and his wild behavior thinking he was going to conquer the whole world. It didn't work out that way and he eventually got kicked out of the company he built. With Dara running the show Uber has the needed professional management in place but there's still a huge amount of remaining hubris in my opinion.


TK didn't get kicked out of the company. He got kicked out as CEO. He was owner on the board up until this past month then he sold off all his stock in the last month that's why he's gone. He's going into some other venture now something with kitchen space.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Hopindrew said:


> TK didn't get kicked out of the company. He got kicked out as CEO. He was owner on the board up until this past month then he sold off all his stock in the last month that's why he's gone. He's going into some other venture now something with kitchen space.


That's true. I should have said he got kicked out of *running *Uber. That was the end of the TK era.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

got a p said:


> It's a new age, time for new solutions. Can't think of it in those binary terms if we are going to be able to move forward with success. Ab5 will not be good for the blue collar worker or for the corporations that do the white collar stuff. We need to create a new age type of union that works for this new gig economy.
> 
> We need people who can think outside the box.
> 
> ...


@got a p

Who do you see that could create this new style of union?


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

great question. like a specific person, or type of person?


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

got a p said:


> great question. like a specific person, or type of person?


Either one. Or even a group.

According to all reports the churn rate of Uber drivers is astronomical so how would a union even function?


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

well unions get dues. i have only been in one before and it was 2%, so there's that. i don't think rideshare drivers would mind paying 2% if their income goes back to normal.

outside of the restoration of income, the first thing that comes to mind is protection from unjust deactivation. my brother works at lyft i told him we should all have breathalyzers that hook up via usb so we can eliminate the false intoxication for a free ride scam. ofc while blowing you should be on camera so they know it's you.

i suppose california would be a good place to start. no-one likes ab5 but they have massive amounts of "liberal" lawmakers that are desperate to show that they support blue collar workers, even if they are mostly NIMBY's...they gotta bs so they can get re-elected. i'd bet a bunch of white guilt rich folks would donate to a go-fund me to pay for petitioners. i don't know the exact number of signatures you'd need but it should be in a place that has a large market like los angeles.

i guess the basic demands to would be that drivers get 75% of the fare - full stop. minimum of $5/ride, maybe less for shared, which would mean a min fare for x would be $6.66 :woot:, which makes sense bc you know dara is the devil, lol. and yes we should be supplied with cameras, if we dont have one, for protection. as well as a breathalyzer. that's all i can think of atm but it's a start right? what else can get someone unfairly deactivated?

i guess those would be the things that i think are at the top. ofc others will have lists of demands that i haven't thought of. i could come up with more i'm sure, but i would bet money that if rideshare usa or whoever they are that got some press from the protests could start a go-fund me they could pay petitioners to get a bill to be voted on in los angeles. i wouldn't doubt that they could even have a second one to have starting funds for an office and a couple union reps to get the ball rolling.

if it works in los angeles then it can spread to other cities. every driver in america will know about it and want their own local chapter. with the proceeds from los angeles dues they could help fund locals that are having a hard time raising the initial capital. tbh i wouldn't doubt it could get off the ground purely through volunteer union reps at first. but yeah you have to get laws passed and one great way to do that is to get the sufficient amount of signatures for your petition.

that's really just off the top of my head but i would be certainly willing to volunteer some time to help with the planning and petitioning at the very least. i'm sure there are thousands of others who would volunteer their time and mental energy to get things rolling.


----------



## troothequalstroll (Oct 12, 2019)

Uber announcing every 1000 rides $5000 bonus retroactive if still active & raises rates .60 per mile vow to only take 10% of fare and use transparent receipts where riders & drivers see the same things

Lyft copies groundbreaking turnaround 3 days later

Rider complaints, wait times plummet, & cancel rates average less than 5%, acceptence rate sky rockets

Psyche

We are all working for a Ponzi scam that won't be regulated because the government been bribed enjoy it if & while you can, 4% do the rest it's failure



got a p said:


> well unions get dues. i have only been in one before and it was 2%, so there's that. i don't think rideshare drivers would mind paying 2% if their income goes back to normal.
> 
> outside of the restoration of income, the first thing that comes to mind is protection from unjust deactivation. my brother works at lyft i told him we should all have breathalyzers that hook up via usb so we can eliminate the false intoxication for a free ride scam. ofc while blowing you should be on camera so they know it's you.
> 
> ...


$5 per rides is a joke and less than a 1995 ny cab rate which was 100% of $6.50 no maintenance required

Children need to grow up until drivers get $10 gross minimum fares & I'd slide to $8 but that's pushing it it's an illegal Ponzi scam paying illegal wages which is predatory & anti competitive

It's nothing but a cab company and every state has regulated the price of cabs for over half a century & could in 5 minutes mandate Uber Lyft to pay drivers regulated minimum per mile per minute that the states set but they won't

Because they are all complicit in this organized crime racket that preys on elderly, immigrants, & desperate math failures


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

well we gotta compromise, and from a riders point of view paying $11 for a 2 mile ride isn't gonna jibe. business will plummet imo. 

i've taken less than 10 cab rides in america in my life, because they are too expensive. i'm an average american. however i've taken between 1000-2000 lyft/uber rides in the last 5 years. if i had to pay $11 instead of $6 i would have just bought another car as i had planned to do.


----------



## troothequalstroll (Oct 12, 2019)

got a p said:


> well we gotta compromise, and from a riders point of view paying $11 for a 2 mile ride isn't gonna jibe. business will plummet imo.
> 
> i've taken less than 10 cab rides in america in my life, because they are too expensive. i'm an average american. however i've taken between 1000-2000 lyft/uber rides in the last 5 years. if i had to pay $11 instead of $6 i would have just bought another car as i had planned to do.


Cabs aren't meant to be taken daily, if you're not paying $10+ you can't afford the service period those are the costs human or robot period

Last time I checked you need to make well over 100K a year to have a chauffeur on payroll

The few times car was in shop or needed a ride I'd offer a friend family coworker gas money or lunch don't these non car owning losers have people they know they'd rather help

I'd walk 40 minutes to work before I'd pay $10 for a cab too because I know math & if I can't afford card I can't afford private driver so I better get a bus pass & save up for adult purchase so women will want to drop it like it's hot when I roll by...

Adults own cars you don't take cabs to your $10-20 an hour mcjob, get tacos delivered, go shopping with food stamps in a cab, you can't afford a friggin scooter what makes you think I want to share oxygen with you? You need an app to get 1-5 miles boy bye cancel wait for the next idiot who will fail because they're stupid enough to deliver you 1-10 miles for less than a McChicken after costs

These idiots working 2 hours everyday just for the commute? What part of the game is that lol stay home collect cans at that point Uber drivers can afford cars at$3 an hour what's your excuse cuz every job you drop someone off at pays least minimum wage haha, not 1 person at Walmart will drive you home? Don't y'all all get off at the same time couldn't they use the extra hour of minimum wage without working another hour? It's some useless people out here

The math don't work

It's called walking

There's a reason $5 footlongs aren't $1

Half their "customers" can't afford a friggin scooter who wants those "customers" they're literally loss leaders but they have no profitable product to sell

If you only paid $5-6 and didn't tip $5 each ride you did nothing but use modern day exploited labor

Put paperclip in an envelope go to Fed ex, ups, post office, call a courier service see how much they'll charge to deliver it 7 miles in less than an hour, I bet Uber Lyft will be cheaper than half lmao then ask them to put you in some luggage & add you to the delivery

The s h I t costs more than a beer or a pizza geez people act like this advanced calculus

Actual Costs are $2-4 per ride $8-10 per hour PERIOD uber Lyft don't count those because they pass em on to labor & no one's stopping them from violating the law millions of times per day

No adult can possibly think it costs less than $8-10 to deliver 100-500 pounds 1-10 miles same hour delivery LMAO

Of course you can't blame riders if I was poor or couldn't afford a car & could use an app to buy $5 bills for $2 or a ride at 41% off I'd be on my 10th banned account too

It's not rocket science duh people like slave labor

2 miles takes 20-30 minutes walking not much longer than an Uber that's 5+ minutes away depending on how many cancels

And it's not about compromise if Uber Lyft wants to operate at a loss that's on them tricking labor into doing the same with blank contracts, fraud, games, snacks, coupons, stars, points, badges,... & lies is illegal


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

well in my case i was bartending, and my car was toast. so i figured i'd uber to work a couple miles away for a week and buy another car. my buddy told me to try shared so i did, just ordered 10 minutes earlier. i tipped $2 and the fare was cheaper bc it was shared and totalled around $6. if it was more i probably would have bought a car. 

now if you're getting $3.75 for a min fare and you start getting $5 that a pretty nice raise. as well as the fact that if they are legally bound to pay 75% long rides will pay well.

i appreciate your input though. it's good to get as much input from as many people as possible.


----------



## troothequalstroll (Oct 12, 2019)

got a p said:


> well in my case i was bartending, and my car was toast. so i figured i'd uber to work a couple miles away for a week and buy another car. my buddy told me to try shared so i did, just ordered 10 minutes earlier. i tipped $2 and the fare was cheaper bc it was shared and totalled around $6. if it was more i probably would have bought a car.
> 
> now if you're getting $3.75 for a min fare and you start getting $5 that a pretty nice raise. as well as the fact that if they are legally bound to pay 75% long rides will pay well.
> 
> i appreciate your input though. it's good to get as much input from as many people as possible.


It's a nice raise but still illegal & $5 short of minimum wage

Also a pre 1995 cab rate

Youre never getting 3-5 rides an hour 24/7 on average a rides going to take about 15-20 minutes and 2 an hour is realistic 24/7 certain times just die down

2 rides at $10 gross is $20 minus costs $10 an hour which is less than most states minimum wage

$3-4 gross is 1970s wages it's beyond illegal you can't agree to .60 per mile the contract is in breach it contains illegal terms period

We will least get details hopefully and then I guess idiots that accept $3-8 eats orders with details can choose to accept the $3-8 Uber contracts I'll keep ignoring them and be happy I don't have to cancel them anymore because that's beyond insulting it was 5 years ago it is today far as I'm concerned every time I'm sent a ride less than $10 they just spit on & slapped me

There's no humans at this company they're all criminal cowards hiding behind an app which could actually be benefitting humanity but instead it's bought 3 people really nice mansions


----------



## jfinks (Nov 24, 2016)

That $5 ride didn't take an hour.... Sometimes you make $50 per hour. 30 min ride that pays $30 is $60 per hour. It's about averages. But ya we aren't even talking about $5 rides. A short ride is $2.67. If you didn't drive far to pickup then that is $2.67 per mile, however this should be at least $5 or $6 just for the effort alone.


----------



## ubergrind (May 23, 2017)

got a p said:


> well we gotta compromise, and from a riders point of view paying $11 for a 2 mile ride isn't gonna jibe. business will plummet imo.
> 
> i've taken less than 10 cab rides in america in my life, because they are too expensive. i'm an average american. however i've taken between 1000-2000 lyft/uber rides in the last 5 years. if i had to pay $11 instead of $6 i would have just bought another car as i had planned to do.


Cabs are priced to reflect for the operating cost of the vehicle and the drivers time . It's also a very low margin business at 8-10% tops.

If a cab is too expensive for the customer they should find alternative forms of transportation. When this started out it reflected the actual cost as well as the drivers time. They can walk, phone a friend , or wait for the bus . Back then tipping wasn't required since it was actually fairly priced .

I don't think there is a one size fits all model since all the cities are different . Representation is needed. A premium serivce that picks you up on demand should be priced higher than a cab .


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

got a p said:


> well unions get dues. i have only been in one before and it was 2%, so there's that. i don't think rideshare drivers would mind paying 2% if their income goes back to normal.
> 
> outside of the restoration of income, the first thing that comes to mind is protection from unjust deactivation. my brother works at lyft i told him we should all have breathalyzers that hook up via usb so we can eliminate the false intoxication for a free ride scam. ofc while blowing you should be on camera so they know it's you.
> 
> ...


2% uber dues in exchange for having the hourly pay in orlando _increasing 90%_ to hit min wage levels... sure...

Most drivers don't know just how underpaid you are.



jfinks said:


> That $5 ride didn't take an hour.... Sometimes you make $50 per hour. 30 min ride that pays $30 is $60 per hour. It's about averages. But ya we aren't even talking about $5 rides. A short ride is $2.67. If you didn't drive far to pickup then that is $2.67 per mile, however this should be at least $5 or $6 just for the effort alone.


It's not always that good.

And sometimes a $5 ride can take 30 minutes *cough orlando rates cough*

including the time waiting for a ping and yes a $5.00 ride could be 30 minutes.

$50 per hour is impossible on X in Orlando. A 45 minute 40 mile fare won't pay $50 here. The longest they get around here without going out of town, without a surge it caps at $20. So at best 1 $20 fare and inevitably a $3.00 fare.

$23 - 30 miles at 45c a mile = $12.50

$12.50 is right about what i AVERAGE driving a cab after expenses. (A 12 hour shift is really only 10-11 hours of actual working. 2:30-3:40 in the morning is honestly never much of anything.


----------



## ubergrind (May 23, 2017)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> 2% uber dues in exchange for having the hourly pay in orlando _increasing 90%_ to hit min wage levels... sure...
> 
> Most drivers don't know just how underpaid you are.


truer words have never been spoken . As I saw someone post on here this is really just a reverse mortgage on your vehicle. they get away with this since the drivers have zero collective bargaining power. If my car wasn't a fully depreciated beater I wouldn't even consider this job as a viable option. I hope 2020 will be different across the board .


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> It's like talking to tomatopaste
> 
> I always knew you were a shill, it's good to see your true colors
> 
> ...


The Jury has voted unanimously that AB5 interferes with federal laws regarding interstate commerce, especially concerning the trucking industry.
The Jury has also determined that uberfornow is self centered and does not consider the wishes of millions of Californians to remain as independent contractors ou
tside his limited world of ride share.
The Judge hates when he sees this comment posted, but in this case it seems entirely appropriate.
Go get a job at McDonald's. Further, expend your efforts trying to unionize their employees.


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)

ubergrind said:


> Back then tipping wasn't required since it was actually fairly priced .


&#128563;

I've always tipped because who doesn't?

the only time I didnt tip was when this taxi driver and I got (mind you I was a kid/teenager) into an argument because every other taxi driver I had went through the park to UCSF and he went around which is way longer. He told me that I can "keep" my money for the fare if I didn't think it was right.

I gave him what the price was but didn't tip because it was $10 over anyways.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Judge and Jury said:


> The Jury has voted unanimously that AB5 interferes with federal laws regarding interstate commerce, especially concerning the trucking industry.
> The Jury has also determined that uberfornow is self centered and does not consider the wishes of millions of Californians to remain as independent contractors ou
> tside his limited world of ride share.
> The Judge hates when he sees this comment posted, but in this case it seems entirely appropriate.
> Go get a job at McDonald's. Further, expend your efforts trying to unionize their employees.


nobody has ruled AB5 interferes with any federal laws

what you want to happen and what does happen are two different things

keep lying


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Cold Fusion said:


> This will end up in the US Supreme Court


The Jury agrees. AB5 inadvertently interferes with interstate commerce.
How this will affect intrastate commerce, e.g. ride share, obviously, remains to be seen.



Polomarko said:


> One think U/L cannot stop. Starting January 1 2019 U/L driver have rights to form the Union
> WE DRIVE PROGRESS


The Jury has responded; lol



TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Not a fan of taking this to the Supreme Court. The State made a law of the land based off the majority of its citizens opinion. The People don't need a big brother.


The Jury wants to know how the State knew the opinion of the majority of the citizens regarding this matter.
The Jury states that ride share contractors are a minority of State citizens affected by AB5.
The Judge states; OMG, the State of California is big brother and a nanny State at the same time.



uberdriverfornow said:


> nobody has ruled AB5 interferes with any federal laws
> 
> what you want to happen and what does happen are two different things
> 
> ...





uberdriverfornow said:


> nobody has ruled AB5 interferes with any federal laws
> 
> what you want to happen and what does happen are two different things
> 
> ...


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> nobody has ruled AB5 interferes with any federal laws
> 
> what you want to happen and what does happen are two different things
> 
> keep lying


The Jury gives up.
The Judge hopes you are eventually hired as a part time employee.
Everything you complain about will become part of your daily routine. No decisions about who or where to pick up or drop off. No decisions about shuffling or toes to curb. No decisions about potential pukers. No decisions about the hood. And many more decisions made for you by a non-driver sitting at a desk reviewing your actions via the same algorithm.
Good luck to you.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Judge and Jury said:


> The Jury gives up.
> The Judge hopes you are eventually hired as a part time employee.
> Everything you complain about will become part of your daily routine. No decisions about who or where to pick up or drop off. No decisions about shuffling or toes to curb. No decisions about potential pukers. No decisions about the hood. And many more decisions made for you by a non-driver sitting at a desk reviewing your actions via the same algorithm.
> Good luck to you.


I can't wait to complain about a great union contract and great benefits, great pay, and protections against unfair deactivation. Can't wait.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

In 2016, there were 14.6 million members in the U.S., down from 17.7 million in 1983. The percentage of workers belonging to a *union* in the United States (or total labor *union* "density") was 10.7%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. *Union membership* in the private sector has fallen under 7%-levels not seen since 1932.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Judge and Jury said:


> The Jury agrees. AB5 inadvertently interferes with interstate commerce.
> How this will affect intrastate commerce, e.g. ride share, obviously, remains to be seen.
> 
> 
> ...


Because Lorena actually talked to drivers, many of them. All the anti-AB5'ers did was grab a few cry babies and paid shills to act like everyone is against AB5 which is bs.



SHalester said:


> In 2016, there were 14.6 million members in the U.S., down from 17.7 million in 1983. The percentage of workers belonging to a *union* in the United States (or total labor *union* "density") was 10.7%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. *Union membership* in the private sector has fallen under 7%-levels not seen since 1932.


Those numbers soon to go up when the Teamsters organize drivers. &#128079;&#128079;&#128079;


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> Those numbers soon to go up when the Teamsters organize drivers


nope. Union membership has been declining and will continue. 
One thing you seem to not mention: union membership is VOTED on. Do you beleive A) Calif drivers will be employees soon and B) they would vote to be unionized? FAT fraken chance, I say. AND with over 80% doing RS 20 or fewer hours a week, they all PT. No union membership for them either. 
Knock yourself out trying to organize drivers; better chance herding wild white bunnies.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

SHalester said:


> nope. Union membership has been declining and will continue.
> One thing you seem to not mention: union membership is VOTED on. Do you beleive A) Calif drivers will be employees soon and B) they would vote to be unionized? FAT fraken chance, I say. AND with over 80% doing RS 20 or fewer hours a week, they all PT. No union membership for them either.
> Knock yourself out trying to organize drivers; better chance herding wild white bunnies.


union membership numbers don't go down when people join unions they go up

not sure where you learned math

no idea who told that only fulltime workers could join unions lol you don't know anything about unions


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> nobody has ruled AB5 interferes with any federal laws
> 
> what you want to happen and what does happen are two different things
> 
> keep lying


What captured your strong interest in AB5 when you don't drive in Cali? Are you a union organizer?


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

goneubering said:


> What captured your strong interest in AB5 when you don't drive in Cali? Are you a union organizer?


Who told you I don't drive in CA ?

Been in three unions CWA SMW UFCW

never had anything less than great pay, great benefits, sick pay, holiday pay, and more in all of them


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

SHalester said:


> nope. Union membership has been declining and will continue.
> One thing you seem to not mention: union membership is VOTED on. Do you beleive A) Calif drivers will be employees soon and B) they would vote to be unionized? FAT fraken chance, I say. AND with over 80% doing RS 20 or fewer hours a week, they all PT. No union membership for them either.
> Knock yourself out trying to organize drivers; better chance herding wild white bunnies.


The Jury has voted 12 to zero against joining a union. The Judge concurs.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> union membership numbers don't go down when people join unions they go up


ah, dude what I posted was fact, not made up fantasy. And before I even googled i knew it was a fact union membership has been declining for years, but wanted to post proof to try avoid the denial I knew was coming. Boy did you go for it.

As far as pt in a union, you best google it. Mostly it depends on the bargaining agreement.

I noticed you skipped over everything else. A) we ain't employees B) employees must VOTE on union C) you could not organize anything if this forum was your only tool.

next.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

SHalester said:


> ah, dude what I posted was fact, not made up fantasy. And before I even googled i knew it was a fact union membership has been declining for years, but wanted to post proof to try avoid the denial I knew was coming. Boy did you go for it.
> 
> As far as pt in a union, you best google it. Mostly it depends on the bargaining agreement.
> 
> ...


Been in three unions CWA SMW UFCW

never had anything less than great pay, great benefits, sick pay, holiday pay, and more in all of them


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> never had anything less than great pay, great benefits, sick pay, holiday pay, and more in all of them


and yet you are here? Odd. When I had great pay and benefits RS wasn't even on my radar; for peanuts compared to a W2 job? Something about what you post is not ringing true........


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

we are now employees, it's only a matter of time til we get to vote on union membership


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Judge and Jury said:


> The Judge concurs.


I think the 'Judge' has a day job with another ID. hmmmmm :coolio:


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> Who told you I don't drive in CA ?
> 
> Been in three unions CWA SMW UFCW
> 
> never had anything less than great pay, great benefits, sick pay, holiday pay, and more in all of them


You obviously don't drive here.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

SHalester said:


> and yet you are here? Odd. When I had great pay and benefits RS wasn't even on my radar; for peanuts compared to a W2 job? Something about what you post is not ringing true........


when drivers were making $35 an hour minus expenses it wasn't a big deal

now that we are down to $20 an hour and always at risk for 50% pay cuts and deactivation, employee status and a union contract is in store


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> we are now employees


I must be missing the W4 that must be filled out when becoming an employee. In the mail?


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

goneubering said:


> You obviously don't drive here.


open mouth insert foot











SHalester said:


> I must be missing the W4 that must be filled out when becoming an employee. In the mail?


you missed the part where Uber filed suit to block the law that made CA drivers legally employees


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> you missed the part where Uber filed suit to block the law thar made CA drivers employees


will you please keep track of what you post? You posted


uberdriverfornow said:


> we are now employees,


And now you say it is blocked? I miss nothing. Nice try, tho. And please please research how unions are formed because you are really confused on that score as well.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

SHalester said:


> will you please keep track of what you post? You posted
> 
> And now you say it is blocked? I miss nothing. Nice try, tho. And please please research how unions are formed because you are really confused on that score as well.


only as it relates to truckers and only temporarily

we, as rideshare drivers, are now legally employees under AB5


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> we, as rideshare drivers, are now legally employees under AB5


Oh, I see the back stepping here.
and, no, we are not employees. Legally or otherwise until it clears all the court cases. PLUS where is your W4? i don't have mine. Can't become something wo a W4 filled out. 
You are forgiven for not knowing how onboarding works.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> we are now employees, it's only a matter of time til we get to vote on union membership


Again, The Jury asks; are you going to apply to the gig companies and how do you know if you will be accepted.
The Jury's position is that any and all contractors can be deactivated by notice for no specified reason as long as the notification is in compliance with the TOS.
If they do not employ you, how will a union benefit you.
The Judge wants to know; what is your acceptance rate, cancellation rate, driver rating, passenger rating, number of times you contacted driver support, complaints against you, etc. 
The Judge stlates: Unfavorable answers equals no job for you. No union for you.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Judge and Jury said:


> Again, The Jury asks; are you going to apply to the gig companies and how do you know if you will be accepted.
> The Jury's position is that any and all contractors can be deactivated by notice for no specified reason as long as the notification is in compliance with the TOS.
> If they do not employ you, how will a union benefit you.
> The Judge wants to know; what is your acceptance rate, cancellation rate, driver rating, passenger rating, number of times you contacted driver support, complaints against you, etc.
> The Judge stlates: Unfavorable answers equals no job for you. No union for you.


thats what union negotiations work out

if not then we strike


----------



## Johnny Mnemonic (Sep 24, 2019)

Uber is obviously desperate.

First they claim that the law doesn't apply to them because they're a "technology" company.

Then they sue because it violates their Constitutional rights? How does it violate their rights if the law doesn't apply to them?

They're just shopping it to a Federal judge in hopes of getting a temporary injunction to stall, but they've just blown their whole "doesn't apply to us" defense.



25rides7daysaweek said:


> If it goes to trumps supreme court things wont go well for ab5.


The SCOTUS is currently split 4/4 between liberals and conservatives, which means John Roberts will most likely cast the deciding vote. It could go either way right now.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

SHalester said:


> Oh, I see the back stepping here.
> and, no, we are not employees. Legally or otherwise until it clears all the court cases. PLUS where is your W4? i don't have mine. Can't become something wo a W4 filled out.
> You are forgiven for not knowing how onboarding works.


lol ya Uber sued to block a law making us employees even though we are actually independent contractors lol

thats what Uber does lol


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

SHalester said:


> I think the 'Judge' has a day job with another ID. hmmmmm :coolio:


Nope. The Judge and The Jury are lurkers, not sock puppets. (The Jury had to ask The Bailiff to Google the meaning of that blasphemous term.)
The Court has limited time to post online. 
Further, as The Judge has stated before, SHalester is respected by The Jury and The Judge concurs. Grounded and Intelligent by unanimous vote.



uberdriverfornow said:


> thats what union negotiations work out
> 
> if not then





uberdriverfornow said:


> only as it relates to truckers and only temporarily
> 
> we, as rideshare drivers, are now legally employees under AB5


The Jury wants to know: Where exactly in AB5 does it say that contractors for Uber/Lyft and the food delivery apps are employees. To the best of The Jurors comprehension, the law basically specifies a three point definition which is open to interpretation. That interpretation will either be modified by the state Congress, a ballot initiative, or, more likely, by the courts.
To paraphrase your earlier statement, just because you think you are an employee does not make it so.



SHalester said:


> I think the 'Judge' has a day job with another ID. hmmmmm :coolio:


Most of The Jury members deliver food. The Judge frequently provokes The Jury by stating that the best thing about delivering food is that there is never more than one drunk in the vehicle.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> open mouth insert foot
> View attachment 396534
> 
> 
> ...


Nobody actually driving in Cali could be unaware as you were about the recent changes Uber made in response to AB5.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

goneubering said:


> Nobody actually driving in Cali could be unaware as you were about the recent changes Uber made in response to AB5.


but you said I wasn't in Califirmia ?


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> but you said I wasn't in Califirmia ?


That's the most likely explanation. You are very strong on details yet you didn't know anything about Uber's changes in response to AB5.



SHalester said:


> Something about what you post is not ringing true........


That's the same impression I have.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

goneubering said:


> That's the most likely explanation. You are very strong on details yet you didn't know anything about Uber's changes in response to AB5.
> 
> 
> That's the same impression I have.


uber hasn't changed shit...they simply offered some supposed concessions that were nothing of value to drivers

and I know as much about rideshare in CA as any other person because I'm interested in seeing things better for all drivers in CA


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> Uber hasn't changed shit


Wut? U can't be that dense? What do U call eliminating AR? What do u call full info on ping? Former in place for all California the latter only a third have it w full by mid Jan.
A bit better than shite. Next.


----------



## troothequalstroll (Oct 12, 2019)

jfinks said:


> That $5 ride didn't take an hour.... Sometimes you make $50 per hour. 30 min ride that pays $30 is $60 per hour. It's about averages. But ya we aren't even talking about $5 rides. A short ride is $2.67. If you didn't drive far to pickup then that is $2.67 per mile, however this should be at least $5 or $6 just for the effort alone.


Lol it averages lol lol lol

It don't work like that homey this piece work every contract needs to be legal they don't guarantee rides after every drop off lol

Your choice is loiter, drive around, or drive home where your headed in 5 minutes or 5 hours kinda important info to know lol will I be 2 hours away from where I need to be or 5 minutes? Because no one's paying you for those 2 hours to get home, if I was stupid everyday I'd take one of these idiots downtown it's only 15 miles but it'll take an hour, now I'm an hour away from home no guaranteed ride and I was paid $15 lmao

Of course it's a blank contract cuz only a desperate starving idiot would willingly accept that contract or if they lived downtown

So show details till it bounces around to the idiot or the driver going that way it's not rocket science they hate drivers so much they just play games with em now, yeah who cares your driving you end trip and a pop up for a friggin worthless snack distracts you pretending to be a ping **** get all this crap scams fraud off my screen lol

oh we sent him a $50 airport ride that's $50 an hour hey algo send him nothing but $2 an hour rides for 7 hours it'll average out LMAO

That's for the 96% who fail

Anything less than $10 gross to driver is predatory & illegal wages

No the $5 doesn't take an hour but it does average 15-20 minutes unless it's your neighbor pinging you and going exactly where you're going it might be worth it but chances are unless you use teleportation devices & your vehicle runs on air it's not your neighbor & you don't end up right next to your bed & that's half your miles DEAD

$5 is maybe a mchicken after costs I don't know why I even bother this is CHILDRENS pay in 1985

Your vehicle requires $2.50 gallon gas and has thousands of parts let's say 200 of those parts lose .10 every ride & you spend $1-2 of that has every ride

An easier formula since this ride has 100% Uber Lyft use in 4+ years and I have $8300+ in receipts so it passes inspection with 4000+ rides

It's $4 in Costa every single ride no matter how short or long $1-2 gas $1-2 future maintenance

Gas station is 1/2 a mile fill up tank get an airport run which is 90+% of my rides, dead head back fill up again

Advanced calculus time it costs $8ish to fill back up $2 for the future maintenance trip takes 40 minutes each way my operating costs are $10 an hour give or take

10+ years old, 240K miles, 3K or less bluebook fully depreciated, 22mpg, xl rates over $1.20 used to be $1.85+

X rides are only worth it because smart tint the $10 toll I know most drivers aren't getting that extra 10 an hour

.60 per mile is beyond almost no chance lol the math don't work so 96% fail by design

In highschool I wouldn't give you a ride for $4 lmao and we were probably standing at the same place going the same place wtf?

Drivers accepting those rides just as bad as Uber Lyft show some respect for yourself

Its basic math or work for McChicken I really don't care I cancel or ignore almost anything that's not airport for 4+ years based on my right to not have to work for free

I just want details of my contracts or approx fare so I can stop the silly games I know they're nothing but criminals they won't change everything they do is an attempt to defraud me or an insult so anyone that can force em to show me the details of my contract per my rights Im with em, then idiots can CHOOSE to risk their life for a taco I suppose, I need 10 tacos but average 50+ tacos per trip, I don't let cowards steal from me or trick me into working for free apparently lots not in that position


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> uber hasn't changed shit...they simply offered some supposed concessions that were nothing of value to drivers
> 
> and I know as much about rideshare in CA as any other person because I'm interested in seeing things better for all drivers in CA


Indeed. Perhaps you should read and learn what real Cali drivers say.

https://uberpeople.net/threads/uber...g-screen-in-california-starting-today.365396/


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

What I said.


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

Title: *Uber sues California*

_Evil cackling on the Koala Bear's end intensifies :roflmao: _


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

SHalester said:


> Wut? U can't be that dense? What do U call eliminating AR? What do u call full info on ping? Former in place for all California the latter only a third have it w full by mid Jan.
> A bit better than shite. Next.


it's called trying to act like they are doing something useful when it's not even close to what we shoulda had all along

and it's only happening because AB5 is here

we are nowhere near being actual IE's



goneubering said:


> Indeed. Perhaps you should read and learn what real Cali drivers say.
> 
> https://uberpeople.net/threads/uber...g-screen-in-california-starting-today.365396/


hate to break it to you but I still don't even get that feature and I'm in CA


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

@SHalester just to clarify the flippancy in my earlier post.

Uber suing the STATE of California, is equivalent to a murderer death row inmate suing the STATE of Texas---for wrongful termination of their former job occupation....

IMO this sounds like a lot of sword rattling on Uber's end. Because it's somewhat incomprehensible to believe they're serious otherwise.

And if so, then this is basically NOT going to end well for the Plaintiff. Which apparently has a LOT to learn about trying to sue any level of the US Government....


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> it's called trying to act like they are doing something useful
> 
> hate to break it to you but I still don't even get that feature and I'm in CA


It's actually very useful. It might even be enough for some court to conclude we drivers are indeed ICs.

You might not have the new features because...

1. It's a rollout. Everyone knows this except again you. Funny how that works.

2. Or you're not in Cali. This seems the most likely because you're the only driver who didn't know about Uber's biggest change in four years. Then when I told you about it you denied there had been any change. Bizarre.

3. Or you really are in Cali but you don't drive for Uber. You're a union organizer posing as a driver. This would explain why you're so angry because the Teamsters gave you the nearly impossible job of organizing drivers.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

goneubering said:


> 1. It's a rollout.


yeah, it rolled to 1/3 12/3 and then dead stop. Nothing since. Notice the AR was gone as of 12/3 for all tho.
Uber says mid Jan; well that is fast approaching. Roll roll roll some more.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

goneubering said:


> It's actually very useful. It might even be enough for some court to conclude we drivers are indeed ICs.
> 
> You might not have the new features because...
> 
> ...


well, I already posted my proof that I'm a driver, but you're in denial

I would love to see proof that you drive so let's see it


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> hate to break it to you but I still don't even get that feature and I'm in CA


nor do I, tho I know it supposed to be fully rolled out by mid Jan. AR is gone, tho. That could be argued was a nothing burger.....still nice it is no longer considered or displayed.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

SHalester said:


> nor do I, tho I know it supposed to be fully rolled out by mid Jan. AR is gone, tho. That could be argued was a nothing burger.....still nice it is no longer considered or displayed.


drivers could have any acceptance rate anyhow even before they removed it so it didn't matter at all that they finally removed it

just much ado about nothing


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> drivers could have any acceptance rate


nope. not those who found value in Pro status; they need AR.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

SHalester said:


> nope. not those who found value in Pro status; they need AR.


nobody gives a shit about "Pro status" lol


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

goneubering said:


> That's the most likely explanation. You are very strong on details yet you didn't know anything about Uber's changes in response to AB5.
> 
> ,
> 
> That's the same impression I have.


The Jury has concluded, on a 10 to 2 vote, that uberdriverfornow is a paid union organizer. The Judge concurs.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

If Uber drivers voted for union membership the teamsters could probably get better then min wage.

And if they force you to take all pings that’s reality, but if you sit for 20 minutes taking some dude to Walmart they will have to pay you for all that time.

Reading through this thread has done nothing but reveal more good news as we piece together the laws in California and how they would apply.

What we know..

$13.00 an hour base pay plus tips.

Mileage reimbursement at 30c a mile for all miles driven including to pickups. (This is still underpaying drivers) pappa johns lost lawsuits and had to pay out the full standard mileage rate.

The time between pings would also be payable. (Under California rules on on call time)

Uber/lyft would most likely require only being logged on to one platform. They also might only pay for time between pings, and if you decline you won’t get paid.

Tax Liability would go up because pay will go up so much. You won’t have zero taxi liability after deducting your mileage. However Uber will have to withhold.


Truth is, all the folks who end up not owing taxes after mileage deductions is making less than zero by IRS standards.m


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> If Uber drivers voted for union membership the teamsters could probably get better then min wage.
> 
> And if they force you to take all pings that's reality, but if you sit for 20 minutes taking some dude to Walmart they will have to pay you for all that time.
> 
> ...


the way it works for employees is that Uber has to reimburse all expenses and that money is nontaxable

so you lose the write off but it should, in theory, be the same



Judge and Jury said:


> The Jury has concluded, on a 10 to 2 vote, that uberdriverfornow is a paid union organizer. The Judge concurs.


future paid union organizer


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

SHalester said:


> yeah, it rolled to 1/3 12/3 and then dead stop. Nothing since. Notice the AR was gone as of 12/3 for all tho.
> Uber says mid Jan; well that is fast approaching. Roll roll roll some more.


It did start on 12/3 but I wasn't in that batch of drivers. I'm just a lowly Blue with bad AR and CR so I expected to be one of the very last drivers to get the new info but surprisingly I got everything about two or three weeks after the primary group. So there's at least a partial rollout going on. One LA driver says this means they're testing something. That's probably true.



uberdriverfornow said:


> future paid union organizer


You could have just said that up front instead of getting so angry.

I wish you good luck.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> the way it works for employees is that Uber has to reimburse all expenses and that money is nontaxable
> 
> so you lose the write off but it should, in theory, be the same
> 
> ...


Not remotely close to current numbers,


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

goneubering said:


> I'm just a lowly Blue with bad AR and CR


don't think it relates to either. I had 86% AR and zero CR; not rolled to me either.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Not remotely close to current numbers,


i did pretty good as a pizza delivery driver writing off mileage while at the same time getting delivery reimbursements lol

not sure how it is since they closed the loophole


----------



## Wonkytonk (Jan 28, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> Limiting Uber's cut to 25% is fine, but that alone isn't enough to protect the drivers from getting clobbered by rate cuts / price wars.
> 
> From June 2014 - February 2016, Uber and Lyft slashed fares three times, which decimated driver earnings and turned rideshare into a low-paying job. During that period, drivers were still on the alleged 75-80% rate (minus the ever-increasing booking fee).
> 
> ...


You've engaged in these fair percentage discussions more than once, and every few months someone else comes on here and artificially Bumps up what they think Uber & Lyft's percent take should be and it's always higher than it originally was at 15 & 20%.

Their cut shouldn't be any more than 10 to 15% of the total fare paid by riders. They can add a million and one fees on all they like but they can't take more than 10 to 15% of the total fare the rider pays. With the cost of all promotional fares coming out of their 15%. If they discounted a ride by 5 bucks to the rider they have to make up the 90 to 85% of that 5 dollar discount to the driver.

If they want to make more they have to increase fares which helps drivers. That simple provision will help stop fares from spiraling downwards because they've rigged the gig to where no matter what they're always making more and more, and drivers are taking in less and less. If they're percent-of-fare-capped at a low % rate the only way they make more is to raise rates, and every time they do that drivers get paid proportionally more as well.

I cede your point that setting a minimum mileage, and time rate would also help, but I think setting the max percentage they can take off the top at a low rate would work as well maybe even better to start seeing those fares rise.

Frankly at this point we should be discussing the necessity for its constituent parts to be broken off into separate companies. If the people transport section of the company is a separate entity they would be far more inclined to make better more driver friendly financial decisions. Let uber eats, uber flights, uber autonomous vehicles entities die the ignominous deaths they so richly deserve.


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

SHalester said:


> In 2016, there were 14.6 million members in the U.S., down from 17.7 million in 1983. The percentage of workers belonging to a *union* in the United States (or total labor *union* "density") was 10.7%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. *Union membership* in the private sector has fallen under 7%-levels not seen since 1932.


That's Why Middle class disappeared in this country.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Polomarko said:


> That's Why Middle class disappeared in this country.


Well, those in a union for sure. Biggest percent in unions, here in calif, are teachers. Take them out, union membership slips to single digits. 
All this union talk is quite pointless. We aren't employees yet and very very doubtful 51% would vote for a union.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

SHalester said:


> Well, those in a union for sure. Biggest percent in unions, here in calif, are teachers. Take them out, union membership slips to single digits.
> All this union talk is quite pointless. We aren't employees yet and very very doubtful 51% would vote for a union.


True story!! It's all wishful thinking and speculation at this point.


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

SHalester said:


> Well, those in a union for sure. Biggest percent in unions, here in calif, are teachers. Take them out, union membership slips to single digits.
> All this union talk is quite pointless. We aren't employees yet and very very doubtful 51% would vote for a union.


You do not have to but we have several hundred Union members so far.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Polomarko said:


> You do not have to but we have several hundred Union members so far.


Which union? Teamsters?


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

goneubering said:


> Which union? Teamsters?


We drive progress


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Polomarko said:


> We drive progress


Thx. I found their website but it doesn't really have much information.


----------



## Wonkytonk (Jan 28, 2018)

goneubering said:


> Which union? Teamsters?





Polomarko said:


> We drive progress


That is just a priceless response.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Wonkytonk said:


> That is just a priceless response.


It's actually true. I found their website and their Facebook page.


----------



## Wonkytonk (Jan 28, 2018)

goneubering said:


> It's actually true. I found their website and their Facebook page.


That's what makes it priceless. Well, that and many another reasons really, but that one is enough.


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

goneubering said:


> Thx. I found their website but it doesn't really have much information.





Wonkytonk said:


> That is just a priceless response.


Register your email and phone number at this website and you will get all information.. New members meting is every Thrsday from 6pm in SF. We will get you address when you join us! Welcome


----------

