# Dara says Uber may SHUT DOWN in California for months!



## JimKE

*Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*

Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.

"If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.

Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.

California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."

Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.

Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.

Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.

If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."

Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.

Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
"Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.









Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees


If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.




www.cnbc.com


----------



## Johnny Mnemonic

JimKE said:


> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.


----------



## TBone

And you know they absolutely will shut it down. This will be interesting to watch


----------



## 197438

With pax complaining about the price of rides this week, they deserve to find no rides available next week. After all, they voted for the fools in the Legislature who always have gifts to offer the unions under the guise of being for the workers. Let pax return to the days of six cabs for the entire city and 45 minute wait times.


----------



## 25rides7daysaweek

Johnny Mnemonic said:


> View attachment 497553


If you dont do what i want
ILL HOLD MY BREATH!!!!


----------



## JimKE

TBone said:


> And you know they absolutely will shut it down. This will be interesting to watch


I actually don't think they have any choice.

The Uber/Lyft business model simply does not work if drivers are employees. Neither company is making profits NOW with independent contractor drivers, and paying very low rates.


----------



## Cdub2k

I thought Uber's response to AB5 was outstanding. Allowing their Independent Contractor Drivers to set their own rates via Set your own surge as well as providing all of the rides details of the ride before the Driver accepted the ride checked off all the checkboxes I thought what being an Independent Contractor Driver should look like. Apparently it was *not *enough and now they are being forced to classify drivers as Employees. So when Uber shuts down their operations and reopen it back up in November you can pretty much bet that the "Set your own surge" benefit will go away and be a footnote in the history books. As well as knowing all of the trip details. Also, now that you are an employee they will probably start strictly enforcing Acceptance % Rate rules considering they'll be paying people on a $ per hour basis. Instant pay might go away as well and things might resemble a regular job where you get paid Bi-Weekly via direct Deposit.

Now looking at the data I see that the minimum wage in Cali is $12 an hour. And since the average cost per mile has been established at $0.57 by the IRS I'm assuming your base gross pay will be $12 an hour + .57 a mile. And you keep all tips. If this pay scale is true I consider that a fair deal.

Some of that is speculation but it seems reasonable. What do you guys think? I also think Uber will have to start limiting the amount of Drivers they allow on the platform at times which might require them to create a "Schedule your block" function similar to DoorDash, Waitr, and other gig apps.


----------



## x100

what high stake poker by a bunch of no goods!


----------



## 197438

JimKE said:


> I actually don't think they have any choice.
> 
> The Uber/Lyft business model simply does not work if drivers are employees. Neither company is making profits NOW with independent contractor drivers, and paying very low rates.


It's a cost of doing business that will get them results on the November ballot measure. Think of the free publicity they get when the remaining ants apply for unemployment and people have to go outside themselves because they can't get their Starbucks delivered. The lost tax revenue for cities from each fare will hurt at a time municipalities are bankrupt. The restaurants will be hurt when delivery apps are unavailable. Game on.


----------



## SHalester

Of course. The mere logistics of making any amount of drivers employees would be an employee onboarding disaster. No way it could be done overnight. Cal is their largest market with most active drivers. And why not drag out the clock on Until Nov to see what happens with Prop 22, which if passed all AB5 goes away. 

Plus no RS would stick it to the pax in a way that will cause them to start putting pressure on politicians who caused this. Should be fun the next 7-8 days.


----------



## jocker12

Cdub2k said:


> I thought Uber's response to AB5 was outstanding.


https://www.latimes.com/business/te...stmates-call-ab5-unconstitutional-new-lawsuit
Outstanding indeed....


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect

EastBayRides said:


> With pax complaining about the price of rides this week, they deserve to find no rides available next week. After all, they voted for the fools in the Legislature who always have gifts to offer the unions under the guise of being for the workers. Let pax return to the days of six cabs for the entire city and 45 minute wait times.


Since the pax are can not figure out to switch to Lyft since then, that is on them. I have no F's to give.


----------



## June132017

Lyft is drooling on this news : D


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect

Cdub2k said:


> I thought Uber's response to AB5 was outstanding.


Only outstanding compared to Lyft. As we know did not even Lyft a finger to make those changes.

I think I'll start driving Monday just to be part of the group that can not log on any more. Call it Herd Immunity. :roflmao:


----------



## observer

SHalester said:


> Of course. The mere logistics of making any amount of drivers employees would be an employee onboarding disaster. No way it could be done overnight. Cal is their largest market with most active drivers. And why not drag out the clock on Until Nov to see what happens with Prop 22, which if passed all AB5 goes away.
> 
> Plus no RS would stick it to the pax in a way that will cause them to start putting pressure on politicians who caused this. Should be fun the next 7-8 days.


This is a problem that TNC companies themselves created.

They're a TECHNOLOGY company, most other companies don't have that luxury.

AB5 is going nowhere.

Go ahead shut down.

They won't because it will cause their stock to drop in the toilet.

BTW,

"it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said."

With this statement, he knows the writing is on the wall.


----------



## SHalester

observer said:


> AB5 is going nowhere.


Well, technically you are splitting hairs. If (when) Prop 22 passes all RS is excluded from AB5 coverage.

Yeh, I don't buy U/L are technology companies. W/out drivers they are nothing.

Trust me, if the appeal fails U/L and others will cease operating in Calif for some period of time.


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect

When "they" start using the word "May" You can bet on they "Will". 9 days left.


----------



## observer

SHalester said:


> Well, technically you are splitting hairs. If (when) Prop 22 passes all RS is excluded from AB5 coverage.
> 
> Yeh, I don't buy U/L are technology companies. W/out drivers they are nothing.
> 
> Trust me, if the appeal fails U/L and others will cease operating in Calif for some period of time.


Even if prop 22 passes, it will be immediately challenged in the courts.

Passage isn't assured.

Uber won't shut down for any length of time. They may do it for a week or two like they did in Arizona but they will be back, like they did in Arizona.

Uber can only bleed so much, they don't have any blood to spare. It would cost them millions of dollars a day.

This would be the perfect time for Didi to step in and open up their TNC the right way.


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect

Perhaps Uber can ask for an extension of time. Which rightfully so, be Denied.


----------



## SHalester

observer said:


> Even if prop 22 passes, it will be immediately challenged in the courts.


of course, but it would nullify AB5 at the same exact time. Stalemate.

Uber/Lyft will shut down. Logistics point to that. The onboarding alone would take weeks/months. Plus U/L know the pax will cry to the heavens, since until then they have not been effected. Pissing off voters right before Nov, not a good idea.

Yes, calif is Uber's biggest market. It certainly will hurt a great deal, but they will have NO choice. Circle back to onboarding logistics.

Didi? More like tryp, but both equally effected.


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect

SHalester said:


> Uber/Lyft will shut down. Logistics point to that. The onboarding alone would take weeks/months. Plus U/L know the pax will cry to the heavens, since until then they have not been effected. Pissing off voters right before Nov, not a good idea.


The last thing I want to see is a crying pax on the news.


----------



## observer

SHalester said:


> of course, but it would nullify AB5 at the same exact time. Stalemate.
> 
> Uber/Lyft will shut down. Logistics point to that. The onboarding alone would take weeks/months. Plus U/L know the pax will cry to the heavens, since until then they have not been effected. Pissing off voters right before Nov, not a good idea.
> 
> Yes, calif is Uber's biggest market. It certainly will hurt a great deal, but they will have NO choice. Circle back to onboarding logistics.
> 
> Didi? More like tryp, but both equally effected.


Three months of no income at ALL.

No Uber, no Ubereats, no nothing.

All on the hope of having a bill passed that would be immediately challenged.

That's a pretty big bet.

Investors should be worried, very worried.


----------



## SHalester

observer said:


> Investors should be worried, very worried.


any investor that has RS stocks enjoys risk. Just saying.


----------



## JimKE

Cdub2k said:


> Now looking at the data I see that the minimum wage in Cali is $12 an hour. And since the average cost per mile has been established at $0.57 by the IRS I'm assuming your base gross pay will be $12 an hour + .57 a mile. And you keep all tips. If this pay scale is true I consider that a fair deal.


What makes you think Uber would pay minimum wage *+ $0.57/mile???*

They would pay minimum wage, period. You get to _DEDUCT the $0.57 per mile from your taxes_ as compensation for driving your own car. Uber is certainly not going to pay minimum wage plus time or mileage!


----------



## #professoruber

Craigslist and FB marketplace are going to be busy.


----------



## Cdub2k

JimKE said:


> What makes you think Uber would pay minimum wage *+ $0.57/mile???*
> 
> They would pay minimum wage, period. You get to _DEDUCT the $0.57 per mile from your taxes_ as compensation for driving your own car. Uber is certainly not going to pay minimum wage plus time or mileage!


Well yeah if they had their way that's how they'd do it. I'm assuming that the state of California isn't trying to turn the entire fleet of Uber/Lyft drivers into $12 an hour slave workers because that would actually be a horrible thing. I'm assuming that the state of California will factor costs per mile into the baseline salary. This is just my optimistic speculation.


----------



## doyousensehumor

JimKE said:


> What makes you think Uber would pay minimum wage *+ $0.57/mile???*
> 
> They would pay minimum wage, period. You get to _DEDUCT the $0.57 per mile from your taxes_ as compensation for driving your own car. Uber is certainly not going to pay minimum wage plus time or mileage!


I'm not sure about that isn't there some wording in that says drivers expences?

At minimum I suppose they would do a similar structure to Domino's and Pizza Hut drivers. When I did pizza delivery it was a dollar or two per run, which wasn't the IRS deduction write-off or cover Commercial Insurance.


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect

Neither Uber nor the State of CA. gives a F... about the drivers. It is all about how much blood can the State suck out of Uber. And the drivers.


----------



## W00dbutcher

JimKE said:


> I actually don't think they have any choice.
> 
> The Uber/Lyft business model simply does not work if drivers are employees. Neither company is making profits NOW with independent contractor drivers, and paying very low rates.


And........ this is WHY TAXI Rates are where they are at. The rideshare rates was just for the company to make money, but the actual people doing the work we're losing out. Taxi rates are for both the company and the people doing the work to make money.

If you never drove a taxi you probably do not understand this.


----------



## doyousensehumor

Amsoil Uber Connect said:


> The last thing I want to see is a crying pax on the news.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

Ok, i have to admit this might work, especially if all the "no on prop 22" stuff comes back as "bring back uber and lyft after they forced us to shut down"

People will vote for prop 22 if that's the case.

However this DOES open a huge door.

Look at what happened in Austin, ridesharing companies popped up that actually paid their drivers well.

Imagine that but in a large market,


----------



## dnlbaboof

basically 80% of part time drivers will be fired, no more mileage deduction so lose obamacare and pay more taxes( now you know what this is about) get ready to fight for shifts to give rides to 4.1 pool riders. Ab5 has already cost thousands of jobs in CA, from musicians to journalists now in the middle of a depression they want to cut another 100k jobs right when pua ends!!!!! Everyone will leave CA, its 100% fascist police state.


----------



## Trafficat

observer said:


> Three months of no income at ALL.
> 
> No Uber, no Ubereats, no nothing.
> 
> All on the hope of having a bill passed that would be immediately challenged.
> 
> That's a pretty big bet.
> 
> Investors should be worried, very worried.


Uber will only need to shut down operations in California, but Uber exists all over the world. I'm sure California is a huge market for Uber, but Uber will still exist even if they have no California operations.


----------



## Transportador

observer said:


> Even if prop 22 passes, it will be immediately challenged in the courts.
> 
> Passage isn't assured.
> 
> Uber won't shut down for any length of time. They may do it for a week or two like they did in Arizona but they will be back, like they did in Arizona.
> 
> Uber can only bleed so much, they don't have any blood to spare. It would cost them millions of dollars a day.
> 
> This would be the perfect time for Didi to step in and open up their TNC the right way.


Oh yeah, Didi is already in South America. They operate in TJ. Can't wait for them to start in SD.


----------



## Cdub2k

Trafficat said:


> Uber will only need to shut down operations in California, but Uber exists all over the world. I'm sure California is a huge market for Uber, but Uber will still exist even if they have no California operations.


Eventually other states will follow in Cali's footsteps. Cali is just the beginning of Uber's headaches.


----------



## observer

JimKE said:


> What makes you think Uber would pay minimum wage *+ $0.57/mile???*
> 
> They would pay minimum wage, period. You get to _DEDUCT the $0.57 per mile from your taxes_ as compensation for driving your own car. Uber is certainly not going to pay minimum wage plus time or mileage!


They can't.

In California, employers must pay minimum wage PLUS all expenses and tips.



Transportador said:


> Oh yeah, Didi is already in South America. They operate in TJ. Can't wait for them to start in SD.


Didi set up offices in SF over a year ago.

T


Trafficat said:


> Uber will only need to shut down operations in California, but Uber exists all over the world. I'm sure California is a huge market for Uber, but Uber will still exist even if they have no California operations.


They won't shut down, it's just a bluff.

Governments everywhere are waking up.


----------



## Trafficat

Cdub2k said:


> Eventually other states will follow in Cali's footsteps. Cali is just the beginning of Uber's headaches.


One can always hope the marxist scourge will not spread, but it does seem that the "eat the wealthy" ideology is widespread among today's youth.


----------



## Ylinks

dnlbaboof said:


> basically 80% of part time drivers will be fired,


Actually, Uber's incentive is get eliminate all Full Time drivers


----------



## observer

JimKE said:


> What makes you think Uber would pay minimum wage *+ $0.57/mile???*
> 
> They would pay minimum wage, period. You get to _DEDUCT the $0.57 per mile from your taxes_ as compensation for driving your own car. Uber is certainly not going to pay minimum wage plus time or mileage!


I believe Trump changed that to where employees can no longer deduct miles on their federal taxes but, in California the employer must pay all business expenses free and clear of minimum wage.

Gas, insurance, tires, oil changes, car washes, mechanical repairs etc...



Ylinks said:


> Actually, Uber's incentive is get eliminate all Full Time drivers


Their goal is to get rid of ALL drivers.


----------



## Ylinks

Cdub2k said:


> Eventually other states will follow in Cali's footsteps. Cali is just the beginning of Uber's headaches.


That's assuming PAX don't vote.


----------



## JimKE

dnlbaboof said:


> no more mileage deduction so lose obamacare and pay more taxes


That statement is incorrect.

The mileage deduction applies if you use your personal vehicle for business purposes; it has nothing to do with how you are paid, or what the nature of your employment relationship is. Drivers would still have the ability to deduct that cost, which would eliminate any justification for requiring Uber to pay a mileage amount.



Ylinks said:


> Actually, Uber's incentive is get eliminate all Full Time drivers


Exactly! Minimum wage requirements apply to employees who work more than a prescribed number of hours. Why do you think there are so many kids working at McDonalds? Because they only will hire people for 20 hours a week or so...to avoid having to pay minimum wage.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

It’s funny nobody is mentioning that we have a possible presidential change coming at the same time the prop 22 is running.

Big Boy Bunker Biden’s Vegas odds are at 60+ %, with Orange NY Man at 40%.

All this talk of leaving CA could turn into talking about leaving State Side all together.

Biden already claimed he will make AB5 Federal.

So if he wins prop 22 will have no value if it wins.

So over 50% odds federal ABC contractor test trumps prop 22. Leaving CA turns into Leaving USA.

Germany don’t wanem, UK don’t wanem, most major markets don’t wanem outside USA.

This could be the end of this type of ride share. Drivers can sign onto a taxi app and get licenses as a Cab at least.
Most cities don’t charge for medallion, just licensing fees.

I’m sorry guys!


----------



## observer

JimKE said:


> That statement is incorrect.
> 
> The mileage deduction applies if you use your personal vehicle for business purposes; it has nothing to do with how you are paid, or what the nature of your employment relationship is. Drivers would still have the ability to deduct that cost, which would eliminate any justification for requiring Uber to pay a mileage amount.
> 
> 
> Exactly! Minimum wage requirements apply to employees who work more than a prescribed number of hours. Why do you think there are so many kids working at McDonalds? Because they only will hire people for 20 hours a week or so...to avoid having to pay minimum wage.


https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/heres-the-411-on-who-can-deduct-car-expenses-on-their-tax-returns


----------



## Transportador

Regarding Didi, I worry that Trump will ban it along with Tik Tok, LOL.


----------



## tohunt4me

SHalester said:


> of course, but it would nullify AB5 at the same exact time. Stalemate.
> 
> Uber/Lyft will shut down. Logistics point to that. The onboarding alone would take weeks/months. Plus U/L know the pax will cry to the heavens, since until then they have not been effected. Pissing off voters right before Nov, not a good idea.
> 
> Yes, calif is Uber's biggest market. It certainly will hurt a great deal, but they will have NO choice. Circle back to onboarding logistics.
> 
> Didi? More like tryp, but both equally effected.


DiDi
More Communist Chineese Crap in AMERICA !


----------



## Ylinks

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> This could be the end of this type of ride share.


It's hard to overstate how much the cheap transportation Uber has provided has done for people working their way out of poverty. If Uber shuts down it will cause a lot of disruption. AB5 is just another law which will end up hurting the people who it is supposed to help.


----------



## observer

observer said:


> They can't.
> 
> In California, employers must pay minimum wage PLUS all expenses and tips.
> 
> 
> Didi set up offices in SF over a year ago.
> 
> T
> 
> They won't shut down, it's just a bluff.
> 
> Governments everywhere are waking up.


Three years.

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20171114006230/en/DiDi-Labs-Opens-New-Campus-Mountain-View


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect

Ylinks said:


> people working their way out of poverty.


? Yet there monthly uber bill is a car payment. Course not having to find / pay for parking helps.


----------



## Ylinks

Amsoil Uber Connect said:


> ? Yet there monthly uber bill is a car payment. Course not having to find / pay for parking helps.


No Credit


----------



## joebo1963

I can see Uber shutting down... especially right before the vote in California It reminds me of Ubers strategy here in South Florida back in the early days of RS: any time government didn't approve what Uber wanted Uber would shut down all or partial service like in the airports and use the public RS riders to pressure the lawmakers....so I believe Uber's tactic is too pit the riders against the drivers and ask the many riders to support Ubers position or else there is no ride for them to take.... simply put....


----------



## Mista T

Cdub2k said:


> Now looking at the data I see that the minimum wage in Cali is $12 an hour. And since the average cost per mile has been established at $0.57 by the IRS I'm assuming your base gross pay will be $12 an hour + .57 a mile. And you keep all tips. If this pay scale is true I consider that a fair deal.


I drive pizza, as an employee, and they pay min + 30 cents per mile. Unless CA is different, Uber don't have to pay at the IRS mileage rate.



observer said:


> Uber can only bleed so much, they don't have any blood to spare.


Yet they invest in plenty of money losing things ..... Maybe they do have money to burn after all?


----------



## Eddyles

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


very very sad not good i made a video about this i feel bad


----------



## Mista T

JimKE said:


> What makes you think Uber would pay minimum wage *+ $0.57/mile???*
> 
> They would pay minimum wage, period. You get to _DEDUCT the $0.57 per mile from your taxes_ as compensation for driving your own car. Uber is certainly not going to pay minimum wage plus time or mileage!


No, you don't.

This is directly from the IRS website:

*Employees*

Employees who use their car for work can no longer take an employee business expense deduction as part of their miscellaneous itemized deductions reported on Schedule A. Employees can't deduct this cost even if their employer doesn't reimburse the employee for using their own car. This is for tax years after December 2017. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act suspended miscellaneous itemized deductions subject to the 2% floor.

However, certain taxpayers may still deduct unreimbursed employee travel expenses, this includes Armed Forces reservists, qualified performing artists, and fee-basis state or local government officials.


----------



## JimKE

Mista T said:


> No, you don't.
> 
> This is directly from the IRS website:
> 
> *Employees*
> 
> Employees who use their car for work can no longer take an employee business expense deduction as part of their miscellaneous itemized deductions reported on Schedule A. Employees can't deduct this cost even if their employer doesn't reimburse the employee for using their own car. This is for tax years after December 2017. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act suspended miscellaneous itemized deductions subject to the 2% floor.
> 
> However, certain taxpayers may still deduct unreimbursed employee travel expenses, this includes Armed Forces reservists, qualified performing artists, and fee-basis state or local government officials.


I've always deducted vehicle expenses on Schedule C as an independent contractor, but I guess if we were employees we wouldn't qualify.


----------



## 58756

That's when clones will hit.


----------



## 197438

SHalester said:


> Well, technically you are splitting hairs. If (when) Prop 22 passes all RS is excluded from AB5 coverage.
> 
> Yeh, I don't buy U/L are technology companies. W/out drivers they are nothing.
> 
> Trust me, if the appeal fails U/L and others will cease operating in Calif for some period of time.


So, all AirBnB hosts are actually employees of a hotel company? Are resellers on Amazon and EBay and Etsy to now be considered employees?


----------



## touberornottouber

Cdub2k said:


> I thought Uber's response to AB5 was outstanding. Allowing their Independent Contractor Drivers to set their own rates via Set your own surge as well as providing all of the rides details of the ride before the Driver accepted the ride checked off all the checkboxes I thought what being an Independent Contractor Driver should look like. Apparently it was *not *enough and now they are being forced to classify drivers as Employees. So when Uber shuts down their operations and reopen it back up in November you can pretty much bet that the "Set your own surge" benefit will go away and be a footnote in the history books. As well as knowing all of the trip details. Also, now that you are an employee they will probably start strictly enforcing Acceptance % Rate rules considering they'll be paying people on a $ per hour basis. Instant pay might go away as well and things might resemble a regular job where you get paid Bi-Weekly via direct Deposit.
> 
> Now looking at the data I see that the minimum wage in Cali is $12 an hour. And since the average cost per mile has been established at $0.57 by the IRS I'm assuming your base gross pay will be $12 an hour + .57 a mile. And you keep all tips. If this pay scale is true I consider that a fair deal.
> 
> Some of that is speculation but it seems reasonable. What do you guys think? I also think Uber will have to start limiting the amount of Drivers they allow on the platform at times which might require them to create a "Schedule your block" function similar to DoorDash, Waitr, and other gig apps.


Yeah but the second the threat to make drivers employees went away they would have got rid of all of that freedom for the driver. Just like how they aren't allowing drivers from other states to set their own rates or see where the trip is going.


----------



## observer

Mista T said:


> I drive pizza, as an employee, and they pay min + 30 cents per mile. Unless CA is different, Uber don't have to pay at the IRS mileage rate.
> 
> Yet they invest in plenty of money losing things ..... Maybe they do have money to burn after all?


That is true. Uber doesn't have to pay the .57 per mile rate.

They can pay .30 or .10 but it must cover the business expenses.

As the employer, it's up to Uber to keep track of all business expenses for each driver and pay those expenses.


----------



## Cdub2k

Mista T said:


> I drive pizza, as an employee, and they pay min + 30 cents per mile. Unless CA is different, Uber don't have to pay at the IRS mileage rate.
> 
> Yet they invest in plenty of money losing things ..... Maybe they do have money to burn after all?


$12 an hour + 30 cents a mile +"tips in the app" doesn't seem like a good deal to me. Especially when you consider how Uber will more than likely munch 100% of the surge and not give their employees any of it. Then, if you also consider Uber won't allow anybody to go over 40 hours a week because they'd be forced to pay overtime everybody's pay is pretty much capped.

This doesn't feel like a good deal for the Home Team.


----------



## observer

Cdub2k said:


> I thought Uber's response to AB5 was outstanding. Allowing their Independent Contractor Drivers to set their own rates via Set your own surge as well as providing all of the rides details of the ride before the Driver accepted the ride checked off all the checkboxes I thought what being an Independent Contractor Driver should look like. Apparently it was *not *enough and now they are being forced to classify drivers as Employees. So when Uber shuts down their operations and reopen it back up in November you can pretty much bet that the "Set your own surge" benefit will go away and be a footnote in the history books. As well as knowing all of the trip details. Also, now that you are an employee they will probably start strictly enforcing Acceptance % Rate rules considering they'll be paying people on a $ per hour basis. Instant pay might go away as well and things might resemble a regular job where you get paid Bi-Weekly via direct Deposit.
> 
> Now looking at the data I see that the minimum wage in Cali is $12 an hour. And since the average cost per mile has been established at $0.57 by the IRS I'm assuming your base gross pay will be $12 an hour + .57 a mile. And you keep all tips. If this pay scale is true I consider that a fair deal.
> 
> Some of that is speculation but it seems reasonable. What do you guys think? I also think Uber will have to start limiting the amount of Drivers they allow on the platform at times which might require them to create a "Schedule your block" function similar to DoorDash, Waitr, and other gig apps.


Minimum wage in California is 12 bux an hour for businesses with less than 25 employees.

Uber would be paying 13 bux an hour.

In January it goes up to 14 an hour.

Next January it goes up to 15 an hour.

Wages should be going UP, not down. Uber forces them down.


----------



## 1.5xorbust

Damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Dara is in a nasty Catch 22 situation.


----------



## Uberdriver2710

Doodoodash is always looking for drivers.


----------



## Mkang14

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*


Oh dear god &#128546;


----------



## Don'tchasethesurge

stuipid dará called bluff and didn’t do anything useful... no one to blame but themselves


----------



## LoLo SF

SHalester said:


> Of course. The mere logistics of making any amount of drivers employees would be an employee onboarding disaster. No way it could be done overnight. Cal is their largest market with most active drivers. And why not drag out the clock on Until Nov to see what happens with Prop 22, which if passed all AB5 goes away.
> 
> Plus no RS would stick it to the pax in a way that will cause them to start putting pressure on politicians who caused this. Should be fun the next 7-8 days.


They've had months to prepare for this.


----------



## observer

LoLo SF said:


> They've had months to prepare for this.


They have prepared.

It's just a bluff.


----------



## mbd

I don’t think the State and Uber can afford to have a shut down . It’s essential business. People need to go to work , need rides to and from the airports and what about hospitals ?. State does not have the resources to move people in a emergency. They will use delaying tactics and decide later. :thumbup: Remember, it’s Covid season...good luck finding drivers.
Pax does not want a non Uber driver , with no background check and get assaulted. Background checks takes too long due to Mr. Covid.


----------



## Mole

Welcome to the new ride share called Mole we are fully operational and only cost 13% more then dysfunctional Uber.

just raise the prices Uber or be replaced.


----------



## driverdoug

I’d be handing out my phone number to all my pax these next ten days.


----------



## mbd

What happens when the first alleged assault happens ? Or the first accident ? :thumbup:


----------



## Anonymousdude

Amsoil Uber Connect said:


> Neither Uber nor the State of CA. gives a F... about the drivers. It is all about how much blood can the State suck out of Uber. And the drivers.


It doesn't matter. If the end result is better conditions and higher consistent pay for drivers who cares if California makes money off of it too. Damn just worry about yourself.


----------



## The Gift of Fish

Cdub2k said:


> Apparently it was *not *enough and now they are being forced to classify drivers as Employees.


Yes, Uber did make a lot of changes, however they were never going to be enough. One of the criteria for having ICs is that the work performed by them must be outside the normal line of business of the hiring company. The judge said in his summing up that there was no doubt that Uber is a transportation provider, and that drivers also fall under the category of transportation provider. The _only_ way Uber could have avoided this injunction being granted is if it suddenly became a software company, which it did not do.



JimKE said:


> I actually don't think they have any choice.
> 
> The Uber/Lyft business model simply does not work if drivers are employees. Neither company is making profits NOW with independent contractor drivers, and paying very low rates.


Absolutely. Uber loses billions with drivers as ICs, subsidising rides for Uber by the provision of cut-rate labour _and_ paying for vehicle expenses. With drivers as employees the cash burn rate simply increases.



observer said:


> Three months of no income at ALL.
> 
> No Uber, no Ubereats, no nothing.
> 
> All on the hope of having a bill passed that would be immediately challenged.
> 
> That's a pretty big bet.
> 
> Investors should be worried, very worried.


I think it's very unlikely that either will suspend operations in California and hand the rideshare market of the seventh largest economy in the world to whoever would like to take it. Even if Dara runs at a(n even bigger) loss with drivers as employees, he will have to do that to keep competitors out.



JimKE said:


> What makes you think Uber would pay minimum wage *+ $0.57/mile???*


The law. California Labor Code § 2802 ("Section 2802") requires employers to reimburse California employees for "_all necessary business expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his or her duties._" 


> Uber is certainly not going to pay minimum wage plus time or mileage!


They would have no choice! They would have to pay mileage for all miles driven while on shift. That's why they are so terrified of AB5!


----------



## observer

The Gift of Fish said:


> Yes, Uber did make a lot of changes, however they were never going to be enough. One of the criteria for having ICs is that the work performed by them must be outside the normal line of business of the hiring company. The judge said in his summing up that there was no doubt that Uber is a transportation provider, and that drivers also fall under the category of transportation provider. The _only_ way Uber could have avoided this injunction being granted is if it suddenly became a software company, which it did not do.
> 
> 
> Absolutely. Uber loses billions with drivers as ICs, subsidising rides for Uber by the provision of cut-rate labour _and_ paying for vehicle expenses. With drivers as employees the cash burn rate simply increases.
> 
> I think it's very unlikely that either will suspend operations in California and hand the rideshare market of the seventh largest economy in the world to whoever would like to take it. Even if Dara runs at a(n even bigger) loss with drivers as employees, he will have to do that to keep competitors out.
> 
> 
> The law. California Labor Code § 2802 ("Section 2802") requires employers to reimburse California employees for "_all necessary business expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his or her duties._"
> They would have no choice! They would have to pay mileage for all miles driven while on shift. That's why they are so terrified of AB5!


The biggest problem with Ubers changes is,

They are not laws and Uber will change them "because they can".


----------



## The Gift of Fish

observer said:


> The biggest problem with Ubers changes is,
> 
> They are not laws and Uber will change them "because they can".


Although AB5 will cause some problems for drivers, I find it very pleasing to see both Uber and Lyft finally get what they deserve.


----------



## IRME4EVER

EastBayRides said:


> With pax complaining about the price of rides this week, they deserve to find no rides available next week. After all, they voted for the fools in the Legislature who always have gifts to offer the unions under the guise of being for the workers. Let pax return to the days of six cabs for the entire city and 45 minute wait times.


Scumbags want cheap rides and expect limousine service. Let them suffer!!!! Especially when they don't tip!!!


----------



## JimKE

And now Lyft says they ALSO will suspend California operations:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/12/lyf...ay-have-to-suspend-service-in-california.html


----------



## Wildgoose

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


When one goes, another one will come and fill the spot. 
I bet this is just a threat. He won't do it.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

Guys i don't think this is a threat,

I truly beleive that uber doesn't have it in them to figure out how to do this. They don't have the Human resources necessary to set everything up. Then they are going to have to make changes to the app. (Specific to california)

Then they have to reconfigure the app to function they way they would need to in order to have employees.

I think this is what is going to happen,

They are going to leave.


Hopefully a replacement or 3 pops up between now and November that actually treats drivers like employees, because uber has no reason to. And it looks like California has had it with the gig economy. For those of you who depend on it?

Sucks, but the state warned you almost a year ago.

Getting burned driving for uber?

Who saw that coming? They've never screwed anyone over in their entire existence.


Either that or you can get for-hire insurance and slap a sign on your roof and drum up business.

Charge what uber was charging the customers and half as many rides would get you the same money in less miles driven.


And to call uber drivers independent contractors is a bunch of horse shit,

if an uber driver handed out his card and picked up a customer off App? That's a crime in Florida, That's a second degree misdemeanor if they don't have a whole bunch of other things above and beyond what's required to do uber.



The anti-prop 22 guys are going to have tons of ammunition to throw at them over this, and frankly Uber/lyft shutting down over this?


"Uber, lyft, you need to start treeting your 100s of thousands of drivers as employees"


"NO... WERE LEAVING CALIFORNIA! THIS ISN'T RIGHT! You are WRONG and WE ARE RIGHT!"


I don't see this going how uber and lyft want it to go.


It wouldn't surprise me if there wasn't a corporation or entrepreneur ready to step in with a better option who is willing to play ball with California.


----------



## SHalester

LoLo SF said:


> They've had months to prepare for this.


maybe, maybe not. This assumes they are working on any of the changes....in advance...with the layoffs at Uber, I really doubt it. The massive amount of just app changes, not to mention their HR internal systems. Epic sized project from the logistics point of view. Manpower intensive.....



EastBayRides said:


> So, all AirBnB hosts are actually employees of a hotel company? Are resellers on Amazon and EBay and Etsy to now be considered employees?


are they named in the latest ruling? I asked my masters at HopSkipDrive and they say they are not named, so are not worried. Not sure that is the right answer. **** it as an AB5 ruling and AB5 all about ICs of any ilk. Well, I think there were a few exceptions, can't quote them tho wo looking.


----------



## Wildgoose

Arguments in Support vs Arguments in Opposition of 09/10/19- Assembly Floor Analysis

Arguments in Support:
The California Labor Federation, sponsor of this bill, states that "unfairly labeling certain workers 'independent contractors' not only means those workers get no minimum wage or overtime, but it also means all the risk is shifted from a company to an individual. He or she must purchase and maintain a vehicle, pay for transportation expenses, and provide their own tools and supplies. *They are not entitled to a safe workplace or protected from discrimination. That worker has no access to unemployment when the job ends, no workers' compensation if injured on the job, and no right to organize to improve conditions*."

Arguments in Opposition:
The Southwest California Legislative Council, is opposed and states, "the rise of independent contractors has served to ignite large portions of the California economy, encourage entrepreneurship, and provide income for an estimated 4 million workers. Many of our members are local entrepreneurs who contract their services out to a variety of businesses, enabling them to benefit from multiple income streams."

*So I guess that Uber and Lyft suppose to pay employee benefit to RS drivers. And need to create overtime payment (pay more fares rate) environment when driving time is over 8 hours or 40 hours for a week. Drivers can enjoy EDD when they get deactivated. *
_*That sounds good to me. *
I don't think it is hard to pay benefit to Uber/Lyft drivers. Uber CEO and his team just need to take a little less salary by doing this. Why is it so hard for them?_


----------



## jocker12

June132017 said:


> Lyft is drooling on this news : D


No, they don't.

"President and co-founder of Lyft, John Zimmer, said on an earnings call Wednesday that the company may need to suspend its ride-hailing operations in California starting on August 21 if a court does not overturn its recent ruling which requires the company (and competitor Uber) to classify drivers as employees eligible for benefits, not independent contractors."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/finance/c...points-to-uptick-in-rides-in-july/ar-BB17STBY


----------



## Andrew Philip

So if you’re a part time driver like many Uber and Lyft drivers are ... too bad? They’re going to make Uber a full time only thing ? Schedules for their drivers? This is going to be devastating for part time drivers , and if you’re full time driver, you will be told when to work. Both situations are shit.


----------



## observer

Wildgoose said:


> Arguments in Support vs Arguments in Opposition of 09/10/19- Assembly Floor Analysis
> 
> Arguments in Support:
> The California Labor Federation, sponsor of this bill, states that "unfairly labeling certain workers 'independent contractors' not only means those workers get no minimum wage or overtime, but it also means all the risk is shifted from a company to an individual. He or she must purchase and maintain a vehicle, pay for transportation expenses, and provide their own tools and supplies. *They are not entitled to a safe workplace or protected from discrimination. That worker has no access to unemployment when the job ends, no workers' compensation if injured on the job, and no right to organize to improve conditions*."
> 
> Arguments in Opposition:
> The Southwest California Legislative Council, is opposed and states, "the rise of independent contractors has served to ignite large portions of the California economy, encourage entrepreneurship, and provide income for an estimated 4 million workers. Many of our members are local entrepreneurs who contract their services out to a variety of businesses, enabling them to benefit from multiple income streams."
> 
> *So I guess that Uber and Lyft suppose to pay employee benefit to RS drivers. And need to create overtime payment (pay more fares rate) environment when driving time is over 8 hours or 40 hours for a week. Drivers can enjoy EDD when they get deactivated. *
> _*That sounds good to me. *
> I don't think it is hard to pay benefit to Uber/Lyft drivers. Uber CEO and his team just need to take a little less salary by doing this. Why is it so hard for them?_


If Dara didn't plan ahead investors will be calling for his head.

A good leader looks in to the future and anticipates different outcomes.

As CEO he knew this was coming and should have planned accordingly. There is no excuse for him to claim they aren't ready.

If they aren't ready, he needs to be fired.


----------



## June132017

The stock should be down $10/share from this. Uber stock is going to get crushed from this!


----------



## Wildgoose

Andrew Philip said:


> So if you're a part time driver like many Uber and Lyft drivers are ... too bad? They're going to make Uber a full time only thing ? Schedules for their drivers? This is going to be devastating for part time drivers , and if you're full time driver, you will be told when to work. Both situations are shit.


Every one is thinking to depict Drivers as employees in the figure of driving with time schedule. And they don't like that way. 
There is a another escape option that Driver could be classified as fulltime when his driving hours is more than 40 hours a week and part time if otherwise. There is no need to work with time schedule, It should be flexible. A driver could start his shift when he is ready to go out. Something like that. Uber/Lyft need to pay benefits to some drivers who are fulltime drivers for certain years.
Why is so hard about that?


----------



## Breezze

Transportador said:


> Regarding Didi, I worry that Trump will ban it along with Tik Tok, *and We Chat* LOL.


Fixed it for you.


----------



## observer

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sf...orney-seeks-to-force-DoorDash-to-15479846.php


----------



## Cil

Uber


----------



## Mole

If I am a real IC then I should be able to decide if I want to carry a firearm or other type of protection against violent pax's



June132017 said:


> The stock should be down $10/share from this. Uber stock is going to get crushed from this!


Get rid of all the costly Ca drivers save the company from losses and the stock goes up.


----------



## LoLo SF

SHalester said:


> maybe, maybe not. This assumes they are working on any of the changes....in advance...with the layoffs at Uber, I really doubt it. The massive amount of just app changes, not to mention their HR internal systems. Epic sized project from the logistics point of view. Manpower intensive.....
> 
> 
> are they named in the latest ruling? I asked my masters at HopSkipDrive and they say they are not named, so are not worried. Not sure that is the right answer. thought it as an AB5 ruling and AB5 all about ICs of any ilk. Well, I think there were a few exceptions, can't quote them tho wo looking.


They have always known the time would come when their intentional misclassification of drivers would end. They have wasted so much time, money and energy bucking the system, when they could have put these resources to better use. Their arrogance will bring them down.


----------



## Fusion_LUser

Cdub2k said:


> Now looking at the data I see that the minimum wage in Cali is $12 an hour. And since the average cost per mile has been established at $0.57 by the IRS I'm assuming your base gross pay will be $12 an hour + .57 a mile. And you keep all tips. If this pay scale is true I consider that a fair deal.


$12 an hour and .57 a mile is not an acceptable amount to drive and for most drivers that is a *huge* pay cut. Uber and Lyft would love this because it screws the ant far more they they ever dared to screw them before AB5!


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

SHalester said:


> maybe, maybe not. This assumes they are working on any of the changes....in advance...with the layoffs at Uber, I really doubt it. The massive amount of just app changes, not to mention their HR internal systems. Epic sized project from the logistics point of view. Manpower intensive.....
> 
> 
> are they named in the latest ruling? I asked my masters at HopSkipDrive and they say they are not named, so are not worried. Not sure that is the right answer. thought it as an AB5 ruling and AB5 all about ICs of any ilk. Well, I think there were a few exceptions, can't quote them tho wo looking.


They've known they lost this since 2018 when the dynamax decision was met,

APRIL 18TH 2018!...

THIS is when uber lost,

They've just been _fighting it_ ever since.

Uber/lyft undeniably fail 2/3 parts of the ABC test that the employees must pass ALL OF.

They kept fighting this and fighting this and fighting this oh so so long.

but april 18th, 2018 is when the dynamax decision was reached on the ABC test,

Uber/lyft and doordash et all should have been putting something together to comply FOR the LAST TWO YEARS!.

And now these hucksters are going to blame the state of California for them leaving in a hissy fit because they didn't get their way.

But i'm golden,

I'm sitting back with the popcorn watching this unfold with a short position on Both uber and lyft stock.


----------



## Fusion_LUser

Mole said:


> Welcome to the new ride share called Mole we are fully operational and only cost 13% more then dysfunctional Uber.
> 
> just raise the prices Uber or be replaced.


Fusion Ride Share plans to fully copy Mole and charge a 23% more while keeping the actual fares paid by pax from the ants and pretending its better than Mole to win the perception battle.


----------



## goneubering

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


Ten days to turn drivers at Uber and Lyft into employees is absurd. I would guess it's logistically impossible.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

goneubering said:


> Ten days to turn drivers at Uber and Lyft into employees is absurd. I would guess it's logistically impossible.


They should have started in September when the law was signed in I guess?


----------



## MikhailCA

Andrew Philip said:


> So if you're a part time driver like many Uber and Lyft drivers are ... too bad? They're going to make Uber a full time only thing ? Schedules for their drivers? This is going to be devastating for part time drivers , and if you're full time driver, you will be told when to work. Both situations are shit.


You will be told when to work and no more than 8hours, the end of the story.
The problem is they are taking out the source of income for a lot of people in the middle of pandemic with biggest unemployment rate in the history cuz Uber/Lyft will actually shutdown in California cuz they cannot afford this dems shit.


----------



## SleelWheels

Ya’ll wanted to be employees well you got it.


----------



## _Tron_

Yippee. No more dead miles.

Take as long as you want to pick up a fare.

Take as long as you want to reach the destination.

Park your car in the lowest traffic spot in the city. I know a place in my locale where you NEVER get pings. My house.

No more shuffling passengers. Hide out while online and shuffle UBER.

Make at least minimum wage while you write your memoirs.

Uber fires you for not being a good ant. No, they won't. Because you are an employee, with rights, and you can sue for wrongful termination. You are not in charge of finding pax who need a ride. You just drive the car.


----------



## MikhailCA

_Tron_ said:


> Uber fires you for not being a good ant. No, they won't. Because you are an employee, with rights, and you can sue for wrongful termination.


Actually there's no need to fire someone if you are not going to get hired. Wrongful termination? Do you know that does the term "at will employment" mean?
I will let you you, we decide to fire you cuz we decide to fire you, no explanation.


----------



## The Gift of Fish

goneubering said:


> Ten days to turn drivers at Uber and Lyft into employees is absurd. I would guess it's logistically impossible.


As the judge said, though, AB5 was passed in September of last year. Uberlyft has had nearly one year to implement the changes necessary to onboard drivers as employees and to get all of their operational systems for drivers as employees in place. If they unwisely chose not to do so, even as a contingency measure in case their disobeying of AB5 did not work, then that's on them.



_Tron_ said:


> Yippee. No more dead miles.
> 
> Take as long as you want to pick up a fare.
> 
> Take as long as you want to reach the destination.
> 
> Park your car in the lowest traffic spot in the city. I know a place in my locale where you NEVER get pings. My house.
> 
> No more shuffling passengers. Hide out while online and shuffle UBER.
> 
> Make at least minimum wage while you write your memoirs.
> 
> Uber fires you for not being a good ant. No, they won't. Because you are an employee, with rights, and you can sue for wrongful termination. You are not in charge of finding pax who need a ride. You just drive the car.


Lots of good things here. As you say, no more dead miles, and also no more dead time. As a pseudo IC I earned 31 cents per minute when pax were in the car; as an employee I will earn 25 cents per minute, every minute I am on shift. And the mileage compensation of 57.5 cents per mile for every mile will be great - much better than 72 cents per mile only when pax are in the car.

Of course, we will lose surge, but for the last year or so Uber had killed surge anyway, so no real loss there. We're also likely to lose most if not all of the incentives. But again, those have been whittled away over the past 12 - 24 months so no great loss.

Overall, the pay will be about the same as before or higher, but much more consistent.

Uber will have performance metrics in place, though. It won't be possible to dilly-dally too much on the way to pick up pax, for the risk of being fired. Also, since Uber will control where we go even with no pax in the car, I think we can be expect to be routed when the car is empty to the hot zones. No big deal, though, I'll be paid 57.5 cents per mile plus 25 cents per minute to do it.


----------



## 197438

MikhailCA said:


> You will be told when to work and no more than 8hours, the end of the story.
> The problem is they are taking out the source of income for a lot of people in the middle of pandemic with biggest unemployment rate in the history cuz Uber/Lyft will actually shutdown in California cuz they cannot afford this dems shit.


Even if you are hired (few current drivers will be hired), you will never be full time because that drives up the cost of benefits. Drivers need to find another income source. The Legislature is not concerned with your plight. You are a tool for the unions and their lackies in the Democratic Party. Time to leave California.


----------



## The Gift of Fish

EastBayRides said:


> Even if you are hired (few current drivers will be hired), you will never be full time because that drives up the cost of benefits. Drivers need to find another income source. The Legislature is not concerned with your plight. You are a tool for the unions and their lackies in the Democratic Party. Time to leave California.


I can't see any point in crying about this. Anyone with any sense knew (as I did in 2014 when it was still an illegal taxi service) that nothing in this rideshare gig was guaranteed. We knew it could end at any time for any of us (or all of us) for any reason, or for no reason. As I and lots of others have said on here, it should never have been thought of as a job.

It is now, finally, becoming a job thanks to AB5, however the last throes of pseudo IC will claim a few more victims yet.


----------



## MikhailCA

EastBayRides said:


> Even if you are hired (few current drivers will be hired), you will never be full time because that drives up the cost of benefits. Drivers need to find another income source. The Legislature is not concerned with your plight. You are a tool for the unions and their lackies in the Democratic Party. Time to leave California.


Yes for sure, I'm just don't really understand the happiness of some people on this board about AB5.
Looks like they don't even drive(what are they doing here not quite sure) or stupid enough to believe what if AB5 will pass they gonna benefits from it.


----------



## Lee239

I don't care Dara, go ahead and Lyft will own California and then own you.


----------



## njn

dara knew this was coming. he was waiting for an excuse to shut down in the most business unfriendly state. there's a reason why they are moving to tx.


----------



## FormerTaxiDriver♧

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


Good stinking BYE!


----------



## Invisible

_Tron_ said:


> Yippee. No more dead miles.
> 
> Take as long as you want to pick up a fare.
> 
> Take as long as you want to reach the destination.
> 
> Park your car in the lowest traffic spot in the city. I know a place in my locale where you NEVER get pings. My house.
> 
> No more shuffling passengers. Hide out while online and shuffle UBER.
> 
> Make at least minimum wage while you write your memoirs.
> 
> Uber fires you for not being a good ant. No, they won't. Because you are an employee, with rights, and you can sue for wrongful termination. You are not in charge of finding pax who need a ride. You just drive the car.


As an employee, you won't have a say in where you will pickup pax. And if you're terminated for not going far to pickup rides or are hiding out at home, you won't receive unemployment because you were fired for cause for defying orders and not doing your job.


----------



## Seamus

observer said:


> They have prepared.
> 
> It's just a bluff.


OR it's not a bluff but a calculated strategy focused on the big picture of making sure this doesn't spread. Two strategies support shutting down at least temporarily.

It will inflict some level of pain into the transportation sector. Many will not flock to taxi's as the rates are higher with long wait times. It's always been that way. This strategy supports the attempt to get prop 22 passed.
When other states see the result of U/L and eventually food delivery shut down and the pain it inflicts this strategy supports the stopping of the spread to other markets.
My prediction is:

U/L will suspend operations in California and let the pain sink in.
U/L will focus it's resources in California to passing Prop 22
If Prop 22 passes then it's back to business as usual with some modifications
If Prop 22 fails then they will only go back to operating in large cities with higher rates and become more like a quasi taxi.
Those that think a new company is going to come in and be the "knight in shining armor" are seriously smoking something. There isn 't a business model that supports profitable operations. Seriously, "Didi" is the savior? You think a Chinese company is going to be the model of how to treat people right? OMG have you done no research into how they operate?


----------



## CJfrom619

MikhailCA said:


> Yes for sure, I'm just don't really understand the happiness of some people on this board about AB5.
> Looks like they don't even drive(what are they doing here not quite sure) or stupid enough to believe what if AB5 will pass they gonna benefits from it.


It's easy to see why alot of people on this board are happy. Most don't drive and hate Uber.


----------



## goneubering

CJfrom619 said:


> It's easy to see why alot of people on this board are happy. Most don't drive and hate Uber.


Hate is a bad way to live. Unfortunately most drivers aren't as successful as you.


----------



## observer

EastBayRides said:


> Even if you are hired (few current drivers will be hired), you will never be full time because that drives up the cost of benefits. Drivers need to find another income source. The Legislature is not concerned with your plight. You are a tool for the unions and their lackies in the Democratic Party. Time to leave California.


As opposed to being a tool for Uber?



Invisible said:


> As an employee, you won't have a say in where you will pickup pax. And if you're terminated for not going far to pickup rides or are hiding out at home, you won't receive unemployment because you were fired for cause for defying orders and not doing your job.


It won't matter how far the pickups are, Uber will be paying mileage and time both ways. They'll HAVE to make sure it's profitable for THEM to send you on long distance drives or UBER will lose money instead of the driver.

If an employee is hiding out at home, shouldn't they be terminated?


----------



## losiglow

What a cluster. I'm glad I live in a state that isn't run by left wing extremists.


----------



## observer

Seamus said:


> OR it's not a bluff but a calculated strategy focused on the big picture of making sure this doesn't spread. Two strategies support shutting down at least temporarily.
> 
> It will inflict some level of pain into the transportation sector. Many will not flock to taxi's as the rates are higher with long wait times. It's always been that way. This strategy supports the attempt to get prop 22 passed.
> When other states see the result of U/L and eventually food delivery shut down and the pain it inflicts this strategy supports the stopping of the spread to other markets.
> My prediction is:
> 
> U/L will suspend operations in California and let the pain sink in.
> U/L will focus it's resources in California to passing Prop 22
> If Prop 22 passes then it's back to business as usual with some modifications
> If Prop 22 fails then they will only go back to operating in large cities with higher rates and become more like a quasi taxi.
> Those that think a new company is going to come in and be the "knight in shining armor" are seriously smoking something. There isn 't a business model that supports profitable operations. Seriously, "Didi" is the savior? You think a Chinese company is going to be the model of how to treat people right? OMG have you done no research into how they operate?


Could be but I doubt it.

Uber will lose millions of dollars every day. The state will lose very little, most drivers are already on unemployment anyway. The bluff may have worked when drivers were all working but right now there's less chance of that affecting anything.

If it isn't profitable, they should shut it down, not temporarily but permanently.

We aren't in China although UBER has treated drivers that way for years. Didi and all other TNCs will have to follow our laws.



losiglow said:


> What a cluster. I'm glad I live in a state that isn't run by left wing extremists.


Me too.



goneubering said:


> Hate is a bad way to live. Unfortunately most drivers aren't as successful as you.


I think many drivers drive to offset taxes from other income. Those are the ones that will lose.


----------



## Seamus

observer said:


> Uber will lose millions of dollars every day.


They already do.


observer said:


> If it isn't profitable, they should shut it down


It's not profitable, nor has it ever been. It seems only to exist to raise mountains of cash that are bamboozled out of investors. The actual operation burns thru the money piles and the executives get to take from that pile for personal enrichment. There is an end game here, which will happen when they can no longer raise piles of cash.


observer said:


> Didi and all other TNCs will have to follow our laws.


Hence the reason they won't come to California.


----------



## goneubering

Seamus said:


> They already do.
> 
> It's not profitable, nor has it ever been. It seems only to exist to raise mountains of cash that are bamboozled out of investors. The actual operation burns thru the money piles and the executives get to take from that pile for personal enrichment. There is an end game here, which will happen when they can no longer raise piles of cash.
> 
> Hence the reason they won't come to California.


Rideshare is profitable for Uber. It's all the other stupid stuff like flying cars and self driving cars that cause huge losses.


----------



## Fusion_LUser

The Gift of Fish said:


> As the judge said, though, AB5 was passed in September of last year. Uberlyft has had nearly one year to implement the changes necessary to onboard drivers as employees and to get all of their operational systems for drivers as employees in place. If they unwisely chose not to do so, even as a contingency measure in case their disobeying of AB5 did not work, then that's on them.
> 
> 
> Lots of good things here. As you say, no more dead miles, and also no more dead time. As a pseudo IC I earned 31 cents per minute when pax were in the car; as an employee I will earn 25 cents per minute, every minute I am on shift. And the mileage compensation of 57.5 cents per mile for every mile will be great - much better than 72 cents per mile only when pax are in the car.
> 
> Of course, we will lose surge, but for the last year or so Uber had killed surge anyway, so no real loss there. We're also likely to lose most if not all of the incentives. But again, those have been whittled away over the past 12 - 24 months so no great loss.
> 
> Overall, the pay will be about the same as before or higher, but much more consistent.
> 
> Uber will have performance metrics in place, though. It won't be possible to dilly-dally too much on the way to pick up pax, for the risk of being fired. Also, since Uber will control where we go even with no pax in the car, I think we can be expect to be routed when the car is empty to the hot zones. No big deal, though, I'll be paid 57.5 cents per mile plus 25 cents per minute to do it.


Wow you sure sell yourself short and all it takes is $15 an hour and .57 a mile! Now you can smile when you do Wal*Mart and dirty laundry rides in the worst part of town knowing you are making the big bucks!


----------



## _Tron_

goneubering said:


> Rideshare is profitable for Uber. It's all the other stupid stuff like flying cars and self driving cars that cause huge losses.


That is what Travis claimed at some point. That RS in USA was profitable. Which is why in an earlier post I suggested to make RS a separate entity. Even from delivery. But Uber wants to rule the [transportation] world. _That_ is the model that isn't working. At least at this juncture.

What is not clear, to me, is how Lyft is pulling off losing millions/billions.


----------



## Transportador

MikhailCA said:


> Yes for sure, I'm just don't really understand the happiness of some people on this board about AB5.
> Looks like they don't even drive(what are they doing here not quite sure) or stupid enough to believe what if AB5 will pass they gonna benefits from it.


Most definitely, the people that are happy about AB5 have NO STAKE in the gig. They don't drive, or have failed driving Uber with their cars dead and are very bitter. They couldn't care less about the real working people trying to make a living on Uber. AB5 is garbage legislation, pushed through by a crazy b***h democrat in Chula Vista who takes bribes from the unions. AB5 is completely reckless. They never did an economic impact assessment on it before hand or what? It is pure politics, using "poor Uber drivers who lack benefits" as a bad excuse.

California is definitely not business friendly. It keeps piling up laws like this, and needs tons of tax money to "help" the poor. Bad plans, bad laws, no business. That is why if you live here, you pay tons of sales tax, property tax, income taxes. God helps you if you want to open a business in CA. The only thing good in CA is the weather!


----------



## Dice Man

Temporary shutdowns is a very good choice.
Meanwhile the passengers will appreciate the rideshare services.


----------



## _Tron_

Transportador said:


> AB5 is garbage legislation, pushed through by a crazy b***h democrat in Chula Vista who takes bribes from the unions.


Got a link for this claim by any chance? Not the crazy part. The bribery part.


----------



## ThrowInTheTowel

JimKE said:


> I actually don't think they have any choice.
> 
> The Uber/Lyft business model simply does not work if drivers are employees. Neither company is making profits NOW with independent contractor drivers, and paying very low rates.


They can't make a profit? Sell the business to the taxi cab companies and see how fast they capitalize on making a profit with drivers using their own car. They manage to do it providing a fleet of cars and maintenance. Your comment only exposes how incompetent a company they are that can't turn a profit even after you pay your employees dirt cheap wages and they use their own vehicles. Truly embarrassing.



Cdub2k said:


> I thought Uber's response to AB5 was outstanding. Allowing their Independent Contractor Drivers to set their own rates via Set your own surge as well as providing all of the rides details of the ride before the Driver accepted the ride checked off all the checkboxes I thought what being an Independent Contractor Driver should look like. Apparently it was *not *enough and now they are being forced to classify drivers as Employees. So when Uber shuts down their operations and reopen it back up in November you can pretty much bet that the "Set your own surge" benefit will go away and be a footnote in the history books. As well as knowing all of the trip details. Also, now that you are an employee they will probably start strictly enforcing Acceptance % Rate rules considering they'll be paying people on a $ per hour basis. Instant pay might go away as well and things might resemble a regular job where you get paid Bi-Weekly via direct Deposit.
> 
> Now looking at the data I see that the minimum wage in Cali is $12 an hour. And since the average cost per mile has been established at $0.57 by the IRS I'm assuming your base gross pay will be $12 an hour + .57 a mile. And you keep all tips. If this pay scale is true I consider that a fair deal.
> 
> Some of that is speculation but it seems reasonable. What do you guys think? I also think Uber will have to start limiting the amount of Drivers they allow on the platform at times which might require them to create a "Schedule your block" function similar to DoorDash, Waitr, and other gig apps.


The problem is the standard procedures should be the same across all states. Why play these games and wait until another state files a lawsuit and then you start allowing drivers to have more freedom. If you are in violation in one state, you are in violation in all states. All driver's should be able to set their own rates not just in California.

Every other thread someone is arguing how easy it is to make $25 to $30 an hour with little effort. Here is where the B.S gets exposed. In that case Uber/Lyft will continue to charge the same rates and minimum wage is only $12 per hour in California.

That gives them $13-$18 profit per hour minus mileage. That's sounds like a pretty good deal? Not. Because most driver's don't make $25-$30 hour and Uber/Lyft know this.


----------



## Seamus

_Tron_ said:


> But Uber wants to rule the [transportation] world. _That_ is the model that isn't working.


BINGO!

If Uber simply wanted to be profitable they would scale back to about 10% the size they are and simply be a software developer who developed apps, created a market, and then took a % of the fares that ensued. Win - win for everybody. This is essentially the Arbnb model.

BUT NO, Travis wanted to revolutionize transportation. He had big dreams that weren't grounded in financial reality. He's gone but yet the ambition lives on to the tune of Billions of dollars burned away with little to show for it all. They want to be bigger than a rideshare company. They want to get pax as loyal customers and then surround them with other goods and services to make money off them. Problem is they have no clear financial strategy, just pie in the sky dreams and haven't learned to surround pax with other non rideshare products.


----------



## Gone_in_60_seconds

Seamus said:


> BINGO!
> 
> If Uber simply wanted to be profitable they would scale back to about 10% the size they are and simply be a software developer who developed apps, created a market, and then took a % of the fares that ensued. Win - win for everybody. This is essentially the Arbnb model.
> 
> BUT NO, Travis wanted to revolutionize transportation. He had big dreams that weren't grounded in financial reality. He's gone but yet the ambition lives on to the tune of Billions of dollars burned away with little to show for it all. They want to be bigger than a rideshare company. They want to get pax as loyal customers and then surround them with other goods and services to make money off them. Problem is they have no clear financial strategy, just pie in the sky dreams and haven't learned to surround them with other non rideshare products.


Yup. And no more money from Softbank. LOL


----------



## Aharm

Trafficat said:


> Uber will only need to shut down operations in California, but Uber exists all over the world. I'm sure California is a huge market for Uber, but Uber will still exist even if they have no California operations.


ding ding ding

only 11% of their traffic is from California. Lyft's is almost double.


----------



## Rell806

Honestly this whole situation is frustrating. I've been driving for Uber since 2016 as well as having 2 other jobs on the side. I make great money with Uber. The flexibility is why I'm able to drive for Uber. I rent a car through Uber Hertz so if this shutdown happens, I will not only lose money but the car rental as well. In the last few weeks I have made $900-$1000 per week at around 20-25 hours per week. From my experience, Uber is a great job for supplemental income. I've never been in the position before of losing a job. My question is will we be able to get unemployment pay if this goes into play? I'm stressed and worried right now. I wish the deadline could be extended to 2021. Times are already hard enough right now for many of us and with Uber getting temporarily shutdown, that's going to boost the unemployment rate and many other issues. Hopefully something can happen for Uber to stay in business for the remainder of 2020 at least.


----------



## MikhailCA

Seamus said:


> BINGO!
> 
> If Uber simply wanted to be profitable they would scale back to about 10% the size they are and simply be a software developer who developed apps, created a market, and then took a % of the fares that ensued. Win - win for everybody. This is essentially the Arbnb model.
> 
> BUT NO, Travis wanted to revolutionize transportation. He had big dreams that weren't grounded in financial reality. He's gone but yet the ambition lives on to the tune of Billions of dollars burned away with little to show for it all. They want to be bigger than a rideshare company. They want to get pax as loyal customers and then surround them with other goods and services to make money off them. Problem is they have no clear financial strategy, just pie in the sky dreams and haven't learned to surround pax with other non rideshare products.


Actually Uber is making a profit from rideshare, all the losses they are showing from UE, freight, self driving cars etc...


----------



## Lee239

Good,we are in a pandemic, it's a perfect time to shut down for months.


----------



## Transportador

_Tron_ said:


> Got a link for this claim by any chance? Not the crazy part. The bribery part.


No, I'm not that good. Let's google it...



Rell806 said:


> Honestly this whole situation is frustrating. I've been driving for Uber since 2016 as well as having 2 other jobs on the side. I make great money with Uber. The flexibility is why I'm able to drive for Uber. I rent a car through Uber Hertz so if this shutdown happens, I will not only lose money but the car rental as well. In the last few weeks I have made $900-$1000 per week at around 20-25 hours per week. From my experience, Uber is a great job for supplemental income. I've never been in the position before of losing a job. My question is will we be able to get unemployment pay if this goes into play? I'm stressed and worried right now. I wish the deadline could be extended to 2021. Times are already hard enough right now for many of us and with Uber getting temporarily shutdown, that's going to boost the unemployment rate and many other issues. Hopefully something can happen for Uber to stay in business for the remainder of 2020 at least.


I hear you man. You are one of the few who has a stake in this game, and AB5 is ruining it for you. Too many people here talk big since they have no skin in the game and are very hateful. Since they don't drive anymore or try to make a living from Uber, I wish they would at least have some consideration for guys like you.


----------



## njn

drivers will only be paid when on a trip, just like nyc. in general, on call employees are not paid unless working. sitting around waiting for a job is not considered working if you are free to do something else.


----------



## ThrowInTheTowel

Invisible said:


> As an employee, you won't have a say in where you will pickup pax. And if you're terminated for not going far to pickup rides or are hiding out at home, you won't receive unemployment because you were fired for cause for defying orders and not doing your job.


Absolutely not true. You must have never received unemployment benefits before. At least in my state there is a screening process that your employer expectations were at least reasonable. For example if they asked you to clean the rest rooms because the janitor called out sick and you are a secretary that is not within your scope of normal work.

If you think a driver will pull up, pick up passenger, start trip, and see that it is a 3 hour ride, but has children getting out of school in 1 hour will be terminated for cancelling its not going to happen. Let them use their fancy algorithm and destination filter to keep drivers within a certain mile radius or pay up in unemployment. Sorry but they are out of excuses.


----------



## SHalester

njn said:


> on call employees are not paid unless working


wut? IN calif? Nope. On call employees are paid for their time at a reduced rate when there is no call. Hospitals workers and such get 50% of their hourly being on 30 minute on-call status. I speak from experience.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

_Tron_ said:


> Yippee. No more dead miles.
> 
> Take as long as you want to pick up a fare.
> 
> Take as long as you want to reach the destination.
> 
> Park your car in the lowest traffic spot in the city. I know a place in my locale where you NEVER get pings. My house.
> 
> No more shuffling passengers. Hide out while online and shuffle UBER.
> 
> Make at least minimum wage while you write your memoirs.
> 
> Uber fires you for not being a good ant. No, they won't. Because you are an employee, with rights, and you can sue for wrongful termination. You are not in charge of finding pax who need a ride. You just drive the car.


That doesn't sound so scary.

You forgot to also make it clear for people minimum wage is 13$ going to 14$ in a few month will be 15$ by Jan 1,2022.
When was the last time Uber gave a raise?

If you drive 50 miles out of your " service area", and drive back, that's 100 miles at .57 cents = 57$

In California minimum wage is after mileage expense and tips.

So economist say that's about 25/30$ per hour before tips.

ohhh, don't forget that 2,500$ deductible will be gone. Pax kicks your car, 250$ damage. NO DEDUCTABLE.

Thats why Uber needs to fool people to go against this.

I know some drivers that will pop up a App within days of Uber leaving. Driver owned cooperative app. No fee, just expenses to run the app. Drivers are still here, so are passengers, who said the app to connects us can't be driver owned.

Get the F out Uber. Go get lost in the abyss.

We have our own driver owned app and will role it out once we kick em out.


----------



## Steve appleby

Let them shut down. It’s a lose lose for everybody. Both sides are shooting themselves in the foot. I personally don’t agree with AB5 but all you can do is sit back and watch. These People can’t come to the negotiating table like adults but are at each other’s throats and think that their opinion is best opinion. I personally do not agree with any of the California government’s policies, but I think that people need to see how bad things can get before they change their minds


----------



## ThrowInTheTowel

Transportador said:


> No, I'm not that good. Let's google it...
> 
> 
> I hear you man. You are one of the few who has a stake in this game, and AB5 is ruining it for you. Too many people here talk big since they have no skin in the game and are very hateful. Since they don't drive anymore or try to make a living from Uber, I wish they would at least have some consideration for guys like you.


Any reasonable person would have sympathy for anyone hurt by this situation. Why pick and choose who to fill sorry for? Just as many people that make good money now will be hurt there are many drivers working in oversaturated markets for pennies trying to feed their families. 
If you think about it, it's just as selfish to say leave things well enough alone and turn your head because it doesn't affect me and my family. Where is the frustration towards Uber/Lyft? Why not pay drivers a more competitive rate like they did in the beginning? My heart goes out to everyone but some of these same people crying were coming in other threads months ago telling people to shut up and stop complaining because they were happy with things. Can't have it both ways.


----------



## Steve appleby

With how expensive California is and the tax rates over there I don’t know how people live over there..


----------



## SHalester

Steve appleby said:


> I don't know how people live over there..


carefully.


----------



## Alemus

Cdub2k said:


> I thought Uber's response to AB5 was outstanding. Allowing their Independent Contractor Drivers to set their own rates via Set your own surge as well as providing all of the rides details of the ride before the Driver accepted the ride checked off all the checkboxes I thought what being an Independent Contractor Driver should look like. Apparently it was *not *enough and now they are being forced to classify drivers as Employees. So when Uber shuts down their operations and reopen it back up in November you can pretty much bet that the "Set your own surge" benefit will go away and be a footnote in the history books. As well as knowing all of the trip details. Also, now that you are an employee they will probably start strictly enforcing Acceptance % Rate rules considering they'll be paying people on a $ per hour basis. Instant pay might go away as well and things might resemble a regular job where you get paid Bi-Weekly via direct Deposit.
> 
> Now looking at the data I see that the minimum wage in Cali is $12 an hour. And since the average cost per mile has been established at $0.57 by the IRS I'm assuming your base gross pay will be $12 an hour + .57 a mile. And you keep all tips. If this pay scale is true I consider that a fair deal.
> 
> Some of that is speculation but it seems reasonable. What do you guys think? I also think Uber will have to start limiting the amount of Drivers they allow on the platform at times which might require them to create a "Schedule your block" function similar to DoorDash, Waitr, and other gig apps.


Average cost per mile does not apply to employees, ask any pizza guy. You will get a fixed amt per trip. You also now get to pay taxes directly. No more deductions for cleaning supplies, passenger goodies, cell phone plans etc. Also since the passenger cost is going to increase, less tips. Finally, no more setting your hours. You get to work when and likely where your new boss thinks you are needed.


----------



## SHalester

Alemus said:


> Finally, no more setting your hours. You get to work when and likely where your new boss thinks you are needed.


i really hope not. Or I hope Prop 22 passes. One or the other.


----------



## mrpjfresh

Cdub2k said:


> Some of that is speculation but it seems reasonable. What do you guys think?


I agree that it is a much better approach, but unfortunately, it was just too late in the game. They should have been doing this all along to muddle the IC lines as much as possible and not treating drivers like employees yet providing none of the accompanying benefits and making more on certain riders than the person in the car actually doing the work. There were multiple signs along the track that clearly said "TRACK ENDS AHEAD" yet out of foolishness, pigheadedness, greed, whatever... Uber and Lyft just cruised along full steam ahead.

I will fully admit my error recently on another thread when I said there is no chance Uber would ever pull out of California. Even if they are bluffing and displaying some brinkmanship in order to sway public opinion (with a month or so a drivers setting their own rates causing price increases and removing access to the service entirely) for the big vote in November, it is still incredibly risky! As Stevie says, all of us on the outside can only grab the popcorn and watch history unfold. This is their "Napster" moment.


----------



## observer

njn said:


> drivers will only be paid when on a trip, just like nyc. in general, on call employees are not paid unless working. sitting around waiting for a job is not considered working if you are free to do something else.


That is not true in California.



Alemus said:


> Average cost per mile does not apply to employees, ask any pizza guy. You will get a fixed amt per trip. You also now get to pay taxes directly. No more deductions for cleaning supplies, passenger goodies, cell phone plans etc. Also since the passenger cost is going to increase, less tips. Finally, no more setting your hours. You get to work when and likely where your new boss thinks you are needed.


As long as the fixed amount per trip covers the expenses that is OK.

In California the employer pays for cleaning supplies, passenger goodies, phone plans, gasoline, tires, mechanical work, insurance, insurance deductibles etc. Either through mileage reimbursement or by keeping track of costs.

It is the employers responsibility to make sure all business costs are compensated to the employees.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Rell806 said:


> Honestly this whole situation is frustrating. I've been driving for Uber since 2016 as well as having 2 other jobs on the side. I make great money with Uber. The flexibility is why I'm able to drive for Uber. I rent a car through Uber Hertz so if this shutdown happens, I will not only lose money but the car rental as well. In the last few weeks I have made $900-$1000 per week at around 20-25 hours per week. From my experience, Uber is a great job for supplemental income. I've never been in the position before of losing a job. My question is will we be able to get unemployment pay if this goes into play? I'm stressed and worried right now. I wish the deadline could be extended to 2021. Times are already hard enough right now for many of us and with Uber getting temporarily shutdown, that's going to boost the unemployment rate and many other issues. Hopefully something can happen for Uber to stay in business for the remainder of 2020 at least.


I'm sorry. Assume driverless cars are here. This gig was temporary. The driverless cars could have been here now instead AB5. What then? Do the same.

The reason the Judge said shut it down NOW, is exactly because this is the only time drivers are covered under unemployment. Of course you can get unemployment. That is why the judge said do it now, while the drivers are covered for unemployment. California UI is at 57 weeks now. You will get a whole year unemployment until things are figured out.

75% of drivers are not working right now, they are on unemployment Already. So it doesn't effect them. You can have the same as the other drivers through unemployment. Don't freak out. Assume it's shut down due to pandemic and there is no business.

May I know how you make 40$ per hour consistently in C.A.?
I work in SF and I average 25 on the best days.


----------



## Gone_in_60_seconds

Rell806 said:


> Honestly this whole situation is frustrating. I've been driving for Uber since 2016 as well as having 2 other jobs on the side. I make great money with Uber. The flexibility is why I'm able to drive for Uber. I rent a car through Uber Hertz so if this shutdown happens, I will not only lose money but the car rental as well. In the last few weeks I have made $900-$1000 per week at around 20-25 hours per week. From my experience, Uber is a great job for supplemental income. I've never been in the position before of losing a job. My question is will we be able to get unemployment pay if this goes into play? I'm stressed and worried right now. I wish the deadline could be extended to 2021. Times are already hard enough right now for many of us and with Uber getting temporarily shutdown, that's going to boost the unemployment rate and many other issues. Hopefully something can happen for Uber to stay in business for the remainder of 2020 at least.


Does the amount you make above include tips? Are tips consistent in your area? And, what is the percentage or amount of the tip usually?


----------



## MikhailCA

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> The reason the Judge said shut it down NOW, is exactly because this is the only time drivers are covered under unemployment. Of course you can get unemployment. That is why the judge said do it now, while the drivers are covered for unemployment. California UI is at 57 weeks now. You will get a whole year unemployment until things are figured out.


The reason why he said it right now cuz he has no clue and never been anywhere close to situation where he need to work for living. And yes he is from dem party. 









How much this unemployment is? 300bucks in Cali, such a joke.


----------



## Uberdriver2710




----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

MikhailCA said:


> The reason why he said it right now cuz he has no clue and never been anywhere close to situation where he need to work for living. And yes he is from dem party.


Please read below, then counter with facts. Thank You for participating.

( Schulman wrote that any impact of the injunction on Uber and Lyft's businesses would likely be mitigated by the fact that both have said the "vast majority of their drivers work on a casual or sporadic basis" and the reality that the coronavirus pandemic has "drastically reduced the demand for Defendants' services."

"Now, when Defendants' ridership is at an all-time low, may be the best time (or the least worst time) for Defendants to change their business practices to conform to California law without causing widespread adverse effects on their drivers," Schulman wrote.)

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/10/jud...-stop-classifying-drivers-as-contractors.html
*California may offer $600 a week in extra jobless benefits if Congress doesn't act*

Comments









SACRAMENTO - If Congress doesn't act to extend an extra $600 in weekly benefits for unemployed Californians, state legislators say they're ready to jump in to prevent benefits from plunging during the pandemic.


----------



## _Tron_

Seamus said:


> *BUT NO*, Travis wanted to revolutionize transportation.


If that's your John Belushi imitation you probably need a couple of extra O's...


----------



## ThrowInTheTowel

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Please read below, then counter with facts. Thank You for participating.
> 
> ( Schulman wrote that any impact of the injunction on Uber and Lyft's businesses would likely be mitigated by the fact that both have said the "vast majority of their drivers work on a casual or sporadic basis" and the reality that the coronavirus pandemic has "drastically reduced the demand for Defendants' services."
> 
> "Now, when Defendants' ridership is at an all-time low, may be the best time (or the least worst time) for Defendants to change their business practices to conform to California law without causing widespread adverse effects on their drivers," Schulman wrote.)
> 
> https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/10/jud...-stop-classifying-drivers-as-contractors.html





Steve appleby said:


> Let them shut down. It's a lose lose for everybody. Both sides are shooting themselves in the foot. I personally don't agree with AB5 but all you can do is sit back and watch. These People can't come to the negotiating table like adults but are at each other's throats and think that their opinion is best opinion. I personally do not agree with any of the California government's policies, but I think that people need to see how bad things can get before they change their minds


You are going to be surprised by how many people will still feel the same way regardless of how long of a shutdown or possibly pulling out. Our economy is not designed to pay people below minimum wage and basically tell people a little something is better than nothing. All employers should be allowed to do the same thing.

Walmart would love to decrease wages over the next 3 years to below minimum wage and tell everyone to take it or leave it but that won't fly. They would have a few managers not affected by it defending it just like you but that won't fly either. Stop blaming drivers and go to the source. You break the law you pay. You defy the law you pay even more. You don't like the law change it. Now we get to see who the real cry babies are.


----------



## Jennyma

I just got the notice from Lyft saying to support prop 22 or Lyft no longer in California. They can't operate as employers so they would rather just remove the state from platform.



June132017 said:


> Lyft is drooling on this news : D


nope they are out too


----------



## _Tron_

Lee239 said:


> Good,we are in a pandemic, it's a perfect time to shut down for months.


Good point. But it's still a catch 22 for any driver who is "offered a job" by Uber or Lyft... Should they take the job -during the pandemic- to insure they will have a place with U/L, or do they continue with the high paying unemployment (their _will_ be another PUA of some sort).


----------



## Wolfgang Faust

*Uber and Lyft just lost their bid to delay a court order in California that says their drivers must be classified as employee*









Drivers in California sued Uber and Lyft, alleging the companies owe them $630 million in back wages. Mario Tama/Getty Images

Uber and Lyft on Wednesday threatened to shut down their apps in California over a long-running labor dispute.
The companies requested a 10-day delay on a prior ruling that said drivers must be classified as employees.
On Thursday, the judge denied that request.
Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

A California judge on Thursday refused to grant Uber Technologies Inc. and Lyft Inc. more time to appeal his decision requiring the ride-hailing companies to classify drivers in that state as employees.
At a hearing in San Francisco County Superior Court, Judge Ethan Schulman said he found no reason to push back his August 20 deadline for the companies to appeal the preliminary injunction he issued on Monday before it could take effect.

https://www.businessinsider.com/uber-lyft-lose-bid-for-delay-in-california-driver-injunction-2020-8


----------



## MarkMan

Now Uber/Lyft are crying. ALL they ever had to do is change that one little variable (percentage_cut_from_driver) from 40% to 10% and none of this would have ever happened. Greedy bastards!


----------



## EM1

Cdub2k said:


> I thought Uber's response to AB5 was outstanding. Allowing their Independent Contractor Drivers to set their own rates via Set your own surge as well as providing all of the rides details of the ride before the Driver accepted the ride checked off all the checkboxes I thought what being an Independent Contractor Driver should look like. Apparently it was *not *enough and now they are being forced to classify drivers as Employees. So when Uber shuts down their operations and reopen it back up in November you can pretty much bet that the "Set your own surge" benefit will go away and be a footnote in the history books. As well as knowing all of the trip details. Also, now that you are an employee they will probably start strictly enforcing Acceptance % Rate rules considering they'll be paying people on a $ per hour basis. Instant pay might go away as well and things might resemble a regular job where you get paid Bi-Weekly via direct Deposit.
> 
> Now looking at the data I see that the minimum wage in Cali is $12 an hour. And since the average cost per mile has been established at $0.57 by the IRS I'm assuming your base gross pay will be $12 an hour + .57 a mile. And you keep all tips. If this pay scale is true I consider that a fair deal.
> 
> Some of that is speculation but it seems reasonable. What do you guys think? I also think Uber will have to start limiting the amount of Drivers they allow on the platform at times which might require them to create a "Schedule your block" function similar to DoorDash, Waitr, and other gig apps.


CA minimum wage is $13/hr and its increasing again soon. I driver uber part time. While pay sucked at times, its some of the other shit that got me, like no protection or consequences for belligerent or violent or crazy pax; stiffing us on rides, saying the ride never occurred even though I had screen shots. Playing games with tips. And so on. And this driver-sets-the-rate thing? That wont last, its a temporary pacifier to give drivers warm fuzzies and jack up driver earnings to show CA legislators, and after that Im certain theyll stop the drivers from setting the rate regardless of AB5 staying or going. Uber is a nefarious and very lacking in integrity company.



JimKE said:


> That statement is incorrect.
> 
> The mileage deduction applies if you use your personal vehicle for business purposes; it has nothing to do with how you are paid, or what the nature of your employment relationship is. Drivers would still have the ability to deduct that cost, which would eliminate any justification for requiring Uber to pay a mileage amount.
> 
> 
> Exactly! Minimum wage requirements apply to employees who work more than a prescribed number of hours. Why do you think there are so many kids working at McDonalds? Because they only will hire people for 20 hours a week or so...to avoid having to pay minimum wage.


Minimum wage isnt affected by full or part time status.


----------



## ThrowInTheTowel

Will the last Uber/Lyft driver to leave California please turn off the lights. Thanks in advance.


----------



## 197438

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Please read below, then counter with facts. Thank You for participating.
> 
> ( Schulman wrote that any impact of the injunction on Uber and Lyft's businesses would likely be mitigated by the fact that both have said the "vast majority of their drivers work on a casual or sporadic basis" and the reality that the coronavirus pandemic has "drastically reduced the demand for Defendants' services."
> 
> "Now, when Defendants' ridership is at an all-time low, may be the best time (or the least worst time) for Defendants to change their business practices to conform to California law without causing widespread adverse effects on their drivers," Schulman wrote.)
> 
> https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/10/jud...-stop-classifying-drivers-as-contractors.html
> *California may offer $600 a week in extra jobless benefits if Congress doesn't act*
> 
> Comments
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SACRAMENTO - If Congress doesn't act to extend an extra $600 in weekly benefits for unemployed Californians, state legislators say they're ready to jump in to prevent benefits from plunging during the pandemic.


I might take them up on that, since it is they and Newsom who have done everything in their power to prevent me from working this year.


----------



## roughtime

JimKE said:


> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees


This was the best news I heard in 2020, after 5yrs of working for those slavery companies, as a full-time job, I hope they can keep their word and Give Up all that money in California.
They lied from the beginning, they are still cheating, they put us on front lines of horrible events & conflicts, and they made money, they abused us and made money.
Now they want to use us to win in court against our rights.
I'll give my MIDDLE Finger to them. I hope they enjoy it.



Rell806 said:


> I have made $900-$1000 per week at around 20-25 hours per week


What kind of job you have at Uber, are you dara khosrowshahi??????


----------



## goneubering

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> SACRAMENTO - If Congress doesn't act to extend an extra $600 in weekly benefits for unemployed Californians, state legislators say they're ready to jump in to prevent benefits from plunging during the pandemic.


Fact. Cali doesn't have the money.


----------



## Jennyma

_Tron_ said:


> Good point. But it's still a catch 22 for any driver who is "offered a job" by Uber or Lyft... Should they take the job -during the pandemic- to insure they will have a place with U/L, or do they continue with the high paying unemployment (their _will_ be another PUA of some sort).


I would not wait for that.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

goneubering said:


> Fact. Cali doesn't have the money.


They will after they collect from Uber, Lyft, Doordash, etc. Plus federal government is offering at least 300 up and asking states to chip in 100 top off.

California always tops off fed programs like this.
You think California can't pay more than say Mississippi.

They plan on getting low interest loan from fed and figure it out.
I don't know, it sound like typical California. I bet they do it. Not saying they should.


----------



## Jennyma

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> They will after they collect from Uber, Lyft, Doordash, etc. Plus federal government is offering at least 300 up and asking states to chip in 100 top off.
> 
> California always tops off fed programs like this.
> You think California can't pay more than say Mississippi.
> 
> They plan on getting low interest loan from fed and figure it out.
> I don't know, it sound like typical California. I bet they do it. Not saying they should.


The federal govt already changed states adding the 100. It's only $300 dollars now. And the fema money will last about 4 weeks. So another $1200 is all you can expect from that when California can change their system to do it. Nothing is coming anytime soon. Don't count it. They don't expect stimulus till October. Senate is on recess and nothing is happening till after Labor Day. They don't give a ****.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Bastard cowards.

WTF!

3 T is crazy high. 1 T a bit low If we want to keep GDP and the Markets from collapsing.

Settle at 1.8 you coward basterds. Businesses need immediate second PPP loan, people need eviction prevention, Schools need money, landlords need subsidies. States need help to fight Covid.

legit we are short 20 million jobs right now. Give people 450 top off and let them keep some of it if they get a job during pandemic as a bonus.

Cowards.

I got rotten tomatoes for them all.


----------



## goneubering

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> They will after they collect from Uber, Lyft, Doordash, etc. Plus federal government is offering at least 300 up and asking states to chip in 100 top off.
> 
> California always tops off fed programs like this.
> You think California can't pay more than say Mississippi.
> 
> They plan on getting low interest loan from fed and figure it out.
> I don't know, it sound like typical California. I bet they do it. Not saying they should.


Our governor says we don't have the money and I believe him.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.la...wont-work-in-california-newsom-says?_amp=true


The Gift of Fish said:


> As the judge said, though, AB5 was passed in September of last year. Uberlyft has had nearly one year to implement the changes necessary to onboard drivers as employees and to get all of their operational systems for drivers as employees in place. If they unwisely chose not to do so, even as a contingency measure in case their disobeying of AB5 did not work, then that's on them.
> 
> 
> Lots of good things here. As you say, no more dead miles, and also no more dead time. As a pseudo IC I earned 31 cents per minute when pax were in the car; as an employee I will earn 25 cents per minute, every minute I am on shift. And the mileage compensation of 57.5 cents per mile for every mile will be great - much better than 72 cents per mile only when pax are in the car.
> 
> Of course, we will lose surge, but for the last year or so Uber had killed surge anyway, so no real loss there. We're also likely to lose most if not all of the incentives. But again, those have been whittled away over the past 12 - 24 months so no great loss.
> 
> Overall, the pay will be about the same as before or higher, but much more consistent.
> 
> Uber will have performance metrics in place, though. It won't be possible to dilly-dally too much on the way to pick up pax, for the risk of being fired. Also, since Uber will control where we go even with no pax in the car, I think we can be expect to be routed when the car is empty to the hot zones. No big deal, though, I'll be paid 57.5 cents per mile plus 25 cents per minute to do it.


Yes. It's on them but the drivers and passengers will most likely be the ones who suffer. I take Dara's service suspension threat seriously.


----------



## EM1

Wolfgang Faust said:


> *Uber and Lyft just lost their bid to delay a court order in California that says their drivers must be classified as employee*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Drivers in California sued Uber and Lyft, alleging the companies owe them $630 million in back wages. Mario Tama/Getty Images
> 
> Uber and Lyft on Wednesday threatened to shut down their apps in California over a long-running labor dispute.
> The companies requested a 10-day delay on a prior ruling that said drivers must be classified as employees.
> On Thursday, the judge denied that request.
> Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.
> 
> A California judge on Thursday refused to grant Uber Technologies Inc. and Lyft Inc. more time to appeal his decision requiring the ride-hailing companies to classify drivers in that state as employees.
> At a hearing in San Francisco County Superior Court, Judge Ethan Schulman said he found no reason to push back his August 20 deadline for the companies to appeal the preliminary injunction he issued on Monday before it could take effect.
> 
> https://www.businessinsider.com/uber-lyft-lose-bid-for-delay-in-california-driver-injunction-2020-8


My gut feeling is that uber is done, probably shut down ops in all states soon. I could be wrong but the ships sinking fast & not enough buckets to scoop water out.


----------



## Filipino858

EM1 said:


> My gut feeling is that uber is done, probably shut down ops in all states soon. I could be wrong but the ships sinking fast & not enough buckets to scoop water out.


It's like when the Titanic sank. The moment the judge said we must be employees is the moment the ship hit the iceberg. A slow sinking at first and then escalating into a heaping pile of Twisted metal and death. Uber has hit its iceberg, and now the water is sweeping in , and the bow is starting to dip ever so slightly into the water.


----------



## EM1

Filipino858 said:


> It's like when the Titanic sank. The moment the judge said we must be employees is the moment the ship hit the iceberg. A slow sinking at first and then escalating into A heaping pile of Twisted metal and death. Uber has hit its iceberg, and now the water is sweeping in , and the bow is starting to dip ever so slightly into the water.


Touche. Sad thing is, uber kinda did it to themselves


----------



## Young Kim

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


I have not read the entirety of this thread, but I can definitely worry about the situation in California. I think that this will really disrupt Uber's business model (which someone else I am sure said already). Costs will probably explode higher, and make an unprofitable Uber become even more so. I hope for a good result.


----------



## 195045

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


JUST DOIT TO SEE WHO LOSE ARE ANOTHER THUSANDS BASE WHO TAKE THE BUSINESS OVER NIGHT LIKE HAPPENED TO TEXAS



EastBayRides said:


> With pax complaining about the price of rides this week, they deserve to find no rides available next week. After all, they voted for the fools in the Legislature who always have gifts to offer the unions under the guise of being for the workers. Let pax return to the days of six cabs for the entire city and 45 minute wait times.


Let them shot down .No one should operate businesses and become billionaire at poor workers expenses ..are Damm to many worker's being treated as slave


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

Filipino858 said:


> It's like when the Titanic sank. The moment the judge said we must be employees is the moment the ship hit the iceberg. A slow sinking at first and then escalating into a heaping pile of Twisted metal and death. Uber has hit its iceberg, and now the water is sweeping in , and the bow is starting to dip ever so slightly into the water.


I love this analogy.

Also with the titanic many of the earliest life boats were launched at way less than capacity because people didn't believe the ship is sinking, it wasn't until the ship really started going under until they took the abandon ship order seriously, by then it was too late.

It was so bad that many of the lifeboats had empty seats because people just weren't getting their act together and getting in the GD lifeboats and taking their sweet time disembarking the ship.

My suspicion is that many stayed in their rooms and ignored the abandon ship order until the thing started leaning heavily.

Just like the titanic, people arn't beleiving that uber/lyft are in act of collapsing, all they are thinking about is uber/lyft pulling out of California, not the realization that this is just the first wave of shutdowns,

Uber and lyft can't keep burning capital, and I seriously doubt anyone will be stupid enough to throw them more money now (Yet as i say this i can't help but think that there is someone that stupid)


----------



## indydriver68

And you can bet other states are watching this with keen interest to see how it turns out.


----------



## Jennyma

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Bastard cowards.
> 
> WTF!
> 
> 3 T is crazy high. 1 T a bit low If we want to keep GDP and the Markets from collapsing.
> 
> Settle at 1.8 you coward basterds. Businesses need immediate second PPP loan, people need eviction prevention, Schools need money, landlords need subsidies. States need help to fight Covid.
> 
> legit we are short 20 million jobs right now. Give people 450 top off and let them keep some of it if they get a job during pandemic as a bonus.
> 
> Cowards.
> 
> I got rotten tomatoes for them all.


the Dems said they had a 2 trillion package and are ready to negotiate. But senate is gone. So after Labor Day they will start talks again but businesses will fold and people will get evicted by then.


----------



## kcdrvr15

It's about time these greedy and fraudulent companies have to comply with the laws. Here in KC, I remember back in 2015 uber and lyft were ordered shut down here because they didn't meet the requirements for carrying passengers for hire. Then all of a sudden they were good to go. I picked up the uber site manager ( KC is run out of Chicago ) and took him to a downtown KC address, a coffee shop I believe, he went in with a briefcase, came out with out it. Inside the briefcase was $ used to donate to the election campaign of the Mayor, and all the city council members, then uber was good to go. You drivers that have become accustomed to making easy $, those days are soon to end. *I was and you all are scab drivers working for an illegal cab company*. Our actions have destroyed the cab companies in many cities, costing thousands of drivers, dispatchers, mechanics and marketing professionals their livelihood. It use to be you could raise a family and send your kids to college on what a taxi driver made, now the majority of you don't even make minimum wage after expenses. I hope these app companies go broke and their management teams go to jail for fraud. They have defrauded they general public, the drivers, the passengers and their investors.

The tragedy of the commons.

If you dont know about that, it's something I had to read and make a report on in college.


----------



## observer

indydriver68 said:


> And you can bet other states are watching this with keen interest to see how it turns out.


I'm thinking other states like Massachussetts, Washington and New York may file their own lawsuits soon.

Right now would be the time for them to force a change.

It would be the "perfect storm".


----------



## Kings-Full

Gby said:


> JUST DOIT TO SEE WHO LOSE ARE ANOTHER THUSANDS BASE WHO TAKE THE BUSINESS OVER NIGHT LIKE HAPPENED TO TEXAS


What??



observer said:


> I'm thinking other states like Massachussetts, Washington and New York may file their own lawsuits soon.


This is a given imo. Just a matter of when.



observer said:


> Right now would be the time for them to force a change.


This assumes ethical, adult leadership on the part of Uber. Something I've seen no evidence of to date.


----------



## JimKE

Jennyma said:


> the Dems said they had a 2 trillion package and are ready to negotiate. But senate is gone. So after Labor Day they will start talks again but businesses will fold and people will get evicted by then.


That's BS. They stalled on the first stimulus package. They stalled on the second stimulus package. And they have completely refused to negotiate at all on this stimulus package. They don't want a deal; they want economic turmoil because they think that helps them in November.

Trump has stopped the evictions from federally-funded housing, and most of the rest of it is in the hands of local and state governments. I think ALL evictions are still blocked here in Florida.


----------



## SHalester

EM1 said:


> My gut feeling is that uber is done, probably shut down ops in all states soon


In Calif, almost guaranteed until Jan 2021 (if Prop 22 passed it would be effective then). All states? Yeah, not so much


----------



## Filipino858

If Uber is shut down until November I would be ok with it and many drivers including myself are collecting PUA / UI. At the time Uber is shutdown we can continue to get unemployment but the current drivers out now working will need to sign up for pua or ui. I really hope that we get this fixed and Uber can resolve its California mess. If it’s back online again January 2021, I’m going to get back out there. Hopefully by then Covid isn’t so bad and I really am researching on ways to drive during the pandemic. Uber eats seems like the only safe option now.


----------



## Cdub2k

It might be a good time to apply for a Taxi Cab license in California.


----------



## observer

HOLD THE PRESSES!!!

I just thought of something big, huge, YUUUUGE I tell ya.

At the moment drivers are considered EMPLOYEES.

If Uber shuts down NOW, it would be in violation of the WARN act and subject to its penalties.

https://www.fisherphillips.com/reso...Getting It,day and reasonable attorney's fees.










@doyousensehumor

NOW I'M EXCITED!! :smiles:


----------



## MikhailCA

Cdub2k said:


> It might be a good time to apply for a Taxi Cab license in California.


Can you rent a taxi and just drive it over here?


----------



## observer

MikhailCA said:


> Can you rent a taxi and just drive it over here?


There are companies that lease taxis by the day or week. I used to buy junk taxis from a place called LA Taxi.

https://rideyellow.com/driver/


----------



## MikhailCA

observer said:


> There are companies that lease taxis by the day or week. I used to buy junk taxis from a place called LA Taxi.
> 
> https://rideyellow.com/driver/


Cool, do you need to have CDL or regular DL would be enough?


----------



## observer

MikhailCA said:


> Cool, do you need to have CDL or regular DL would be enough?


I believe just a regular DL. The CDL is for those that drive vehicles over 26K pounds or passenger busses.


----------



## Cynergie

Exactly 4 market commodities in SF & Bay Area are going to see an insane spike in sales if this goes down

1. Bikes
2. Skateboards
3. Cab medallions
4. Lyft share price

:laugh:

Just effing






Wonder how Prop 16 come November will be affecting this. Hmmm......


----------



## njn

Does the warn act even apply? Maybe...

" WARN generally applies to private employers with 100 or more employees, not counting employees who have worked less than 6 months in the last 12 months nor employees who work an average of fewer than 20 hours per week. In some cases, independent contractors and subsidiary companies may be treated as part of the employer when counting the number of employees for coverage purposes. "


----------



## MikhailCA

Cynergie said:


> Exactly 4 market commodities in SF & Bay Area are going to see an insane spike in sales if this goes down
> 
> 1. Bikes
> 2. Skateboards
> 3. Cab medallions
> 4. Lyft share price
> 
> :laugh:
> 
> Wonder how Prop 16 come November will be affecting this. Hmmm......


Cabis should be fairly busy if Uber will leave CA. Gonna try to apply on the next week.
Should be interesting how restaurant owners will react, those guys whining all the time what Uber is robbing them.

<off topic>
if someone work for them in the Bay Area or have some info I would be appreciated if you PM me about it.
</off topic>


----------



## observer

njn said:


> Does the warn act even apply? Maybe...
> 
> " WARN generally applies to private employers with 100 or more employees, not counting employees who have worked less than 6 months in the last 12 months nor employees who work an average of fewer than 20 hours per week. In some cases, independent contractors and subsidiary companies may be treated as part of the employer when counting the number of employees for coverage purposes. "


That should be a good chunk of drivers.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

observer said:


> HOLD THE PRESSES!!!
> 
> I just thought of something big, huge, YUUUUGE I tell ya.
> 
> At the moment drivers are considered EMPLOYEES.
> 
> If Uber shuts down NOW, it would be in violation of the WARN act and subject to its penalties.
> 
> https://www.fisherphillips.com/reso...Getting It,day and reasonable attorney's fees.
> 
> View attachment 498389
> 
> 
> @doyousensehumor
> 
> NOW I'M EXCITED!! :smiles:


Holly Canned Cannoli! &#127958;

You made me spill my latte on my poodle.

Are you saying what I think your saying?&#129300;

Are you saying we are Uber employees under the Law. Thus we get a severance package as compliance with the WARN ACT, like the other employees they let go the other month?

I got the SEC memo, but didn't get it till you hit the jackpot.

(As part of this restructuring, the Company expects to reduce its workforce by approximately 3,000 full-time employee roles. In connection with these actions, the Company estimates that it will incur approximately $175 million to $220 million of charges. These estimated costs include approximately $110 million to $140 million related to severance and other termination benefits (excluding stock-based compensation expense),

https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1543151/000155278120000362/e20337_uber-8k.htm


----------



## Jo3030




----------



## Boca Ratman

JimKE said:


> What makes you think Uber would pay minimum wage *+ $0.57/mile???*
> 
> They would pay minimum wage, period. You get to _DEDUCT the $0.57 per mile from your taxes_ as compensation for driving your own car. Uber is certainly not going to pay minimum wage plus time or mileage!


I'm CA, the employer must reimburse for milage.


----------



## observer

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Holly Canned Cannoli! &#127958;
> 
> You made me spill my latte on my poodle.
> 
> Are you saying what I think your saying?&#129300;
> 
> Are you saying we are Uber employees under the Law. Thus we get a severance package as compliance with the WARN ACT, like the other employees they let go the other month?
> 
> I got the SEC memo, but didn't get it till you hit the jackpot.
> 
> (As part of this restructuring, the Company expects to reduce its workforce by approximately 3,000 full-time employee roles. In connection with these actions, the Company estimates that it will incur approximately $175 million to $220 million of charges. These estimated costs include approximately $110 million to $140 million related to severance and other termination benefits (excluding stock-based compensation expense),
> 
> https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1543151/000155278120000362/e20337_uber-8k.htm


Not a severance package as those aren't required by law but when a company shuts down (in California) they must let employees know 60 days in advance. If they don't, they owe employess sixty days pay and penalties.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

Boca Ratman said:


> I'm CA, the employer must reimburse for milage.
> View attachment 498472


Federal law also backs it up,

However federal only states that you have to make min wage after all impermissible deductions (including mileage).

So if your employer paid you $20 an hour but didn't reimburse mileage and you wrote off $5.00 an hour worth of mileage they'd still be in compliance with federal.


----------



## The Entomologist




----------



## _Tron_

Has this been mentioned? Separate from any WARN monies -which presumably will take a court case, or ten- would all of us that don't get hired by Uber if/when the order cuts in be eligible to make a fresh application for unemployment. And would that application be considered not based upon the current minimum payout, but upon actual earnings over the past couple/few years?


----------



## The Entomologist

_Tron_ said:


> Has this been mentioned? Separate from any WARN monies -which presumably will take a court case, or ten- would all of us that don't get hired by Uber if/when the order cuts in be eligible to make a fresh application for unemployment. And would that application be considered not based upon the current minimum payout, but upon actual earnings over the past couple/few years?


Youll get to collect so much... it wont be funny.


----------



## _Tron_

Filipino858 said:


> It's like when the Titanic sank. The moment the judge said we must be employees is the moment the ship hit the iceberg. A slow sinking at first and then escalating into a heaping pile of Twisted metal and death. Uber has hit its iceberg, and now the water is sweeping in , and the bow is starting to dip ever so slightly into the water.


Yeah. And a third of us drivers will score a life raft, another third will be trapped in the lower decks, and the remaining third will be the idiots who still don't get it and will be off rearranging the deck chairs near the stern.


----------



## dnlbaboof

the wonders of ab5......uber as an employer is only responsible to pay drivers 12 bucks an hour minimum wage and 58 cents a mile, they'll hire a bunch of part time drivers so they don't have to give health care. So the new uber will be 12 bucks an hour and 58 cents a mile on a shift 30 miles from your house where you have to accept every ping and eat the miles back and forth since the dest filter will be gone......


----------



## OG ant

JimKE said:


> I actually don't think they have any choice.
> 
> The Uber/Lyft business model simply does not work if drivers are employees. Neither company is making profits NOW with independent contractor drivers, and paying very low rates.


I'm tired of bieng squeezed by uber, now they need to know how it feels, we wern't asking for much to begin with. I hope they shutdown. Karma always wins!


----------



## 197438

JimKE said:


> They stalled on the first stimulus package. They stalled on the second package.


Wake up. Dems got what they wanted in the first package after the GOP tried to gut what you were eventually given. Dems passed a second bill in the House THREE MONTHS BEFORE THE SENATE EVER TALKED ABOUT A SECOND PACKAGE. The Senate STILL has not passed a second bill. FYI...The GOP dominates the Senate and can't compromise even among themselves to garner enough votes for a bill. The Senate went home for vacation, showing you what they think of your plight. Apparently America will not be great until you are flat broke.


----------



## radikia




----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

I don't think there's going to be a loss I'm flexibility and here's why.

1. 10 part timers working 4 hours a week is cheaper than 1 full timer working 40 hours. The benifits are cheaper.

2. 10 part timers can better cover the busy times of the day than 1 fill timer.

3. they can "surge" drivers online to when needed with part timers, impossible with full timers.

4. it's infinitely easier to limit how many drivers can go online and kick them offline when there's too many than it is to schedule drivers.

4. let's assume Uber, lyft, grub hub, and door dash all cut you at 20 hours. That's 80 hours between the 4.

Monday-Friday 4:00 am to 8:00 am uber (max demand time)

Friday Saturday 3:00 pm to 3:00 am on lyft. There's another 20+ hours.

Monday-Friday 4:00 pm to 8:00 pm. Split between DD and grub hub. 
thats another 20 hours.

I count 60ish "peak" hours to gig where I see the companies not having to cap the number of active drivers too badly.


Dara is just trying to scare y'all into voting yes on prop 22.


----------



## observer

dnlbaboof said:


> the wonders of ab5......uber as an employer is only responsible to pay drivers 12 bucks an hour minimum wage and 58 cents a mile, they'll hire a bunch of part time drivers so they don't have to give health care. So the new uber will be 12 bucks an hour and 58 cents a mile on a shift 30 miles from your house where you have to accept every ping and eat the miles back and forth since the dest filter will be gone......


13 bux an hour. 12 bux an hour is for employers with less than 25 employees.

In three months it goes up to 14 bux an hour.

In one year and three months, it goes up to 15 bux an hour.

Some cities and counties also already have higher minimum wages so drivers would get paid the higher of the two.

Every time after that there is an increase in minimum wage, drivers also get an increase.

What can you expect wi th Uber as an Independent Contractor?

Lower and lower pay, higher and higher expenses.

If gas prices go up,

Who cares. Uber pays.

If you have to drive 30 miles to a pick up,

Who cares? Uber does.

Uber pays you for your miles and your time, they won't send you on a long run because UBER loses money, not the driver.


----------



## Philly heretic

EastBayRides said:


> With pax complaining about the price of rides this week, they deserve to find no rides available next week. After all, they voted for the fools in the Legislature who always have gifts to offer the unions under the guise of being for the workers. Let pax return to the days of six cabs for the entire city and 45 minute wait times.


What are you writing about?

States all over the US just got PUA data on gig workers making bank and then applying for government benefits. Walmart workers receive benefits too but they pay taxes (revenues for states) to feedback into the system; gig workers only do it on a small percentage. Even the IRS is updating its regulations on gig jobs. Although, legal now... many drivers game the system to reduce their taxes and apply for welfare.

PA Supreme Court ruled last week that Uber drivers are employees in regards to unemployment benefits, which means they (uber) will have to pay back taxes.

Where do you see unions, taxis, and fools in all of this? The legislators all over the country were using gig jobs to make their job numbers look good using venture capital money... Softbank quit the game (weworks debacle) and left the gig companies as bagholders.

Just enjoy the ride while it lasts... that was its original purpose.



JimKE said:


> I actually don't think they have any choice.
> 
> The Uber/Lyft business model simply does not work if drivers are employees. Neither company is making profits NOW with independent contractor drivers, and paying very low rates.


So what?

We are independent contractors now and the model still doesn't work (gig companies lost billions and continues to lose billions more since their inception)?

Only ones who lose are the retirees collecting ss, pensions, and gig income. Why should the rest of us care?


----------



## goneubering

observer said:


> There are companies that lease taxis by the day or week. I used to buy junk taxis from a place called LA Taxi.
> 
> https://rideyellow.com/driver/


What was the highest mileage you ever saw on those cars?


----------



## observer

goneubering said:


> What was the highest mileage you ever saw on those cars?


Bout 300K they were mostly old repainted cop cars.

Nowadays, they use mostly Prii so the mileage is probly higher.


----------



## tohunt4me

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

observer said:


> Bout 300K they were mostly old repainted cop cars.
> 
> Nowadays, they use mostly Prii so the mileage is probly higher.


as far as $300 a day I'd be skeptical of that,
Camrys that Mears taxi uses in Orlando max out at 350,000 or so.

The ford transit vans are under 350,000, the sienna vans get retired 300-350.

and the last of the e series vans are all massive gas guzzling POS that I won't touch to find out what mileage they are at.


----------



## observer

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> as far as $300 a day I'd be skeptical of that,
> Camrys that Mears taxi uses in Orlando max out at 350,000 or so.
> 
> The ford transit vans are under 350,000, the sienna vans get retired 300-350.
> 
> and the last of the e series vans are all massive gas guzzling POS that I won't touch to find out what mileage they are at.


Do they sell the old taxis or do they junk them out?

I'm not sure but I think most companies that use newer vehicles will sell them while they can still get a good price for them.

LA Taxi would keep them on the road the full ten years and cannibalize wrecked taxis and other taxis.


----------



## goneubering

Cynergie said:


> Exactly 4 market commodities in SF & Bay Area are going to see an insane spike in sales if this goes down
> 
> 1. Bikes
> 2. Skateboards
> 3. Cab medallions
> 4. Lyft share price
> 
> :laugh:
> 
> Just effing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wonder how Prop 16 come November will be affecting this. Hmmm......


I've heard Covid already caused a surge in bike sales.


----------



## jeanocelot

Mista T said:


> No, you don't.
> 
> This is directly from the IRS website:
> 
> *Employees*
> 
> Employees who use their car for work can no longer take an employee business expense deduction as part of their miscellaneous itemized deductions reported on Schedule A. Employees can't deduct this cost even if their employer doesn't reimburse the employee for using their own car. This is for tax years after December 2017. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act suspended miscellaneous itemized deductions subject to the 2% floor.
> 
> However, certain taxpayers may still deduct unreimbursed employee travel expenses, this includes Armed Forces reservists, qualified performing artists, and fee-basis state or local government officials.


This was never a big deduction. It was only for expenses that were above 2% of AGI, and only have any meaning if total deductions were over the standard deduction.



MikhailCA said:


> Actually there's no need to fire someone if you are not going to get hired. Wrongful termination? Do you know that does the term "at will employment" mean?
> I will let you you, we decide to fire you cuz we decide to fire you, no explanation.


U/L could simply put in quotas that are hard to meet, and if you don't meet them ...


----------



## Jacob THE DRIVER

observer said:


> Even if prop 22 passes, it will be immediately challenged in the courts.
> 
> Passage isn't assured.
> 
> Uber won't shut down for any length of time. They may do it for a week or two like they did in Arizona but they will be back, like they did in Arizona.
> 
> Uber can only bleed so much, they don't have any blood to spare. It would cost them millions of dollars a day.
> 
> This would be the perfect time for Didi to step in and open up their TNC the right way.


Uber didn't shut down in Arizona nor did it ever . Iv been here in the valley of hell I mean sun before uber took over and shut down all taxi traffic . This whole ab5 thing is bull$hit . The only people crying are non drivers who do not understand transportation as a whole . Anyone who makes their own money with miles understands and knows this nasty game . Uber fooled you as a "driver" and sold you ticket to a show that will never start. It's interesting to see the overwhelming hypocrisy of the average cali "driver" . You want all the benefits of being independent but at the same time demand the benefits of a hourly slave and now have ruined it for the rest hmmm sounds so California lmao. If you truly understood after the fact of what contracting thru uber or lyft is really about you would set your car on fire collect the insurance and move on. Mcdonalds pays minimum wage and has all the benefits you claim you are entitled too. It takes a certain kind of person to understand the ins and out and financial pitfalls of being independent and truly in charge of your own destiny . The part that everyone overlooks in this endless argument is what rideshare really did . They took away the freedom of choice and took away the building blocks to actually build a successful business so eventually you could build a client list that will fill your week and actually make you money. It's all more than obvious and could be seen if the ignorance of California wasn't as thick as the smog in the evening. By all means don't forget who really made this possible, the people. The people who take advantage of the average driver and use uber for everyday purposes . Uber has some of the smartest people working for them behind closed doors who have only one purpose , to **** you out of your money but no amount of education can trump a law fueled by ignorance so why not just pull out and stick it somewhere else . Losing California as a account in the long run is no big deal when you factor in California's greed and oversight to a company like uber . Personally I feel that during this bull$hit cancel culture uber is just protecting their image as they figure out what grease they need to get out of California with little public blow back . I fell bad for drivers in cali and I mean drivers not the part time whiners or the morons that finance brand new cars and then complain about the value of the car after a few months when odometer is reading almost 100,000 miles and they still have 40 more payments on a car that is technically worthless and is falling apart mechanically because you didn't comprehend what a work car is vs your commuter or family car. You made a mistake now be accountable for YOUR decision and stop ruining it for real drivers. Get uber out of California and drivers can actually make money again. Just go get a website from godaddy.com put your number on a google ad and get a yp.com listing and actually go work this game and make yourselves some mother****ing money .....


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

observer said:


> Do they sell the old taxis or do they junk them out?
> 
> I'm not sure but I think most companies that use newer vehicles will sell them while they can still get a good price for them.
> 
> LA Taxi would keep them on the road the full ten years and cannibalize wrecked taxis and other taxis.


They auctioned about 2/3rds of them with 1/3rd getting cannibalized. Anything that got badly wrecked got cannibalized. Depending on how many miles the vehicle had at the time of an accident they cannibalize them for parts.

and I beleive the term they use is "recycling",


----------



## observer

Jacob THE DRIVER said:


> Uber didn't shut down in Arizona nor did it ever . Iv been here in the valley of hell I mean sun before uber took over and shut down all taxi traffic . This whole ab5 thing is bull$hit . The only people crying are non drivers who do not understand transportation as a whole . Anyone who makes their own money with miles understands and knows this nasty game . Uber fooled you as a "driver" and sold you ticket to a show that will never start. It's interesting to see the overwhelming hypocrisy of the average cali "driver" . You want all the benefits of being independent but at the same time demand the benefits of a hourly slave and now have ruined it for the rest hmmm sounds so California lmao. If you truly understood after the fact of what contracting thru uber or lyft is really about you would set your car on fire collect the insurance and move on. Mcdonalds pays minimum wage and has all the benefits you claim you are entitled too. It takes a certain kind of person to understand the ins and out and financial pitfalls of being independent and truly in charge of your own destiny . The part that everyone overlooks in this endless argument is what rideshare really did . They took away the freedom of choice and took away the building blocks to actually build a successful business so eventually you could build a client list that will fill your week and actually make you money. It's all more than obvious and could be seen if the ignorance of California wasn't as thick as the smog in the evening. By all means don't forget who really made this possible, the people. The people who take advantage of the average driver and use uber for everyday purposes . Uber has some of the smartest people working for them behind closed doors who have only one purpose , to **** you out of your money but no amount of education can trump a law fueled by ignorance so why not just pull out and stick it somewhere else . Losing California as a account in the long run is no big deal when you factor in California's greed and oversight to a company like uber . Personally I feel that during this bull$hit cancel culture uber is just protecting their image as they figure out what grease they need to get out of California with little public blow back . I fell bad for drivers in cali and I mean drivers not the part time whiners or the morons that finance brand new cars and then complain about the value of the car after a few months when odometer is reading almost 100,000 miles and they still have 40 more payments on a car that is technically worthless and is falling apart mechanically because you didn't comprehend what a work car is vs your commuter or family car. You made a mistake now be accountable for YOUR decision and stop ruining it for real drivers. Get uber out of California and drivers can actually make money again. Just go get a website from godaddy.com put your number on a google ad and get a yp.com listing and actually go work this game and make yourselves some mother****ing money .....


My mistake, I should have been more specific.

Both Uber and Lyft threatened to shut down at Sky Harbor, which is where???

Arizona.

Of course, their threats got them no where even though they had politicians in their back pocket.

https://www.abc15.com/news/uber-to-cease-operations-at-sky-harbor-next-month-company-says
https://www.azfamily.com/news/lyft-...cle_dca0b4ee-21e0-11ea-8dd8-df04da1361bb.html


----------



## Crosbyandstarsky

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


Don't blame them


----------



## Jacob THE DRIVER

observer said:


> My mistake, I should have been more specific.
> 
> Both Uber and Lyft threatened to shut down at Sky Harbor, which is where???
> 
> Arizona.
> 
> Of course, their threats got them no where even though they had politicians in their back pocket.
> 
> https://www.abc15.com/news/uber-to-cease-operations-at-sky-harbor-next-month-company-says


Ahhh yes your very right about that it was all bluster but in the end in this greedy now purple state, the state went after the airport and ruled it was unconstitutional to charge uber and lyft more money to operate at sky harbor. Here in Arizona greed is just plain greed the state was not going to allow the city of phx to profit where the state cannot ...


----------



## observer

https://www.knau.org/post/uber-lyft-drop-threats-stop-serving-phoenix-sky-harbor-airport


Jacob THE DRIVER said:


> Ahhh yes your very right about that it was all bluster but in the end in this greedy now purple state, the state went after the airport and ruled it was unconstitutional to charge uber and lyft more money to operate at sky harbor. Here in Arizona greed is just plain greed the state was not going to allow the city of phx to profit where the state cannot ...


Both companies have a habit of threatening to leave but governments are calling their bluff.

Actually, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled against Uber, Lyft and their political friends.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.azcentral.com/amp/5112820002


----------



## Jacob THE DRIVER

observer said:


> https://www.knau.org/post/uber-lyft-drop-threats-stop-serving-phoenix-sky-harbor-airport
> 
> Both companies have a habit of threatening to leave but governments are calling their bluff.
> 
> Actually, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled against Uber, Lyft and their political friends.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.azcentral.com/amp/5112820002


There is a huge difference between a 4 dollar fee that increases over time vs California's bull$hit in operating a w2 based business...



observer said:


> https://www.knau.org/post/uber-lyft-drop-threats-stop-serving-phoenix-sky-harbor-airport
> 
> Both companies have a habit of threatening to leave but governments are calling their bluff.
> 
> Actually, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled against Uber, Lyft and their political friends.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.azcentral.com/amp/5112820002


I always admit if Im wrong and your right I forgot it did come back that way that fee as far as I knew was not passed on to the driver so I stopped caring . Doesn't sway my opinions on the matter tho.


----------



## Demon

Jacob THE DRIVER said:


> There is a huge difference between a 4 dollar fee that increases over time vs California's bull$hit in operating a w2 based business...
> 
> 
> I always admit if Im wrong and your right I forgot it did come back that way that fee as far as I knew was not passed on to the driver so I stopped caring . Doesn't sway my opinions on the matter tho.


You're right, there's a huge difference between Sky Harbor and the most populous state in the nation. If UBER chooses to shut down in California they may as well fold.


----------



## _Tron_

Jacob THE DRIVER said:


> [d sipfjgpdiuh pdihu rpihjpohij pdifgjh d[ij[erotr][pwqkt ]weothkj e[pjyho re[p jioerp[j oer[j hier[pzj ire[pokjh s]e[ogk wre[pjhie-irjyhre[okjyie[rpj y[wrejyo iwre[p jyoieryh[pjkrehy[peojy [eorjy[eryjhre[pijer er[ihjer[ ijrwe[ ijrwet[iprjet[rijy[rpi vjywr[ihpjerp[j hoer[iy jer[pzijwer[pzjore[p6 oj[re 6oj[repzjyore[pyjowe[pyjoe[pjyoerpjyoer[pzvoj[rep vojy[pejyoerp[j yoer[pzjyow-p yjw[peyiw[peyjiw[pejwpyoj[rijy[rewpiyj[ewpiyj[pity[werpyjer[p ejyerip[ yjer[pijy[eri jp[eri ypter[pejoer[ypjoer[pye6ors[piyjw][ypjow[3p5[d sipfjgpdiuh pdihu rpihjpohij pdifgjh d[ij[erotr][pwqkt ]weothkj e[pjyho re[p jioerp[j oer[j hier[pzj ire[pokjh s]e[ogk wre[pjhie-irjyhre[okjyie[rpj y[wrejyo iwre[p jyoieryh[pjkrehy[peojy [eorjy[eryjhre[pijer er[ihjer[ ijrwe[ ijrwet[iprjet[rijy[rpi vjywr[ihpjerp[j hoer[iy jer[pzijwer[pzjore[p6 oj[re 6oj[repzjyore[pyjowe[pyjoe[pjyoerpjyoer[pzvoj[rep vojy[pejyoerp[j yoer[pzjyow-p yjw[peyiw[peyjiw[pejwpyoj[rijy[rewpiyj[ewpiyj[pity[werpyjer[p ejyerip[ yjer[pijy[eri jp[eri ypter[pejoer[ypjoer[pye6ors[piyjw][ypjow[3p5[d sipfjgpdiuh pdihu rpihjpohij pdifgjh d[ij[erotr][pwqkt ]weothkj e[pjyho re[p jioerp[j oer[j hier[pzj ire[pokjh s]e[ogk wre[pjhie-irjyhre[okjyie[rpj y[wrejyo iwre[p jyoieryh[pjkrehy[peojy [eorjy[eryjhre[pijer er[ihjer[ ijrwe[ ijrwet[iprjet[rijy[rpi vjywr[ihpjerp[j hoer[iy jer[pzijwer[pzjore[p6 oj[re 6oj[repzjyore[pyjowe[pyjoe[pjyoerpjyoer[pzvoj[rep vojy[pejyoerp[j yoer[pzjyow-p yjw[peyiw[peyjiw[pejwpyoj[rijy[rewpiyj[ewpiyj[pity[werpyjer[p ejyerip[ yjer[pijy[eri jp[eri ypter[pejoer[ypjoer[pye6ors[piyjw][ypjow[3p5


Makes sense to me.


----------



## jeanocelot

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> They auctioned about 2/3rds of them with 1/3rd getting cannibalized. Anything that got badly wrecked got cannibalized. Depending on how many miles the vehicle had at the time of an accident they cannibalize them for parts.
> 
> and I beleive the term they use is "recycling",


I remember the taxis of the late 70s (the TV show, well, "Taxi" had perfect representations of them), and wondered why they looked like cars from the 50s. Of course, the reason is that ... they WERE cars from the 50s that had been kept going all this time. I remember taking a taxi in a Mercedes-Benz in Europe, and I got talking with the ant, and noticed that the car only had 120K km on it. He said the odometer had rolled over (i.e., 1120K km).


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

observer said:


> Not a severance package as those aren't required by law but when a company shuts down (in California) they must let employees know 60 days in advance. If they don't, they owe employess sixty days pay and penalties.


Potaito, potatoo.
Show me the money&#127958;

ShootIng their face off to spite their nose!


----------



## simont23

It boggles my mind at the refusal of most of the forum contributors to deliberately misunderstand Uber's position. To paraphrase California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, if a business cannot make enough money to look after it's employees, then maybe it shouldn't be in business. That applies to all businesses, and has applied, in an obvious manner to Uber since day one. The only people Uber has ever looked after are the few top executives. Which reminds me, speaking of sacking all it's drivers, has Uber's driverless car program made much headway since killing that pedestrian and getting caught stealing the other company's technology?



jeanocelot said:


> I remember the taxis of the late 70s (the TV show, well, "Taxi" had perfect representations of them), and wondered why they looked like cars from the 50s. Of course, the reason is that ... they WERE cars from the 50s that had been kept going all this time. I remember taking a taxi in a Mercedes-Benz in Europe, and I got talking with the ant, and noticed that the car only had 120K km on it. He said the odometer had rolled over (i.e., 1120K km).


Wrong. they were usually Checker taxis that were made the same shape for about 50 years from memory without doing any research. Correct me if I'm wrong!


----------



## jeanocelot

simont23 said:


> Wrong. they were usually Checker taxis that were made the same shape for about 50 years from memory without doing any research. Correct me if I'm wrong!


You are correct, but the first release of that mark was 1959; evidently, they never redesigned the body (until 1982) to save costs. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checker_Taxi


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> I don't think there's going to be a loss I'm flexibility and here's why.
> 
> 1. 10 part timers working 4 hours a week is cheaper than 1 full timer working 40 hours. The benifits are cheaper.
> 
> 2. 10 part timers can better cover the busy times of the day than 1 fill timer.
> 
> 3. they can "surge" drivers online to when needed with part timers, impossible with full timers.
> 
> 4. it's infinitely easier to limit how many drivers can go online and kick them offline when there's too many than it is to schedule drivers.
> 
> 4. let's assume Uber, lyft, grub hub, and door dash all cut you at 20 hours. That's 80 hours between the 4.
> 
> Monday-Friday 4:00 am to 8:00 am uber (max demand time)
> 
> Friday Saturday 3:00 pm to 3:00 am on lyft. There's another 20+ hours.
> 
> Monday-Friday 4:00 pm to 8:00 pm. Split between DD and grub hub.
> thats another 20 hours.
> 
> I count 60ish "peak" hours to gig where I see the companies not having to cap the number of active drivers too badly.
> 
> 
> Dara is just trying to scare y'all into voting yes on prop 22.


I agree.

A poster From NY explained to me there is no way to preplan and schedule rideshare demand.

Absolutely impossible to calculate how many drivers you need on a weekend or rush hour, especially with rigid full time schedule setting.

Its so blatantly a fear tactic and a refusal to go forward in a adult manner.

What is actual is limitation, cap on driver ability to log on during slow hours, example m-f 10 am- 2 pm. 10 pm to 4 am.

During busy hours, just like now, they will need as many drivers logged on as possible. I don't see a need to cap log on during busy hours.

Matter of fact, we would get surge notifications to log on during busy times to entice enough supply to meet demand.

FEAR TACTICS!


----------



## simont23

jeanocelot said:


> You are correct, but the first release of that mark was 1959; evidently, they never redesigned the body (until 1982) to save costs.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checker_Taxi


Ta .I should have done that research myself!


----------



## ThrowInTheTowel

Jacob THE DRIVER said:


> Uber didn't shut down in Arizona nor did it ever . Iv been here in the valley of hell I mean sun before uber took over and shut down all taxi traffic . This whole ab5 thing is bull$hit . The only people crying are non drivers who do not understand transportation as a whole . Anyone who makes their own money with miles understands and knows this nasty game . Uber fooled you as a "driver" and sold you ticket to a show that will never start. It's interesting to see the overwhelming hypocrisy of the average cali "driver" . You want all the benefits of being independent but at the same time demand the benefits of a hourly slave and now have ruined it for the rest hmmm sounds so California lmao. If you truly understood after the fact of what contracting thru uber or lyft is really about you would set your car on fire collect the insurance and move on. Mcdonalds pays minimum wage and has all the benefits you claim you are entitled too. It takes a certain kind of person to understand the ins and out and financial pitfalls of being independent and truly in charge of your own destiny . The part that everyone overlooks in this endless argument is what rideshare really did . They took away the freedom of choice and took away the building blocks to actually build a successful business so eventually you could build a client list that will fill your week and actually make you money. It's all more than obvious and could be seen if the ignorance of California wasn't as thick as the smog in the evening. By all means don't forget who really made this possible, the people. The people who take advantage of the average driver and use uber for everyday purposes . Uber has some of the smartest people working for them behind closed doors who have only one purpose , to @@@@ you out of your money but no amount of education can trump a law fueled by ignorance so why not just pull out and stick it somewhere else . Losing California as a account in the long run is no big deal when you factor in California's greed and oversight to a company like uber . Personally I feel that during this bull$hit cancel culture uber is just protecting their image as they figure out what grease they need to get out of California with little public blow back . I fell bad for drivers in cali and I mean drivers not the part time whiners or the morons that finance brand new cars and then complain about the value of the car after a few months when odometer is reading almost 100,000 miles and they still have 40 more payments on a car that is technically worthless and is falling apart mechanically because you didn't comprehend what a work car is vs your commuter or family car. You made a mistake now be accountable for YOUR decision and stop ruining it for real drivers. Get uber out of California and drivers can actually make money again. Just go get a website from godaddy.com put your number on a google ad and get a yp.com listing and actually go work this game and make yourselves some [email protected]@@@ing money .....


For someone who portrays to have expertise in this line of work you really failed to mention the key points with this issue by twisting the facts.

As always anyone who disagrees does not drive or must be a part time uneducated loser. To the facts, nobody ever wanted the benefits of being an independent contractor and be paid as an hourly slave at the same time. We wanted Uber/Lyft to follow the law of the land. I have a legal right to protect my independent contractor status and decide what is best for me to be profitable in this business. How dare Uber/Lyft take that right from us, pay me what they decide to pay, force me to follow rules and regulations on their platform to their satisfaction, but classify me as an IC to avoid paying the benefits associated with said status.

The truth or the matter is the real idiots are anyone who will sit back and think it is ok to skirt the laws and take advantage of people. The bigger idiots are the ones who try to defend it. We look at a prostitute as a fool for working hard 7 days a week and giving all her money to her pimp. In return he provides her with the bare minimum necessities to survive which she could already do with her own money. He needs her more. No sex, no profit.

Now we have Uber/Lyft here working as pimps making us use our own cars and taking half the profits. Yet we defend them just like the prostitute defends the pimp after he beats her to a pulp. It was my fault for making him angry. Stop blaming the driver. Stop blaming the politicians. Stop being blind and ignorant. Blame your pimp. (Uber/Lyft)


----------



## Jacob THE DRIVER

Nice a emotionally based opinion. Respected but I do not agree as is why I left the bay area in the 90s for Sacramento and then left the hypocrisy behind and bailed on cali all together . There is no twisting of facts. I worked as a driver all my life from a hourly paid work to owner operator. I have managed tow companies and taxi companies , supervised fleets of drivers and have leased my own taxis to drivers . I have heard all the complaints in the world with whats wrong with working as a driver and I will say the same thing again go find another line of work this is not for you . Up until march 13 2020 I was 5 star uber driver and if it wasn't for this pandemic I would be out running my business . Do I agree with the way uber runs its business and treats its drivers fu(k no not in the least . That is why as a person with expertise in this field I take uber for what it is a contract, a contract with many and very hair splitting stipulations . I also did run a ad on yp.com and passed out cards to just about anyone I could talk to offering the only service left that could compete with rideshare ie airport transportation. I also contracted with lyft up until they redid the rates. I didnt cry foul or organize a march or portray udder devastation and how unfair this company is with their contracts. I dropped them like a bad habit fu(k em this is merica I am free to do as I wish within the confides of the law something California residents know nothing about. 
No business on this planet gets to operate for free. Especially in the taxi business. California is so stuck on labels. We can call it whatever you want but at the end of the day this is a taxi business . Only difference is uber is handing you the customers . Yes its your car, your gas, your time and your responsibility to run your business as you see fit . The part that is blindly overlooked is those are uber customers . Uber does the advertising, uber invented the software that allows me to provide this service so uber should give this to me all for free is what Im hearing and I do not agree with that . Whats the law of the land mean to you I googled it and cant find the correlation . Are you implying that since all you non drivers cried foul and now some new law has been imposed uber should just follow it because its law . What about illegal immigration those laws are broken everyday and Californians support those law breaking individuals by making excuses for them , so uber cant bend the law or perverse the law in their favor just like your average Californian and illegal immigrant does when they see fit . Hypocrisy the left liberal way of america. Just because the majority all agree to be two faced and ignorant doesn't make it right . Last time i checked 2+2= 4 the true definition of equality. I dont know what math is being taught in school but thats equal to me . 
I see your trying to use prostitution as some example okay . Are you or have you ever prostituted yourself ? Odds are no so how dare you compare any of this to a prostitute or the game of prostitution. There are leaps and bounds difference between a man or woman who is forced to sell their body so someone else can profit and a man or woman who chooses to play that game , again its the shock value of what you think your saying. I lived in Las Vegas for over 5 years where "prostitution" is some what legal and tolerated. I drove limos there and never encountered any of the stereo types that came from people that never once sold their own body let alone have sold another person for profit.. While I lived in Sacramento I lived on auburn blvd between watt and fulton plenty of working girls and pimps and never saw a single beating or black eye and I had regular customers in my taxi on both sides of the line. lol True story when I drove for b.c cab back in the day I had a working girl get in my taxi and complain on how slow it was for a friday night I said funny its 3 am and every guy i picked up from a bar that was alone was asking where the girls at , she laughed and two light bulbs went off in the car at the same time she said could I ride with you from midnight until 3 am it will get me off the street and I bet your tips will go up I laughed and being in my twenty's I said ok . See always looking for opportunity . Something uber drivers should consider no dont start selling kitty kat in your car but dont put all your eggs in one basket duh. It came to a abrupt end when another driver found out got jealous and thought I was making a killing and getting free kitty kat . He tried it and got robbed lmao I knew who I was with, he picked up some random girl and learned the hard way , after that he snitched me out and said I was contributing to human trafficking and was running a prostitution ring in the cab but only after he tried and failed HYPOCRITE lmao see thats the california way baby and you can keep it .Needless to say Roxy made her money, my tips and demand did go up and at the end I was a well known driver so it was win win . Personally Im offended at how your trying to say uber is my pimp and Im a prostitute by that way of ignorant thinking anyone who works is a prostitute and maybe hair thin maybe so but cmon now is McDonalds a pimp , how about amazon ? They pay 18 bucks per hour on flex . I could have sworn Bezos made a few billion dollars in one day does that make him the OG pimp of pimps no it doesn't. Oh your avatar is also offensive to me you do not represent anything wonder woman . Wonder woman stood for whats right and didn't just throw in the towel or go around spreading bull$hit and didn't just help people based on what could further her own opinion. Wonder woman helped men women and children in her show I loved watching wonder woman back in the 80s a true balance of beauty and righteousness.


----------



## goneubering

Jacob THE DRIVER said:


> Nice a emotionally based opinion. Respected but I do not agree as is why I left the bay area in the 90s for Sacramento and then left the hypocrisy behind and bailed on cali all together . There is no twisting of facts. I worked as a driver all my life from a hourly paid work to owner operator. I have managed tow companies and taxi companies , supervised fleets of drivers and have leased my own taxis to drivers . I have heard all the complaints in the world with whats wrong with working as a driver and I will say the same thing again go find another line of work this is not for you . Up until march 13 2020 I was 5 star uber driver and if it wasn't for this pandemic I would be out running my business . Do I agree with the way uber runs its business and treats its drivers fu(k no not in the least . That is why as a person with expertise in this field I take uber for what it is a contract, a contract with many and very hair splitting stipulations . I also did run a ad on yp.com and passed out cards to just about anyone I could talk to offering the only service left that could compete with rideshare ie airport transportation. I also contracted with lyft up until they redid the rates. I didnt cry foul or organize a march or portray udder devastation and how unfair this company is with their contracts. I dropped them like a bad habit fu(k em this is merica I am free to do as I wish within the confides of the law something California residents know nothing about.
> No business on this planet gets to operate for free. Especially in the taxi business. California is so stuck on labels. We can call it whatever you want but at the end of the day this is a taxi business . Only difference is uber is handing you the customers . Yes its your car, your gas, your time and your responsibility to run your business as you see fit . The part that is blindly overlooked is those are uber customers . Uber does the advertising, uber invented the software that allows me to provide this service so uber should give this to me all for free is what Im hearing and I do not agree with that . Whats the law of the land mean to you I googled it and cant find the correlation . Are you implying that since all you non drivers cried foul and now some new law has been imposed uber should just follow it because its law . What about illegal immigration those laws are broken everyday and Californians support those law breaking individuals by making excuses for them , so uber cant bend the law or perverse the law in their favor just like your average Californian and illegal immigrant does when they see fit . Hypocrisy the left liberal way of america. Just because the majority all agree to be two faced and ignorant doesn't make it right . Last time i checked 2+2= 4 the true definition of equality. I dont know what math is being taught in school but thats equal to me .
> I see your trying to use prostitution as some example okay . Are you or have you ever prostituted yourself ? Odds are no so how dare you compare any of this to a prostitute or the game of prostitution. There are leaps and bounds difference between a man or woman who is forced to sell their body so someone else can profit and a man or woman who chooses to play that game , again its the shock value of what you think your saying. I lived in Las Vegas for over 5 years where "prostitution" is some what legal and tolerated. I drove limos there and never encountered any of the stereo types that came from people that never once sold their own body let alone have sold another person for profit.. While I lived in Sacramento I lived on auburn blvd between watt and fulton plenty of working girls and pimps and never saw a single beating or black eye and I had regular customers in my taxi on both sides of the line. lol True story when I drove for b.c cab back in the day I had a working girl get in my taxi and complain on how slow it was for a friday night I said funny its 3 am and every guy i picked up from a bar that was alone was asking where the girls at , she laughed and two light bulbs went off in the car at the same time she said could I ride with you from midnight until 3 am it will get me off the street and I bet your tips will go up I laughed and being in my twenty's I said ok . See always looking for opportunity . Something uber drivers should consider no dont start selling kitty kat in your car but dont put all your eggs in one basket duh. It came to a abrupt end when another driver found out got jealous and thought I was making a killing and getting free kitty kat . He tried it and got robbed lmao I knew who I was with, he picked up some random girl and learned the hard way , after that he snitched me out and said I was contributing to human trafficking and was running a prostitution ring in the cab but only after he tried and failed HYPOCRITE lmao see thats the california way baby and you can keep it .Needless to say Roxy made her money, my tips and demand did go up and at the end I was a well known driver so it was win win . Personally Im offended at how your trying to say uber is my pimp and Im a prostitute by that way of ignorant thinking anyone who works is a prostitute and maybe hair thin maybe so but cmon now is McDonalds a pimp , how about amazon ? They pay 18 bucks per hour on flex . I could have sworn Bezos made a few billion dollars in one day does that make him the OG pimp of pimps no it doesn't. Oh your avatar is also offensive to me you do not represent anything wonder woman . Wonder woman stood for whats right and didn't just throw in the towel or go around spreading bull$hit and didn't just help people based on what could further her own opinion. Wonder woman helped men women and children in her show I loved watching wonder woman back in the 80s a true balance of beauty and righteousness.


How did this thread veer into Wonder Woman??!!


----------



## ThrowInTheTowel

@Jacob THE DRIVER . You have been in this business for a long time as you say. Did you really think Uber/Lyft would get away with this forever? This is not a new law. The law clearly states what qualifies as an Independent Contractor. A certain amount of control of daily operations must be rendered to said contractor. Uber/Lyft clearly violated those laws by classifying drivers as independent contractors while maintaining control over everything except flexibility to drive with open schedule. They were found guilty by a court and refused to accept the ruling.

Comparing them to Amazon Flex is like comparing apples to oranges. Even Amazon has enough sense to make sure all drivers get more than minimum wage to avoid the negative attention. When you have drivers that are using their own vehicles and are not guaranteed minimum wage YES you are pimping them, YES it is illegal, and YES all good things must come to an end. Instead of saying drivers should find another line of work, based on your said experience, you should of been saying if taxi cab companies can't get away it why hell did they think they would?

We expect them to run a business for free? Marketing costs and App expenses? News Flash... They have made billions of dollars in profits but have squandered every penny on nonsense like self driving cars. That's what pimps do. Take drivers profits and buy out the competition and pimp those drivers too.


----------



## June132017

I tried searching the MPG of the Checker taxi cab's and couldn't find any info. Anyone able to find how many MPG these old cabs got?


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

simont23 said:


> Wrong. they were usually Checker taxis that were made the same shape for about 50 years from memory without doing any research. Correct me if I'm wrong!


I'm not a historian but... a quick search shows...










This 1982 is the last checker cab to roll of the assembly line. This car was the very last.










and this one is a 1958 A8.

So the things just didn't change for decades, from the late 50s into the mid 80s they were all basically the same. And i have no doubt that there was checker cabs still operating into the mid 80s.

Checker mostly built them for commercial vehicles so there was little need to redesign and the parts were often interchangeable between _very_ wide age range.

One of the advantages to using cars like this is that the parts are much more available, they are easier to cannibalize, and if your just replacing a % of your fleet a year you don't need to keep parts for 5 different age years, only a pile of checker parts.

Most taxi companies in this age range had their own shops and did their own everything in house saving money.



June132017 said:


> I tried searching the MPG of the Checker taxi cab's and couldn't find any info. Anyone able to find how many MPG these old cabs got?


4 gallons to the mile?

Just a guess but the cars from the late 50s hate horrible fuel economy.


----------



## tohunt4me

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> I'm not a historian but... a quick search shows...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This 1982 is the last checker cab to roll of the assembly line. This car was the very last.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and this one is a 1958 A8.
> 
> So the things just didn't change for decades, from the late 50s into the mid 80s they were all basically the same. And i have no doubt that there was checker cabs still operating into the mid 80s.
> 
> Checker mostly built them for commercial vehicles so there was little need to redesign and the parts were often interchangeable between _very_ wide age range.
> 
> One of the advantages to using cars like this is that the parts are much more available, they are easier to cannibalize, and if your just replacing a % of your fleet a year you don't need to keep parts for 5 different age years, only a pile of checker parts.
> 
> Most taxi companies in this age range had their own shops and did their own everything in house saving money.


You cant buy a " Cheap" Checker anymore either !
$$!!!

Someone has a Checker " El Camino" near where i deliver pizza.
Probably a Custom build.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

tohunt4me said:


> You cant buy a " Cheap" Checker anymore either !
> $$!!!
> 
> Someone has a Checker " El Camino" near where i deliver pizza.
> Probably a Custom build.
> View attachment 498861
> View attachment 498862


Considering the newest checkers are pushing 30 years they are virtually all "Classics" at his point. The oldest models are also virtually impossible to find,

I've considered picking up a 70s/80s checker just to have one.

If i got one i'd drop a crate engine in it and make it a hot rod.

For laughs i'd put the uber pay rate on the door...


----------



## 197438

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> I don't think there's going to be a loss I'm flexibility and here's why.
> 
> 1. 10 part timers working 4 hours a week is cheaper than 1 full timer working 40 hours. The benifits are cheaper.
> 
> 2. 10 part timers can better cover the busy times of the day than 1 fill timer.
> 
> 3. they can "surge" drivers online to when needed with part timers, impossible with full timers.
> 
> 4. it's infinitely easier to limit how many drivers can go online and kick them offline when there's too many than it is to schedule drivers.
> 
> 4. let's assume Uber, lyft, grub hub, and door dash all cut you at 20 hours. That's 80 hours between the 4.
> 
> Monday-Friday 4:00 am to 8:00 am uber (max demand time)
> 
> Friday Saturday 3:00 pm to 3:00 am on lyft. There's another 20+ hours.
> 
> Monday-Friday 4:00 pm to 8:00 pm. Split between DD and grub hub.
> thats another 20 hours.
> 
> I count 60ish "peak" hours to gig where I see the companies not having to cap the number of active drivers too badly.
> 
> 
> Dara is just trying to scare y'all into voting yes on prop 22.


If you had a clue, you would beI don't need to be scared into voting Yes on Prop 22. I was convinced AB5 was an awful law from the moment I read it. VOTE YES ON PROP 22! No to unions.


Philly heretic said:


> What are you writing about?
> 
> States all over the US just got PUA data on gig workers making bank and then applying for government benefits. Walmart workers receive benefits too but they pay taxes (revenues for states) to feedback into the system; gig workers only do it on a small percentage. Even the IRS is updating its regulations on gig jobs. Although, legal now... many drivers game the system to reduce their taxes and apply for welfare.
> 
> PA Supreme Court ruled last week that Uber drivers are employees in regards to unemployment benefits, which means they (uber) will have to pay back taxes.
> 
> Where do you see unions, taxis, and fools in all of this? The legislators all over the country were using gig jobs to make their job numbers look good using venture capital money... Softbank quit the game (weworks debacle) and left the gig companies as bagholders.
> 
> Just enjoy the ride while it lasts... that was its original purpose.
> 
> 
> So what?
> 
> We are independent contractors now and the model still doesn't work (gig companies lost billions and continues to lose billions more since their inception)?
> 
> Only ones who lose are the retirees collecting ss, pensions, and gig income. Why should the rest of us care?


This is sad in its naiveté. The shift from gig to employee is a purely Democrat legal maneuver. In other words, it's the unions. If you still are unconvinced, do some research into who is paying the organize drivers groups that are taking on each state. Do you really believe rideshare app drivers knew how to organize a national movement? There's no Lech Walesa leading this movement.

Taxis? I don't see taxis in my city. That's why Uber was created - to fill a vast void in the transportation sector. That was the point of my comment on pax vying for the same 6 cabs.

Fools? You seem to be one of them, and many of them vote us new taxes and other bad ideas every election day...sometime a bad proposition with new taxes, sometimes a bad politician like the one who wrote AB5 (and is also a union organizer).

Pensions? Seriously? How are pensions doing these days? How many old companies have gone bankrupt due to pensions and left their retirees with nothing. Is your municipality's pension doing well in this 0% interest environment? My self-managed IRA is doing better than any pension. What rock have you been hiding beneath for the past three decades? As a private contractor, it is your responsibility to pay for your own health insurance and retirement plan, just like any other business does for its employees. Why do you think it is someone else's responsibility to take care of you? Are you infirm? Do you enjoy being a dependent?

Time to step into the 21st century, Philly. Reagan killed the unions (Pennsyltucky voted for Reagan...see my next remark about Boomers and their poor election choices), and we have all had ample time since then to figure out how to live life without unions. The Baby Boomers did not leave us with a functional governing system or viable employment system. The best way to create the necessary change is to stop voting for Baby Boomers and their stale, 20th century ideas (like pensions and unions). I would take this even farther and suggest we eliminate states, an 18th century idea and slavery relic that exacerbates many of the nation's problems, but that's too deep a philosophical/intellectual discussion for this forum.

Uber/Lyft transactions are all documented electronically. Tax each dollar that transacts through the app. End of story. No union needed. No pension needed. No boss needed. No income tax needed. Andrew Yang knows what he is talking about.


----------



## MikhailCA

EastBayRides said:


> If you had a clue, you would beI don't need to be scared into voting Yes on Prop 22. I was convinced AB5 was an awful law from the moment I read it. VOTE YES ON PROP 22! No to unions.
> 
> This is sad in its naiveté. The shift from gig to employee is a purely Democrat legal maneuver. In other words, it's the unions. If you still are unconvinced, do some research into who is paying the organize drivers groups that are taking on each state. Do you really believe rideshare app drivers knew how to organize a national movement? There's no Lech Walesa leading this movement.
> 
> Taxis? I don't see taxis in my city. That's why Uber was created - to fill a vast void in the transportation sector. That was the point of my comment on pax vying for the same 6 cabs.
> 
> Fools? You seem to be one of them, and many of them vote us new taxes and other bad ideas every election day...sometime a bad proposition with new taxes, sometimes a bad politician like the one who wrote AB5 (and is also a union organizer).
> 
> Pensions? Seriously? How are pensions doing these days? How many old companies have gone bankrupt due to pensions and left their retirees with nothing. Is your municipality's pension doing well in this 0% interest environment? My self-managed IRA is doing better than any pension. What rock have you been hiding beneath for the past three decades? As a private contractor, it is your responsibility to pay for your own health insurance and retirement plan, just like any other business does for its employees. Why do you think it is someone else's responsibility to take care of you? Are you infirm? Do you enjoy being a dependent?
> 
> Time to step into the 21st century, Philly. Reagan killed the unions (Pennsyltucky voted for Reagan...see my next remark about Boomers and their poor election choices), and we have all had ample time since then to figure out how to live life without unions. The Baby Boomers did not leave us with a functional governing system or viable employment system. The best way to create the necessary change is to stop voting for Baby Boomers and their stale, 20th century ideas (like pensions and unions). I would take this even farther and suggest we eliminate states, an 18th century idea and slavery relic that exacerbates many of the nation's problems, but that's too deep a philosophical/intellectual discussion for this forum.
> 
> Uber/Lyft transactions are all documented electronically. Tax each dollar that transacts through the app. End of story. No union needed. No pension needed. No boss needed. No income tax needed. Andrew Yang knows what he is talking about.


Prop 22 gonna be in November, so most of the drivers will stop giving a *** about Uber by this date. Anyway Uber will be forced to double the rates, so gonna be decrease in demand. Wanna see who gonna order happy meal from Macdonald for 20$


----------



## Philly heretic

EastBayRides said:


> If you had a clue, you would beI don't need to be scared into voting Yes on Prop 22. I was convinced AB5 was an awful law from the moment I read it. VOTE YES ON PROP 22! No to unions.
> 
> This is sad in its naiveté. The shift from gig to employee is a purely Democrat legal maneuver. In other words, it's the unions. If you still are unconvinced, do some research into who is paying the organize drivers groups that are taking on each state. Do you really believe rideshare app drivers knew how to organize a national movement? There's no Lech Walesa leading this movement.
> 
> Taxis? I don't see taxis in my city. That's why Uber was created - to fill a vast void in the transportation sector. That was the point of my comment on pax vying for the same 6 cabs.
> 
> Fools? You seem to be one of them, and many of them vote us new taxes and other bad ideas every election day...sometime a bad proposition with new taxes, sometimes a bad politician like the one who wrote AB5 (and is also a union organizer).
> 
> Pensions? Seriously? How are pensions doing these days? How many old companies have gone bankrupt due to pensions and left their retirees with nothing. Is your municipality's pension doing well in this 0% interest environment? My self-managed IRA is doing better than any pension. What rock have you been hiding beneath for the past three decades? As a private contractor, it is your responsibility to pay for your own health insurance and retirement plan, just like any other business does for its employees. Why do you think it is someone else's responsibility to take care of you? Are you infirm? Do you enjoy being a dependent?
> 
> Time to step into the 21st century, Philly. Reagan killed the unions (Pennsyltucky voted for Reagan...see my next remark about Boomers and their poor election choices), and we have all had ample time since then to figure out how to live life without unions. The Baby Boomers did not leave us with a functional governing system or viable employment system. The best way to create the necessary change is to stop voting for Baby Boomers and their stale, 20th century ideas (like pensions and unions). I would take this even farther and suggest we eliminate states, an 18th century idea and slavery relic that exacerbates many of the nation's problems, but that's too deep a philosophical/intellectual discussion for this forum.
> 
> Uber/Lyft transactions are all documented electronically. Tax each dollar that transacts through the app. End of story. No union needed. No pension needed. No boss needed. No income tax needed. Andrew Yang knows what he is talking about.


The only thing I agree with is simplifying the tax code through the transaction process. VAT tax... and that's it.

By the way, reread my reply... and do some research before you spit out some anecdotal bs... here.


----------



## observer

Jacob THE DRIVER said:


> There is a huge difference between a 4 dollar fee that increases over time vs California's bull$hit in operating a w2 based business...





Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> I'm not a historian but... a quick search shows...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This 1982 is the last checker cab to roll of the assembly line. This car was the very last.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and this one is a 1958 A8.
> 
> So the things just didn't change for decades, from the late 50s into the mid 80s they were all basically the same. And i have no doubt that there was checker cabs still operating into the mid 80s.
> 
> Checker mostly built them for commercial vehicles so there was little need to redesign and the parts were often interchangeable between _very_ wide age range.
> 
> One of the advantages to using cars like this is that the parts are much more available, they are easier to cannibalize, and if your just replacing a % of your fleet a year you don't need to keep parts for 5 different age years, only a pile of checker parts.
> 
> Most taxi companies in this age range had their own shops and did their own everything in house saving money.
> 
> 
> 4 gallons to the mile?
> 
> Just a guess but the cars from the late 50s hate horrible fuel economy.


We didn't use taxis much here when I was young, actually I still don't use taxis here much, but I do remember getting in to a checker cab a couple times.

Taxis just weren't a thing here. Usually it was after a trip to the Pike or Ports O'Call with my grandpa. The only thing I remember about them was the seats were slippery and they were YUUUUGE inside.

One of my neighbors at one time was a taxi driver back east and he found a Checker cab here. He bought it fixed it up and when he retired back east he took it with him.


----------



## ANT 7

Dara should shut down immediately, and list their corporate properties in CA for sale, subject to Prop 22 results. Engage the same firm to find a new corporate HQ in a friendly state. Uber wouldn't be the first company to flee Kalifornia, and they will not be the last.

What's that, a couple of hundred thousand out of work VOTERS and their VOTER families that Governor Newsom will have to contend with ? San Francisco real estate will crater if that happens.

As much as I dislike TK, he would have eaten that liberal puke for breakfast and shit him out within the hour.


----------



## AnUberDriver.

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


By word we are IC's..but by pay we are worst than employees..if uber pays driver fare as ic ..then no1 will sue them..
Minimim delivery was $4.00 now it is 3
Was paying 1.2+0.8 pickup dropoff now is waived..on each trip we have 3 dollars loss..why did u lower? Minimum delivery must be $6.00 to us to be called ics..
Uberx must be 1.00ml net and 25cents mnt net..then u can say IC's..


----------



## 15000+driver

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


This will create major Bankruptcies in CA. People use Uber to make ends meet and taking that away will destroy the CA economy. Leave it to democrats to destroy the national economy and shut down peoples ability to survive.. You really think socialism is still a good idea?


----------



## thumpus

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


California has some of the the dumbest government officials in the entire Union. Some of these clowns have been on CNBC this week and they are just so out of touch. Who would want to be an employee when you can be a freelancer??? Now the drivers will have NOTHING! The stupidity is astonishing.


----------



## goneubering

ANT 7 said:


> Dara should shut down immediately, and list their corporate properties in CA for sale, subject to Prop 22 results. Engage the same firm to find a new corporate HQ in a friendly state. Uber wouldn't be the first company to flee Kalifornia, and they will not be the last.
> 
> What's that, a couple of hundred thousand out of work VOTERS and their VOTER families that Governor Newsom will have to contend with ? San Francisco real estate will crater if that happens.
> 
> As much as I dislike TK, he would have eaten that liberal puke for breakfast and shit him out within the hour.


SF real estate will be fine. Which means still absurdly expensive. It's the smaller towns and poor people who will suffer the most.


----------



## TheShow

Here's the thing about business in general I learned decades ago. 90% of all starting businesses will go out of business in the first 3 years, and of the remainder 70% will go out of business in just a few more years. Of the remainder yet...the rest will stay in business long. I have had lots and lots of experience with my own businesses and then other business analysis...and lots and lots of markets. Markets are specific areas of businesses and their customers for a specific kind of business offer.

Most of the time people in general as a rule can't figure out business, and that's what the college statistic said. That's what my years of experience taught me, and this is an insult to their faces because...anything else is too. Se la vie. They're many things, as many are, but that's not at all my point. My point is that they can't figure out business, and these incompetent people might be okay at snapping parts together at a manufacturing joint, raking leaves under a tree climber's tree, or collecting the till by the register at the checkout counter, but they can't manage their own business. They fail, flop, and go out of business.

Given the real statistics I learned in business school long ago mentioned at the top it is no wonder that there would be any rhetoric in a government circuit about"the congiguration of the bid/offer brokering that goes on between the driver and the driver companies for them, so that they can just check in and out of work like a regular simp's jobby job, and not have to configure any business strategy for themselves..." for these incompetent nerds. In other words it would be like a stupid monkey government stepping in to all of the businesses out there, and making all of the business owners and brokers be paid on a simple hourly wages basis...thus the "business" is removed from the businesses...stolen by the stupid monkey governments not for free by the way for the simpleton masses or so they say.

The majority of people can't figure out business, and stupid monkey governments are only happy to ruin business as a rule of thumb especially in coastal metro states like as in West Europe. You will never get rid of either one as they are the majority of the market in any regard on this planet; no matter what. In fact in 20 years of doing various business ventures...the dumb monkey governments and/or the incompetent business makers have goofed up every single business market I've ever been in. Every time it comes down to this nerd problem, and then POOF! The market is gone because stupid simians in governments don't abide by the laws themselves which are stated in the Constitution of the Republic. They instead place their business of usurpation everywhere they can extorting by force of kidnapping and larceny in order to recuperate all of their "business losses" for incompetently running their government rackets with varying degrees and off shots by the way. They are a categorical phenomenon themselves unbeknownst to themselves however, thus a Constitution tries to curb their messy interference hazards.

As a rule of thumb in business and markets' trends you should never "run to a deal" of any kind, but research and look around first...coming back to it later if there is nothing wrong with the future of that deal, or if they're is not a better version of that deal elsewhere because you have to make sure that there is going to be a demand at a higher rate than the rate you invested for that. If there is not a higher demanding price for what you invest in, you can only liquidate it at a loss. Boohoo.  Also don't expect any deal or market opportunities to last long because they won't since every single opportunity is open for only a brief window before market saturation dilutes the pricing power at your loss, or demand simply fades away. If you are late on this last one, you're late, and don't run to that deal with the fear of missing out...because you'll wind up with more losses and problems than you'll benefit every time. There are too many deals and market opportunities in the world to be be in a hurry for any one of them. They are all the same where you're going to broker some product and/or service as the spread maker between sellers and buyers, and believe me when I say that...

*...monkey governments will be there to take that from you ASAP...every single f-fring time.*

As a rideshare driver I make around $60 an hour on UberX, but I depend a lot on tips...big tips by the way, and I work only certain hours and days of the week to maximize the pay per hour. I wouldn't bother with any other hours of the week which pay less per hour. It took me 6 months of experimenting and testing to figure out the best pattern, and it was all good after that...too good obviously because here is the government and their nerds nabbing away my spread takes on the contracts with Uber and the market...every time in business they'll be there. They're mentally ill as in the information that their brains operate on is fallacious and insufficient for them to have the capacity to remove themselves from businesses. All they are is a group of Fudds with guns and kidnap cells using that for viability in capital markets. Technically that could repeat itself back upstream, and they would be forced to comply the same way, but it never happens. :ninja:


----------



## SHalester

TheShow said:


> As a rideshare driver I make around $60 an hour on UberX,


um, gross¿ Right? It is ok I'm skeptical? Otherwise welcome to the forum; if this is your first time....I mean......


----------



## TheShow

SHalester said:


> um, gross¿ Right? It is ok I'm skeptical? Otherwise welcome to the forum; if this is your first time....I mean......


Since nobody in business talks net, I suppose yeah.


----------



## SHalester

TheShow said:


> Since nobody in business talks net


Here, I talk positive cash flow. I don't care about gross, or really even net. I care about cash flow and having a net tax loss at YE. Nothing else matter to me, but the time RS gives me OUT OF THE HOUSE.

but, still, I find $60 a hour to be quite high; maybe as a unicorn day, but not daily/weekly/monthly. I'm a skeptic. Hope that is ok.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

Everyone who makes less than zero on their taxes would experience a $13 an hour increase in California.

sure paying taxes sucks but I’d rather make twice as much than not pay taxes.

And for the record,

In California $25 would be employee classification min wage ( an average of 20 miles driven per hour) and only $13 would be taxable.

the rest would go into gasoline, oil changes and a new car.

You shouldn’t be at zero income after expenses. That’s the whole GD problem.

Zero income after expenses is literally being paid zero.

All of us should be getting a large pile of untaxed money to be putting into a new shiny Cadillac.

Realaliatically, there’s no reasons we can’t all be driving Cadillacs with what we would be getting paid in reimbursements every day.

The 57.5 c or 58c a mile, that’s $100-150 a day,

It’s enough to run an SUV or large truck. That’s what the math is designed for, not a fuel efficient car.

If your using a Camry hybrid you should be pulling in $30-50 a day in tax free money as a bonus for using a fuel Efficient car and not a gas guzzler.

Uber has this so sideways upside down on the pay that it’s literally sickening to think about,


----------



## ANT 7

goneubering said:


> SF real estate will be fine. Which means still absurdly expensive. It's the smaller towns and poor people who will suffer the most.


You live in CA, so you'd know the local market better than I do, living up here in Soviet Kanuckistan where I am.

Thing is, it only takes a 10% shit in the RE market to screw up the other 90 % in my experience............unfortunately we are having a bigger problem than that, with 15.5 % "reported" unemployment, and a 40 % commercial vacancy rate in our downtown high rises. Residential RE is down 30% in value and sales are off 50% +.........an average run of the mill one bedroom DT apartment rents are almost at 1999-2002 levels. -o:

Something tells me folks in CA don't save money either, you know, between Prius lease payments and avocado toast.


----------



## IRME4EVER

Here in Arizona, Uber/Lyft drivers struggle!! Constantly getting screwed over by both. The more we as drivers make the more they take.
Hello IRS 2018 taxes I got back 2.00 from Federal and 25.00 from State. 2019 taxes I owed 46.00 to Federal and got back 25.00 from State. It's a crock of crap, what we as drivers have to pay out of our own pocket and not get reimbursed!! 
That's why I refuse to furnish water, phone charging cords, aux cords, etc. All pax think they are entitled scumbags. The scumbags tell me Uber says that you have to provide the needs of your riders. I tell them when Uber furnishes it without the cost of the driver, I will provide it.
Every once in awhile I will get I'll get a moran pax, who tells me Uber/Lyft pays for our car (rideshare) insurance. I tell them not true, as soon as we accept the trip and until the end of the trip, we are covered under U/L insurance. But otherwise, we pay for our own insurance which is not cheap. Before and after trips we are on our insurance. 
Then maintenance stupid morans think that U/L pays for that too. BS!!!
Well hell, let them both make our car payments in which they use for their BS trips!!! When I bought my new 2019 Mitsubishi 06/21/19 only had 17 miles on it, Today it has 43,235 on it. Great on gas it only has a 9-gallon tank, 40+ mpg. Mostly Uber miles!!


----------



## Fusion_LUser

June132017 said:


> I tried searching the MPG of the Checker taxi cab's and couldn't find any info. Anyone able to find how many MPG these old cabs got?


Not much out there but I did come by a 1977 MPG guide for all cars and found this...










Its probably safe to say Checker did this type of mileage throughout its lifespan since they didn't change much over the years...

And I found couple of Checker's on Fuelly...

http://www.fuelly.com/car/checker/marathon/1979/kevinc97/1012674 (12.9MPG average)

http://www.fuelly.com/car/checker/marathon/1977/kevinc97/1012676 (15.3MPG average)


----------



## observer

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/16/tech/uber-lyft-california-suspension/index.html


----------



## tohunt4me

Fusion_LUser said:


> Not much out there but I did come by a 1977 MPG guide for all cars and found this...
> 
> View attachment 499081
> 
> 
> Its probably safe to say Checker did this type of mileage throughout its lifespan since they didn't change much over the years...
> 
> And I found couple of Checker's on Fuelly...
> 
> http://www.fuelly.com/car/checker/marathon/1979/kevinc97/1012674 (12.9MPG average)
> 
> http://www.fuelly.com/car/checker/marathon/1977/kevinc97/1012676 (15.3MPG average)


Checker used a 305 c.i.G.M. motor the last few years.
Older checkers used mainly straight 6 cyl.


----------



## newengland

observer said:


> https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/16/tech/uber-lyft-california-suspension/index.html


Thanks. That article links to the actual complaint from the Massachusetts AG's office from July 10th stating U/L are misclassifying drivers.
Here's the link: https://www.mass.gov/doc/ride-sharing-complaint/download


----------



## Steve appleby

Uber and Lyft are going to pull out. It's going to happen. You can thank the California state legislature for it. Hundreds of thousands of drivers are going to be out of work. And you know what the shit of it is? All the people that voted against AB5 are going to look at all the people that supported AB5 and say "thanks for screwing us all".

like I said in my previous posts, sometimes you just have to let it fail, sometimes people need to feel what's it's like to suck. When Uber says go **** yourself to the California state legislators everyone loses and will be left out in the cold. Those drivers will be left with nothing and Uber is just going to shrug it off and simply say we don't operate in California anymore and say "well you can blame your legislators" Oh you wait, when Uber pulls out of California that's when the legal fireworks will begin. It's going to get ugly boy. THAT I can assure you. Riders and drivers rely on rideshare to work and to get to work.

As someone who opposes bills like AB5 all I'm going to do is sit and laugh and shake my head.

Sometimes I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and say "ok we'll try your plan" and when it fails I can ridicule them forever for it. It's so funny to watch


----------



## tohunt4me

Steve appleby said:


> Uber and Lyft are going to pull out. It's going to happen. You can thank the California state legislature for it. Hundreds of thousands of drivers are going to be out of work. And you know what the shit of it is? All the people that voted against AB5 are going to look at all the people that supported AB5 and say "thanks for screwing us all".
> 
> like I said in my previous posts, sometimes you just have to let it fail, sometimes people need to feel what's it's like to suck. When Uber says go @@@@ yourself to the California state legislators everyone loses and will be left out in the cold. Those drivers will be left with nothing and Uber is just going to shrug it off and simply say we don't operate in California anymore and say "well you can blame your legislators" Oh you wait, when Uber pulls out of California that's when the legal fireworks will begin. It's going to get ugly boy. THAT I can assure you. Riders and drivers rely on rideshare to work and to get to work.
> 
> As someone who opposes bills like AB5 all I'm going to do is sit and laugh and shake my head.
> 
> Sometimes I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and say "ok we'll try your plan" and when it fails I can ridicule them forever for it. It's so funny to watch


THEY PULLED OUT OF TEXAS A FEW YEARS AGO.

THEY CAME BACK.


----------



## Steve appleby

tohunt4me said:


> THEY PULLED OUT OF TEXAS A FEW YEARS AGO.
> 
> THEY CAME BACK.


We'll see about that...


----------



## Mole

Fusion_LUser said:


> Fusion Ride Share plans to fully copy Mole and charge a 23% more while keeping the actual fares paid by pax from the ants and pretending its better than Mole to win the perception battle.


Mole not happy about this!


----------



## goneubering

tohunt4me said:


> THEY PULLED OUT OF TEXAS A FEW YEARS AGO.
> 
> THEY CAME BACK.


Not even the whole state. Just Austin.



Steve appleby said:


> Uber and Lyft are going to pull out. It's going to happen. You can thank the California state legislature for it. Hundreds of thousands of drivers are going to be out of work. And you know what the shit of it is? All the people that voted against AB5 are going to look at all the people that supported AB5 and say "thanks for screwing us all".
> 
> like I said in my previous posts, sometimes you just have to let it fail, sometimes people need to feel what's it's like to suck. When Uber says go @@@@ yourself to the California state legislators everyone loses and will be left out in the cold. Those drivers will be left with nothing and Uber is just going to shrug it off and simply say we don't operate in California anymore and say "well you can blame your legislators" Oh you wait, when Uber pulls out of California that's when the legal fireworks will begin. It's going to get ugly boy. THAT I can assure you. Riders and drivers rely on rideshare to work and to get to work.
> 
> As someone who opposes bills like AB5 all I'm going to do is sit and laugh and shake my head.
> 
> Sometimes I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and say "ok we'll try your plan" and when it fails I can ridicule them forever for it. It's so funny to watch


Not going to happen. They're not leaving forever. They will suspend operations until there's enough public pain and chaos to force through another option like the possible franchise model.


----------



## Cynergie

Steve appleby said:


> Uber and Lyft are going to pull out. It's going to happen. You can thank the California state legislature for it. Hundreds of thousands of drivers are going to be out of work. And you know what the shit of it is? All the people that voted against AB5 are going to look at all the people that supported AB5 and say "thanks for screwing us all".
> 
> like I said in my previous posts, sometimes you just have to let it fail, sometimes people need to feel what's it's like to suck. When Uber says go @@@@ yourself to the California state legislators everyone loses and will be left out in the cold. Those drivers will be left with nothing and Uber is just going to shrug it off and simply say we don't operate in California anymore and say "well you can blame your legislators" Oh you wait, when Uber pulls out of California that's when the legal fireworks will begin. It's going to get ugly boy. THAT I can assure you. Riders and drivers rely on rideshare to work and to get to work.
> 
> As someone who opposes bills like AB5 all I'm going to do is sit and laugh and shake my head.
> 
> Sometimes I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and say "ok we'll try your plan" and when it fails I can ridicule them forever for it. It's so funny to watch


Like @tohunt4me says you can bank on them being back. Golden State is far too much of a lucrative cash cow market for them to withdraw permanently. I'm willing to bet the bulk of their profit comes from the supercities LA etc. Especially the Millennial population based ones like SF and Silicon Valley markets.

Issue nobody seems to be asking about AB5 is: If Uber is forced to declare their driver base as employees, what's that going to do for driver profitability in the future? Before as ICs, drivers had the legal (not psychological) perogative to ignore pings for potential bad mileage/pax trips. And were free to drive their acceptance rate to negative infinity. But as newly minted employees (assuming they survive the culling that will surely come with this new statusing), it's going to be mandatory to make that 22 mile out of your way just to pickup pax. Or take that underaged minor teen. Or unaccompanied 8th grader whose single and carless parent insists you drive them to school. Or take that smelly canine companion who your disabled pax insists is necessary for them to navigate in the world. Or be forced to take that wheel chair bound patient that requires you help them get in/out of the vehicle from the hospital/clinic etc etc.

As a fully blown Uber hourly employee (making less than Amazon $15 per hr) drivers will have to accept 100% of the pax pings they get. Or move on to some better venture....


----------



## observer

Cynergie said:


> Like @tohunt4me says you can bank on them being back. Golden State is far too much of a lucrative cash cow market for them to withdraw permanently. I'm willing to bet the bulk of their profit comes from the supercities LA etc. Especially the Millennial population based ones like SF and Silicon Valley markets.
> 
> Issue nobody seems to be asking about AB5 is: If Uber is forced to declare their driver base as employees, what's that going to do for driver profitability in the future? Before as ICs, drivers had the legal (not psychological) perogative to ignore pings for potential bad mileage/pax trips. And were free to drive their acceptance rate to negative infinity. But as newly minted employees (assuming they survive the culling that will surely come with this new statusing), it's going to be mandatory to make that 22 mile out of your way just to pickup pax. Or take that underaged minor teen. Or unaccompanied 8th grader whose single and carless parent insists you drive them to school. Or take that smelly canine companion who your disabled pax insists is necessary for them to navigate in the world. Or be forced to take that wheel chair bound patient that requires you help them get in/out of the vehicle from the hospital/clinic etc etc.
> 
> As a fully blown Uber hourly employee (making less than Amazon $15 per hr) drivers will have to accept 100% of the pax pings they get. Or move on to some better venture....


If Uber sends a driver 22 miles it's going to cost UBER 12 bux in mileage PLUS the drivers hourly pay just to get the driver there.

What happens if the driver gets there and the pax cancels??

Driver still get paid.

All the other things happen now, there would be no difference.

The underage pax? Uber would still be required to deny service because in California it is against CPUC regulations for Uber to transport minors.


----------



## Steve appleby

Cynergie said:


> Like @tohunt4me says you can bank on them being back. Golden State is far too much of a lucrative cash cow market for them to withdraw permanently. I'm willing to bet the bulk of their profit comes from the supercities LA etc. Especially the Millennial population based ones like SF and Silicon Valley markets.
> 
> Issue nobody seems to be asking about AB5 is: If Uber is forced to declare their driver base as employees, what's that going to do for driver profitability in the future? Before as ICs, drivers had the legal (not psychological) perogative to ignore pings for potential bad mileage/pax trips. And were free to drive their acceptance rate to negative infinity. But as newly minted employees (assuming they survive the culling that will surely come with this new statusing), it's going to be mandatory to make that 22 mile out of your way just to pickup pax. Or take that underaged minor teen. Or unaccompanied 8th grader whose single and carless parent insists you drive them to school. Or take that smelly canine companion who your disabled pax insists is necessary for them to navigate in the world. Or be forced to take that wheel chair bound patient that requires you help them get in/out of the vehicle from the hospital/clinic etc etc.
> 
> As a fully blown Uber hourly employee (making less than Amazon $15 per hr) drivers will have to accept 100% of the pax pings they get. Or move on to some better venture....


I don't think so, it's California. Their so far to the left out there there is no convincing them otherwise. California is a Democratic stronghold. The California state legislators and especially their AG have a nasty reputation of digging in their heals. If prop 22 passes you can bet your ass the AG is going to try and overturn it. It's California people, do you honestly think that those communist politicians are going to let that slide. If god forbid I become an employee on Uber, that'll be the day I quit and find something else. (I don't live in California by the way, THANK GOD)

Xavier Becerra is a communist piece of shit in my book. He is the absolute WORST. He is going to fight this tooth and nail. Everyone saw how he fought the magazine ban, he'll use the same tactics for prop 22. The state legislators will find a way to skirt prop 22.


----------



## Fusion_LUser

tohunt4me said:


> THEY PULLED OUT OF TEXAS A FEW YEARS AGO.
> 
> THEY CAME BACK.


Actually it was just Austin, TX (which is CA Southeast when you think about it) not the whole state and it was over Uber wanting to fingerprint its own dangerous ants like you knowing that you will fail the fingerprint test but they like you, they want you driving because scary ants are the best ants.



observer said:


> If Uber sends a driver 22 miles it's going to cost UBER 12 bux in mileage PLUS the drivers hourly pay just to get the driver there.
> 
> What happens if the driver gets there and the pax cancels??
> 
> Driver still get paid.


After 22 minute wait on a pickup if the pax cancels Uber charges now. And Uber is just doing themselves a disservice by not charging the pax an appropriate cancellation fee.


----------



## Jo3030

*Uber CEO on the fight in California: 'We can't go out and hire 50,000 people overnight*

https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/19/21376009/uber-ceo-interivew-california-ab5-drivers-khosrowshahi


----------



## observer

Fusion_LUser said:


> Actually it was just Austin, TX (which is CA Southeast when you think about it) not the whole state and it was over Uber wanting to fingerprint its own dangerous ants like you knowing that you will fail the fingerprint test but they like you, they want you driving because scary ants are the best ants.
> 
> 
> After 22 minute wait on a pickup if the pax cancels Uber charges now. And Uber is just doing themselves a disservice by not charging the pax an appropriate cancellation fee.


After DRIVING there 22 miles not waiting.


----------



## Fusion_LUser

observer said:


> After DRIVING there 22 miles not waiting.


I get what you are saying but right now anything but cancelling after 2 minutes (or is it 5?) the pax gets a cancellation charge. Right now Uber gives what $3.75 to the ant for a cancellation fee and doesn't care if the ant drives 22 miles. However when Uber is paying that bill you can bet they will care and charge appropriately. It's only not a big deal when Uber is not paying the ant as an employee!


----------



## observer

Fusion_LUser said:


> I get what you are saying but right now anything but cancelling after 2 minutes (or is it 5?) the pax gets a cancellation charge. Right now Uber gives what $3.75 to the ant for a cancellation fee and doesn't care if the ant drives 22 miles. However when Uber is paying that bill you can bet they will care and charge appropriately. It's only not a big deal when Uber is not paying the ant as an employee!


That's exactly what I meant.


----------



## Cynergie

observer said:


> If Uber sends a driver 22 miles it's going to cost UBER 12 bux in mileage PLUS the drivers hourly pay just to get the driver there.
> 
> What happens if the driver gets there and the pax cancels??
> 
> Driver still get paid.
> 
> All the other things happen now, there would be no difference.
> 
> The underage pax? Uber would still be required to deny service because in California it is against CPUC regulations for Uber to transport minors.


I'll give you the 22 miles.

But you can't deny drivers will be giving up their only leverage under AB5 when they become official employees. Their freedom to say NO as ICs is going to be permanently taken off the bargaining table. Because every driver has been victim to Uber's toxic psychological warfare pressuring them to accept rides at least once in their rideshare career. Imagine the license they'll be getting once they officially become your employer.

Two anaologies to this: Amazon delivery drivers and IT software developers.

Amazon has been one of the worst where it comes to abusing it's driver employees. These are actual Amazon employees and not the white van contract employees. One such delivery driver made the news for quitting in the most unorthodox way.

http://nypost.com/2020/07/02/amazon-delivery-driver-quits-mid-shift-abandons-truck/
He shed a lot of insight into corporate exploitation and psychological abuse practices of this corporate leviathan. Despite making a solid $15/hr with full health/dental/optical benefits, and other benefits like stock options, education etc etc. He finally snapped one day. Literally quit by ditching the fully loaded truck. Then went on social media on a truly unforgettable rant. His actions seem irresponsible and criminal until you realize Amazon expected him to stay working his shift until ALL his packages had been delivered. That meant 13hr+ days. With Amazon expecting him to report in for work the next morning (around 8-9am) to rinse and repeat purgatory all over again. All because he was a regular FT employee. As both a former Amazon Flex and white van delivery IC, I was NEVER subjected to that sort of exploitation or mental abuse. I had set hours in which I was expected to deliver my packages. Any remaining packages at the end of a delivery run were always returned to the WH. With zero penalty. The only operational risks I had as both Flex and White Van IC were the concessions. Racked up enough of those dollar value and/or item wise, and it was termination. But you got several warning emails from Amazon and/or your white van subcontractor long before that.

The software dev analogy is similar. Software development in the AAA gaming industry is basically the white collar, 6 figure salaried, sweatshop-slave driven environment which all dev teams must endure. Crunch time is the hypernorm ---especially when crunch time exponentially shoots to infinity as that game title release draws near. The work environment hypernorm is putting in long hours outside your 40hr workweek. Devs who leave before say, putting in at least a 10 hr day, are considered poor professionals who are selfish, quitters, and viewed very unfavorably by both their peers and management. Those devs who opt to leave after a 8-9 hr day, are likely NOT going to be given another project/contract by the company. They can get passed over for promotions and/or might even get fired as a result. The peer pressure for them to conform and remain working to accomplish the mission can be Machiavellian in it's intensity and very unhealthy. Heck this was (and still is) the type of unhealthy environment Uber software devs have had to endure since Travis. Software devs have committed suicide from the intense psychological pressure they were being subjected to at Uber:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/...-to-blame-for-an-employees-suicide/100938330/
Extend that analogy to the newly minted Uber driver. Yes Uber (by law and on paper) have to observe a normal 40 hr day. However, that doesn't stop them from engaging in the same, toxic, psychological warfare they've been assaulting drivers with since day 1. The odds of them using nasty techniques like spamming you with texts the likes of "earn bonus $$$ for accepting this 22 mile trip!" to put pressure on dirvers to take it. Then using punitive measures like denying drivers access to the app (so NO PAY) for 24hr+ for allowing acceptance rate to fall under 100%. Using weak excuses like pax complaints or stuff being wrong with their security check/licenses etc etc. Just like they do now. There's not going to be a damned thing you as the newly minted employee driver can do if the new boss decides to put you in the time out box. For whatever fantasy excuse they've got for holding your there. And you won't be on the clock while they're at it.


----------



## Cynergie

Jo3030 said:


> *Uber CEO on the fight in California: 'We can't go out and hire 50,000 people overnight*
> 
> https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/19/21376009/uber-ceo-interivew-california-ab5-drivers-khosrowshahi


He's 100% correct.

At $15/hr for a full 40 hr work week (with no benefits), those 50K employee drivers are going to cost Uber $120M per month.

Also which btw, is exactly 120% of what Dara's $100M bonus was supposed to be a while back for successfully turning Uber around...:laugh:

http://www.insider.com/uber-ceo-kho...ed $100 million,company is worth $120 billion
And that's $1.44Billion per year. So bye bye Uber Earnings per Share as this permanently departs for negative infinity on the left side of zero :laugh:

http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C...scso=_zNE9X_zqBYqEtQX73bCABA1:0&wptab=COMPANY


----------



## SHalester

Uber's board of directors will assign blame to Dara if...ahem....when uber shuts down. Buh bye Dara, you should have blinked.


----------



## simont23

Great to see a bloke with principles. Dara would rather shut down in California than pay his employees a living wage!


----------



## Illini

simont23 said:


> Great to see a bloke with principles. Dara would rather shut down in California than pay his employees a living wage!


I'm sure he's paying his employees well. We're not his employees, and that's the point of this mess.


----------



## Quicksilver 5 5 5

I feel for the Uber drivers in California...

Uber's critics note that there is nothing stopping Uber from continuing to provide drivers with the flexibility to set their own schedules under AB5. But the company rejects this notion, arguing that no company in California or elsewhere lets employees set their own hours.

Uber has proposed a "third way" through the ballot measure it's supporting in California called Proposition 22. The measure would allow the company to sidestep AB5 and go on classifying drivers as independent contractors, while also providing some added benefits like a minimum wage and access to health insurance. Along with Lyft and DoorDash, it has committed to spend over $100 million, while union-backed driver groups only have around $866,000 to lobby against it.


----------



## taxicab technology

Cynergie said:


> He's 100% correct.
> 
> At $15/hr for a full 40 hr work week (with no benefits), those 50K employee drivers are going to cost Uber $120M per month.
> 
> Also which btw, is exactly 120% of what Dara's $100M bonus was supposed to be a while back for successfully turning Uber around...:laugh:
> 
> http://www.insider.com/uber-ceo-kho...ed $100 million,company is worth $120 billion
> And that's $1.44Billion per year. So bye bye Uber Earnings per Share as this permanently departs for negative infinity on the left side of zero :laugh:
> 
> http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C...scso=_zNE9X_zqBYqEtQX73bCABA1:0&wptab=COMPANY


so they lose 1.4 billion a year instead of EVERY quarter like they have been lol?


----------



## rkozy

Fusion_LUser said:


> Right now Uber gives what $3.75 to the ant for a cancellation fee and doesn't care if the ant drives 22 miles.


Anybody who drives 22 miles for a pickup deserves what happens to them.


----------



## Kilroy4303

rkozy said:


> Anybody who drives 22 miles for a pickup deserves what happens to them.


I hate to be unsympathetic. . . . . . . but I have to agree. .. time management is a large part of this business. If you are going to an area that is hard to get rides in and you drive 22 miles to get there. .. and they cancel. . . maybe you should start examining your judgement


----------



## taxicab technology

Kilroy4303 said:


> I hate to be unsympathetic. . . . . . . but I have to agree. .. time management is a large part of this business. If you are going to an area that is hard to get rides in and you drive 22 miles to get there. .. and they cancel. . . maybe you should start examining your judgement


the request shouldnt be sent, the algo can do 3rd grade math its not legal to trick idiots into working for free idiots and math flunkies have rights it should simply say no drivers available or add $1 a mile to pick up address if riders agrees to pay it not try and trick some hunger pain having immigrant or senior living in theior car or afraid to get evicted into working for illegal wages

the algo knows its an unprofitable trip for the driver thats why it hides all the details to deFRAUD labor thats why all these games are brogrammed in to deFRAUD the driver but since it gets 50-90% of the fare it dont care it bounces the request around until an idiot who will fail eventually gets it those 100 million dollar mansions and billions in stock options come from the massive cash flow that human trafficking produces it was 4 million rides a day in usa thats 16 million minimum cash coming in everyday but now its less than 1 million rides a day (usa market) nba players make that lol theyre DONE but then they skim like an old vegas casino bribing eveyone that matters laundering it thru real estate and no show jobs i mean the 25,000 i mean now 15,000 employees who do nothing all day but try to figure out new scams to steal more from labor


----------



## simont23

Illini said:


> I'm sure he's paying his employees well. We're not his employees, and that's the point of this mess.


Sorry. I, and the Government of California stand corrected!


----------



## Jimmy44

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


Beccara sounds like an idiot


----------



## Lee239




----------



## Jimmy44

Kilroy4303 said:


> I hate to be unsympathetic. . . . . . . but I have to agree. .. time management is a large part of this business. If you are going to an area that is hard to get rides in and you drive 22 miles to get there. .. and they cancel. . . maybe you should start examining your judgement


That is a rookie mistake for sure. Driving is a learning curve and not a day goes by that I don't learn something


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Illini said:


> I'm sure he's paying his employees well. We're not his employees, and that's the point of this mess.


Want to make a bet?

I bet you I am an employee of Lyft as a driver.

If your willing to put money on it, I'll bet you, and then I'll show you the papers I have Proving my worker status under California Law.

EDD has already sent them the bill for my unemployment as a employee.

I also have worker's compensation under employee status.

If I'm wrong I'lL..... Let's bet!


----------



## Fusion_LUser

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Want to make a bet?
> 
> I bet you I am an employee of Lyft as a driver.
> 
> If your willing to put money on it, I'll bet you, and then I'll show you the papers I have Proving my worker status under California Law.
> 
> EDD has already sent them the bill for my unemployment as a employee.
> 
> I also have worker's compensation under employee status.
> 
> If I'm wrong I'll eat my dick. Let's bet!
> 
> View attachment 501434
> View attachment 501435


What's on your Lyft W4 form?


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Fusion_LUser said:


> What's on your Lyft W4 form?


Lyft does not recognize my legal status.

But EDD, CPUC, and Labor Department audited me and gave me employee status formally.
( They approved immediate benefits of unemployment and worker's compensation under employee status, until I get the rest in court)

Since Lyft intentionally misclassified they will have to pay penalties on top of all the other damages.

"Both complaints note that the California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates Uber and Lyft, said in a June 9 decision that ride-hailing company drivers are employees. The suits argue that Uber and Lyft have failed to pay drivers minimum wage, overtime, compensation for rest periods and business expenses, among other damages. The defendants are also liable for civil penalties of at least $10,000 for each driver who has been misclassified, according to the complaints."
LA Times.


----------



## Illini

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Want to make a bet?
> 
> I bet you I am an employee of Lyft as a driver.
> 
> If your willing to put money on it, I'll bet you, and then I'll show you the papers I have Proving my worker status under California Law.
> 
> EDD has already sent them the bill for my unemployment as a employee.
> 
> I also have worker's compensation under employee status.
> 
> If I'm wrong I'll eat my dick. Let's bet!


You're not an employee. You may be soon, but not yet.


----------



## Jimmy44

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Want to make a bet?
> 
> I bet you I am an employee of Lyft as a driver.
> 
> If your willing to put money on it, I'll bet you, and then I'll show you the papers I have Proving my worker status under California Law.
> 
> EDD has already sent them the bill for my unemployment as a employee.
> 
> I also have worker's compensation under employee status.
> 
> If I'm wrong I'll eat my dick. Let's bet!
> 
> View attachment 501434
> View attachment 501435





Fusion_LUser said:


> What's on your Lyft W4 form?


I have a standing request for anyone who gets hired as an employee to sent a copy of the contract. All I hear is the sound of crickets


----------



## Cereal Killer

Dara also said Uber would one day be profitable. I've learned not to listen to Dara.


----------



## Jimmy44

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Lyft does not recognize my legal status.
> 
> But EDD, CPUC, and Labor Department audited me and gave me employee status formally.
> ( They approved immediate benefits of unemployment and worker's compensation under employee status, until I get the rest in court)
> 
> Since Lyft intentionally misclassified they will have to pay penalties on top of all the other damages.
> 
> "Both complaints note that the California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates Uber and Lyft, said in a June 9 decision that ride-hailing company drivers are employees. The suits argue that Uber and Lyft have failed to pay drivers minimum wage, overtime, compensation for rest periods and business expenses, among other damages. The defendants are also liable for civil penalties of at least $10,000 for each driver who has been misclassified, according to the complaints."
> LA Times.


Send a copy of the check for back pay



Cereal Killer said:


> Dara also said Uber would one day be profitable. I've learned not to listen to Dara.


I am not a big fan of his either. The salary and stock deal he gets for being the CEO of a company losing money is ridiculous


----------



## Driving With A Purpose

Cdub2k said:


> since the average cost per mile has been established at $0.57 by the IRS I'm assuming your base gross pay will be $12 an hour + .57 a mile. And you keep all tips. If this pay scale is true I consider that a fair deal.


Technically it is 57 1/2 cents per mile. I need every 1/2 penny I can get- after all you know how I make my living.



observer said:


> Go ahead shut down.
> 
> They won't because it will cause their stock to drop in the toilet.


As a former stock broker and very active daytrader, I know that people often overreact to bad news and panic selling can ensue. That said, those with the stones (and $) to buy cheap and double down again if the stock keeps going down (without investing $ they have to have back soon) stand to do very well when people come to their senses.

Sure the stocks might be down and down sharply for a while. But then, out of the blue comes a surprise story like "XYZ Airlines is resuming a bunch of their flights and increasing capacity." If that happens, the stocks could go up sharply- both Lyft and Uber.

Disclaimer: Once in a while the doom and gloomers get it right. That is, there is probably a very small chance Uber and Lyft could declare bankruptcy. So don't invest what you can't afford to lose. I am not making any recommendations on either stock, only pointing out that there will likely be money to be made (betting on the stocks going up or down- depending on how this plays out). Also, this is not a game for amateurs to play with "rainy day" money- you will likely get played and faked out by the pros. Good luck to anyone who does invest (long or short) in either or both stocks.


----------



## Buckiemohawk

Good Riddance to Uber and Lyft in California


----------



## Driving With A Purpose

What do all the drunk people in California do when they need a place to puke? 

On the serious side, if Uber/Lyft don't operate in CA for an extended amount of time, it would be very interesting to see the stats for DUI accidents in the state (before and after Uber/Lyft cease operations)...


----------



## Jimmy44

Driving With A Purpose said:


> Technically it is 57 1/2 cents per mile. I need every 1/2 penny I can get- after all you know how I make my living.
> 
> 
> As a former stock broker and very active daytrader, I know that people often overreact to bad news and panic selling can ensue. That said, those with the stones (and $) to buy cheap and double down again if the stock keeps going down (without investing $ they have to have back soon) stand to do very well when people come to their senses.
> 
> Sure the stocks might be down and down sharply for a while. But then, out of the blue comes a surprise story like "XYZ Airlines is resuming a bunch of their flights and increasing capacity." If that happens, the stocks could go up sharply- both Lyft and Uber.
> 
> Disclaimer: Once in a while the doom and gloomers get it right. That is, there is probably a very small chance Uber and Lyft could declare bankruptcy. So don't invest what you can't afford to lose. I am not making any recommendations on either stock, only pointing out that there will likely be money to be made (betting on the stocks going up or down- depending on how this plays out). Also, this is not a game for amateurs to play with "rainy day" money- you will likely get played and faked out by the pros. Good luck to anyone who does invest (long or short) in either or both stocks.


Take a stock like GE that is down 50% since the pandemic. If they come up with a vaccine this stock will bounce back.


----------



## Fusion_LUser

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Lyft does not recognize my legal status.


Well then you better get some mustard and a bun then because you are having a dick burger for lunch today.

You are not an employee of Lyft. That is fact.

Enjoy eating that dick burger.


----------



## Jimmy44

Fusion_LUser said:


> Well then you better get some mustard and a bun then because you are having a dick burger for lunch today.
> 
> You are not an employee of Lyft. That is fact.
> 
> Enjoy eating that dick burger.


It really is amazing how many people still believe they are employees and that they are due thousands in back pay.
My feeling is they are extreme liberals who are used to having the states and the govt. provide everything for them.
They somehow view Uber as an extension of the govt. that will provide money , health benefits, child care, paid leave etc.
That's just my feeling based on the responses.


----------



## ntcindetroit

Ylinks said:


> Actually, Uber's incentive is get eliminate all Full Time drivers


Can you elaborate why Uber hates fooltimer?


----------



## Jimmy44

ntcindetroit said:


> Can you elaborate why Uber hates fooltimer?


They don't hate me I was giving them 35 grand a year.


----------



## MarkMan

time for a non profit to do the brokering between drivers and passengers, imagine keeping all the fare and just pay some small subscription fee every month/week


----------



## Jimmy44

MarkMan said:


> time for a non profit to do the brokering between drivers and passengers, imagine keeping all the fare and just pay some small subscription fee every month/week


Sounds good


----------



## ntcindetroit

MikhailCA said:


> Can you rent a taxi and just drive it over here?


One might hang out the sign of 'Ride Austin' Here we're to rescue yo Cali sis & bro.


----------



## Jimmy44

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Your right and wrong!
> 
> In California I am only a employee for specific benefits from EDD, meaning unemployment and from CPUC that decides over worker compensation.
> 
> If I was not an employee for their specific purpose they would Not have awarded me the right.
> 
> ( Drivers are told they can not collect unemployment when they are deactivate in non COVID times, that's not true in many cases, they get approved for UI as a employee and the department sends the company a bill)
> 
> Same with worker's compensation, drivers are told they will not be awarded that, but it's not true, if a driver applies, many would get approved.
> 
> Right now they are convicted of having employees, the courts have given them some time to modify accordingly.
> It says they have a few month to comply willingly or they will be shut down, however they are convicted of having employees.
> 
> Those employee driver could become non employee 3rd category at the earliest Jan 2021 if the Uber ballet wins.
> 
> However from Jan 2020 ( some from 2018 on) till Jan 2021 they will have been employees In the Eyes of California authority and Courts.
> 
> It's a twisted tale but thats what it is.


I have an ongoing request. Send me a copy of your contract with uber. Send me a copy of a check that Uber has sent you as an employee. So far I hear the sounds of crickets.


----------



## June132017

Driving With A Purpose said:


> As a former stock broker and very active daytrader, I know that people often overreact to bad news and panic selling can ensue. That said, those with the stones (and $) to buy cheap and double down again if the stock keeps going down (without investing $ they have to have back soon) stand to do very well when people come to their senses.


What is Uber's plan to profit? They didn't profit in the best of times. 2017,2018, and in 2019 they lost billions of dollars. Companies like this go bankrupt all the time. Sears and GM are two huge companies to recently report massive losses before waving the white flag. GM's old investors are still crying because they lost all their money in 2008. Uber continues to disappoint losing even more money so far in 2020. I would stay far away from Uber's stock.


----------



## Mista T

ntcindetroit said:


> Can you elaborate why Uber hates fooltimer?


People who drive under 10 hours per week dont give a rat's azz about min wage, workers comp, employment benefits, fair pay, etc etc.

It's the full timers who are the squeaky wheels.

Unfortunately for U/L, without full timers, the entire system grinds to a halt. They CANNOT have a reliable business model without full timers that they can count on to give rides and do deliveries.


----------



## Jimmy44

Mista T said:


> People who drive under 10 hours per week dont give a rat's azz about min wage, workers comp, employment benefits, fair pay, etc etc.
> 
> It's the full timers who are the squeaky wheels.
> 
> Unfortunately for U/L, without full timers, the entire system grinds to a halt. They CANNOT have a reliable business model without full timers that they can count on to give rides and do deliveries.


Every driver has there own reason for driving. They also all have different reasons for disliking Uber for some of there business practices. I personally hate AB5 and want know part of it.


----------



## JonC

Jimmy44 said:


> I have an ongoing request. Send me a copy of your contract with uber. Send me a copy of a check that Uber has sent you as an employee. So far I hear the sounds of crickets.


All that proves is that Uber is continuing to break the law. And that's not exactly a surprise.

ALL California Uber and Lyft drivers are legally employees now, and they have been since AB5 was signed. They are all due back pay and benefits.


----------



## Jimmy44

JonC said:


> All that proves is that Uber is continuing to break the law. And that's not exactly a surprise.
> 
> ALL California Uber and Lyft drivers are legally employees now, and they have been since AB5 was signed. They are all due back pay and benefits.


Congratulations !!!!! I am so happy for you . Just post a copy of your contract or your paycheck or your check for back pay. Thsnks and again congratulations !!!!!!


----------



## JonC

Jimmy44 said:


> Congratulations !!!!! I am so happy for you . Just post a copy of your contract or your paycheck or your check for back pay. Thsnks and again congratulations !!!!!!


You seem to have a reading comprehension issue.

*Uber is continuing to break the law.*

The court orders will take a while. But they will come.


----------



## Jimmy44

JonC said:


> You seem to have a reading comprehension issue.
> 
> *Uber is continuing to break the law.*
> 
> The court orders will take a while. But they will come.


I hope members can appreciate how I do not engage in verbal childlike attacks like the above reply.
All I do is report facts as I see them.
You may not like them but as they say don't kill the messenger.
I would also add that if AB5 we're adopted in Connecticut I would become rich with back pay.


----------



## njn

Can drivers be employed full time by one company and their competitor? What is the state's response to this question?


----------



## Jimmy44

njn said:


> Can drivers be employed full time by one company and their competitor? What is the state's response to this question?


Exactly very good question. 
Actually if you had both apps on at same time it would be like working two jobs.
So say Uber gave you 15 and Lyft 14 that's 29 dollars an hour.
Plus you would get two medical plans, two retirement plans, two sick leave plans and two child day care plans.
Now I can't wait to get AB5 addopted Nationwide.
With my back pay for five years of full time work I would probably be second only to Dara as far as salary.
Your reply emphasizes how ridiculous AB5 is.
Thanks for adding some clarity for others to consider.



Jimmy44 said:


> Exactly very good question.
> Actually if you had both apps on at same time it would be like working two jobs.
> So say Uber gave you 15 and Lyft 14 that's 29 dollars an hour.
> Plus you would get two medical plans, two retirement plans, two sick leave plans and two child day care plans.
> Now I can't wait to get AB5 addopted Nationwide.
> With my back pay for five years of full time work I would probably be second only to Dara as far as salary.
> Your reply emphasizes how ridiculous AB5 is.
> Thanks for adding some clarity for others to consider.


Google Assembly woman Lorena Gonzalis the woman behind AB5.
It will tell you everything you need to know.
You read it and make up your own mind about her and the bill.



Jimmy44 said:


> Exactly very good question.
> Actually if you had both apps on at same time it would be like working two jobs.
> So say Uber gave you 15 and Lyft 14 that's 29 dollars an hour.
> Plus you would get two medical plans, two retirement plans, two sick leave plans and two child day care plans.
> Now I can't wait to get AB5 addopted Nationwide.
> With my back pay for five years of full time work I would probably be second only to Dara as far as salary.
> Your reply emphasizes how ridiculous AB5 is.
> Thanks for adding some clarity for others to consider.
> 
> 
> Google Assembly woman Lorena Gonzalis the woman behind AB5.
> It will tell you everything you need to know.
> You read it and make up your own mind about her and the bill.


By you I mean every member on Uber hope.net


----------



## JonC

Jimmy44 said:


> I hope members can appreciate how I do not engage in verbal childlike attacks like the above reply.
> All I do is report facts as I see them.
> You may not like them but as they say don't kill the messenger.
> I would also add that if AB5 we're adopted in Connecticut I would become rich with back pay.


You repeated a ridiculous request for "a copy of your contract or your paycheck or your check for back pay" which you're fully aware does not exist because Uber is continuing to break the law.

I suspect something similar to AB5 will happen nationally next year.

What I can't comprehend is that you seem to oppose AB5, but you acknowledge that it would clearly benefit you to be paid a legal wage for your work. What advantage is it to you to be underpaid?



njn said:


> Can drivers be employed full time by one company and their competitor? What is the state's response to this question?


Assuming the employers don't have a valid noncompete, what is there to stop you?

There are people who work for both McDonald's and Taco Bell.


----------



## SHalester

JonC said:


> ALL California Uber and Lyft drivers are legally employees now


when, those of us, in calif are sent a W4 form to fill out we will be employees. Until then, we ain't. But the clock is ticking. U/L have until 8/25 to submit written plan on how they will make us all employees and if the judge ain't happy, the stay will be lifted and that will be that. Shutdown...months....



JonC said:


> here are people who work for both McDonald's and Taco Bell.


...but not at the exact same moment, aye? So would having both apps online at the same time be legit? I say nyet. If employee status drops on us there won't be any more running both apps at the same time.


----------



## Jimmy44

JonC said:


> You repeated a ridiculous request for "a copy of your contract or your paycheck or your check for back pay" which you're fully aware does not exist because Uber is continuing to break the law.
> 
> I suspect something similar to AB5 will happen nationally next year.
> 
> What I can't comprehend is that you seem to oppose AB5, but you acknowledge that it would clearly benefit you to be paid a legal wage for your work. What advantage is it to you to be underpaid?
> 
> 
> Assuming the employers don't have a valid noncompete, what is there to stop you?
> 
> There are people who work for both McDonald's and Taco Bell.


I am just going to address your last question. The rest I am just going to agree to disagree because quite frankly I am tired of saying the same things.
That being said I will try and answer your question. It's true if AB5 was passed I would be swimming in money. I average 100 thousand miles a year. Most of my weeks are between 40 to 60 hours sometimes more. If I was paid for hourly and back pay you can see I would be a rich man at least by my standards. Would I want that ? Yes of course. Will I ever get it ? You answer that question for me and I think we both know the answer to it. Uber has worked for me and I can grind out a living working full time. Do I want to get paid more ? Yes but within the framework of the business model I created for myself. I am all for drivers getting more money but not at the expense of ruining the platform I have chosen for my life and my business.



JonC said:


> You repeated a ridiculous request for "a copy of your contract or your paycheck or your check for back pay" which you're fully aware does not exist because Uber is continuing to break the law.
> 
> I suspect something similar to AB5 will happen nationally next year.
> 
> What I can't comprehend is that you seem to oppose AB5, but you acknowledge that it would clearly benefit you to be paid a legal wage for your work. What advantage is it to you to be underpaid?
> 
> 
> Assuming the employers don't have a valid noncompete, what is there to stop you?
> 
> There are people who work for both McDonald's and Taco Bell.


Exactly


----------



## UberBastid

JonC said:


> Uber is continuing to break the law.


Congress is continuing to break the law.
Gov Newsom of California is continuing to break the law.
Bill DeBlasio is continuing to break the law.
Phil Murphey Gov of New Jersey is continuing to break the law.
District Attorney's and police officers across the nation continue to break the law.
Antifa, BLM and democrat socialists continue to break the law.

You think Uber is our biggest problem?
It's not.
Freedom is our biggest problem - that damn pesky Constitution.
We gotta fix that.



JonC said:


> benefit you to be paid a legal wage for your work.


See ... that's why we can't communicate.
What, exactly is "a legal wage".
There IS NO SUCH THING.

Give me a reference ... a law, a rule that defines "a legal wage".

You want to create a law that defines 'legal wage'. I don't. I want the freedom to negotiate my own wage. Freedom. I bet that word sounds like finger nails on a blackboard to you.
Freedom. Freedom.

I consider a legal wage to be whatever me and 'the boss' agree to. It's a contractual thing - not a legal thing.
I consider personal freedom to define what I am willing and able to do - I don't need a bureaucrat taking care of me. 
Do you?


----------



## Cynergie

JonC said:


> You seem to have a reading comprehension issue.
> 
> *Uber is continuing to break the law.*
> 
> The court orders will take a while. But they will come.


Can you answer these 2 questions if drivers are truly Uber employees right now?

1. Given njn's insightful post here:



njn said:


> Can drivers be employed full time by one company and their competitor? What is the state's response to this question?


How is it possible you as an Uber employee, are still being permitted to drive for their main archenemy market competitor? Basically, if you were *an Uber employee *who was a software dev (i.e. one of the software engineers who develop & maintain the app you use to drive), do you truly believe they would be ok with you *working for Lyft doing the exact same thing*? -o:

2. Since the majority of drivers are working for both rideshare companies to date, then this makes driver status in #1 a great conundrum. Regardless, what makes you think you'll be around to benefit from all this back pay (no matter if you're an employee or IC) when that day comes. aka you're not deactivated by then?


----------



## Jimmy44

Cynergie said:


> Can you answer these 2 questions if drivers are truly Uber employees right now?
> 
> 1. Given njn's insightful post here:
> 
> How is it possible you as an Uber employee, are still being permitted to drive for their main archenemy market competitor? Basically, if you were *an Uber employee *who was a software dev (i.e. one of the software engineers who develop & maintain the app you use to drive), do you truly believe they would be ok with you *working for Lyft doing the exact same thing*? -o:
> 
> 2. Since the majority of drivers are working for both rideshare companies to date, then this makes driver status in #1 a great conundrum. Regardless, what makes you think you'll be around to benefit from all this back pay (no matter if you're an employee or IC) when that day comes. aka you're not deactivated by then?


I think at the white collar level there would be clauses to prevent say a Coke employee from working at Pepsi.
At the blue collar level a lot of people work at McDonalds and Burger King to get 40 hours in.
So Uber and Lyft should not be a problem working both.


----------



## UberBastid

Jimmy44 said:


> I think at the white collar level there would be clauses to prevent say a Coke employee from working at Pepsi.


Yes, youre right. It's called a NonCompete Clause.

And, just like I said above, that is a contractual agreement. It is an agreement. Get it? It is not A LAW. If I agree to work for you for $20 an hour, and you say that I can't work for anyone you compete with during or for a year after I leave your employ, I will then say that I need $25 an hour to compensate me for the year requirement. We negotiate without The Government interfering in our private business. We either agree and I go to work; or we don't and I go home.
That's the way FREE PEOPLE negotiate their worth.

The way Pelosi and Sleepy Joe wants it The Government writes laws to protect me and makes it hard for my boss to stay in business and he goes under and I end up working for ... The Government.


----------



## SHalester

UberBastid said:


> We negotiate


if we, in calif, were to become employees there would be no negotiating at all. They offer, you accept or pound pavement. AND each would not allow you to work both apps online at same exact time as well. AB5 supporters be aware.


----------



## UberBastid

SHalester said:


> if we, in calif, were to become employees there would be no negotiating at all. They offer, you accept or pound pavement. AND each would not allow you to work both apps online at same exact time as well. AB5 supporters be aware.


Yes, of course.
That's the point.
That is what the Socialist state gov't of Cali wants.
That is what the AB5 supporters want.*
Socialism.
No freedom of choice.

* You have to look at the motivations of people. Why do drivers want less control over their lives? Why do they want to put Uber out of business? Because they are lazy. Most Marxists are. They see someone who has more than them and they say 'Hey, I want some of that. You must have done some evil to become rich, you need to give it all away.' In other words, they don't want to work - they want YOU to work for them. Supporters of socialist goals are in fact and action, socialists. Some admit it. Some don't.


----------



## SHalester

UberBastid said:


> That is what the AB5 supporters want.


so if Prop 22 fails and U/L forced to employee setup and both decide they can still operate in Calif the karma will be the AB5 supporters won't be selected to be hired. Karma is a boomerang.


----------



## Fusion_LUser

I plan to have 2 phones when I'm an employee for both Uber and Lyft. I will put tape right down the center of the my car and make Uber sit on one side and Lyft sit on the other side. It worked when Ricky and Lucy fought over how messy the house was. Oh and divided rooms worked on the Brady Bunch with Bobby and Peter. 

Mater of fact divided rooms always worked out on TV so I see no reason why I can't have a divided Uber/Lyft car! Minimum wage X2 here I come!


----------



## Jimmy44

SHalester said:


> if we, in calif, were to become employees there would be no negotiating at all. They offer, you accept or pound pavement. AND each would not allow you to work both apps online at same exact time as well. AB5 supporters be aware.





SHalester said:


> as


Good advice BEWARE


----------



## JonC

SHalester said:


> ...but not at the exact same moment, aye? So would having both apps online at the same time be legit? I say nyet. If employee status drops on us there won't be any more running both apps at the same time.


How is it different than running them both now? If you're sitting on your ass waiting for a ping, you can simultaneously do the same work for two employers. If you're driving to a pickup or have a pax, it's not really kosher to have them both logged in now, because you can't adequately handle the work.



SHalester said:


> if we, in calif, were to become employees there would be no negotiating at all. They offer, you accept or pound pavement. AND each would not allow you to work both apps online at same exact time as well. AB5 supporters be aware.


Ever hear of a union?

You can't negotiate with Uber or Lyft as independent contractors. I mean, you could try, and they'd laugh at you. As an employee you have the legal right to unionize.


----------



## Jimmy44

JonC said:


> How is it different than running them both now? If you're sitting on your ass waiting for a ping, you can simultaneously do the same work for two employers. If you're driving to a pickup or have a pax, it's not really kosher to have them both logged in now, because you can't adequately handle the work.
> 
> 
> Ever hear of a union?
> 
> You can't negotiate with Uber or Lyft as independent contractors. I mean, you could try, and they'd laugh at you. As an employee you have the legal right to unionize.


Then go work in a factory that makes you an employee and has a union. Frankly those two words could not be further from what I desire.


----------



## JonC

UberBastid said:


> See ... that's why we can't communicate.
> What, exactly is "a legal wage".
> There IS NO SUCH THING.
> 
> Give me a reference ... a law, a rule that defines "a legal wage".
> 
> You want to create a law that defines 'legal wage'. I don't. I want the freedom to negotiate my own wage. Freedom. I bet that word sounds like finger nails on a blackboard to you.
> Freedom. Freedom.
> 
> I consider a legal wage to be whatever me and 'the boss' agree to. It's a contractual thing - not a legal thing.
> I consider personal freedom to define what I am willing and able to do - I don't need a bureaucrat taking care of me.
> Do you?


You want a reference to the law? No problem: https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2019/code-lab/division-2/part-4/chapter-1/section-1182-12/

You have the absolute freedom to negotiate any wage higher than that law's minimums in California. Other states have their own laws, some with lower minimums.

If you want to be paid less than the legal wage, no, it's a legal thing, you have the right to a legal wage, and you cannot contract it away. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=3513. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=1668. It is against public policy and unlawful.

You want a minimum wage not to exist at all? There are probably still a few undeveloped countries where that's the case. They probably won't allow Americans in right now, but you might be able to emigrate after the pandemic is over.

Look, I get wanting to set your own rates and hours. I get wanting full control of what you do. In my "day job" I am a real independent contractor. I set my own calendar, I set my own rates, I choose and bring my own tools, I handle collecting my own payments from the client. I can tell somebody a few counties over who wants me to show up at their site that I'm going to charge them for my time in both directions. And I charge a f**klot more than $15/hour. I'm not driving for Uber or Lyft right now, and haven't been for a while. Once the pandemic is over, if they start paying enough to put the wear on my tires, I might do it again.

But Uber/Lyft don't treat drivers like independent contractors. They treat drivers like employees. They set the pay rates, you have no control. They tell you what kind of tools you have to have, you can't use a car they don't approve. You can't say "Don't send me jobs more than 2 miles away." You can't say "if a trip is less than 2 miles or more than 15 I don't want it." You can't say "I want a multiplier surge, and if it's lower than 2x I won't accept the trip." You only get to set the rough direction your trips are going a few times a day.

Employee vs independent with Uber/Lyft makes no real difference to me in terms of money, because I can handle the math that says right now I'd lose money driving. Employee vs independent would make more sense on the employee side because I'd get paid for sitting on my ass in the driveway waiting for a ping, or I would be told "don't bother, you're not needed right now because there aren't enough pax for the drivers already on the road." No real downside there, just less wasted time.

I enjoyed driving because encountering random people was fun. But I also made decent off-hours money when I did it, because I mostly drove during the "old days" surges when I could gross around $50/hour. Not my "day job" pay, but enough to make it worth bothering with when I had nothing else to do and felt like getting out of the house. You can't do that in my market any more, nobody here is grossing $10/hour, most of them a lot less than that, and net they're losing money.

You have no "freedom" to negotiate a wage with Uber/Lyft now. You take what they offer or don't. You have no power in that transaction. At least as an employee you have the freedom to form a union to negotiate as a more powerful group. You have the freedom to demand a legal wage and to sue if they won't pay it.


----------



## Jimmy44

JonC said:


> You want a reference to the law? No problem: https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2019/code-lab/division-2/part-4/chapter-1/section-1182-12/
> 
> You have the absolute freedom to negotiate any wage higher than that law's minimums in California. Other states have their own laws, some with lower minimums.
> 
> If you want to be paid less than the legal wage, no, it's a legal thing, you have the right to a legal wage, and you cannot contract it away. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=3513. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=1668. It is against public policy and unlawful.
> 
> You want a minimum wage not to exist at all? There are probably still a few undeveloped countries where that's the case. They probably won't allow Americans in right now, but you might be able to emigrate after the pandemic is over.
> 
> Look, I get wanting to set your own rates and hours. I get wanting full control of what you do. In my "day job" I am a real independent contractor. I set my own calendar, I set my own rates, I choose and bring my own tools, I handle collecting my own payments from the client. I can tell somebody a few counties over who wants me to show up at their site that I'm going to charge them for my time in both directions. And I charge a f**klot more than $15/hour. I'm not driving for Uber or Lyft right now, and haven't been for a while. Once the pandemic is over, if they start paying enough to put the wear on my tires, I might do it again.
> 
> But Uber/Lyft don't treat drivers like independent contractors. They treat drivers like employees. They set the pay rates, you have no control. They tell you what kind of tools you have to have, you can't use a car they don't approve. You can't say "Don't send me jobs more than 2 miles away." You can't say "if a trip is less than 2 miles or more than 15 I don't want it." You can't say "I want a multiplier surge, and if it's lower than 2x I won't accept the trip." You only get to set the rough direction your trips are going a few times a day.
> 
> Employee vs independent with Uber/Lyft makes no real difference to me in terms of money, because I can handle the math that says right now I'd lose money driving. Employee vs independent would make more sense on the employee side because I'd get paid for sitting on my ass in the driveway waiting for a ping, or I would be told "don't bother, you're not needed right now because there aren't enough pax for the drivers already on the road." No real downside there, just less wasted time.
> 
> I enjoyed driving because encountering random people was fun. But I also made decent off-hours money when I did it, because I mostly drove during the "old days" surges when I could gross around $50/hour. Not my "day job" pay, but enough to make it worth bothering with when I had nothing else to do and felt like getting out of the house. You can't do that in my market any more, nobody here is grossing $10/hour, most of them a lot less than that, and net they're losing money.
> 
> You have no "freedom" to negotiate a wage with Uber/Lyft now. You take what they offer or don't. You have no power in that transaction. At least as an employee you have the freedom to form a union to negotiate as a more powerful group. You have the freedom to demand a legal wage and to sue if they won't pay it.


I agree with most of what you said. Especially the good old days of Uber when you could make 300 on a good shift. You did not complain back then when things were going your way. The market became flooded with drivers and that's the main reason rates went down. That and the activist investors putting there nose where it does not belong. So what we are left with is classic supply and demand.


----------



## observer

Jimmy44 said:


> It really is amazing how many people still believe they are employees and that they are due thousands in back pay.
> My feeling is they are extreme liberals who are used to having the states and the govt. provide everything for them.
> They somehow view Uber as an extension of the govt. that will provide money , health benefits, child care, paid leave etc.
> That's just my feeling based on the responses.


Says the guy that was getting 798 dollars a week on unemployment.

You could have refused the UI, instead you "let the govt provide everything for them".



JonC said:


> How is it different than running them both now? If you're sitting on your ass waiting for a ping, you can simultaneously do the same work for two employers. If you're driving to a pickup or have a pax, it's not really kosher to have them both logged in now, because you can't adequately handle the work.
> 
> 
> Ever hear of a union?
> 
> You can't negotiate with Uber or Lyft as independent contractors. I mean, you could try, and they'd laugh at you. As an employee you have the legal right to unionize.


DING!DING!DING!

That's exactly why Uber is fighting drivers becoming employees.


----------



## Jimmy44

observer said:


> Says the guy that was getting 798 dollars a week on unemployment.
> 
> You could have refused the UI, instead you "let the govt provide everything for them".


If you think that's a fair comparison your entitled.
To me UI durring a deadly once in a lifetime pandemic is just a little different.


----------



## observer

Jimmy44 said:


> If you think that's a fair comparison your entitled.
> To me UI durring a deadly once in a lifetime pandemic is just a little different.


Not trying to put you or any other driver that is on UI down.

Just pointing out that your statement is hypocritical.

And yes I do think that's a fair comparison.


----------



## Jimmy44

observer said:


> Not trying to put you or any other driver that is on UI down.
> 
> Just pointing out that your statement is hypocritical.
> 
> And yes I do think that's a fair comparison.


Again your entitled to your opinion but I am not costing govt 2 trillion dollars


----------



## observer

Jimmy44 said:


> Again your entitled to your opinion but I am not costing govt 2 trillion dollars


No but I just want you to think about something.

You keep putting down liberals.

189 Republican Representatives voted to give you Unemployment Insurance.

*230 *Democrat Representatives voted to give YOU Unemployment Insurance.

49 Republican Senators voted to give you Unemployment Insurance.

*45 *Democrat Senators voted to give you Unemployment Insurance.

Yet, you keep putting "Liberals" down. The very people who made it possible for YOU to get Unemployment Insurance.


----------



## Escoman

JimKE said:


> *Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees*
> 
> Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle Wednesday on MSNBC.
> 
> "If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," Khosrowshahi said.
> 
> Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.
> 
> California's attorney general and three city attorneys brought the lawsuit against the companies under the state's new law, Assembly Bill 5, that aims to provide benefits to gig workers core to a company's business by classifying them as employees. In his decision granting the preliminary injunction, the judge rejected the notion that drivers should be considered outside the course of the companies' businesses, calling the logic "a classic example of circular reasoning."
> 
> Uber and Lyft both said they would appeal the ruling during the ten day period before it goes into effect.
> 
> Rather than classify drivers as employees, Khosrowshahi has advocated for what he calls a "third way" that would maintain drivers' independence while allowing companies to provide some protections without risking being viewed as full-time employers. In a New York Times op-ed ahead of the court ruling, Khosrowshahi said gig companies like Uber could pay into a fund that workers could dip into for paid time off on healthcare benefits based on the number of hours they work.
> 
> Khosrowshahi said on Wednesday that his Plan B if Uber can't win on appeal would be to temporarily pause service in California. While he said Uber would later resume service in the state, it would likely be more centered in cities, which could mean limited availability in less concentrated areas like suburbs.
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate. Khosrowshahi said if that's the case, the service would likely shut down in California until November, when voters in the state decide on Proposition 22, which would exempt drivers for app-based transportation and delivery companies from being considered employees. Uber has argued its drivers prefer working as independent contractors, though California AG Xavier Becerra rejected that claim as a "bogus argument."
> 
> Khosrowshahi emphasized that pausing service in the state would leave thousands of drivers without the income they would typically earn from Uber. Still, ridership has been down during the pandemic anyway, which the judge said made the injunction come at what is perhaps "the least worst time" for Uber and Lyft to adjust their business models.
> 
> Becerra said in an interview on CNBC Tuesday that he was unconcerned about the potential for Uber to leave the state as a result of the order.
> "Any business model that relies on short-changing workers in order to make it probably shouldn't be anywhere, whether California or otherwise," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California if it's forced to classify drivers as employees
> 
> 
> If the appeal doesn't work out for Uber, it will be banking on voters to determine its fate in voting on Proposition 22 in November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com


And Dara is the puppeteer playing your strings as usual lying out of his ass while you all suck it up like Gospel! Nowhere does Ab5 say you have to be an employee and work a fixed shift. Ab5 simply says you are entitled to a guaranteed Minimum wage protection like the unemployment many of you are enjoying along with basic rights like workers comp if injured on the job. Dara says We would love to give drivers more but Ab5 stops us . So what's the excuse for the other 49 states ? Prop 22 Guarantees no expense for Scr-U- ber and continued low base fares for you and you stay under their thumb. All these changes your enjoying happened because if AB5 and Scr-U- ber trying to circumvent it. Mark my words 22 passes every goodie they gave vanishes.Rember the Golden rule if Scr-U- ber says it's good for you it means us good for them. Remember Pool was created to keep our cars full and make more $ then came express pool. That was good for you and Dara promised you will like Prop 22 even more! After all has Scr-U- ber ever lied to you ?


----------



## Cynergie

SHalester said:


> so if Prop 22 fails and U/L forced to employee setup and both decide they can still operate in Calif the karma will be the AB5 supporters won't be selected to be hired. Karma is a boomerang female dog.


Fixed it for ya :smiles:


----------



## UberBastid

SHalester said:


> so if Prop 22 fails and U/L forced to employee setup and both decide they can still operate in Calif the karma will be the AB5 supporters won't be selected to be hired. Karma is a boomerang.


Sorry soul, that's not the way it works.
What happens is the AB5 supporters become union activists, think tank slugs, social workers, lobbyists, college professors, politicians and preachers. They will proudly boast in their resume that they put you and thousands of others out of work. 
In other words; they make a career out of YOUR WORK.


----------



## Jimmy44

observer said:


> No but I just want you to think about something.
> 
> You keep putting down liberals.
> 
> 189 Republican Representatives voted to give you Unemployment Insurance.
> 
> *230 *Democrat Representatives voted to give YOU Unemployment Insurance.
> 
> 49 Republican Senators voted to give you Unemployment Insurance.
> 
> *45 *Democrat Senators voted to give you Unemployment Insurance.
> 
> Yet, you keep putting "Liberals" down. The very people who made it possible for YOU to get Unemployment Insurance.


I really do not consider UI to be liberal. 
The liberal sanctuary cities do upset me.
The Stymulous bill the Dems proposed included 2 trillion more then the Republicans with most of it targeted for liberal programs that aided sanctuary cities.
I feel that the Dems are holding the 600 a week from the poor. 
That's what upsets me about the liberals mostly Nancy and chuckup


observer said:


> No but I just want you to think about something.
> 
> You keep putting down liberals.
> 
> 189 Republican Representatives voted to give you Unemployment Insurance.
> 
> *230 *Democrat Representatives voted to give YOU Unemployment Insurance.
> 
> 49 Republican Senators voted to give you Unemployment Insurance.
> 
> *45 *Democrat Senators voted to give you Unemployment Insurance.
> 
> Yet, you keep putting "Liberals" down. The very people who made it possible for YOU to get Unemployment Insurance.


----------



## Mista T

SHalester said:


> if we, in calif, were to become employees there would be no negotiating at all. They offer, you accept or pound pavement.


... and how is that different from the way it is now?


----------



## SHalester

Mista T said:


> and how is that different from the way it is now?


none. See note I replied to.


----------



## Jimmy44

Jimmy44 said:


> I really do not consider UI to be liberal.
> The liberal sanctuary cities do upset me.
> The Stymulous bill the Dems proposed included 2 trillion more then the Republicans with most of it targeted for liberal programs that aided sanctuary cities.
> I feel that the Dems are holding the 600 a week from the poor.
> That's what upsets me about the liberals mostly Nancy and chuckup


If you have been following me I gave Nancy and Chuck kudos for the gig workers being included in the Stymulous bill. I also criticized Lindsy and Grassly and Mitch for opposing it



Mista T said:


> ... and how is that different from the way it is now?


I am not addressing any one person but this employee vs IC debate is just so old and talked to death. Let's just wait and see what CA and Uber come up with.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

I STILL STAND BY MY BET!

I claim drivers ( you) in at least California have Unemployment Insurance and Workers Comp rights. Under employee status!

If you guys agree to the bet, then I have to name names and post court papers showing award or I’ll eat my own D#%^

If at least 3 posters accept the terms, bets on!


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

Jimmy44 said:


> I agree with most of what you said. Especially the good old days of Uber when you could make 300 on a good shift. You did not complain back then when things were going your way. The market became flooded with drivers and that's the main reason rates went down. That and the activist investors putting there nose where it does not belong. So what we are left with is classic supply and demand.


It's not the flooded with drivers part that killed Orlando.

When one airport run from Disney (20+ miles) made you $40+ ($50 on XL) minus tolls you could rack in good money. Now it's <$20 minus $5.00 in tolls.

Back in the day on a Friday night, every pickup from the nightclubs downtown got you $15-100. Now it's $5-15 (_with_ a $2.00 BS surge). Triple pain, half rates, BS surge, and too many drivers.

Back in the day a min trip was literally a mile, now it's up to 3 miles, and they pay less.

Back in the day, you could rack up back to back fares for $10.00-20.00 each at Disney. Now it's $5-10, and you only get half as many (this is before covid by the way)

I'm not exaggerating on these numbers either.

It's why I drive a cab, fewer fares and i _still_ make more money.

more drivers WILL lead to less pay, but it also leads to fewer miles driven.


----------



## Amos69

And there is going to be many new drivers hitting the roads.

* It begins:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...lay-off-18-000-amid-slow-comeback-for-casinos
https://www.q13fox.com/news/delta-a...-pilots-in-october-according-to-internal-memo
https://www.q13fox.com/news/millions-of-jobs-lost-to-coronavirus-pandemic-could-take-years-to-return*
All those companies that took stimulus money are now getting ready to lay off or fire hundreds of thousands of people heading into fall.


----------



## Jimmy44

Amos69 said:


> And there is going to be many new drivers hitting the roads.
> 
> * It begins:
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...lay-off-18-000-amid-slow-comeback-for-casinos
> https://www.q13fox.com/news/delta-a...-pilots-in-october-according-to-internal-memo
> https://www.q13fox.com/news/millions-of-jobs-lost-to-coronavirus-pandemic-could-take-years-to-return*
> All those companies that took stimulus money are now getting ready to lay off of fire hundreds of thousands of people heading into fall.


We need a cure it's only thing that will stop the bleeding


----------



## Cynergie

Amos69 said:


> And there is going to be many new drivers hitting the roads.
> 
> * It begins:
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...lay-off-18-000-amid-slow-comeback-for-casinos
> https://www.q13fox.com/news/delta-a...-pilots-in-october-according-to-internal-memo
> https://www.q13fox.com/news/millions-of-jobs-lost-to-coronavirus-pandemic-could-take-years-to-return*
> All those companies that took stimulus money are now getting ready to lay off or fire hundreds of thousands of people heading into fall.


That news is pretty depressing. There was an article awhile back in one of the top gaming magazines on Activison. One of the anonymous sources (most likely an employee) provided the journalist with some interesting insight. They indicated that while Activison executive management were busy slashing work hours and firing/meat grinding up their software devs and IT personnel everywhere, the number of Uber/Lyft stickers on employee cars seemed to be multiplying in a proportional rate in the parking lots around the building....

UE is still doing well. But at the rate new potential drivers may be adding themselves to the Uber platform, Dara's going to have to man up and face reality. Uber's business model is completely unsustainable where its PE ratio is concerned. DK's going to have to flat out lock all drivers to whatever the minimum wage is in the state/region Uber is operating in. If that's not enough to cut costs, then only other alternative is deactivation. Or a long term perma lockout of excess drivers from the app to try and break even. Wonder what the average driver to pax ratio is to date?


----------



## Jenga

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> I STILL STAND BY MY BET!
> 
> I claim drivers ( you) in at least California have Unemployment Insurance and Workers Comp rights. Under employee status!
> 
> If you guys agree to the bet, then I have to name names and post court papers showing award or I'll eat my own D#%^
> 
> If at least 3 posters accept the terms, bets on!


Interesting. Did you know that in Hawaii all Uber drivers have now been switched from PUA (Independent contractor status) to UI (employee status)? This change was effective from June 12 and I don't yet know how they arrived at this and how they expect UI to be funded... by the legitimate "employers" I suppose, since you can bet Uber is not paying into that fund. It's been a huge mess actually, since my PUA has been suspended since June 13 and I've received ZERO in benefits while these 2 systems duke it out. The really stupid thing is that there is no reason for the PUA people at the state level to be trying to switch us over to UI, since PUA is 100% paid for by the Feds (under the CARES Act) and UI comes out of the state coffers... Talk about fiscally stupid! I sense someone trying to do too "good" of a job for some future promotion. (I actually know who it is).


----------



## Jimmy44

Jenga said:


> Interesting. Did you know that in Hawaii all Uber drivers have now been switched from PUA (Independent contractor status) to UI (employee status)? This change was effective from June 12 and I don't yet know how they arrived at this and how they expect UI to be funded... by the legitimate "employers" I suppose, since you can bet Uber is not paying into that fund. It's been a huge mess actually, since my PUA has been suspended since June 13 and I've received ZERO in benefits while these 2 systems duke it out. The really stupid thing is that there is no reason for the PUA people at the state level to be trying to switch us over to UI, since PUA is 100% paid for by the Feds (under the CARES Act) and UI comes out of the state coffers... Talk about fiscally stupid! I sense someone trying to do too "good" of a job for some future promotion. (I actually know who it is).


It's kind of like big foot rumers it's there but no evidence.
Just someone send me A. the contract. or B. a check C. back pay
Anyone of these 3 things not a blury photograph


----------



## Uberyly

TBone said:


> And you know they absolutely will shut it down. This will be interesting to watch


BS, part time is easily implemented, in fact I'll bet most employees are part time. We could then switch to lyft for 4 hours.


----------



## SHalester

Uberyly said:


> BS, part time is easily implemented, in fact I'll bet most employees are part time.


really. have you EVER worked at a corporation of any size? Onboarding thousands of employees at one time would strain any system. Plus, before onboarding, there would be the actual 'hiring' process.

That doesn't even begin to touch the changes to the overall system (what a few call, incorrectly, the AI system). Yeah, not a 4 hour process at all.


----------



## Jimmy44

Uberyly said:


> BS, part time is easily implemented, in fact I'll bet most employees are part time. We could then switch to lyft for 4 hours.


It's a total mess like I said it would be


----------



## Workforfood

JimKE said:


> I actually don't think they have any choice.
> 
> The Uber/Lyft business model simply does not work if drivers are employees. Neither company is making profits NOW with independent contractor drivers, and paying very low rates.


U/L first pay their C suite then their BS projects like autonomous cars then employees like Rohit then drivers.
AB5 has had the clock ticking for some time now. It is corporately irresponsible for the CEO to say that they can't turn on a dime and comply. They have spent prodigiously in defiance and scoffed planning for possible compliance. The stockholders should scrutinize this board and C suite for malfeasance against their interest


----------



## Jimmy44

Workforfood said:


> U/L first pay their C suite then their BS projects like autonomous cars then employees like Rohit then drivers.
> AB5 has had the clock ticking for some time now. It is corporately irresponsible for the CEO to say that they can't turn on a dime and comply. They have spent prodigiously in defiance and scoffed planning for possible compliance. The stockholders should scrutinize this board and C suite for malfeasance against their interest


I'm just glad I don't drive in CA.
It sounds like a total mess.


----------



## Cynergie

Uberyly said:


> BS, part time is easily implemented, in fact I'll bet most employees are part time. We could then switch to lyft for 4 hours.


This is like saying you get hired to work PT for Google. Then you tell them you're moonlighting 4 hrs a day for Fakebook -o:


----------



## Jimmy44

Cynergie said:


> This is like saying you get hired to work PT for Google. Then you tell them you're moonlighting 4 hrs a day for Fakebook -o:


Yes isn't there competition clauses


----------



## Paul Vincent

Illini said:


> You're not an employee. You may be soon, but not yet.


He is misclassified. When prop 22 passes Uber/Lyft has an entire year of fines and penalties that could be imposed, for the entirety of 20/20 they were breaking the law under AB5..... Unless they win in the appellate Court.



JonC said:


> You seem to have a reading comprehension issue.
> 
> *Uber is continuing to break the law.*
> 
> The court orders will take a while. But they will come.


A perfect fit for Uber



SHalester said:


> really. have you EVER worked at a corporation of any size? Onboarding thousands of employees at one time would strain any system. Plus, before onboarding, there would be the actual 'hiring' process.
> 
> That doesn't even begin to touch the changes to the overall system (what a few call, incorrectly, the AI system). Yeah, not a 4 hour process at all.


They should have sent us applications months ago


----------



## SHalester

Paul Vincent said:


> They should have sent us applications months ago


well, as of yet, no judge has really forced them to yet. Came close, then a stay landed.

I just hope Prop 22 passes as that will nullify AB5.


----------



## Jimmy44

SHalester said:


> well, as of yet, no judge has really forced them to yet. Came close, then a stay landed.
> 
> I just hope Prop 22 passes as that will nullify AB5.


I am adding a fourth item to my list of things I want ANY employee to send me.
1. Paycheck 
2. Contract
3. Back pay
4. The ticket or fine you received for using your app

I have requested the first two items since this AB5 was first introduced.
All I get is the sound of crickets.


----------



## SHalester

Jimmy44 said:


> I have requested the first two items since this AB5 was first introduced.


there is zero possibility anybody will send you those items, ever. FYI

btw, few employees 'sign' an employment contract. At least not peons.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Jenga said:


> Interesting. Did you know that in Hawaii all Uber drivers have now been switched from PUA (Independent contractor status) to UI (employee status)? This change was effective from June 12 and I don't yet know how they arrived at this and how they expect UI to be funded... by the legitimate "employers" I suppose, since you can bet Uber is not paying into that fund. It's been a huge mess actually, since my PUA has been suspended since June 13 and I've received ZERO in benefits while these 2 systems duke it out. The really stupid thing is that there is no reason for the PUA people at the state level to be trying to switch us over to UI, since PUA is 100% paid for by the Feds (under the CARES Act) and UI comes out of the state coffers... Talk about fiscally stupid! I sense someone trying to do too "good" of a job for some future promotion. (I actually know who it is).


Sorry to hear about the delays.

My understanding is by switching over to regular UI, the State can send a bill to Uber/Lyft.

In California I am on regular UI, instead of PUA. UI is 57 weeks while PUA is 39 weeks. My weekly benefit is also higher under regular UI. I enjoy knowing Uber/Lyft are being billed.

I think the driver gets more while the state gets the right to bill the Corporations. But the delays do suck. Hope you get a nice lump sum.


----------



## Jimmy44

SHalester said:


> there is zero possibility anybody will send you those items, ever. FYI
> 
> btw, few employees 'sign' an employment contract. At least not peons.


You have to have a job description. What shifts to work ? 
Sent me the job application.


----------



## SHalester

Jimmy44 said:


> You have to have a job description. What shifts to work ?


one day I'll understand what you are so 'into' a state you don't live in. One day.


----------



## Jenga

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Sorry to hear about the delays.
> 
> My understanding is by switching over to regular UI, the State can send a bill to Uber/Lyft.
> 
> In California I am on regular UI, instead of PUA. UI is 57 weeks while PUA is 39 weeks. My weekly benefit is also higher under regular UI. I enjoy knowing Uber/Lyft are being billed.
> 
> I think the driver gets more while the state gets the right to bill the Corporations. But the delays do suck. Hope you get a nice lump sum.


State can bill them, but they will certainly not pay without extensive litigation. In CA, you have prop 5 to back up the state's claim, but HI is doubtful. Though maybe a new law is why they shifted me - but I've not seen or heard of it. Crazy thing is, the dept of taxation says we still have to act as though self-employed, so they aren't even consistent.

Is there a reason for the 57 weeks? My understanding is that when UI runs out after 26 weeks, either PUA or FPUE kicks in, but that's only for another 13 weeks for a total of 39. What do I have wrong? Maybe can you explain your math...


----------



## Jimmy44

SHalester said:


> one day I'll understand what you are so 'into' a state you don't live in. One day.


Because my


Jenga said:


> State can bill them, but they will certainly not pay without extensive litigation. In CA, you have prop 5 to back up the state's claim, but HI is doubtful. Though maybe a new law is why they shifted me - but I've not seen or heard of it. Crazy thing is, the dept of taxation says we still have to act as though self-employed, so they aren't even consistent.
> 
> Is there a reason for the 57 weeks? My understanding is that when UI runs out after 26 weeks, either PUA or FPUE kicks in, but that's only for another 13 weeks for a total of 39. What do I have wrong? Maybe can you explain your math...


Between AB5 and Executive order money CA. Is in a mess. It sounds like things are going to be in litigation forever


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

I wasn't clear. I meant only in California. California added its own extensions to the 26 + 13. So it's now 39 + with a total of 57.

However, only people on regular unemployment can get more than 39 weeks. PUA under federal stimulus get cut of at 39 regardless if a state adds it own extensions.

I checked Hawaii, it has no state extension passed the 39 weeks as of now. So everyone gets cut off at 39 in Sunny Hawaii. But if Hawaii adds its own extension in the future only regular UI recipients will get it.

The only reason Hawaii might have done that is if they have something up their sleeve, like you said there is no AB5 in Hawaii. I wounder if you get more since you say they are processing it under regular UI. PUA is based on net, while UI is based on gross income. They might also be planning to extend the regular UI.

But the main reason would be so the State could file a lawsuit and collect from the company.



Jenga said:


> State can bill them, but they will certainly not pay without extensive litigation.


Administrators in Washington and Illinoisare processing app-based workers for regular unemployment benefits on a case-by-case basis.Nick Demerice, a spokesperson for Washington's Employment Security Department, said that "some gig workers qualify in Washington for UI while some for PUA."

(full-time platform worker who gets PUA (net income) instead of state unemployment (gross income) could stand to lose a great deal.Veena Dubal, a law professor at UC Hastings, in San Francisco, said that one local driver reported his gross earnings to be $88,000; his net: just $22,000. She also noted that routing gig workers through PUA lets app companies off the hook and burdens underfunded governments: "We have no accounting of how many drivers went through the [state] portal and how much money taxpayers are fronting because these employers are refusing to pay into unemployment insurance." )



Jimmy44 said:


> Between AB5 and Executive order money CA. Is in a mess. It sounds like things are going to be in litigation forever


ABC test, coming to a city near you!

*Unemployment Compensation *- The Hawaii Employment Security Act uses the "ABC" test.

*Tax Revenue *- For tax purposes, Hawaii uses the Internal Revenue Service standard for classifying workers. What was historically referred to as the "20 factors" have been simplified to three primary categories of evidence which must be considered to evaluate the degree of control and independence of the worker:

*Workers' Compensation *- The state workers' compensation statutes use the "control" and "relative nature of the work" tests. The control test provides that "an employment relationship is established when the person in whose behalf the work is done has the power, express or implied, to dictate the means and methods by which the work is to be accomplished."


----------



## 197438

SHalester said:


> well, as of yet, no judge has really forced them to yet. Came close, then a stay landed.
> 
> I just hope Prop 22 passes as that will nullify AB5.


Prop 22 does not go far enough. I wrote to both of my Legislature reps expressing my need for AB5 to be repealed. I told them that many of us lifelong Democrats do not want to ever be part of a union, as we have adapted since Reagan was President. It is time for the Party step into the 21st century and learn what workers really need. We do not need to be told how much sugar is in our soda or cherry flavor in our blunts. We need secure healthcare access, not as a subservient payment by employers. We need housing at fair prices, not as gov't-guaranteed cash flow for investors to pay their debts.

My gig ex-Uber is as a consultant to non-profits, some of whom have no employees. I don not fit within any of the existing exemptions, nor under any of the proposed exemptions (incl. Prop 22). As written in AB5 (as amended), I personally responded by going from Sole Proprietor to LLC, paid the state its fees and taxes, paid the City its biz license fee, and Uber now pays me through my LLC's bank account with my LLC's tax ID number. I am outside the reach of AB5, in my reading of the law. Yet my NGO clients worry about hiring me as a consultant using state grants. I started driving for Uber because I anticipated a rapid decline in my consulting income this year (pre COVID) due to AB5. Regardless the outcome of AB5 and Prop 22, Uber is a source of easy cash flow to pay bills as my NGO clients sort out their worries. If Prop 22 passes, at least I will have this gig to fall back on as my core clients determine their legal obligations under this ludicrous law.



Jimmy44 said:


> You have to have a job description. What shifts to work ?
> Sent me the job application.


Dude, wake up. They will not hire employees. They will hire franchisees.

As far as Uber income is concerned, I will win with AB5 because I am already set up to be a corporate franchise. It may even become my primary source of income.

Don't misconstrue. I hate AB5. I want it repealed. But I also want Prop 13 repealed, which has not had much momentum in recent decades, yet had a good 22-year career from the trickle down benefits of Prop 13. Seek opportunity in disruption. It can fund your career.


----------



## Jimmy44

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> I wasn't clear. I meant only in California. California added its own extensions to the 26 + 13. So it's now 39 + with a total of 57.
> 
> However, only people on regular unemployment can get more than 39 weeks. PUA under federal stimulus get cut of at 39 regardless if a state adds it own extensions.
> 
> I checked Hawaii, it has no state extension passed the 39 weeks as of now. So everyone gets cut off at 39 in Sunny Hawaii. But if Hawaii adds its own extension in the future only regular UI recipients will get it.
> 
> The only reason Hawaii might have done that is if they have something up their sleeve, like you said there is no AB5 in Hawaii. I wounder if you get more since you say they are processing it under regular UI. PUA is based on net, while UI is based on gross income. They might also be planning to extend the regular UI.
> 
> But the main reason would be so the State could file a lawsuit and collect from the company.





EastBayRides said:


> Prop 22 does not go far enough. I wrote to both of my Legislature reps expressing my need for AB5 to be repealed. I told them that many of us lifelong Democrats do not want to ever be part of a union, as we have adapted since Reagan was President. It is time for the Party step into the 21st century and learn what workers really need. We do not need to be told how much sugar is in our soda or cherry flavor in our blunts. We need secure healthcare access, not as a subservient payment by employers. We need housing at fair prices, not as gov't-guaranteed cash flow for investors to pay their debts.
> 
> My gig ex-Uber is as a consultant to non-profits, some of whom have no employees. I don not fit within any of the existing exemptions, nor under any of the proposed exemptions (incl. Prop 22). As written in AB5 (as amended), I personally responded by going from Sole Proprietor to LLC, paid the state its fees and taxes, paid the City its biz license fee, and Uber now pays me through my LLC's bank account with my LLC's tax ID number. I am outside the reach of AB5, in my reading of the law. Yet my NGO clients worry about hiring me as a consultant using state grants. I started driving for Uber because I anticipated a rapid decline in my consulting income this year (pre COVID) due to AB5. Regardless the outcome of AB5 and Prop 22, Uber is a source of easy cash flow to pay bills as my NGO clients sort out their worries. If Prop 22 passes, at least I will have this gig to fall back on as my core clients determine their legal obligations under this ludicrous law.
> 
> 
> Dude, wake up. They will not hire employees. They will hire franchisees.
> 
> As far as Uber income is concerned, I will win with AB5 because I am already set up to be a corporate franchise. It may even become my primary source of income.
> 
> Don't misconstrue. I hate AB5. I want it repealed. But I also want Prop 13 repealed, which has not had much momentum in recent decades, yet had a good 22-year career from the trickle down benefits of Prop 13. Seek opportunity in disruption. It can fund your career.


This AB5 is a total mess


----------



## O-Side Uber

Jimmy44 said:


> We need a cure it's only thing that will stop the bleeding


Are you talking about forced vaccinations ? Because that's what is coming our way . Forcing you to take a vax that's maybe 20% to 30% effective with no immunity . You also need to keep getting tested and vaccinated . Sound fun?

Why do people think there will be a successful vaccine for a cold ? This is about control and trace tracking. It's already starting in Ireland . A health passport . You can't do shit without it. That's control and it's coming to America .


----------



## Jimmy44

O-Side Uber said:


> Are you talking about forced vaccinations ? Because that's what is coming our way . Forcing you to take a vax that's maybe 20% to 30% effective with no immunity . You also need to keep getting tested and vaccinated . Sound fun?
> 
> Why do people think there will be a successful vaccine for a cold ? This is about control and trace tracking. It's already starting in Ireland . A health passport . You can't do shit without it. That's control and it's coming to America .


Be real a forced vaccination with 30 % success ?


----------



## O-Side Uber

Jimmy44 said:


> Be real a forced vaccination with 30 % success ?


The current H1 N1 vaccine has a 30% effective rate . It's only 30% because the virus mutates. That vaccine has been around for years . Many people were going to stop taking the flu shot because it makes them feel ill and they still got the flu anyway!!!

In Ireland they just rolled out the vaccine travel passport. It's soon to come here to the USA . F that!! I will go out in a hail of bullets before I allow the authority to shoot me up with a new world order vaccine . No thanks !


----------



## Jimmy44

O-Side Uber said:


> The current H1 N1 vaccine has a 30% effective rate . It's only 30% because the virus mutates. That vaccine has been around for years . Many people were going to stop taking the flu shot because it makes them feel ill and they still got the flu anyway!!!
> 
> In Ireland they just rolled out the vaccine travel passport. It's soon to come here to the USA . F that!! I will go out in a hail of bullets before I allow the authority to shoot me up with a new world order vaccine . No thanks !


I don't think they can force you.


----------



## O-Side Uber

Jimmy44 said:


> I don't think they can force you.


The government is of course trying to brain wash the public into volunteering to get the shot. I estimate about half the country will get it voluntarily . Soon a health passport will be integrated into the system and your phone. Only those that are vaccinated will be allowed to travel freely. This is some Orwellian BS of the highest order.

Check out this commercial currently being shown in Ireland at the beginning of this podcast. It will be in place here in USA by November 2nd. Watch the first few minutes of this &#128071;&#127995;


----------



## SHalester

*We believe a better way to work is possible *
Explaining Prop 22's earnings guarantee Apps like Uber are great for finding flexible work that can help you make ends meet. But it can sometimes be hard to know exactly how much you'll make by driving or delivering food.

That's why we're fighting for *Prop 22*: it will give you an earnings guarantee so you can always know the minimum that you'll earn for your time.

Prop 22's earnings guarantee includes:

*Minimum earnings:* If you earn less than the guarantee (120% of minimum wage over 2 weeks) Uber will pay you the difference.
*Expense reimbursement:* This earnings guarantee includes $0.30 per mile to account for your expenses, such as gas and vehicle wear and tear.
*No upper limit:* The minimum is just that-a minimum. There's no upper limit to how much you can earn on the app.
*Tips are on top:* As always, you keep 100% of the tips you earn for the service you provide. And these tips are not included in how the minimum guarantee is calculated.

*How it would work:*
The guarantee is calculated every 2 weeks:







*($0.30 x miles*) + (1.2 x $minimum wage x hours*) **en route to pickups and on-trip only 







For example, over 2 weeks, a driver in Los Angeles:

Is en route to pickups and on-trip for 500 miles
For a total of en route and on-trip of 20 hours
The minimum wage in Los Angeles is $13

In this case, the driver would have a total earnings guarantee of $462.

$0.30 x 500 miles = $150
1.2 x $13 x 20 hours = $312
$150 + $312 = *$462 total minimum earning guarantee*

So, in this example, if the driver makes less than $462 ($23.10/hour in this case), Uber would pay the driver the difference.

*In addition to this earnings guarantee, Prop 22 would also give you access to new benefits, like healthcare, and new protections against discrimination.

To make this a reality, we need to update our outdated laws. We need Californians to vote YES on Prop 22.*

We believe drivers and delivery people deserve better. We will continue to advocate for you and do everything we can to keep you moving in California.


----------



## Jimmy44

SHalester said:


> ​
> ​
> ​
> ​
> *We believe a better way to work is possible *
> Explaining Prop 22's earnings guaranteeApps like Uber are great for finding flexible work that can help you make ends meet. But it can sometimes be hard to know exactly how much you'll make by driving or delivering food.
> 
> That's why we're fighting for *Prop 22*: it will give you an earnings guarantee so you can always know the minimum that you'll earn for your time.
> 
> Prop 22's earnings guarantee includes:
> 
> *Minimum earnings:* If you earn less than the guarantee (120% of minimum wage over 2 weeks) Uber will pay you the difference.
> *Expense reimbursement:* This earnings guarantee includes $0.30 per mile to account for your expenses, such as gas and vehicle wear and tear.
> *No upper limit:* The minimum is just that-a minimum. There's no upper limit to how much you can earn on the app.
> *Tips are on top:* As always, you keep 100% of the tips you earn for the service you provide. And these tips are not included in how the minimum guarantee is calculated.
> *How it would work:*
> The guarantee is calculated every 2 weeks:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> ​
> *($0.30 x miles*) + (1.2 x $minimum wage x hours*) **en route to pickups and on-trip only
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> ​
> For example, over 2 weeks, a driver in Los Angeles:
> 
> Is en route to pickups and on-trip for 500 miles
> For a total of en route and on-trip of 20 hours
> The minimum wage in Los Angeles is $13
> In this case, the driver would have a total earnings guarantee of $462.
> 
> $0.30 x 500 miles = $150
> 1.2 x $13 x 20 hours = $312
> $150 + $312 = *$462 total minimum earning guarantee*
> 
> So, in this example, if the driver makes less than $462 ($23.10/hour in this case), Uber would pay the driver the difference.
> 
> *In addition to this earnings guarantee, Prop 22 would also give you access to new benefits, like healthcare, and new protections against discrimination.
> 
> To make this a reality, we need to update our outdated laws. We need Californians to vote YES on Prop 22.*
> 
> We believe drivers and delivery people deserve better. We will continue to advocate for you and do everything we can to keep you moving in California.


I think the first sentence is correct.
Everything else no thank you. 
If this was Connecticut I would be so pissed off.
I wish all of you the best.
But all I can see is a total mess.


----------



## SHalester

If Prop 22 pisses you off AB5 must make your head explode. I mean, from where you live, a remote head exploding, aye?


----------



## Areyousure

O-Side Uber said:


> The government is of course trying to brain wash the public into volunteering to get the shot. I estimate about half the country will get it voluntarily . Soon a health passport will be integrated into the system and your phone. Only those that are vaccinated will be allowed to travel freely. This is some Orwellian BS of the highest order.
> 
> Check out this commercial currently being shown in Ireland at the beginning of this podcast. It will be in place here in USA by November 2nd. Watch the first few minutes of this &#128071;&#127995;


Its like two "shots" (doses). Two visits. Google if you want.


----------



## JonC

SHalester said:


> ​
> ​
> ​
> ​
> *We believe a better way to work is possible *
> Explaining Prop 22's earnings guaranteeApps like Uber are great for finding flexible work that can help you make ends meet. But it can sometimes be hard to know exactly how much you'll make by driving or delivering food.
> 
> That's why we're fighting for *Prop 22*: it will give you an earnings guarantee so you can always know the minimum that you'll earn for your time.
> 
> Prop 22's earnings guarantee includes:
> 
> *Minimum earnings:* If you earn less than the guarantee (120% of minimum wage over 2 weeks) Uber will pay you the difference.
> *Expense reimbursement:* This earnings guarantee includes $0.30 per mile to account for your expenses, such as gas and vehicle wear and tear.
> *No upper limit:* The minimum is just that-a minimum. There's no upper limit to how much you can earn on the app.
> *Tips are on top:* As always, you keep 100% of the tips you earn for the service you provide. And these tips are not included in how the minimum guarantee is calculated.
> *How it would work:*
> The guarantee is calculated every 2 weeks:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> ​
> *($0.30 x miles*) + (1.2 x $minimum wage x hours*) **en route to pickups and on-trip only
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> ​
> For example, over 2 weeks, a driver in Los Angeles:
> 
> Is en route to pickups and on-trip for 500 miles
> For a total of en route and on-trip of 20 hours
> The minimum wage in Los Angeles is $13
> In this case, the driver would have a total earnings guarantee of $462.
> 
> $0.30 x 500 miles = $150
> 1.2 x $13 x 20 hours = $312
> $150 + $312 = *$462 total minimum earning guarantee*
> 
> So, in this example, if the driver makes less than $462 ($23.10/hour in this case), Uber would pay the driver the difference.
> 
> *In addition to this earnings guarantee, Prop 22 would also give you access to new benefits, like healthcare, and new protections against discrimination.
> 
> To make this a reality, we need to update our outdated laws. We need Californians to vote YES on Prop 22.*
> 
> We believe drivers and delivery people deserve better. We will continue to advocate for you and do everything we can to keep you moving in California.


Sounds like a good reason to vote no, because the benefits as an employee would be even better.

And seriously, they're playing up keeping 100% of tips? That's the law already. As is expense reimbursement, which they'd need to either pay as actual vehicle expenses or at the IRS mileage rate, not a lousy $.030.

https://calaborfed.org/no-on-prop-22-faq/


----------



## SHalester

JonC said:


> because the benefits as an employee would be even better.


detail that opinion, please.


----------



## JonC

O-Side Uber said:


> The government is of course trying to brain wash the public into volunteering to get the shot. I estimate about half the country will get it voluntarily . Soon a health passport will be integrated into the system and your phone. Only those that are vaccinated will be allowed to travel freely. This is some Orwellian BS of the highest order.
> 
> Check out this commercial currently being shown in Ireland at the beginning of this podcast. It will be in place here in USA by November 2nd. Watch the first few minutes of this &#128071;&#127995;


It wouldn't be necessary if covidiots weren't running around without masks and planning on refusing to be vaccinated.

What kind of fool thinks getting and spreading this disease is better than getting a vaccine?



SHalester said:


> detail that opinion, please.


As a start there's paid sick leave and worker's comp.

And those are a pretty big deal, driving can be dangerous, and if you're injured working as an independent contractor it's out of your pocket, if you're injured on the clock as an employee the company is responsible for your medical bills.

And since Uber likely already has employees in CA getting health insurance, they'd likely be mandated to offer drivers the same health plan.

And of course they'd be required to pay 50% of your social security tax instead of the 0% they're paying now.


----------



## SHalester

JonC said:


> And since Uber likely already has employees in CA getting health insurance,


wild speculation based on......wild speculation. Here's the thing that most seem to discount: Uber et al will not make all active drivers employees (when they forced to do so). the RS driving population will plummet.

the 'few' benefits you mention will be over shadowed with many 'freedoms' going buh bye. Those offsets are far greater than few positive 'spins'.

do a search on this forum to see how members feel over the past year about AB5 and Prop 22.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Stop scaring people guys.

Im scared of vaccines, AB5 and prop 22.

I read a article about how Uber was offering flexibility to its employees. It blew my mind that they are scaring the drivers about rigid shift and a lack of flexibility, while promoting flexibility for non driver employees.

It felt like they are fear monger the drivers intentionally.

Reading about how they will provide "work when and where you want" for corporate employees while scaring the bejeezus out of us the driver about How they will take flexibility away.

Whatever happens we have to adjust accordingly. But they are clearly able to offer flexibility if they wanted.

""Please lead with empathy as you help balance work and at-home needs, and be flexible where you can if they need to reschedule, be offline at certain times, or need some variable time off," Andrew Macdonald, Uber's senior vice president of global rides and platform, wrote in a March 17 email to managers.

https://www.cnet.com/news/ubers-cre...-caregivers-stuck-at-home-during-coronavirus/


----------



## Jimmy44

SHalester said:


> If Prop 22 pisses you off AB5 must make your head explode. I mean, from where you live, a remote head exploding, aye?


To be honest I would just turn on another app.
I complain about the % split and the old style surge and the rediculus method of rating.
But I do not expect to totally overhaul the entire business model and transportation industry


----------



## O-Side Uber

JonC said:


> It wouldn't be necessary if covidiots weren't running around without masks and planning on refusing to be vaccinated.
> 
> What kind of fool thinks getting and spreading this disease is better than getting a vaccine?
> 
> 
> As a start there's paid sick leave and worker's comp.
> 
> And those are a pretty big deal, driving can be dangerous, and if you're injured working as an independent contractor it's out of your pocket, if you're injured on the clock as an employee the company is responsible for your medical bills.
> 
> And since Uber likely already has employees in CA getting health insurance, they'd likely be mandated to offer drivers the same health plan.
> 
> And of course they'd be required to pay 50% of your social security tax instead of the 0% they're paying now.


YOU are the covidiot !!! That term was originally used for mask holes like you that haven't a clue about vaccines . Somehow you dumb dumbs flipped it to call people that aren't mask proponents covidiots . That's some funny shit!!

You go get that Bill Gates vaccine and let us know how it works out for you !! I got very sick in January and likely already had Covid. Therefore, I don't even need a vaccine. Just like I don't need a chicken pox vaccine ... because I already had chicken pox as a child. Do you understand that Mr. Covidiot?


----------



## SHalester

Jimmy44 said:


> To be honest I would just turn on another app.


as long as that app isn't Lyft, yeah? They in same boat, tho they try to hide they are in that boat.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

SHalester said:


> ​
> ​
> ​
> ​
> *We believe a better way to work is possible *
> Explaining Prop 22's earnings guaranteeApps like Uber are great for finding flexible work that can help you make ends meet. But it can sometimes be hard to know exactly how much you'll make by driving or delivering food.
> 
> That's why we're fighting for *Prop 22*: it will give you an earnings guarantee so you can always know the minimum that you'll earn for your time.
> 
> Prop 22's earnings guarantee includes:
> 
> *Minimum earnings:* If you earn less than the guarantee (120% of minimum wage over 2 weeks) Uber will pay you the difference.
> *Expense reimbursement:* This earnings guarantee includes $0.30 per mile to account for your expenses, such as gas and vehicle wear and tear.
> *No upper limit:* The minimum is just that-a minimum. There's no upper limit to how much you can earn on the app.
> *Tips are on top:* As always, you keep 100% of the tips you earn for the service you provide. And these tips are not included in how the minimum guarantee is calculated.
> *How it would work:*
> The guarantee is calculated every 2 weeks:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> ​
> *($0.30 x miles*) + (1.2 x $minimum wage x hours*) **en route to pickups and on-trip only
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> ​
> For example, over 2 weeks, a driver in Los Angeles:
> 
> Is en route to pickups and on-trip for 500 miles
> For a total of en route and on-trip of 20 hours
> The minimum wage in Los Angeles is $13
> In this case, the driver would have a total earnings guarantee of $462.
> 
> $0.30 x 500 miles = $150
> 1.2 x $13 x 20 hours = $312
> $150 + $312 = *$462 total minimum earning guarantee*
> 
> So, in this example, if the driver makes less than $462 ($23.10/hour in this case), Uber would pay the driver the difference.
> 
> *In addition to this earnings guarantee, Prop 22 would also give you access to new benefits, like healthcare, and new protections against discrimination.
> 
> To make this a reality, we need to update our outdated laws. We need Californians to vote YES on Prop 22.*
> 
> We believe drivers and delivery people deserve better. We will continue to advocate for you and do everything we can to keep you moving in California.


A min wage employee would be entitled to...

500 X .575 = $287
+ 20 X 13 =$260
+Y X 13 = ?
+ tips?

or 
$547
+ tips
+ $13(Y) for waiting time between pings

or $85+ more...


----------



## SHalester

How about both AB5 and Prop 22 just go away. But uber keeps all the goodies they did for Calif drivers in place.

All those in favor?


----------



## jocker12

SHalester said:


> But uber keeps all the goodies they did for Calif drivers in place.


I am afraid Uber made those changes after being pushed by AB5 and not because they wanted to do good for the CA drivers. Key word here is - after. So without AB5 they would have never changed the crap rates they still have in the rest of the US.

Of course you judge everything from your perspective, the same way Uber looks at this from their perspective. And if Uber gets things their way, what do you think is going to happen to the drivers? Uber only plays nice because they need Prop22 to pass, not because they value their partners.


----------



## Jimmy44

jocker12 said:


> I am afraid Uber made those changes after being pushed by AB5 and not because they wanted to do good for the CA drivers. Key word here is - after. So without AB5 they would have never changed the crap rates they still have in the rest of the US.
> 
> Of course you judge everything from your perspective, the same way Uber looks at this from their perspective. And if Uber gets things their way, what do you think is going to happen to the drivers? Uber only plays nice because they need Prop22 to pass, not because they value their partners.


So glad I live in Connecticut 3000 miles away from this mess


----------



## 197438

SHalester said:


> ​
> ​
> ​
> ​
> *We believe a better way to work is possible *
> Explaining Prop 22's earnings guaranteeApps like Uber are great for finding flexible work that can help you make ends meet. But it can sometimes be hard to know exactly how much you'll make by driving or delivering food.
> 
> That's why we're fighting for *Prop 22*: it will give you an earnings guarantee so you can always know the minimum that you'll earn for your time.
> 
> Prop 22's earnings guarantee includes:
> 
> *Minimum earnings:* If you earn less than the guarantee (120% of minimum wage over 2 weeks) Uber will pay you the difference.
> *Expense reimbursement:* This earnings guarantee includes $0.30 per mile to account for your expenses, such as gas and vehicle wear and tear.
> *No upper limit:* The minimum is just that-a minimum. There's no upper limit to how much you can earn on the app.
> *Tips are on top:* As always, you keep 100% of the tips you earn for the service you provide. And these tips are not included in how the minimum guarantee is calculated.
> *How it would work:*
> The guarantee is calculated every 2 weeks:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> ​
> *($0.30 x miles*) + (1.2 x $minimum wage x hours*) **en route to pickups and on-trip only
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> ​
> For example, over 2 weeks, a driver in Los Angeles:
> 
> Is en route to pickups and on-trip for 500 miles
> For a total of en route and on-trip of 20 hours
> The minimum wage in Los Angeles is $13
> In this case, the driver would have a total earnings guarantee of $462.
> 
> $0.30 x 500 miles = $150
> 1.2 x $13 x 20 hours = $312
> $150 + $312 = *$462 total minimum earning guarantee*
> 
> So, in this example, if the driver makes less than $462 ($23.10/hour in this case), Uber would pay the driver the difference.
> 
> *In addition to this earnings guarantee, Prop 22 would also give you access to new benefits, like healthcare, and new protections against discrimination.
> 
> To make this a reality, we need to update our outdated laws. We need Californians to vote YES on Prop 22.*
> 
> We believe drivers and delivery people deserve better. We will continue to advocate for you and do everything we can to keep you moving in California.


This email did not help their cause. It's unclear how this convoluted system would work. I drive in multiple cities every day, with multiple Minimum Wages. Then there is the unincorporated county areas. Do they use a wage based on the pax pickup or dropoff location? Or my home base location? Highest wage of all cities driven through? Just repeal AB5. That's what I asked my Legislators to do, and my Senator even wrote back thanking me for the idea for new legislation to introduce (without indicating whether she supports a repeal). My Assembly rep sent me spam.


----------



## Jimmy44

EastBayRides said:


> This email did not help their cause. It's unclear how this convoluted system would work. I drive in multiple cities every day, with multiple Minimum Wages. Then there is the unincorporated county areas. Do they use a wage based on the pax pickup or dropoff location? Or my home base location? Highest wage of all cities driven through? Just repeal AB5. That's what I asked my Legislators to do, and my Senator even wrote back thanking me for the idea for new legislation to introduce (without indicating whether she supports a repeal). My Assembly rep sent me spam.


I really feel for you and the majority of drivers who don't want this and are going thru hell.
Leana Gonzalez is the assembly woman behind this and I am sure your assembly man backed her. They protect one another regardless of how you are effected.
I have been attacked and ridiculed for opposition to AB5 from the very beginning.
I do not take any satisfaction in seeing the exact items I railed about coming to roost.
Be safe out there and do your best to work around this mess


----------



## 197438

Jimmy44 said:


> I really feel for you and the majority of drivers who don't want this and are going thru hell.
> Leana Gonzalez is the assembly woman behind this and I am sure your assembly man backed her. They protect one another regardless of how you are effected.
> I have been attacked and ridiculed for opposition to AB5 from the very beginning.
> I do not take any satisfaction in seeing the exact items I railed about coming to roost.
> Be safe out there and do your best to work around this mess


In the end, I still think all a driver needs to do is incorporate. Case closed. You are no longer a Person as written in AB5. The law speaks of "person" repeatedly, for example, "... a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an employee..." I recall vividly a months-long debate in which Democrats insisted Corporations are not People. So, incorporate and you are no longer classifiable as an employee.

It is this clause that has impacted my primary income: " The person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business."

I manage projects for non-profits who can't afford to hire employees. The projects I manage usually are intended to build capacity within the organization, but what I do is the usual course of business for the NGO. Because I get paid by these NGOs out of state grants, my clients are not sure they can hire me even as an LLC.

These are the same Democrats who a few years ago told NGOs they had to pay their volunteers prevailing wage. WTF? Paid volunteers? The idea was that volunteers should not be performing work that we can hire union laborers to do using state grants. Sounds like a kickback to me.

The way Leana Gonzalez got a sly kickback and avoided campaign finance laws was from Qualcomm who donated enough money to a university to endow a new position for her husband.


----------



## Jimmy44

EastBayRides said:


> In the end, I still think all a driver needs to do is incorporate. Case closed. You are no longer a Person as written in AB5. The law speaks of "person" repeatedly, for example, "... a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an employee..." I recall vividly a months-long debate in which Democrats insisted Corporations are not People. So, incorporate and you are no longer classifiable as an employee.
> 
> It is this clause that has impacted my primary income: " The person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business."
> 
> I manage projects for non-profits who can't afford to hire employees. The projects I manage usually are intended to build capacity within the organization, but what I do is the usual course of business for the NGO. Because I get paid by these NGOs out of state grants, my clients are not sure they can hire me even as an LLC.
> 
> These are the same Democrats who a few years ago told NGOs they had to pay their volunteers prevailing wage. WTF? Paid volunteers? The idea was that volunteers should not be performing work that we can hire union laborers to do using state grants. Sounds like a kickback to me.
> 
> The way Leana Gonzalez got a sly kickback and avoided campaign finance laws was from Qualcomm who donated enough money to a university to endow a new position for her husband.


What's that old rule " follow the money ".
I remember listening to her in an interview.
I could not believe how clueless she was about ride-sharing.
Google her name with local interview and you will be amazed at her stupidity.
So her old man got a gig at a university. The sad part is when I heard that I was not one bit surprised.
That's how far politicians have sank.


----------



## SHalester

EastBayRides said:


> I drive in multiple cities every day,


you do, as I do, but same overall market. If AB5 services intact, the hourly wage would be determined by no less than the county you drive in, perhaps even the overall market. I do think East Bay will be cut from the SF market to create a new market over here. Makes sense.



jocker12 said:


> I am afraid Uber made those changes after being pushed by AB5


...of course they did. No secret there. And, guess what, it made calif drivers happy. So, a success.

As to what stays or goes depending on Prop 22, we the stakeholders, will deal with that when we need to. for now the vast majority of calif drivers are not upset or looking for deeper meaning of the goodies Uber granted us. Amen.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

SHalester said:


> How about both AB5 and Prop 22 just go away. But uber keeps all the goodies they did for Calif drivers in place.
> 
> All those in favor?


Me!

Just like how it was last month before the attorney general made a sloppy strategic move to try to shut down a workforce of 100 of thousands.

Uber made serious changes giving drivers control.

The labor board should have processed complaints by the drivers wanting back pay, etc and just let the operation to continue. They could have just sued for tax money too.

It was a win, win. Nobody would be on shifts and junk. While complaining parties could just file a claim and AB5 would get them court wins.

They should have said, we are going to process individual claims, without shutting the business down, and created a streamline process for driver claims.

I wanted my case to be processed without hurting others and actually shutting it down. AB5 could have just been handled personally between the parties without closing the damn factory, or loosing Flexibility etc.

Its a mess now.


----------



## jocker12

Jimmy44 said:


> So glad I live in Connecticut 3000 miles away from this mess


This is all about the rideshare companies constant abuse and wrong doing. They are getting what they've asked for. Playing divide and conquer (or control to be more precise) with a mass of confused individuals that have the ability to drive a car and think they are "contractors", which they are not, is a very dangerous game that affected much more companies (not rideshare) that were doing things right.



SHalester said:


> we the stakeholders


IMO, If you really are a rideshare company stakeholder, you made a big mistake. All rideshare or delivery platforms, have no respect and understanding for what transportation is, and consequently have no solution for their constant losses. They've just sailed this boat for as long and as far as it took them.


----------



## SHalester

jocker12 said:


> If you really are a rideshare company stakeholder


...actually I was referring to I am in Calif and therefore a stakeholder effected by AB5 and Prop 22........ Lotta hot air being expelled here from folks not directly effected (or even indirectly) by either.......yet.....


----------



## Jimmy44

SHalester said:


> you do, as I do, but same overall market. If AB5 services intact, the hourly wage would be determined by no less than the county you drive in, perhaps even the overall market. I do think East Bay will be cut from the SF market to create a new market over here. Makes sense.
> 
> 
> ...of course they did. No secret there. And, guess what, it made calif drivers happy. So, a success.
> 
> As to what stays or goes depending on Prop 22, we the stakeholders, will deal with that when we need to. for now the vast majority of calif drivers are not upset or looking for deeper meaning of the goodies Uber granted us. Amen.


So it's


SHalester said:


> ...actually I was referring to I am in Calif and therefore a stakeholder effected by AB5 and Prop 22........ Lotta hot air being expelled here from folks not directly effected (or even indirectly) by either.......yet.....


All responses from all drivers from all states are incouraged. You don't have to be from CA. to have interest or share opinions on this topic


SHalester said:


> ...actually I was referring to I am in Calif and therefore a stakeholder effected by AB5 and Prop 22........ Lotta hot air being expelled here from folks not directly effected (or even indirectly) by either.......yet.....


I would think every gig worker in the country would be interested for obvious reasons


----------



## SHalester

Jimmy44 said:


> All responses from all drivers from all states are incouraged.


maybe, maybe not. Those in other states are certainly not stakeholders. Their opinions are effected due to that, yes? Really really easy to have an opinion on something that has no impact on yourself.


----------



## Uberyly

TBone said:


> And you know they absolutely will shut it down. This will be interesting to watch


UBER is able to work with part time employees as before EXCEPT they need to insure the drivers make enough money to pay their wages and make a profit for UBER. That means driver's in areas where they can pickup passengers ONLY. No waiting at home or a restaurant for lunch while on the clock. THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS THAT UBER WILL TAKE A BIG CUT IN PROFITS AND AS WE HAVE SEEN IS WILLING TO SPEND $100 MILLION IN ADS TO PREVENT HAVING TO HIRE CONTRACTORS.


----------



## Jimmy44

SHalester said:


> maybe, maybe not. Those in other states are certainly not stakeholders. Their opinions are effected due to that, yes? Really really easy to have an opinion on something that has no impact on yourself.


We agree to disagree again.


Uberyly said:


> UBER is able to work with part time employees as before EXCEPT they need to insure the drivers make enough money to pay their wages and make a profit for UBER. That means driver's in areas where they can pickup passengers ONLY. No waiting at home or a restaurant for lunch while on the clock. THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS THAT UBER WILL TAKE A BIG CUT IN PROFITS AND AS WE HAVE SEEN IS WILLING TO SPEND $100 MILLION IN ADS TO PREVENT HAVING TO HIRE CONTRACTORS.


Just a total mess


----------



## SHalester

Jimmy44 said:


> We agree to disagree again.


And we didn't call each other names! WooHoo, see it can be done. :thumbup: :biggrin:


----------

