# Uber Claims That Drivers would lose many freedoms if they were Uber "employees"



## Retired Senior (Sep 12, 2016)

I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them. But I am not an attorney....

https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/u...tealing-in-new-lawsuit-from-new-york-drivers/

Uber contends most drivers are not seeking full-time employment and are happy as independent workers, and told TechCrunch earlier today it believes the settlement agreement with drivers in San Francisco to be reasonable.

"Nearly 90 percent of drivers say the main reason they use Uber is because they love being their own boss," Uber spokesperson Matt Wing said. "As employees, drivers would have set shifts, earn a fixed hourly wage, and lose the ability to drive with other ridesharing apps - as well as the personal flexibility they most value."


----------



## kdyrpr (Apr 23, 2016)

Their right.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

No need to tip !


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

People already act like employees, they work 60 hours a week without overtime, that was the only thing keeping you being "your own boss", necessity due to low mile/time rates took care of that a long time ago.

Sure, pay hourly/ create shifts and while you are at it, pay depreciation per mile as well as overtime to see if you can profit at all.

I put 300 miles a day (54 cents per mile), plus 10 bucks an hour and my overtime? Can I be employee already?


----------



## kdyrpr (Apr 23, 2016)

Jesusdrivesuber said:


> People already act like employees, they work 60 hours a week without overtime, that was the only thing keeping you being "your own boss", necessity took care of that a long time ago.
> 
> Sure, pay hourly/ create shifts and while you are at it, pay depreciation per mile as well as overtime to see if you can profit at all.
> 
> I put 300 miles a day (54 cents per mile), plus 10 bucks an hour and my overtime? Can I be employee already?


If you want to be to be a full time employee then go to this website: www.USPS.com/careers. EVERYONE get's hired eventually. I know, I am a supervisor for the USPS. Apply online.


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

kdyrpr said:


> Here is a tip: www.USPS.com/careers. EVERYONE get's hired eventually. Apply online.


I'm not saying I need a job, I am just stating and calling on the obvious bullshit Uber is using to remotely pretend paying drivers as employees would be feasible for them, if they can't make money by tricking drivers into running with all those costs and setting employee rules, what makes them think they get to talk about the possibility of having employees as an option in which the driver will complain?

We aren't even talking about benefits on top.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Well... Uber depends on winning this, more than most people would ever possibly believe.

As an independent cab driver working for a Cab company known as Mears...
12 hours 250 miles driven...

I would need to bring in...
$96.60 to me
$66 to the cab company
$20 gas
$10 tolls

$210 sub total
$25% coming from tips

$175 in meter revenue THE CAB COMPANY GETS $66

Uber on the other hand...
Their drivers MUST be reimbursed for mileage... if they are employees.

Uber would have to pay me the following for 12 hours, 250 miles, the exact same in tolls.
$96.60 (minus tips)
$135 (deductible mileage)
$10 (tolls)

Total
$241

That puts uber at having collect... *37% more WITHOUT A DIME GOING TO UBER*

Lets use the most expensive Taxi the company will lease for a week at capped out miles for 80 hours...

Taxi wage
$322- 40 hours at $8.05
$484-40 hours of Over time
$880 taxi rental
$140 Gas

$1826 subtotal
20% coming from tips

$1521 on the meter + TIPS (*$880 going to the cab company*)

Uber
$322- 40 hours at $8.05
$484- 40 hours of Over time
$936- Mileage

$1742 WITH NOTHING GOING TO UBER

You need to take a note that quite simply,

The mileage reimbursement that uber would be forced to pay would be enough to run a taxi on.

On el cheapo shift...

$135 in uber reimbursement VS $100 in taxi costs

On mega pricey weekly contract..

$936 in reimbursement VS $1040 in taxi costs... (it's almost enough)

But there are weekly cars that rent for as low as $400 in Orlando.


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

They could easily solve an increase to the driver's profits by making deals with maintenance/car parts/gas establishments to cut their costs by 50% off, all of that without having to raise a cent to the mile but again, I'm no Uber CEO.

Run with the cost by 25% and offer a boatload of clients to those establishments for a 20-25% on their end, I guess it's easier to come up with scams than with solutions.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Jesusdrivesuber said:


> They could easily solve an increase to the driver's profits by making deals with maintenance/car parts/gas establishments to cut their costs by 50% off, all of that without having to raise a cent to the mile but again, I'm no Uber CEO.
> 
> Run with the cost by 25% and offer a boatload of clients to those establishments for a 20-25% on their end, I guess it's easier to come up with scams than with solutions.


The problem is...

Those kind of deals can work and do exist but they are usually a deal with a sole... SINGLE manufacturer..

The cab company i drive for, has a mostly exclusive deal with Toyota/Lexus. Anything smaller than an Econoline Van that they buy is now a Toyota or a lexus, including the stretch limos, Camry taxis, Sienna mini vans, Lexus LS Sedans, Luxury RX SUVs... everything.

With that deal i'm sure comes a deal on buying parts in bulk.

This is an issue where you can scale up by having a 1,000 vehicles of relatively few models. They can also just hire Toyota certified mechanics and that's all they need for the majority of the fleet.

Uber does not have this luxury, they need to sign on with drivers who are driving ANYTHING and that's the way it is. They can't save money by having these sorts of deals. You can't have an exclusive deal with every single car manufacturer.


----------



## I_Like_Spam (May 10, 2015)

Retired Senior said:


> "Nearly 90 percent of drivers say the main reason they use Uber is because they love being their own boss," Uber spokesperson Matt Wing said. "


Considering how tightly Uber supervises their partners- chucking their behinds off of the app ASAP if the partner is found to be soliciting their own rides outside of the app and immediately taking action on customer-driver disputes, I'd hardly say that Uber drivers are "their own boss".


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

They are blackmailing drivers into going against being employees by saying they won't be able to turn the app on and off if we were considered employees. It's that simple.


----------



## d0n (Oct 16, 2016)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> The problem is...
> 
> Those kind of deals can work and do exist but they are usually a deal with a sole... SINGLE manufacturer..
> 
> ...


^

What he says is true, maybe when all flying cars come out of uber.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

It just dawned on me that this is the reason that Uber loves part time drivers, the type that don't go long distances so they cancel on customers so often. 

They know that those drivers won't care to want to be employees because they already have a job. It never dawned on me now why Uber would not want more drivers that do Uber full time. Because if they did they would more likely want to be considered employees.


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

uberdriverfornow said:


> They are blackmailing drivers into going against being employees by saying they won't be able to turn the app on and off if we were considered employees. It's that simple.


Would you hire an employee and pay him an hourly wage, if he decided he would spend his shift in some isolated corner of town that no one hardly ever wants a ride and work hours only when you have too many other drivers on the road?

No, you would not.

Hourly wages means that the company will be setting the hours and the locales that you work. It will be, you get to make $7.25 an hour, possibly plus benefits if you sign up for over 32 hours, but only when you work these specific hours in this specific part of town.

Sometimes I sit at home with my app on and I'm online for 4 hours to get one ping. No one is going to pay me an hourly wage to sit at home waiting for some rare customer who is not going to pay enough to cover the federal minimum wage.

Getting paid federal minimum wage to play videogames all day long with a random 15 minute trip to complete every now and then would be pretty swell... but that's not realistic.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Trafficat said:


> Would you hire an employee and pay him an hourly wage, if he decided he would spend his shift in some isolated corner of town that no one hardly ever wants a ride and work hours only when you have too many other drivers on the road?
> 
> No, you would not.
> 
> ...


No driver wants to be an employee. The idea is to force their hand so that they concede control to us so we are actually independent contractors, not just called them.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Jesusdrivesuber said:


> People already act like employees, they work 60 hours a week without overtime, that was the only thing keeping you being "your own boss", necessity due to low mile/time rates took care of that a long time ago.
> 
> Sure, pay hourly/ create shifts and while you are at it, pay depreciation per mile as well as overtime to see if you can profit at all.
> 
> I put 300 miles a day (54 cents per mile), plus 10 bucks an hour and my overtime? Can I be employee already?


LOWER RATES MEAN MORE MONEY !

Keep them Hungry
Keep them Jumping.


----------



## Jagent (Jan 29, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> No driver wants to be an employee. The idea is to force their hand so that they concede control to us so we are actually independent contractors, not just called them.


Exactly. I have no desire to be Uber's employee. Yet, under the current structure of Uber I am an employee who gets zero employee benefits. Uber lies and gets to have their cake and eat it too.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Retired Senior said:


> .
> 
> "Nearly 90 percent of drivers say the main reason they use Uber is because they love being their own boss," Uber spokesperson Matt Wing said. "As employees, drivers would have set shifts, earn a fixed hourly wage, and lose the ability to drive with other ridesharing apps - as well as the personal flexibility they most value."


I bet this statistic came from one of uber's in app polls and the other choices were
"Great pay"
"Excellent driver support"
"Passengers tip"


----------



## dirtylee (Sep 2, 2015)

The only saving grace is that we are IC. Sure we get treated like crap, but real employee status under uber would be a nightmare.


----------



## Safe_Driver_4_U (Apr 2, 2017)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> Well... Uber depends on winning this, more than most people would ever possibly believe.
> ...


 doesn't anyone see the elephant in the room? All someone has to do is come up with a better business model and Uber becomes ancient history. Considering today's technology a better mousetrap is just around the corner.



dirtylee said:


> The only saving grace is that we are IC. Sure we get treated like crap, but real employee status under uber would be a nightmare.


 yes, indeed think of the possibilities of the benefits of being an IC combined with a better business model!.... it's just a matter of time. No institution can be as abusive and survive long term.


----------



## Retired Senior (Sep 12, 2016)

Safe_Driver_4_U said:


> doesn't anyone see the elephant in the room? All someone has to do is come up with a better business model and Uber becomes ancient history. Considering today's technology a better mousetrap is just around the corner.
> 
> yes, indeed think of the possibilities of the benefits of being an IC combined with a better business model!.... it's just a matter of time. No institution can be as abusive and survive long term.


I don't know about that.... look for my post under "surge pricing". It seems that the entire world of commerce may be adopting the Uber business model... (screw everybody - and convince them that they like it and actually asked for it!)


----------



## Safe_Driver_4_U (Apr 2, 2017)

Retired Senior said:


> I don't know about that.... look for my post under "surge pricing". It seems that the entire world of commerce may be adopting the Uber business model... (screw everybody - and convince them that they like it and actually asked for it!)


 yep, just what I mean, kick the dog enough times he will bite back. Look at COSTCO a fair company that is growing in its space because it provides a fair experience for workers and members, why? It's a better mouse trap. Just a matter of time before someone comes up with a fair rideshare model, these greedy TNCs will be history. *The thing they underestimate is how easy it is to dump them! *A few taps on the phone and they are gone. Do you think the riders would opt for Uber or Lyft when there is a real, true, fair rideshare out there? Remember, "No need to tip"


----------



## dirtylee (Sep 2, 2015)

A 10% fee app that just does matching & payment processing {no incentives} would quickly crush uber/lyft.


----------



## Buckiemohawk (Jun 23, 2015)

You shouldn't want to be an employee. You should get 80 percent of the fare at a rate that is a dollar over the mile. Drivers would make money. People would still be happy. They love the convenience of Uber.


----------



## I_Like_Spam (May 10, 2015)

Buckiemohawk said:


> People would still be happy. They love the convenience of Uber.


They love how inexpensive Uber is, especially the Pukahontas crowd


----------



## nomogmos (Feb 6, 2017)

*uber* would lose many of *their* freedoms (many of which they shouldn't have in the first place) if we were their employees. eff uber and all globalist corporate acts to lower wages and benefits, and to dehumanize and marginalize the human beings that [have to, in many cases] work for them!

The U.S. government is no longer the employer-of-last-resort; uber, amazon, walmart, mcdonalds, and the like, are; and their perspective is global, for-power, for-profit.


----------



## Safe_Driver_4_U (Apr 2, 2017)

dirtylee said:


> A 10% fee app that just does matching & payment processing {no incentives} would quickly crush uber/lyft.


 yep, combine that with a mission statement that driver and passenger welfare are to be considered equal by operations management, then add in "driver owned" with revenue sharing, beyond the mileage rate, based upon miles driven with pax. This new business model could easily destroy these abusive TNCs. Write into the corporate declaration driver and passenger protections better than any union could ever offer. It's just a matter of time, slavery was abolished...right. Why are people so loyal to REI and COSTCO? The original insurance companies were "Mutual Benefit" organizations, unions not needed, just an ironclad corporate declaration that protects the welfare of drivers and passengers. Operations management, accountants, engineers and legal staff would be employees that report to a paid Board of Directors that are active drivers. Revenue sharing weighted heavily towards the IC drivers. The Company makes volume deals in favor of the drivers for cars, insurance, gas etc. Create a special division for feasibly transporting disabled, blind elderly, make deals with charities to subsidize disabled transport, special pay and training for these drivers. EVERYTHING mentioned above is possible for Uber and Lyft to do now, what are they doing?

just a matter of time before these TNCs cave from their greed.... Remember "No need to tip"


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

> The U.S. government is no longer the employer-of-last-resort; uber, amazon, walmart, mcdonalds, and the like, are; and their perspective is global, for-power, for-profit.


Government jobs have been known to be pretty cushy for a while. Jobs funded by tax dollars just tend to pay more than jobs funded by actually selling a product or service to people who voluntarily pay for it.


----------



## Safe_Driver_4_U (Apr 2, 2017)

what the globalist underestimate is the technology can bring the power to the workers. The worst thing that could happen is giving power to unions, that would be jumping from the pan into the fire. We need to empower the drivers, NOT union bosses or globalist, we need driver owned TNCs with corporate declarations that provide better protections for the drivers than any union ever could. In most cases, a union is nothing more than a contract with a corporation giving power to the bosses. In today's world giving a Union power would be tantamount to reviving the landline phone for communications. Just a matter of time before someone creates a driver owned TNC, how fast do you think people would delete Uber and Lyft? That is their weakness, a few taps on the phone and they are gone, unlike the monopoly utility company that rips us off every month, you can't tap them away! The TNCs in their hubris have seriously underestimated their vulnerability as well as the investors. WARNING, TNC private ownership may be obsolete.


----------



## Trebor (Apr 22, 2015)

Jesusdrivesuber said:


> People already act like employees, they work 60 hours a week without overtime, that was the only thing keeping you being "your own boss", necessity due to low mile/time rates took care of that a long time ago.
> 
> Sure, pay hourly/ create shifts and while you are at it, pay depreciation per mile as well as overtime to see if you can profit at all.
> 
> I put 300 miles a day (54 cents per mile), plus 10 bucks an hour and my overtime? Can I be employee already?


So, are you saying that business owners pay themselves overtime when they work more than 40 hours a week?

You would also be forced to work in the section they tell you. No more waiting at home or wherever you find the best spot to avoid pukers. Cancel on a rider because you think they may be crazy or puke? You may get written up.


----------



## nomogmos (Feb 6, 2017)

Trebor said:


> So, are you saying that business owners pay themselves overtime when they work more than 40 hours a week?


I think uberSUV is very different from X.

The business owners you are talking about are almost _completely_ different from uber or lyft drivers - are you JUSTIFYING underpaying and overworking workers/employees, and OVERpaying owners and executives? YOUR ideology is PART of this whole[hole] problem. Being a serf is just a step away from being a slave. Should (has?) Travis Kalanick be knighted? Is it "Sir" or "His Lordship"?


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

10/31/2016 -- London

In the court's ruling, however, the judges insisted that "the notion that Uber in London is a mosaic of 30,000 small businesses linked by a common 'platform' is to our minds faintly ridiculous.

Drivers do not and cannot negotiate with passengers&#8230; They are offered and accept trips strictly on Uber's terms."

The tribunal panel reserved hefty criticism for the firm, claiming that it had used "fictions," "twisted language," and "brand new terminology" to hoodwink drivers and passengers alike.

*Court: Uber drivers are company employees not self-employed contractors*

*https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/10/uber-drivers-employees-uk-court-ruling/*


----------



## Safe_Driver_4_U (Apr 2, 2017)

Ca$h4 said:


> 10/31/2016
> 
> In the court's ruling, however, the judges insisted that "the notion that Uber in London is a mosaic of 30,000 small businesses linked by a common 'platform' is to our minds faintly ridiculous.
> 
> ...


 one more reason to cash out every shift, if Uber gets hit with a huge fine or settlement they may go BK and stiff everyone.


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

Safe_Driver_4_U said:


> one more reason to cash out every shift, if Uber gets hit with a huge fine or settlement they may go BK and stiff everyone.


I agree, when companies start having trouble covering expenses, they extend the pay periods. Like from daily to twice a week and then to once a week and then once every two weeks. I don't think Uber is currently having trouble paying drivers on time.


----------



## Certain Judgment (Dec 2, 2016)

If I were an Uber employee, I would lose my freedom to protect my assets with a concealed handgun. Oh wait, I don't have that freedom now...


----------



## Guapcollecta (Apr 11, 2017)

If we were employees we'd at least get the minimum wage plus overtime. Most of us don't right now. Plus benefits. Plus unemployment if they fire us. Plus they'll pay a portion of our taxes. We could start a union. There's all kinds of Perks to Being an employee. And a schedule probably wouldn't be necessary. I could probably still work the same way it works now. Only Uber X drivers will make more money more money.


----------



## Safe_Driver_4_U (Apr 2, 2017)

Guapcollecta said:


> If we were employees we'd at least get the minimum wage plus overtime. Most of us don't right now. Plus benefits. Plus unemployment if they fire us. Plus they'll pay a portion of our taxes. We could start a union. There's all kinds of Perks to Being an employee. And a schedule probably wouldn't be necessary. I could probably still work the same way it works now. Only Uber X drivers will make more money more money.


 why would you want a union that had the potential to have corrupt bosses when you could have a driver owned TNC instead? You could become the owner, driver protections and welfare could be written into the corporate declarations (the reason the corporation exists). In light of the benefits of technology, unionizing in today's world is going backwards, after all, isn't this ridesharing all about disrupting paradigms.


----------



## Tnasty (Mar 23, 2016)

Since when did fuber ever tell the truth about anything?


----------



## circle1 (Sep 17, 2016)

Retired Senior said:


> and told TechCrunch earlier today it believes the _*settlement agreement*_ with drivers in San Francisco _*to be reasonable*_.


_*That's*_ not a good sign! That means the law firm handling it were either effete or else they couldn't get the judge they hoped for.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Retired Senior said:


> I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them. But I am not an attorney....
> 
> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/u...tealing-in-new-lawsuit-from-new-york-drivers/
> 
> ...


The freedom to Starve.
The freedom to work 20 hour days.
( LOWER RATES MEAN MORE MONEY!)
The freedom of no retirement.
The freedom of no healthcare.
The freedom of ratings.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Trafficat said:


> Would you hire an employee and pay him an hourly wage, if he decided he would spend his shift in some isolated corner of town that no one hardly ever wants a ride and work hours only when you have too many other drivers on the road?


A company would be stupid to set up a structure like that. More likely, drivers would be 'commissioned' - just like sales people who are employees, but earn only on what they produce - and if they don't produce, they are let go.



circle1 said:


> _*That's*_ not a good sign! That means the law firm handling it were either effete or else they couldn't get the judge they hoped for.


The article that quote came from is A YEAR OLD (June 2016)


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> A company would be stupid to set up a structure like that. More likely, drivers would be 'commissioned' - just like sales people who are employees, but earn only on what they produce - and if they don't produce, they are let go.
> 
> The article that quote came from is A YEAR OLD (June 2016)


Its EVEN WORSE A YEAR LATER !


----------



## HumungousDill (May 23, 2016)

Retired Senior said:


> "As employees, drivers would have set shifts, earn a fixed hourly wage, and lose the ability to drive with other ridesharing apps - as well as the personal flexibility they most value."


And Uber would lose the ability to keep screwing their "partners" and by paying them unsustainable rates.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

HumungousDill said:


> And Uber would lose the ability to keep screwing their "partners" and by paying them unsustainable rates.


UNSUSTAINABLE SERFDOM !


----------



## El Janitor (Feb 22, 2016)

Yes because they will set schedules for drivers. Like other driving jobs, then we can ***** about not getting the schedules we want etc......


----------



## kdyrpr (Apr 23, 2016)

kdyrpr said:


> If you want to be to be a full time employee then go to this website: www.USPS.com/careers. EVERYONE get's hired eventually. I know, I am a supervisor for the USPS. Apply online.


I should clarify this a bit. There is a fairly simple skills test that must be passed and a background check is done. Pass those and in most cases it will be just a matter of time before you get an email with an offer. If anybody has specific questions about this feel free to email me on the forum.


----------



## dbla (Dec 19, 2016)

Hey mods how about putting a BS button next to the like button for anything quoted by uber employees


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

kdyrpr said:


> If you want to be to be a full time employee then go to this website: www.USPS.com/careers. EVERYONE get's hired eventually. I know, I am a supervisor for the USPS. Apply online.


I was told you have to be both a minority and a veteran to have any chance at all



Safe_Driver_4_U said:


> yep, just what I mean, kick the dog enough times he will bite back. Look at COSTCO a fair company that is growing in its space because it provides a fair experience for workers and members, why? It's a better mouse trap. Just a matter of time before someone comes up with a fair rideshare model, these greedy TNCs will be history. *The thing they underestimate is how easy it is to dump them! *A few taps on the phone and they are gone. Do you think the riders would opt for Uber or Lyft when there is a real, true, fair rideshare out there? Remember, "No need to tip"


Pax will select the cheaper option. Any new enterprise would have to operate at a loss to compete


----------



## darkshy77 (Sep 28, 2015)

Retired Senior said:


> I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them. But I am not an attorney....
> 
> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/u...tealing-in-new-lawsuit-from-new-york-drivers/
> 
> ...


Employee set hr rate Heath care retirement.... Weilder us their own truck and get pay for the rig plus hrs


----------



## Dback2004 (Nov 7, 2015)

uberdriverfornow said:


> They know that those drivers won't care to want to be employees because they already have a job. It never dawned on me now why Uber would not want more drivers that do Uber full time. Because if they did they would more likely want to be considered employees.





uberdriverfornow said:


> No driver wants to be an employee. The idea is to force their hand so that they concede control to us so we are actually independent contractors, not just called them.


I'm all for coercing Uber (and by extension Lyft) via the employment lawsuits but I have no intention of ever becoming an employee, even if the State of Iowa were to rule that way and give me the option. I want to be a true IC. An employee of Uber would be horrific. Being told when and where to drive, mandatory trip acceptance, more stringent than we already have rules on vehicle, cleanliness, protection/cameras, equipment, etc. Most likely minimum wage losing out on surge and opportunity to drive selectively. No thanks.

I want to be a true IC. I want to set my own rates that are competitive in my market. Yeah, that idiot slob of a driver in the beat-up minivan that smells like a cooler of fish died in the back driving parking illegally and running red lights downtown can charge 60c/mile and take the University snowflakes back home to their dorms at 2 in the morning. I have a cleaner car, offer more professional service and would charge a higher fare. Uber can use it's technology to ESTIMATE a fare for a pax when they choose which driver they want based on vehicle type, rating, time to pickup, and per mile/minute price and then keep a percentage of the fare as commission for use of their technology (they are a technology company, right?) and for processing payments on my behalf as my agent.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Certain Judgment said:


> If I were an Uber employee, I would lose my freedom to protect my assets with a concealed handgun. Oh wait, I don't have that freedom now...


Not in Florida. Neither an employee nor a contractor can be penalized in any way for exercising his/her right to carry a firearm.



Safe_Driver_4_U said:


> one more reason to cash out every shift, if Uber gets hit with a huge fine or settlement they may go BK and stiff everyone.


Waymo is asking for $26billion in their lawsuit. That alone would be enough to bankrupt Uber.


----------



## NorthNJLyftacular (Feb 2, 2017)

What a mishmash of trumpist, Breitbart, Fox News bullshit. Anti-"Globalist" AND anti-union? How does that work? Globalists don't like unions either. Unions get in the way of the globalist's plans.

Unions are good for workers. Any other argument is just the product of decades of right wing propaganda and a feeble mind.



Safe_Driver_4_U said:


> what the globalist underestimate is the technology can bring the power to the workers. The worst thing that could happen is giving power to unions, that would be jumping from the pan into the fire. We need to empower the drivers, NOT union bosses or globalist, we need driver owned TNCs with corporate declarations that provide better protections for the drivers than any union ever could. In most cases, a union is nothing more than a contract with a corporation giving power to the bosses. In today's world giving a Union power would be tantamount to reviving the landline phone for communications. Just a matter of time before someone creates a driver owned TNC, how fast do you think people would delete Uber and Lyft? That is their weakness, a few taps on the phone and they are gone, unlike the monopoly utility company that rips us off every month, you can't tap them away! The TNCs in their hubris have seriously underestimated their vulnerability as well as the investors. WARNING, TNC private ownership may be obsolete.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Rat said:


> Not in Florida. Neither an employee nor a contractor can be penalized in any way for exercising his/her right to carry a firearm.


That's not true. The first amendment guarantees citizens the right to free speech, but that does not mean that while employed by or working for a company that the company cannot restrict what you say.

Open carry & concealed carry is legal in many states - but that does not mean that a facility or company can't restrict the carrying of firearms on their premises by employees and workers.



tohunt4me said:


> Its EVEN WORSE A YEAR LATER !


It's much better now than a year ago when Uber could deactivate a driver for not accepting ride requests. Of course, better is a 'relative' term.


----------



## nomogmos (Feb 6, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Anyone who thinks that Uber's valuation (and future) is based on rideshare revenue
> *(rather than the data collected from rideshare) just isn't paying attention.*"


Lyft also has a hefty disclaimer about YOUR lack of rights to YOUR information! Their TOS references "information" 135 times! They only list "fare" or "fares" 28 times.
7. Your Information
"Your Information is any information you provide, publish or post to or through the Lyft Platform (including any profile information you provide) or send to other Users (including via in-application feedback, any email feature, or through any Lyft-related Facebook, Twitter or other social media posting) (your "Information"). You consent to us using your Information to create a User account that will allow you to use the Lyft Platform and participate in the Services. Our collection and use of personal information in connection with the Lyft Platform and Services is as provided in Lyft's Privacy Policy located at www.lyft.com/privacy. You are solely responsible for your Information and your interactions with other members of the public, and we act only as a passive conduit for your online posting of your Information. You agree to provide and maintain accurate, current and complete information and that we and other members of the public may rely on your Information as accurate, current and complete. To enable Lyft to use your Information, you grant to us a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable (through multiple tiers) right and license to exercise the copyright, publicity, and database rights you have in your Information, and to use, copy, perform, display and distribute such Information to prepare derivative works, or incorporate into other works, such Information, in any media now known or not currently known. Lyft does not assert any ownership over your Information; rather, as between you and Lyft, subject to the rights granted to us in this Agreement, you retain full ownership of all of your Information and any intellectual property rights or other proprietary rights associated with your Information.

You may be able to create or log-in to your Lyft User account through online accounts you may have with third party social networking sites (each such account, an "SNS Account"). By connecting to Lyft through an SNS Account, you understand that Lyft may access, store, and make available any SNS Account content according to the permission settings of your SNS Account (e.g., friends, mutual friends, contacts or following/followed lists (the "SNS Content")). You understand that SNS Content may be available on and through the Lyft Platform to other Users. Unless otherwise specified in this Agreement, all SNS Content, if any, shall be considered to be your Information."​https://www.lyft.com/terms as of 6 June, 2017

​


----------



## REX HAVOC (Jul 4, 2016)

Retired Senior said:


> I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them. But I am not an attorney....
> 
> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/u...tealing-in-new-lawsuit-from-new-york-drivers/
> 
> ...


They don't have to make us employees they just need to classify rideshare drivers as independent cabs that use their app for rides, biling and payments. Then pay us what cabs get per mile and take a reasonable percentage to cover costs and profit but without don't gouging us. They could also make it an employee owned company so we had a stake in the success of the company. There are all kinds of ways they could structure this to make it successful.


----------



## Safe_Driver_4_U (Apr 2, 2017)

NorthNJLyftacular said:


> What a mishmash of trumpist, Breitbart, Fox News bullshit. Anti-"Globalist" AND anti-union? How does that work? Globalists don't like unions either. Unions get in the way of the globalist's plans.
> 
> Unions are good for workers. Any other argument is just the product of decades of right wing propaganda and a feeble mind.


 my mind has been shaped by being on the front lines of union sanctioned strikes and non sanctioned strikes, hundreds of hours organizing for a union and campaigning for union endorsed Democrats. The real facts are, in many cases, today's technology makes unions obsolete, especially for rideshare. It would probably be easier to create a driver owned TNC that provided even better worker protections via the corporate documents than any union could negotiate. Unions have done and do a lot of good no doubt, but they also have some huge negatives, usually the union bosses end up having all the power not the members.



Rat said:


> ...
> Waymo is asking for $26billion in their lawsuit. That alone would be enough to bankrupt Uber.


 this is why I cash out every day


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

nomogmos said:


> Lyft also has a hefty disclaimer about YOUR lack of rights to YOUR information! Their TOS references "information" 135 times! They only list "fare" or "fares" 28 times.
> 7. Your Information
> "Your Information is any information you provide, publish or post to or through the Lyft Platform (including any profile information you provide) or send to other Users (including via in-application feedback, any email feature, or through any Lyft-related Facebook, Twitter or other social media posting) (your "Information"). You consent to us using your Information to create a User account that will allow you to use the Lyft Platform and participate in the Services. Our collection and use of personal information in connection with the Lyft Platform and Services is as provided in Lyft's Privacy Policy located at www.lyft.com/privacy. You are solely responsible for your Information and your interactions with other members of the public, and we act only as a passive conduit for your online posting of your Information. You agree to provide and maintain accurate, current and complete information and that we and other members of the public may rely on your Information as accurate, current and complete. To enable Lyft to use your Information, you grant to us a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable (through multiple tiers) right and license to exercise the copyright, publicity, and database rights you have in your Information, and to use, copy, perform, display and distribute such Information to prepare derivative works, or incorporate into other works, such Information, in any media now known or not currently known. Lyft does not assert any ownership over your Information; rather, as between you and Lyft, subject to the rights granted to us in this Agreement, you retain full ownership of all of your Information and any intellectual property rights or other proprietary rights associated with your Information.
> 
> ...


Lol! Well done


----------



## Lag Monkey (Feb 6, 2015)

I work 40-55hrs a week and pretty much half to work the peak hours they set for me. Not much in the term of freedom. I'm basically an employee. I even rent the car and they handle insurance and mantance. I wouldn't mind being an employee because I'm almost one already. What id really like to see is the ability for us to unionize and bargain with these companies so we could have a say in the rates


----------



## Safe_Driver_4_U (Apr 2, 2017)

Dback2004 said:


> *I'm all for coercing Uber (and by extension Lyft) via the employment lawsuits but I have no intention of ever becoming an employee, even if the State of Iowa were to rule that way and give me the option. I want to be a true IC.* An employee of Uber would be horrific. Being told when and where to drive, mandatory trip acceptance, more stringent than we already have rules on vehicle, cleanliness, protection/cameras, equipment, etc. Most likely minimum wage losing out on surge and opportunity to drive selectively. No thanks.
> 
> I want to be a true IC. I want to set my own rates that are competitive in my market. Yeah, that idiot slob of a driver in the beat-up minivan that smells like a cooler of fish died in the back driving parking illegally and running red lights downtown can charge 60c/mile and take the University snowflakes back home to their dorms at 2 in the morning. I have a cleaner car, offer more professional service and would charge a higher fare. Uber can use it's technology to ESTIMATE a fare for a pax when they choose which driver they want based on vehicle type, rating, time to pickup, and per mile/minute price and then keep a percentage of the fare as commission for use of their technology (they are a technology company, right?) and for processing payments on my behalf as my agent.


 IC.. yep, if you know how, you make more losing money driving X than you would in the best situation for an X driver.


----------



## UberxGTA (Dec 1, 2015)

Retired Senior said:


> I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them. But I am not an attorney....
> 
> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/u...tealing-in-new-lawsuit-from-new-york-drivers/
> 
> ...


Nothing but PURE FEAR MONGERING by uber.
It's simply a job with start and end flexibility. 
No IC or business here.


----------



## negeorgia (Feb 1, 2015)

uberdriverfornow said:


> It just dawned on me that this is the reason that Uber loves part time drivers, the type that don't go long distances so they cancel on customers so often.
> 
> They know that those drivers won't care to want to be employees because they already have a job. It never dawned on me now why Uber would not want more drivers that do Uber full time. Because if they did they would more likely want to be considered employees.


Nope, not me, I do not want to be considered an employee.


----------



## Smashup (Sep 28, 2015)

Jesusdrivesuber said:


> People already act like employees, they work 60 hours a week without overtime, that was the only thing keeping you being "your own boss", necessity due to low mile/time rates took care of that a long time ago.


You can work anytime and anywhere you want, but if you are not working the bars and at bar closing time, you won't have many riders or make very much money.

You can choose to work Sunday nights and Wednesdays, and you can choose to be hungry. Hey, it's the same choice, what a coinkydink!


----------



## MadTownUberD (Mar 11, 2017)

I always tell my children that if you want to make decent money in life you need to be good at something that not many other people are, i.e. a specialization. There is nothing special about buying a car, being polite to strangers, and following directions. Repeat drunk drivers and visually impaired people can't drive a car, but just about everyone else can. I don't expect to net any more than about $10 or $12 per hour, and I certainly don't want to be an employee.

The real opportunity I see with Uber is being selective about where and when I drive as well as selecting a suitable vehicle on the basis of what service category it fits into (i.e. XL), how depreciated it is, how low I can keep maintenance costs, fuel economy, etc. But this is the difference between $10 and $12 per hour, maybe $15 if I'm really good. I don't expect $20 or $25.

Being a full time ant is not going to work for the simple reason that the market won't allow it. It's simply too easy and flexible of a gig for it to be lucrative.



NorthNJLyftacular said:


> Unions are good for workers. Any other argument is just the product of decades of right wing propaganda and a feeble mind.


Read Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt. Unions not only decrease everyone's standard of living by making the market less efficient, but they destroy themselves in the long run because they price workers out of markets (i.e. jobs). Hence you see the long term trend of de-unionization.

I can assure you I do not have a feeble mind Sir.


----------



## NoVaDJ61 (Dec 4, 2015)

Uber is full of C.R.A.P. I am getting out ASAP. They are the biggest rip off scheme ever and it is getting worse. 70 cents per mile in Detroit, when I was used to making 1.15 per mile in DC. That sucks especially when insurance in Michigan is four times what it is in DC/VA. I used to believe in Uber wholeheartedly. Not anymore, though. Not anymore


----------



## Steveyoungerthanmontana (Nov 19, 2016)

It depends. If UBER is gonna pay me 30 dollars an hour, then I want to be an employee. However if they are gonna pay us twelve dollars an hour, I'll just keep it like this.


----------



## renod babek (Feb 10, 2016)

Coming soon . Flying cars ....driverless cars... you'll have all the freedom you'll ever need!


----------



## dirtylee (Sep 2, 2015)

Steveyoungerthanmontana said:


> It depends. If UBER is gonna pay me 30 dollars an hour, then I want to be an employee. However if they are gonna pay us twelve dollars an hour, I'll just keep it like this.


LMAO, they provide the car & gas, expect no more than $8 - $11 an hour while they pimp ur arse for $30 - $50/hr.

It's definitely possible in my market for them do that. Last year, they ran $35 - $50/hr guarantees & I usually came close to those figures or exceeded them with blatantly rigged routing {back to back long trips usually on surge for 6 hrs straight}

The damn app would send an employee straight to the airport & back to Downtown non stop. No waiting in FIFO que, just drive like crazy. You guys seriously underestimate uber's capabilities when it comes to matching rides.


----------



## Too Many Miles (Jan 26, 2016)

Retired Senior said:


> I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them. But I am not an attorney....
> 
> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/u...tealing-in-new-lawsuit-from-new-york-drivers/
> 
> ...


This is just a stupid brain washing tactic from Uber.
The biggest looser if drivers become employees would be Uber, because they could never get enough drivers to support the market. It would be a totally different game in the industry.



Retired Senior said:


> I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them. But I am not an attorney....
> 
> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/u...tealing-in-new-lawsuit-from-new-york-drivers/
> 
> ...


An independent contractor is someone that gets hired to do a job for the entity that contracts him or her or someone else representing that entity. These independent contractors get paid by the company that contracts them.
Uber drivers are not independent contractor, they are simply independent transportation providers. Uber drivers get paid by the riders and the drivers pay Uber a fee for the service of connecting the riders with the drivers and for processing the payment.
THIS IS PER THE TOC.
This is one of the many reasons Uber is a scam and so far they are getting away with it.


----------



## Steveyoungerthanmontana (Nov 19, 2016)

dirtylee said:


> LMAO, they provide the car & gas, expect no more than $8 - $11 an hour while they pimp ur arse for $30 - $50/hr.
> 
> It's definitely possible in my market for them do that. Last year, they ran $35 - $50/hr guarantees & I usually came close to those figures or exceeded them with blatantly rigged routing {back to back long trips usually on surge for 6 hrs straight}
> 
> The damn app would send an employee straight to the airport & back to Downtown non stop. No waiting in FIFO que, just drive like crazy. You guys seriously underestimate uber's capabilities when it comes to matching rides.


I have days where I'm super skeptical. But seriously who sits around making sure I don't get my promotions? They don't have enough employees to watch every driver and pick what ride they get. UBER hasn't even made a profit yet. It's all just investments.


----------



## Nomad (Jul 30, 2015)

No one wants to be an employee and Uber can't afford to pay us as employees.

BUT... Uber can stop treating us like employees. There are many more things that determine employee/employer relationship than scheduling, uniforms, and the ability to work for (sorry, "with") competition.

Setting our own rates & parameters, allowing customers to request specific drivers (given that the driver actually wants to be re-paired with them), and not forcing contracts onto drivers would be three of the main things I can think of off the top of my head.

Simply put, if Uber wants to control drivers to "make the platform more reliable," then they should have to pay us as employees. Since they can't feasibly do that, they need to back off their control.

Fun Fact: the new RideShare law passed in Florida will actually allow Uber & Lyft to require uniforms and force contracts on drivers if they deem it necessary.


----------



## smileyfilmore (Feb 14, 2017)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> The problem is...
> 
> Those kind of deals can work and do exist but they are usually a deal with a sole... SINGLE manufacturer..
> 
> ...


You realize a big part of the repair cost is labor right?


----------



## LADriver (Aug 28, 2014)

kdyrpr said:


> If you want to be to be a full time employee then go to this website: www.USPS.com/careers. EVERYONE get's hired eventually. I know, I am a supervisor for the USPS. Apply online.


Yup. My brother is a long time career manager at USPS. One of his "employees" , a drug dealing criminal who's crony mother was a USPS manager, was caught red handed, stealing USPS money orders, on video.

This punk was making $24/hour, $45,000/year. I saw his personnel records. Why? Because it's the USPS, where fiscal reality to the tune of billion dollar losses doesn't exist.

He was busted during an undercover operation assisted by my brother and is now doing time in California State Prison.


----------



## kdyrpr (Apr 23, 2016)

LADriver said:


> Yup. My brother is a long time career manager at USPS. One of his "employees" , a drug dealing criminal who's crony mother was a USPS manager, was caught red handed, stealing USPS money orders, on video.
> 
> This punk was making $24/hour, $45,000/year. I saw his personnel records. Why? Because it's the USPS, where fiscal reality to the tune of billion dollar losses doesn't exist.
> 
> He was busted during an undercover operation assisted by my brother and is now doing time in California State Prison.


See folks ... Uber is not the only option out there!


----------



## Greenghost2212 (Feb 7, 2017)

Jesusdrivesuber said:


> People already act like employees, they work 60 hours a week without overtime, that was the only thing keeping you being "your own boss", necessity due to low mile/time rates took care of that a long time ago.
> 
> Sure, pay hourly/ create shifts and while you are at it, pay depreciation per mile as well as overtime to see if you can profit at all.
> 
> I put 300 miles a day (54 cents per mile), plus 10 bucks an hour and my overtime? Can I be employee already?


Look at yall rates lol. Of course you will have to pull more hours but rates vary by city. Here in Chicago I only drive 40 tops and make enough. But they are right I've been at the retail places and construction jobs. The benefits good but doesn't compensate for having to work when others want to and having to deal with office drama ect.


----------



## suberx (Apr 28, 2017)

Jesusdrivesuber said:


> People already act like employees, they work 60 hours a week without overtime, that was the only thing keeping you being "your own boss", necessity due to low mile/time rates took care of that a long time ago.


This actually sounds more like people running their own businesses, not acting like employees. The more drivers act like business owners and less like employees the better they do.


----------



## Guapcollecta (Apr 11, 2017)

Safe_Driver_4_U said:


> why would you want a union that had the potential to have corrupt bosses when you could have a driver owned TNC instead? You could become the owner, driver protections and welfare could be written into the corporate declarations (the reason the corporation exists). In light of the benefits of technology, unionizing in today's world is going backwards, after all, isn't this ridesharing all about disrupting paradigms.


I don't care about having extra expenses for the TNC as long as the pay is adequate enough to compensate me for it. As far as all the liabilities that it may bring, that's why people incorporate. The whole point of the Union is to fight for workers rights and Welfare as a collective whole. There's strength in numbers. If it has corrupt bosses then we vote them out and replace them. It's not a perfect system but most union workers make more than regular employees in almost every industry. When I looked a little while ago the stat says 30% more in earnings. They also fight for other things that benefit employees to like safety training. Excetera, excetera. If you think Uber is going to look out for its drivers by writing protections into its corporate declarations think again. It's pretty obvious that they want to replace us with driverless cars. We are their biggest expense. And while to you ride sharing maybe about shifting paradigms. For most people who do it, it's about making extra money to support their families. Unions equal more money and power for employees. Without a Union drivers will never matter.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Drivers are pissed at Uber, not because drivers want to be employees, but because they want Uber to stop treating them like employees.

Stop giving timeouts for not accepting trips.. Let drivers set their own rates. Stop telling customers not to tip. If I'm an independent contractor, then what jobs I do, what my rates are, and whether or not I accept tips are my business, not yours. When you make it your business, then you're treating me like an employee.... not to mention, it make you an asshole too.


----------



## Steveyoungerthanmontana (Nov 19, 2016)

UberHammer said:


> Drivers are pissed at Uber, not because drivers want to be employees, but because they want Uber to stop treating them like employees.
> 
> Stop giving timeouts for not accepting trips.. Let drivers set their own rates. Stop telling customers not to tip. If I'm an independent contractor, then what jobs I do, what my rates are, and whether or not I accept tips are my business, not yours. When you make it your business, then you're treating me like an employee.... not to mention, it make you an asshole too.


Do you get timeouts from not accepting trips? I've never gotten one from UBER but I get em all the time with LYFT.


----------



## UofMDriver (Dec 29, 2015)

Don't want to be a employee, but still want fair fares! Uber and Lyft both increased the fares for themselves, with this Upfront Pricing SCAM. How about throwing drivers a bone!


----------



## circle1 (Sep 17, 2016)

Steveyoungerthanmontana said:


> I have days where I'm super skeptical. But seriously who sits around making sure I don't get my promotions? They don't have enough employees to watch every driver and pick what ride they get. UBER hasn't even made a profit yet. It's all just investments.


That's what coders and hackers are for. They write programs that do all those things and MORE.


----------



## suberx (Apr 28, 2017)

UberHammer said:


> Drivers are pissed at Uber, not because drivers want to be employees, but because they want Uber to stop treating them like employees.
> 
> Stop giving timeouts for not accepting trips.. Let drivers set their own rates. Stop telling customers not to tip. If I'm an independent contractor, then what jobs I do, what my rates are, and whether or not I accept tips are my business, not yours. When you make it your business, then you're treating me like an employee.... not to mention, it make you an asshole too.


 Uber doesn't tell people not to tip anymore or give you a timeout for not accepting rides.

As an IC you are absolutely setting your own rates. You just happen to be setting them to match what Uber is offering you. If you want higher rates you can change markets. Or, you can go out and get a CDL, buy your own commercial insurance, form an LLC, put up a web page and charge whatever you want. If you want to use Ubers platform, you come to an agreement and charge exactly what they want to pay you. You also get some insurance, some advertising, and a lot of questionable press from the bros in SF. Too bad Uber doesn't negotiate, but why should they? Lot's of people are willing to drive for current rates just like you are. The second you want to raise your rates or think you are being treated unfairly, you can quit the platform and start your own gig.

I just don't get it when people say Uber "owes" them something . Uber owes us nothing beyond what is in the contract we all signed. The second a driver can't make a profit that he/she feels is reasonable, it is time to hang up the keys. I don't love Uber, but I was never under the impression that they should look out for me or even care about me. I use them and they use me. Capitalism.


----------



## MadTownUberD (Mar 11, 2017)

suberx said:


> Uber doesn't tell people not to tip anymore or give you a timeout for not accepting rides.
> 
> As an IC you are absolutely setting your own rates. You just happen to be setting them to match what Uber is offering you. You can go out and get an CDL, buy your own commercial insurance, form an LLC, put up a web page and charge whatever you want. Or, If you want to use Ubers platform, you come to an agreement and charge exactly what they want to pay you. You also get some insurance, some advertising, and a lot of questionable press from the bros in SF. Too bad Uber doesn't negotiate, but why should they? Lot's of people are willing to drive for current rates just like you are. The second you want to raise your rates or think you are being treated unfairly, you can quit the platform and start your own gig.
> 
> I just don't get it when people say Uber "owes" them something . Uber owes us nothing beyond what is in the contract we all signed. The second a driver can't make a profit that he/she feels is reasonable, it is time to hang up the keys. I don't love Uber, but I was never under the impression that they should look out for me or even care about me. I use them and they use me. Capitalism.


THIS!


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

suberx said:


> Uber doesn't tell people not to tip anymore or give you a timeout for not accepting rides.


----------



## circle1 (Sep 17, 2016)

Nomad said:


> No one wants to be an employee and Uber can't afford to pay us as employees.
> 
> BUT... Uber can stop treating us like employees. There are many more things that determine employee/employer relationship than scheduling, uniforms, and the ability to work for (sorry, "with") competition.
> 
> ...





suberx said:


> Uber doesn't tell people not to tip anymore or give you a timeout for not accepting rides.
> 
> As an IC you are setting your own rates. You can go out and get an CDL, buy your own commercial insurance, form an LLC, put up a web page and charge whatever you want. Or, If you want to use Ubers platform, you come to an agreement and charge exactly what they want to pay you. You also get some insurance, some advertising, and a lot of questionable press from the bros in SF. Too bad Uber doesn't negotiate, but why should they? Lot's of people are willing to drive for current rates just like you are. The second you want to raise your rates or think you are being treated unfairly, you can quit the platform and start your own gig.
> 
> I just don't get it when people say Uber "owes" them something . Uber owes us nothing beyond what is in the contract we all signed. The second a driver can't make a profit that he/she feels is reasonable, it is time to hang up the keys. I don't love Uber, but I was never under the impression that they should look out for me or even care about me. I use them and they use me. Capitalism.


That's all fell and wine (and I agree in principle, _principle_ being the key concept here . . .), but Oops!ber & Gryft are not honoring (or at a minimum hedging on) their agreement(s), and they are using the full extent of their resources, including their coders and IT people to keep drivers under their thumb the way an employer would control their employees. And (some report here) to cheat them out of monies owed (through manipulation or outright theft [benign negligence??]).

You'll say "prove it," well sir my time's valuable, I'm not going to go back and re-dig-up all the intelligence I've digested over the last seven months . . . I'm reporting what I've learned on this forum, reviewing court cases, and through media reports, so you'll have to read past posts or go ask Trump Economics or Smashup.

It's a matter of time before a judge(s) rules that these TNCs are treating their "contractors" like employees.


----------



## Dback2004 (Nov 7, 2015)

NorthNJLyftacular said:


> What a mishmash of trumpist, Breitbart, Fox News bullshit.


What does that have to do with the employee/IC debate at hand? Never once seen the rideshare employee/IC debate featured on Fox News or in a Trump speech. Just once can we leave political badgering out of a otherwise healthy thread!?



suberx said:


> Uber doesn't tell people not to tip anymore or give you a timeout for not accepting rides.


Unless something has changed recently (maybe in different markets?) as of last winter I was put on timeout by Uber for declining enough pings in a row.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Retired Senior said:


> I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them. But I am not an attorney....
> 
> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/u...tealing-in-new-lawsuit-from-new-york-drivers/
> 
> ...


I think what Uber means is They would lose Freedoms
Freedom to treat us as slaves.


----------



## suberx (Apr 28, 2017)

UberHammer said:


>


We don't have Uber Eats here, so I only know about ride share. Here' s what they say for passengers. So, at least for rideshare drivers, if you want a tip you are free to ask.

*Can my driver ask for a tip?*
As independent contractors, drivers may request tips at their discretion.

Drivers care about rider ratings and do their best to create an ideal trip experience. While Uber does not require riders to offer drivers a cash tip, you are welcome to do so. Should you choose to tip, your driver is welcome to accept or decline.

Please note that the trip fare charged to your payment account does not include a gratuity.

Where available, uberTAXI is an exception. uberTAXI connects riders with licensed yellow cabs and includes the option to set the gratuity percentage added to your trip fare.



circle1 said:


> That's all fell and wine (and I agree in principle, _principle_ being the key concept here . . .), but Oops!ber & Gryft are not honoring (or at a minimum hedging on) their agreement(s), and they are using the full extent of their resources, including their coders and IT people to keep drivers under their thumb the way an employer would control their employees. And (some report here) to cheat them out of monies owed (through manipulation or outright theft [benign negligence??]).
> 
> You'll say "prove it," well sir my time's valuable, I'm not going to go back and re-dig-up all the intelligence I've digested over the last seven months . . . I'm reporting what I've learned on this forum, reviewing court cases, and through media reports, so you'll have to read past posts or go ask Trump Economics or Smashup.
> 
> It's a matter of time before a judge(s) rules that these TNCs are treating their "contractors" like employees.


I'd never ask you to prove it. Uber has the reputation that just about anything bad I hear I believe without question. The problem is, we have all signed a contract that allows them to behave in many ways that are contrary to our own self interest. The guys in NY were an exception and Uber is paying. I signed the contract because what Uber provides is worth it to me.


----------



## UberSolo (Jul 21, 2016)

I_Like_Spam said:


> Considering how tightly Uber supervises their partners- chucking their behinds off of the app ASAP if the partner is found to be soliciting their own rides outside of the app and immediately taking action on customer-driver disputes, I'd hardly say that Uber drivers are "their own boss".


correct, we are Non Employee Contractors. Turn App on and off @ our discretion.
Crucial since most have F/T positions outside of ground transportation.
Uber's a GIG not a career 
Those that try to make it a F/T career are doomed to failure, frustration and fear


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

suberx said:


> We don't have Uber Eats here, so I only know about ride share. Here' s what they say for passengers. So, at least for rideshare drivers, if you want a tip you are free to ask.
> 
> *Can my driver ask for a tip?*
> As independent contractors, drivers may request tips at their discretion.
> ...


Uber has used the phrase *"NO NEED TO TIP" *for so long, they could trademark it.


----------



## diehard88 (Dec 2, 2016)

kdyrpr said:


> Their right.


And hour left...



I_Like_Spam said:


> I'd hardly say that Uber drivers are "their own boss".


Now turn right, keep going straight then turn left and, before you start, the Wendy's drivethru over there.


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

tohunt4me said:


> I think what Uber means is They would lose Freedoms
> Freedom to treat us as slaves.


Uber Drivers are already employees but Uber doesn't want to give Driver benefits and rights. The benefits and rights would increase Driver pay by 20%. Half the Drivers dont' mind having 20% of their pay taken away. Amazing!!! A bit of cognitive dissonance.


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

kdyrpr said:


> If you want to be to be a full time employee then go to this website: www.USPS.com/careers. EVERYONE get's hired eventually. I know, I am a supervisor for the USPS. Apply online.


The downside working USPS (as I did for 6 months) is the fact you must join the union (or it's _highly_ encouraged). Majority ppl become union employees here in Sacramento because union employees get paid at least $1/hr more on base salary. $1 to $2 more if selected to become a driver.

But regardless of the FT/PT and union benefits etc, you're still a bottom crawler and FIFO for being laid off when budget cuts come around. This is at least once a year. And could even be as frequent as once per quarter depending on where you are in the country and/or how poorly USPS mgmt mismanages mail delivery operations in your area. Myself and several other new employees made some decent cash before being laid off at the 6 month point. This was since all members above me in the food chain had at least a 12 mo+ seniority head start in work experience.



Safe_Driver_4_U said:


> doesn't anyone see the elephant in the room? All someone has to do is come up with a better business model and Uber becomes ancient history. Considering today's technology a better mousetrap is just around the corner.


The prototype of this is already being tested on the streets of SF as I type. It's called Uber's driverless vehicle aka Travis's golden ticket out of Chapter 11 ...after he fires all his 1Mil+ IC drivers globally first.

IMO, this must be Travis's road to redemption. Because after he clears Uber's liability/debit sheet of us IC drivers (and the billions in legal fees/lawsuits/liability/operational risks we present his company), the way will be clear and free to launch his IPO out the stratosphere.

Because at that point, Uber's investors will be only too happy (particularly given the risk of IC lawsuits eliminated) to throw even more billions into Uber's treasury. And Travis's only concerns at that point will be hiring a minimal white collar skeletal crew of software/mechanical engineers (read Uber EMPLOYEES WITH FULL BENEFITS) globally to maintain remote command & control of his new driverless fleet. Which will be nirvana since driverless cars don't create employee wanabee lawsuit headaches for management. 

And to those naysayers on here being negative Nancy on this being a reality in the near future: Remember that one time in mankind history where civilized society thought the world was flat? Or due to complacency, what became of TRex, the Dodo, and the typewritter maintenance man?


----------



## FrebrezeFarts (May 23, 2017)

tohunt4me said:


> No need to tip !


I tell my friends they should tip their Uber drivers. They say no, why would they, Uber should pay more. My grandma asked me if people tip me like they do taxis, haha good one granny. I do get an occasional pax who tips, very rare though.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> That's not true. The first amendment guarantees citizens the right to free speech, but that does not mean that while employed by or working for a company that the company cannot restrict what you say.
> 
> Open carry & concealed carry is legal in many states - but that does not mean that a facility or company can't restrict the carrying of firearms on their premises by employees and workers.


It most certainly is true in the State of Florida by state law. And when would I ever be on Uber's property?



Nomad said:


> No one wants to be an employee and Uber can't afford to pay us as employees.
> 
> BUT... Uber can stop treating us like employees. There are many more things that determine employee/employer relationship than scheduling, uniforms, and the ability to work for (sorry, "with") competition.
> 
> ...


No it doesn't. Doesn't even mention uniforms and you can't force a contract on anybody



Dback2004 said:


> What does that have to do with the employee/IC debate at hand? Never once seen the rideshare employee/IC debate featured on Fox News or in a Trump speech. Just once can we leave political badgering out of a otherwise healthy thread!?
> 
> Unless something has changed recently (maybe in different markets?) as of last winter I was put on timeout by Uber for declining enough pings in a row.


Uber still uses time outs.


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

UberHammer said:


> Uber has used the phrase *"NO NEED TO TIP" *for so long, they could trademark it.


No one, anywhere, is required to tip for anything. If a tip was required it would be called a fee.

We are independent contractors. Our clients are Uber, Lyft, Fasten, Amazon, etc. The riders are not our clients. We can negotiate our fees with our clients. Our clients can negotiate their fees with us. But our clients aren't forced to comply with our wishes.

I've been an independent contractor for 30 years. I'll go into peoples houses and do an inspection. The homeowner will sometimes pay me directly. When they ask me for my results, I say sorry, you're not my client, even if its their house and their cash. If I want a fee increase, I ask my client. My client will either negotiate with me or find another independent contractor. Due to the lack of supply of independent contractors, my clients often negotiate with me.

Do we have a lack of supply of drivers? No. Ask your client (Uber, lyft, etc) for a fee increase and they'll substitute another independent contractor. The economic principle of substitution states that when comparably equivalent goods or services are available, a person or business, in an open market will choose the one with the lowest price.

There is a point where supply meets demand to create maximum profit. Messing with the economic realities via regulations or unions creates artificial markets that tend to be inefficient and may even destroy a business and lose all their employees. Want a Twinkee? No thanks to unions, we can still get 'em.


----------



## circle1 (Sep 17, 2016)

suberx said:


> I'd never ask you to prove it. Uber has the reputation that just about anything bad I hear I believe without question. The problem is, we have all signed a contract that allows them to behave in many ways that are contrary to our own self interest. The guys in NY were an exception and Uber is paying. I signed the contract because what Uber provides is worth it to me.


Signing/agreeing to a contract, and fulfilling/honoring the terms of a contract in _both_ spirit and letter are what's being used as a yardstick here. Of course you are free to settle for less. The reason I responded to what you were saying about this topic is because, imo, most of the people on this forum want and rightfully expect full compliance with what was agreed to. The logic seems to be, "I'm tired of reading about yer belly-achin', shut up or quit driving." Well, I'm tired of having people who settle for less tell me to stop complaining.



UberSolo said:


> Uber's a GIG not a career
> Those that try to make it a F/T career are doomed to failure, frustration and fear


. . . As the TNC's will is daily manifested . . . they could save themselves and thousands of driver-contractors' time and trouble if they would say this upfront!



Cynergie said:


> you're still a bottom crawler and FIFO for being laid off when budget cuts come around.


. . . Don't you mean LIFO?


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

bsliv said:


> No one, anywhere, is required to tip for anything. If a tip was required it would be called a fee.


Which is exactly why tips are none of Uber's business. Every full service restaurant could tell customer's "no need to tip" and they would be absolutely correct. They would also piss off their waitstaff so bad that they'd have 96% turnover.... like Uber.


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

circle1 said:


> . . . Don't you mean LIFO?


I guess what I meant was first n00b to get hired is first to get fired. lol. Thx for the clarification


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

bsliv said:


> No one, anywhere, is required to tip for anything. If a tip was required it would be called a fee.
> 
> We are independent contractors. Our clients are Uber, Lyft, Fasten, Amazon, etc. The riders are not our clients. We can negotiate our fees with our clients. Our clients can negotiate their fees with us. But our clients aren't forced to comply with our wishes.
> 
> ...


You seem to be trying to walk on both sides of the street. Comparing home inspections (a controlled supply side enterprise) to rideshare ( a non controlled supply side enterprise). While a bank may require a home inspection and choose you, they are legally required to give the homeowner the results. I have hired home inspectors in the past, and believe me, if you failed to give me the results, you will not get paid.



Cynergie said:


> I guess what I meant was first n00b to get hired is first to get fired. lol. Thx for the clarification


Last newb to get hired is first to get fired


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

Rat said:


> You seem to be trying to walk on both sides of the street. Comparing home inspections (a controlled supply side enterprise) to rideshare ( a non controlled supply side enterprise). While a bank may require a home inspection and choose you, they are legally required to give the homeowner the results. I have hired home inspectors in the past, and believe me, if you failed to give me the results, you will not get paid.


You may get a copy of the report but not from me. Confidentiality clause of the Ethics section of uspap. Appraiser, not inspector. I know economics not plumbing.


----------



## WaveRunner1 (Jun 11, 2017)

They sure do act as controlling as an employer. They prey on people's ignorance to what an independent contractor is. I think they violate many things. Don't we have the right to know the destination before starting a trip? Can Uber really take the difference between what a rider pays and what the driver receives? I'm not talking about the Uber fee. I mean upfront fares. There really needs to be an advocacy group started to closely monitor these things.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

bsliv said:


> You may get a copy of the report but not from me. Confidentiality clause of the Ethics section of uspap. Appraiser, not inspector. I know economics not plumbing.


Well, you said "do an inspection", not an appraisal.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

WaveRunner1 said:


> They sure do act as controlling as an employer. They prey on people's ignorance to what an independent contractor is. I think they violate many things. Don't we have the right to know the destination before starting a trip?


Legally speaking this is a grey area. For example, an independent truck driver has every right to see both the pickup and destination locations before accepting a job. But yet, some cities have local laws that make it illegal for an independent taxi driver to turn down a trip because of the destination if the destination is within the city limits. My understanding is Uber has no problem if you cancel trips for destinations going out of town. But Uber can get into trouble by the city if drivers are refusing to take people to certain destinations in the city. The reason Uber doesn't show destination is because in most situations the driver doesn't have the right to refuse a trip because of destination. So no, the driver probably doesn't have the right to know the destination before starting the trip. I think that sucks, but that's the current state of most city laws for taxi services.



> Can Uber really take the difference between what a rider pays and what the driver receives? I'm not talking about the Uber fee. I mean upfront fares.


Yes, but they had to change the contract to do such. The old contract had drivers buying services from Uber. Uber was simply a "lead generation service" and drivers were paying Uber for that service. The driver kept the difference between the fare and what they were paying Uber. The new contract now has Uber buying services from drivers. Uber is simply paying drivers for their time and mileage now. They charge the customers whatever they want. Uber keeps the different between the fare and the driver costs. So yes, Uber can do it. I think that sucks, but there's nothing legally stopping them from doing it.



> There really needs to be an advocacy group started to closely monitor these things.


Absolutely. Uber not only toes the line legally and morally, they willingly jump over the line regularly. They are basically begging the government to create new regulations to protect society from them. Only an idiot blinded by Ayn Rand beliefs wouldn't see that this is eventually where Uber is headed. And he has no intention of stepping down as CEO. I'm just over here watching the train heading straight for the brick wall. Should be a spectacular crash given how many investors are going to be PISSED!


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

UberHammer said:


> Legally speaking this is a grey area. For example, an independent truck driver has every right to see both the pickup and destination locations before accepting a job. But yet, some cities have local laws that make it illegal for an independent taxi driver to turn down a trip because of the destination if the destination is within the city limits. My understanding is Uber has no problem if you cancel trips for destinations going out of town. But Uber can get into trouble by the city if drivers are refusing to take people to certain destinations in the city. The reason Uber doesn't show destination is because in most situations the driver doesn't have the right to refuse a trip because of destination. So no, the driver probably doesn't have the right to know the destination before starting the trip. I think that sucks, but that's the current state of most city laws for taxi services.
> 
> Yes, but they had to change the contract to do such. The old contract had drivers buying services from Uber. Uber was simply a "lead generation service" and drivers were paying Uber for that service. The driver kept the difference between the fare and what they were paying Uber. The new contract now has Uber buying services from drivers. Uber is simply paying drivers for their time and mileage now. They charge the customers whatever they want. Uber keeps the different between the fare and the driver costs. So yes, Uber can do it. I think that sucks, but there's nothing legally stopping them from doing it.
> 
> Absolutely. Uber not only toes the line legally and morally, they willingly jump over the line regularly. They are basically begging the government to create new regulations to protect society from them. Only an idiot blinded by Ayn Rand beliefs wouldn't see that this is eventually where Uber is headed. And he has no intention of stepping down as CEO. I'm just over here watching the train heading straight for the brick wall. Should be a spectacular crash given how many investors are going to be PISSED!


Changing the contract to allow them to disconnect what the rider pays from what the driver gets is an admission that their contract did not allow them to do this prior to the change. I see substantial liabilities, both compensory and punitive.


----------



## Nomad (Jul 30, 2015)

Rat said:


> No it doesn't. Doesn't even mention uniforms and you can't force a contract on anybody


You are correct: uniforms are not mentioned and that is the problem. The bill states that the only conditions that must be met in order to define rideshare drivers as independent contractors are that the driver and company agree to it (contract), no hours are set (a schedule), and that the RideShare company (Uber or Lyft) does not restrict the driver from working with other rideshare companies or any other business.

What this means is that the long list of conditions that help the state differentiate between employees and independent contractors (including uniforms and forcing contracts) is now thinned out to just those 4 conditions when it comes to rideshare drivers.

So when they start matching requests with a driver while they're in the middle of taking a ride, without showing pax rating, location, etc. (they force it on the driver), the driver would then have to analyze whether or not they actually want to give that pax a ride after they've been forced to agree to it. Then the driver would have to cancel if they did not want to give that pax a ride, making the driver susceptible to deactivation for cancellation rates. Drivers end up being coerced into taking rides they don't want to and the law allows it.

Uber and Lyft could also decide tomorrow that drivers must wear "Don't Tip Me" shirts or be deactivated, and there would be nothing drivers could do because the law has defined that this does not constitute an employee/employer relationship.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Nomad said:


> You are correct: uniforms are not mentioned and that is the problem. The bill states that the only conditions that must be met in order to define rideshare drivers as independent contractors are that the driver and company agree to it (contract), no hours are set (a schedule), and that the RideShare company (Uber or Lyft) does not restrict the driver from working with other rideshare companies or any other business.
> 
> What this means is that the long list of conditions that help the state differentiate between employees and independent contractors (including uniforms and forcing contracts) is now thinned out to just those 4 conditions when it comes to rideshare drivers.
> 
> ...


What "bill" are you talking about? Current law is what applies, and there are several more conditions that apply than you mentioned. A "Don't Tip Me" shirt would be a uniform. Assigning fares without the driver acceptioning them destroys IC status.


----------



## circle1 (Sep 17, 2016)

Nomad said:


> You are correct: uniforms are not mentioned and that is the problem. The bill states that the only conditions that must be met in order to define rideshare drivers as independent contractors are that the driver and company agree to it (contract), no hours are set (a schedule), and that the RideShare company (Uber or Lyft) does not restrict the driver from working with other rideshare companies or any other business.
> 
> What this means is that the long list of conditions that help the state differentiate between employees and independent contractors (including uniforms and forcing contracts) is now thinned out to just those 4 conditions when it comes to rideshare drivers.
> 
> ...


These companies have mastered the art of the Gray Area. It mostly works because they're counting on people who just need to make a few dollars quickly, and/or people who are too busy or too lazy to look closely at the details of the deal.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Rat said:


> It most certainly is true in the State of Florida by state law. And when would I ever be on Uber's property?


Has nothing to do with being Uber's property - it has to do you agreeing to follow Uber's policies in order to gain access to their driver app. Don't agree? or violate the policies? Uber can can you. That includes carrying firearms. Free speech is guaranteed by the constitution, too. That doesn't mean you are free to speak whatever you want while performing work pursuant to a work agreement in which you agree not to disparage the company you're associating with.


> Doesn't even mention uniforms and you can't force a contract on anybody


Exactly right. So when you CHOOSE to continue a relationship under a work agreement/contract, you are bound by the terms of that agreement. Don't like the terms and refuse to abide by them? That's fine - then neither party is bound by the agreement.


> Uber still uses time outs.


Not in my market it doesn't.


----------



## Gooberlifturwallet (Feb 18, 2017)

Retired Senior said:


> I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them. But I am not an attorney....
> 
> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/u...tealing-in-new-lawsuit-from-new-york-drivers/
> 
> ...


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Has nothing to do with being Uber's property - it has to do you agreeing to follow Uber's policies in order to gain access to their driver app. Don't agree? or violate the policies? Uber can can you. That includes carrying firearms. Free speech is guaranteed by the constitution, too. That doesn't mean you are free to speak whatever you want while performing work pursuant to a work agreement in which you agree not to disparage the company you're associating with. Exactly right. So when you CHOOSE to continue a relationship under a work agreement/contract, you are bound by the terms of that agreement. Don't like the terms and refuse to abide by them? That's fine - then neither party is bound by the agreement.
> Not in my market it doesn't.


Uber sent me an email telling me they comply with Florida Statue xxxx, the one that says they can be held civilly liable if they retaliate in any way. Uber's policies (which you seem to misunderstand) don't override the law. Yes they can diactivate me, but they would still have to pay me a large sum of money for violating my rights.


----------



## Gooberlifturwallet (Feb 18, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Has nothing to do with being Uber's property - it has to do you agreeing to follow Uber's policies in order to gain access to their driver app. Don't agree? or violate the policies? Uber can can you. That includes carrying firearms. Free speech is guaranteed by the constitution, too. That doesn't mean you are free to speak whatever you want while performing work pursuant to a work agreement in which you agree not to disparage the company you're associating with. Exactly right. So when you CHOOSE to continue a relationship under a work agreement/contract, you are bound by the terms of that agreement. Don't like the terms and refuse to abide by them? That's fine - then neither party is bound by the agreement.
> Not in my market it doesn't.


All spoken like a true uber shill. Only someone associated financially as in paid to post would continue to defend such a horrible morally corrupt company and its asshat bizboy executive culture. They spend their time now pursuing and attacking "partners" who "harm their brand" by having an opinion as if they haven't already destroyed their own reputation.


----------



## senorCRV (Jan 3, 2017)

Retired Senior said:


> I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them. But I am not an attorney....
> 
> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/u...tealing-in-new-lawsuit-from-new-york-drivers/
> 
> ...


They are both right and wrong.

Making them employees doesn't make them lose those freedoms, however making them employees gives Uber the right to take those freedoms and clearly they'd take every advantage they could.


----------



## Nomad (Jul 30, 2015)

Rat said:


> What "bill" are you talking about? Current law is what applies, and there are several more conditions that apply than you mentioned. A "Don't Tip Me" shirt would be a uniform. Assigning fares without the driver acceptioning them destroys IC status.


Bill signed into law: http://www.flgov.com/2017/05/09/governor-scott-signs-uber-lyft-bill/

The actual bill: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2017/0221
- The "Analysis" tab has a pdf dated 5/11/17 that is an excellent summary of the bill's contents. While it has many positive aspects, the end of page 7 is where it defines what the TNC's have to do in order to maintain the independent contractor label and that list is incredibly short as I've mentioned. What it means is that the long list of things that help define IC's has now been shortened to just 4 qualifications for rideshare drivers... and uniforms are not one of them.

As for assigning rides without acceptance... well, that's on it's way. Given the past time difference between when new features go live where I am now and when they show up in your area, I'd say this will be there by football season. I recently received an email from Uber stating, "to help minimize wait time between trips, the app will now *automatically* connect you with a nearby request." And Lyft already does it this way.

So instead of the app notifying you during a ride that there is another request and showing you pax rating, surge amount, and location and then you either letting it pass or tapping the screen to accept... it would just say something like "We have added pax 2 to your route. Please drop off pax 1 and head to pax 2."



Michael - Cleveland said:


> So when you CHOOSE to continue a relationship under a work agreement/contract, you are bound by the terms of that agreement.


Not if the agreement is in violation of the law.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Nomad said:


> Bill signed into law: http://www.flgov.com/2017/05/09/governor-scott-signs-uber-lyft-bill/
> 
> The actual bill: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2017/0221
> - The "Analysis" tab has a pdf dated 5/11/17 that is an excellent summary of the bill's contents. While it has many positive aspects, the end of page 7 is where it defines what the TNC's have to do in order to maintain the independent contractor label and that list is incredibly short as I've mentioned. What it means is that the long list of things that help define IC's has now been shortened to just 4 qualifications for rideshare drivers... and uniforms are not one of them.
> ...


The bill states we are independent contractors, but can not work for anyone other than TNCs, contradicting itself. I expect immediate legal challenges. This is what happens when you allow an industry to write their own regulations. The Senate bill was tabled because it violated the "due process" clause of the Constitution. "Independent contractor" status is determined by Federal law, not State law. Regardless, assigning pax with no choice to the driver destroys any pretense of independence. I pick up a lot of legislators here and will be discussing this with them.


----------



## Nomad (Jul 30, 2015)

Rat said:


> I expect immediate legal challenges.


Me, too. Isn't it sad that they have to be taken to court every single time they try to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Then, once a judge tells them it's illegal, they release a statement along the lines of, "We're changing back because we felt it was the right thing to do for our driver/partners." 



Rat said:


> This is what happens when you allow an industry to write their own regulations.


Preach.



Rat said:


> I pick up a lot of legislators here and will be discussing this with them.


Five bucks says most of them are clueless but each and every one you can talk to will hopefully help the cause. When Uber put the in-app flyer about how we needed to "write our politicians to get this bill passed to make sure we could still have the right to earn money" (paraphrased), that was my first clue that this bill was total BS.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Nomad said:


> Bill signed into law: http://www.flgov.com/2017/05/09/governor-scott-signs-uber-lyft-bill/
> 
> The actual bill: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2017/0221
> - The "Analysis" tab has a pdf dated 5/11/17 that is an excellent summary of the bill's contents. While it has many positive aspects, the end of page 7 is where it defines what the TNC's have to do in order to maintain the independent contractor label and that list is incredibly short as I've mentioned. What it means is that the long list of things that help define IC's has now been shortened to just 4 qualifications for rideshare drivers... and uniforms are not one of them.
> ...


Note section 627.748(1)(b) states a prearranged ride begins when the driver accepts a fare. If the driver does not accept the ride prior to beginning the ride, the entire transaction is out side the law.



Nomad said:


> Me, too. Isn't it sad that they have to be taken to court every single time they try to pull the wool over everyone's eyes. Then, once a judge tells them it's illegal, they release a statement along the lines of, "We're changing back because we felt it was the right thing to do for our driver/partners."
> 
> Preach.
> 
> Five bucks says most of them are clueless but each and every one you can talk to will hopefully help the cause. When Uber put the in-app flyer about how we needed to "write our politicians to get this bill passed to make sure we could still have the right to earn money" (paraphrased), that was my first clue that this bill was total BS.


I have already discussed the bill with one legislator before the bill about it violating the due process clause and that bill was tabled. I can't claim it was my action that prompted this, tho. I spoke to another legislator Friday and you are quit correct, he was clueless. I may be in an excellent position to have a direct effect on State legislation.


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

Nomad said:


> Bill signed into law: http://www.flgov.com/2017/05/09/governor-scott-signs-uber-lyft-bill/
> 
> The actual bill: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2017/0221
> - The "Analysis" tab has a pdf dated 5/11/17 that is an excellent summary of the bill's contents. While it has many positive aspects, the end of page 7 is where it defines what the TNC's have to do in order to maintain the independent contractor label and that list is incredibly short as I've mentioned. What it means is that the long list of things that help define IC's has now been shortened to just 4 qualifications for rideshare drivers... and uniforms are not one of them.
> ...


As expected.

Rick Scott is a corrupt sob, this bill was written by Uber or for Uber, double stamped by him.

Time to write some people about amending those definitions left in a vague state on purpose.

I can bet Uber sued itself about transparency last year so they could set their employee rules on ink.



Michael - Cleveland said:


> Has nothing to do with being Uber's property - it has to do you agreeing to follow Uber's policies in order to gain access to their driver app. Don't agree? or violate the policies? Uber can can you. That includes carrying firearms. Free speech is guaranteed by the constitution, too. That doesn't mean you are free to speak whatever you want while performing work pursuant to a work agreement in which you agree not to disparage the company you're associating with.


Ugh no.

Uber can create whatever rules they want, if those rules lean towards employment, then they work as an employer same as the other way around when it leans towards contracting; it's not simply about agreeing to a contract, it's about what it stipulates respecting laws and regulations.

Imagine if what you said were true, how many employers would simply call everyone a contractor and rid themselves of all employer obligations, if it were that easy then people would be doing it all over the place, it's the ultimate form of profiteering... which sort of puts into perspective how uber cannot make money even abusing such loopholes due to being the first of it's kind.

Everything finds an end at one point or the other.

Now as far as state laws vs contracts AND being backed by the constitution, whoever wants to argue the conceal carry issue in court, at least in my state, has a high chance to win it.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Jesusdrivesuber said:


> Ugh no.
> 
> Uber can create whatever rules they want, if those rules lean towards employment, then they work as an employer same as the other way around when it leans towards contracting; it's not simply about agreeing to a contract, it's about what it stipulates respecting laws and regulations.
> 
> Imagine if what you said were true, how many employers would simply call everyone a contractor and rid themselves of all employer obligations, if it were that easy then people would be doing it all over the place, it's the ultimate form of profiteering...


If it were black & white then it would be easy for the dept of labor and the IRS to determine if a worker is an employee or an IC. But it's not. The law (FLSA) is vague. The 'rules' are written by the IRS and Department of Labor Wage & Hour division. And that's all they are: rules and guidelines. The IRS will issue an 'opinion' on worker classification if you submit IRS form SS-8. But that' all you'll get back from them (6 months later): an opinion. Submit the same request several times and you are likely to get different opinions. (Yup - I have had this happen). It is up to the employer to determine how they want to classify a worker - based on the guidelines published by the IRS and the Dept. of Labor Wages & Hours Div. It's up to a worker - or the IRS/DoL to challenge the classification chosen by the employer. And only a court of law can make a definitive ruling. Our individual opinions are interesting for discussion - what I've outlined above isn't opinion, it's fact.

And here's another interesting fact about the FLSA: A worker's opinion doesn't matter. The law stipulates that certain elements of the FLSA cannot be 'waived' by the worker. Congress did that to prevent worker exploitation.


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> If it were black & white then it would be easy for the dept of labor and the IRS to determine if a worker is an employee or an IC. But it's not. The law (FLSA) is vague. The 'rules' are written by the IRS and Department of Labor Wage & Hour division. And that's all they are: rules and guidelines. The IRS will issue an 'opinion' on worker classification if you submit IRS form SS-8. But that' all you'll get back from them (6 months later): an opinion. Submit the same request several times and you are likely to get different opinions. (Yup - I have had this happen). It is up to the employer to determine how they want to classify a worker - based on the guidelines published by the IRS and the Dept. of Labor Wages & Hours Div. It's up to a worker - or the IRS/DoL to challenge the classification chosen by the employer. And only a court of law can make a definitive ruling. Our individual opinions are interesting for discussion - what I've outlined above isn't opinion, it's fact.
> 
> And here's another interesting fact about the FLSA: A worker's opinion doesn't matter. The law stipulates that certain elements of the FLSA cannot be 'waived' by the worker. Congress did that to prevent worker exploitation.


Which is the reason why most states classify uber drivers as employees when they claim unemployment benefits or sue for misclassification , Brasil is moving on with it and the UK already ruled theirs.

Like I said, it's just paper.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Jesusdrivesuber said:


> Which is the reason why most states classify uber drivers as employees when they claim unemployment benefits or sue for misclassification


If that were true, then you'd be able to cite cases from "most states" - which you can't, because the opposite is true. In all but a few cases were a state board has ruled in favor of the worker, a court has revered the decision on appeal.


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> If that were true, then you'd be able to cite cases from "most states" - which you can't, because the opposite is true. In all but a few cases were a state board has ruled in favor of the worker, a court has revered the decision on appeal.


https://thelejer.wordpress.com/2017...-drivers-eligible-for-unemployment-insurance/

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/03/07/uber-driver-wins-unemployment-benefits/

https://www.mahanyertl.com/2016/uber-driver-was-granted-unemployment-benefits/ (MA settlement)

There were a lot more when I researched last year and they all seem to have been scraped off Google, I will try to find the links here in y older posts.

The only place where they have won is FL and not even as a win but they managed to grease the palms of the people in power to REVERT the initial judgment which favored the drivers.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Jesusdrivesuber said:


> The only place where they have won is FL and not even as a win but they managed to grease the palms of the people in power to REVERT the initial judgment which favored the drivers.


Nope - CA cases ruled on by the Labor Board have been overturned by the State Courts as well. As I said - the cases in which Uber has ultimately lost are few and far-between... and they have not [yet] lost a single class-action case in the US on worker status classification. Your "most states" claim is inaccurate. (and thanks for the links - most appreciated)

first link, New York State: That was a Labor Board Ruling - not a court decision. (ie: wait for the appeal) AND "The rulings by the New York State Department of Labor apply only to the drivers' unemployment insurance claims and *do not directly affect other drivers or extend to other protections normally accorded to employees*.

second link, CA: Not a court decision. A ruling by the California's Employment Development Department that effected* just one driver (not all drivers)*. The state court system has thus far upheld Uber's classifying of drivers as ICs.

link 3... seriously? It's referring to the same CA case.​


----------



## Jesusdrivesuber (Jan 5, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Nope - CA cases ruled on by the Labor Board have been overturned by the State Courts as well. As I said - the cases in which Uber has ultimately lost are few and far-between... and they have not [yet] lost a single class-action case in the US on worker status classification. Your "most states" claim is inaccurate. (and thanks for the links - most appreciated)
> 
> first link, New York State: That was a Labor Board Ruling - not a court decision. (ie: wait for the appeal) AND "The rulings by the New York State Department of Labor apply only to the drivers' unemployment insurance claims and *do not directly affect other drivers or extend to other protections normally accorded to employees*.
> 
> ...





> Uber was set to go to trial this summer to defend its claim that its drivers are independent contractors and not employees, but it reached a settlement totaling $100 million in California and *Massachusetts*.


We will wait for Uber's appeal on the NY case, let's see if they are as easy to bribe as they are in FL.

The California case goes from San Diego to many other places, that's just one case I linked.

Again, we will see if they can bribe their way there to favor an appeal.

For some reason I cannot find Illinois and Pennsylvania, odd.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Jesusdrivesuber said:


> We will wait for Uber's appeal on the NY case, let's see if they are as easy to bribe as they are in FL. The California case goes from San Diego to many other places, that's just one case I linked.


hehe - yeah, many other places, like from a state board to a state COURT. A court system that even if it upholds unemployment benefits, like NY, will still not reclassify the driver as an employee under the FLSA (federal law). Even so, Uber just let it go since it only effected one driver.


> For some reason I cannot find Illinois and Pennsylvania, odd.


That's because the PA case was dismissed in March of 2015.
Pennsylvania Eastern District Court, Case No. 2:15-cv-06121
In the CA case - it never went to the court system because it only effected ONE driver and it wasn't worth the time or money for Uber to fight the administrative ruling in court when they were already defending their position in the O'Conner class-action case (which has subsequently fallen apart - but may have new life breathed into it some day).

UPDATE:
Uber lost an additional NY Labor court ruling this week, but has already announced that they will appeal to a higher level of the board - and then to the state court:
https://qz.com/1005254/three-uber-d...-for-unemployment-purposes-by-new-york-state/
http://www.politico.com/states/new-...ate-labor-court-finds-uber-an-employer-112733



Retired Senior said:


> I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them.


Under the FLSA a worker cannot waive the 'rights' and 'protections' afforded to them under the law. So, no - it has nothing to do with a worker agreeing to work for pennies on the hour or paying for the expenses involved in generating income for the company.

The FLSA was written by congress to protect workers from exploitation by employers. It is assumed that a single employee is at a disadvantage when negotiating a contract with an employer (a power imbalance that makes the negotiations unfair). A contract can be deemed invalid if it is determined that the disparity in 'power' between the parties in too great. That's what labor unions are for - to change the balance of power from being one-sided in favor of an employer, to being equally balanced between Labor and Industry.


----------



## TedInTampa (Apr 5, 2017)

I am a truck driver. I have been Ubering while I look for local work. Over the Road truck drivers are paid per mile, sometimes there is extra for getting a load with more than 2 stops (shipper, consignee). Truck drivers have health, vision, dental, life insurances, often a retirement fund, and paid vacation. I would be at a Truck stop and get a phone call telling me I had a load. I'd go to the truck, copy the info, send a form response (called a macro), then roll to the shipper. Get loaded, then roll toward final. I would stop for lunch, sleep, restroom, whatever...as long as I got to the consignee by the appointed time.

Now, how could this translate to Uber? If this week you are online 40 hours (failing to accept a fare means all time between going online and that fare doesn't count)...you have 1 week counting toward full time status.

After 4 consecutive weeks full time, you have employee benefits: health, dental, vision, etc. You also have a guaranteed minimum. If you are online waiting for a fare and none comes, $8.25/ hour, but only for a full 60 minutes of no fares arriving. Maximum 2 full 60 minute periods per day. (It's time to go home, no one needs a ride.)

You still determine if to go online, and where to park. If in a 4 week period you work less than 160 hours, you are part time again.

I would also like to see minute fare increased by 30 cents at the expense of mileage fare.


----------



## Safe_Driver_4_U (Apr 2, 2017)

MadTownUberD said:


> Read Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt. Unions not only decrease everyone's standard of living by making the market less efficient, but they destroy themselves in the long run because they price workers out of markets (i.e. jobs). Hence you see the long term trend of de-unionization.
> 
> I can assure you I do not have a feeble mind Sir.


 I agree and I used to belong to a union, volunteered hundreds of hours as an organizer and campaigner for Union approved Democrats that stabbed the workers in the back with their anti worker legislation. I watched Union pension funds used to finance non union projects! The president of our union even sat on the Board of Directors of one of the biggest non union companies in the industry, of course they got the loans. I can personally relate dozens of examples of union corruption, the real fact is unions exist like so many other bureaucracies, to benefit themselves, meaning the union bosses. A driver owned TNC that included revenue sharing would be leagues ahead in benefiting the drivers than a union. for those that think "unions" are so great read this, and this article is just a small sample of how unions operate. I was there, and the Democrats are the worst thing that ever happened to workers..... https://www.counterpunch.org/2011/01/26/dying-to-be-a-carpenter/



Guapcollecta said:


> I don't care about having extra expenses for the TNC as long as the pay is adequate enough to compensate me for it. As far as all the liabilities that it may bring, that's why people incorporate. The whole point of the Union is to fight for workers rights and Welfare as a collective whole. There's strength in numbers. If it has corrupt bosses then we vote them out and replace them. It's not a perfect system but most union workers make more than regular employees in almost every industry. When I looked a little while ago the stat says 30% more in earnings. They also fight for other things that benefit employees to like safety training. Excetera, excetera. If you think Uber is going to look out for its drivers by writing protections into its corporate declarations think again. It's pretty obvious that they want to replace us with driverless cars. We are their biggest expense. And while to you ride sharing maybe about shifting paradigms. For most people who do it, it's about making extra money to support their families. Unions equal more money and power for employees. Without a Union drivers will never matter.


 first, rideshare technology is too hard to unionize, it can't be done. A soon as any group forms, the TNCs will simply either leave the market or start a competing non union operation. Voting corruption out of a union, that's a joke, you have obviously never belonged to a union.


----------



## garyk (Jan 22, 2016)

Safe_Driver_4_U said:


> yep, just what I mean, kick the dog enough times he will bite back. Look at COSTCO a fair company that is growing in its space because it provides a fair experience for workers and members, why? It's a better mouse trap. Just a matter of time before someone comes up with a fair rideshare model, these greedy TNCs will be history. *The thing they underestimate is how easy it is to dump them! *A few taps on the phone and they are gone. Do you think the riders would opt for Uber or Lyft when there is a real, true, fair rideshare out there? Remember, "No need to tip"


People will go with the cheapest option


----------



## FaaaUber (Feb 18, 2016)

suberx said:


> Uber doesn't tell people not to tip anymore or give you a timeout for not accepting rides.
> 
> As an IC you are absolutely setting your own rates. You just happen to be setting them to match what Uber is offering you. If you want higher rates you can change markets. Or, you can go out and get a CDL, buy your own commercial insurance, form an LLC, put up a web page and charge whatever you want. If you want to use Ubers platform, you come to an agreement and charge exactly what they want to pay you. You also get some insurance, some advertising, and a lot of questionable press from the bros in SF. Too bad Uber doesn't negotiate, but why should they? Lot's of people are willing to drive for current rates just like you are. The second you want to raise your rates or think you are being treated unfairly, you can quit the platform and start your own gig.
> 
> I just don't get it when people say Uber "owes" them something . Uber owes us nothing beyond what is in the contract we all signed. The second a driver can't make a profit that he/she feels is reasonable, it is time to hang up the keys. I don't love Uber, but I was never under the impression that they should look out for me or even care about me. I use them and they use me. Capitalism.


Where can I find a good slave like you?


----------



## Safe_Driver_4_U (Apr 2, 2017)

garyk said:


> People will go with the cheapest option


 not at all people pay extra for filet mignon Lyft, REI and COSTCO, Lexus, Jaguar, Porsche...... why?


----------



## suberx (Apr 28, 2017)

FaaaUber said:


> Where can I find a good slave like you?


*New*
Just request an Uber. If the Surge is right and you are not too far away, I'll gladly pick you up.


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

Safe_Driver_4_U said:


> not at all people pay extra for filet mignon Lyft, REI and COSTCO, Lexus, Jaguar, Porsche...... why?


People will pay more for some items because they perceive a value in the item. Filet mignon tastes better. REI has quality equipment. Cars will be fast or comfortable. When comparably equivalent goods or services are available, a buyer in an open market will choose the one with the lowest price.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

Retired Senior said:


> I don't understand this reasoning. It seems to me that none of these conditions of employment are set in stone unless the employer and the employee agree to them. But I am not an attorney....
> 
> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/02/u...tealing-in-new-lawsuit-from-new-york-drivers/
> 
> ...


Uber should have two classes, employees (professionals) and independent contractors (college kids, people looking for another job, or moonlighters). The employees get a mileage allowance and a livable wage, and the independents get their freedom, and uber exploiting them to kingdom come. Of course employees will get the lion share of work, but they should have both classes so whatever you choose, you can't complain it was forced on you.

I'll take the former.


----------



## Steve2967 (Jun 14, 2017)

NoVaDJ61 said:


> Uber is full of C.R.A.P. I am getting out ASAP. They are the biggest rip off scheme ever and it is getting worse. 70 cents per mile in Detroit, when I was used to making 1.15 per mile in DC. That sucks especially when insurance in Michigan is four times what it is in DC/VA. I used to believe in Uber wholeheartedly. Not anymore, though. Not anymore


Yeah screw Uber and then making you move from the D.C. Area to Detroit. Oh wait....


----------



## Aneed Momoney (Apr 3, 2017)

lol Uber telling you being an employee is bad should be all you need to hear to know it's actually good


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

I'm actually hoping for a special classification for worker to get made, that is separate from an employee.

+30% higher minimum wage and no benefits/OT entitlements, AND tax withholding by the company contracting them.


It would be a win for the companies paying them, and a win for the contractors who could use the extra money to buy health insurance and the like by pooling revenue from multiple sources.

So if you had 3+ sources of income, you would never come close to getting benefits or OT anywhere, but you would still be getting fairly compensated.

So if you were on uber/lyft, grubhub, and car jump starting service, you could never get OT on anything. Yet if you had 60 hours total you would be getting 1.3X times the minimum wage, partially to get insurance, partially to make up for OT.


----------

