# Is it legal for Uber to deactivate drivers because of PAX complaints?



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

I think not. 

This would be like the BBB closing a business because of a complaint. They serve in an advisory capacity to consumers, but they don't have the legal authority to close a business.

We are independent contractors, not employees! They can provide our rating to pax, but shutting down drivers is illegal.

I suspect that there is a class action lawsuit here that underpins the legality of their whole operation. All would take is to show a driver was removed in a discriminatory fashion (they did nothing provable wrong, just based on word of passenger).


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

Illegal? 

What section of the penal code is violated?


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

Pax Collector said:


> Illegal?
> 
> What section of the penal code is violated?


I'm not a lawyer, you tell me.

They can't remove your phone# from the telephone book because they don't like your business. Something about it seems wrong.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

OldBay said:


> I think not.
> 
> This would be like the BBB closing a business because of a complaint. They serve in an advisory capacity to consumers, but they don't have the legal authority to close a business.
> 
> ...


The contract you signed says they can.

As a matter of fact, it says they can deactivate you for NO REASON, provided they give 7 days notice (and they nail it right down to the minute!). Section 12.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

SuzeCB said:


> The contract you signed says they can.
> 
> As a matter of fact, it says they can deactivate you for NO REASON, provided they give 7 days notice (and they nail it right down to the minute!). Section 12.


So, if we signed a contract, then we are employees?


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

OldBay said:


> I'm not a lawyer, you tell me.
> 
> They can't remove your phone# from the telephone book because they don't like your business. Something about it seems wrong.


None.

It's in the fine prints of the contract you signed that your relationship with Uber can be terminated at any time, with or without cause.

The most you can do is pursue a civil action (Alleging who knows what), but that won't make it illegal.

I think Uber should do a bit more due diligence than simply running off with frivolous complaints and unjustly deactivating drivers. There are some drivers who deserve it and some who don't.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

Pax Collector said:


> None.
> 
> It's in the fine prints of the contract you signed that your relationship with Uber can be terminated at any time, with or without cause.
> 
> ...


So the contract we signed must mean we are employees?

This is like a restaurant saying that they don't want to take reservations from you because someone said something bad about you. Doesn't matter if the restaurant had you sign a piece of paper saying that they reserve the right to not serve you, its still arbitrary discrimination.


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

OldBay said:


> So the* contract *we signed must mean we are employees?


No. It means we are ...um, "contractors." Not sure where that term might have come from...


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

JimKE said:


> No. It means we are ...um, "contractors." Not sure where that term might have come from...


Don't defend it. I think you realize that at best this is in a legal grey area.

Try to find another example of a service provider that can deny you service based upon arbitrary reputation score.


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

Both you and Uber voluntarily do business together. Both you and Uber can terminate that contract for any reason. 

If a passenger claims to you that Uber cheated them, you could deactivate Uber, without doing an investigation! 

It is not fair, of course, that an accusation is treated as fact. 

But it is fair to terminate contract for no reason because it is voluntary for both parties.


----------



## TomTheAnt (Jan 1, 2019)

OldBay said:


> I'm not a lawyer, you tell me.


Neither am I and neither are probably at least 99.9% of the members here, so pretty much any response you get will be just pure speculation. Therefore, you need to talk to an actual lawyer whether what ever they do is illegal or not. Once you've done that, come back and let us know, will ya? :thumbup:


----------



## islanddriver (Apr 6, 2018)

Every service business if I don't like reviews o don't have to use it. With Uber you are an independent business they don't have to use you if you don't fit the terms of their business model . That's the contract you signed when you started with Uber.


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

OldBay said:


> So the contract we signed must mean we are employees?
> 
> This is like a restaurant saying that they don't want to take reservations from you because someone said something bad about you. Doesn't matter if the restaurant had you sign a piece of paper saying that they reserve the right to not serve you, its still arbitrary discrimination.


A restaurant is a private business on private property. For no reason at all they can kick anybody off the property. they can refuse service. No one can force the restaurant 2 serve anybody


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

OldBay said:


> So the contract we signed must mean we are employees?


The contract we signed says were independent contractors.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

doyousensehumor said:


> A restaurant is a private business on private property. For no reason at all they can kick anybody off the property. they can refuse service. No one can force the restaurant 2 serve anybody


So if another customer calls me a racist, and the restaurant refuses to serve me, then I can sue the other customer for defamation? Because apparently the restaurant is not liable.

But in this case, the restaurant keeps the name of the accusing customer invisible.

This doesn't add up.


----------



## NotanEmployee (Apr 20, 2019)

If you go to the movies and have a horrible experience you can leave and never go there again just like they can remove you for being disruptive and never sell you tickets again. No different here. We can choose to use uber app or lift app or go commercial and advertise our business ourselves just as uber can remove us if they no longer want to partner with us. Frankly, employment is no different. Life is "at will"


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

NotanEmployee said:


> If you go to the movies and have a horrible experience you can leave and never go there again just like they can remove you for being disruptive and never sell you tickets again. No different here. We can choose to use uber app or lift app or go commercial and advertise our business ourselves just as uber can remove us if they no longer want to partner with us. Frankly, employment is no different. Life is "at will"


Except that it IS different!

In this case, you didn't do anything disruptive in the theatre, another customer claims that you did. Can the theatre deny you access? No, of course not. You could sue their ass off if they did anything without proof.


----------



## NotanEmployee (Apr 20, 2019)

They don't need a reason to not work with you any more. Usually they have a reason, whether you agree with it or not or if it actually happened or not is irrelevant. They just can't stop business with you because of a reason protected by the civil rights act. Good luck proving that as a driver



OldBay said:


> Can the theatre deny you access?


Absolutely they can! Can you sue? Yes but you probably wouldn't win.


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

OldBay said:


> Except that it IS different!
> 
> In this case, you didn't do anything disruptive in the theatre, another customer claims that you did. Can the theatre deny you access? No, of course not. You could sue their ass off if they did anything without proof.


Yes the theater can kick you out! it is tyranny and slavery for the government to force a business to serve anybody.


----------



## rallias (May 16, 2018)

OldBay said:


> You could sue their ass off if they did anything without proof.


Only it it's one of the federally restricted discrimination reasons, or something you can rationally drive from. Customer claims they won't do business with the theater because they serve you and you have a certain slim color? Illegal. Customer claims you're waving finger pistols around and theater bands you? Perfectly legal, regardless of factuality.

There is a potential claim to being an employee, by means of quality standards. However, that is not an argument that is yet settled.


----------



## NotanEmployee (Apr 20, 2019)

You can deny service to anyone as long as it's not for a protected reason....you CAN deny service to ugly people, fat people or based on what they are wearing! Just not based on protected class like race, religion, gender or national origin.


----------



## RynoHawk (Mar 15, 2017)

OldBay said:


> I think not.
> 
> This would be like the BBB closing a business because of a complaint. They serve in an advisory capacity to consumers, but they don't have the legal authority to close a business.
> 
> ...


They don't "close your business." They deactivate you from *their* driver app. They don't stop you from using Lyft, Door Dash, etc. or striking out on your own. They are within their right (and their EUA) to terminate your use of their app.


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

doyousensehumor said:


> A restaurant is a private business on private property. For no reason at all they can kick anybody off the property. they can refuse service. No one can force the restaurant 2 serve anybody


I think the Uber / driver relationship is somewhat unique, and hasn't worked itself out yet. I see nothing stopping the drivers from organizing and demanding whatever they want. Somewhere, somehow, I think there's going to be some blowback. What other industry do you know where the pay goes down every year? In an economy that is on the rise? And the workers are supposedly the customers? That's not sustainable from any point of view. That's provoking pitch forks and torches.


----------



## BigBadJohn (Aug 31, 2018)

Uber just hopes that the mear threat of a spontaneous deactivation will keep us little ants in line and not explore the legal, or illegal terms of the "independent contractor" agreement we all reluctantly signed.


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

As an Uber driver you could pull over and kick a passenger out for no reason at all! You could change your mind and decide that you don't want to provide a service. The passenger must get out! It doesn't matter weather or not the passenger thinks it's "fair". In fact if you call the police they will arrest the passenger if they refuse to get out! 

Of course, Uber then could terminate you under the same reason. voluntary contract with voluntary termination.


----------



## NotanEmployee (Apr 20, 2019)

The biggest problem is 90% of uber drivers have only held jobs as employees. The don't understand what it is to BE an independent contractor. DRIVERS are business owners for their own delivery/transportation business. They choose to use ubers services to obtain customers. Where this gets muddled is where uber retains all customer information so we have no recourse to obtain unpaid fares, damages etc. That being said, the contract that we agreed to upon requesting their services states that they are the payment processor, and we agree to the amount they charge the passenger and the amount they pay us. If at any time we disagree with the contract we may terminate it at any time.



ZenUber said:


> What other industry do you know where the pay goes down every year?


My other business has contracts for service and those seem to drop every year as well. They demand more while paying less. That business can either accept the terms of the contract or cancel it. THIS IS HOW BUSINESS IS DONE. You just aren't aware of it because you have always been an employee.

To be specific, the Healthcare industry is one of the biggest


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

OldBay said:


> But in this case, the restaurant keeps the name of the accusing customer invisible.


Unless they are subpoenaed to disclose that information. Same thing with Uber.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

NotanEmployee said:


> They don't need a reason to not work with you any more. Usually they have a reason, whether you agree with it or not or if it actually happened or not is irrelevant. They just can't stop business with you because of a reason protected by the civil rights act. Good luck proving that as a driver
> 
> 
> Absolutely they can! Can you sue? Yes but you probably wouldn't win.


Yes, you absolutely would, especially if it was a class action suit of people who were discriminated against, essentially for random, unproven reasons.


----------



## Illini (Mar 14, 2019)

I'll save you time from your lawsuit. I have a couple attorneys in my family, and yes, this is 100% legal. All of your other examples do not correlate to your ability to drive with Uber. Those are different scenarios.
In any case, you're asking this question of Rideshare drivers. Why not contact an attorney and ask for yourself?


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

Illini said:


> I'll save you time from your lawsuit. I have a couple attorneys in my family, and yes, this is 100% legal.


It is until it isn't.


----------



## NotanEmployee (Apr 20, 2019)

Most people don't understand discrimination. That would be almost impossible to prove in an electronic only arrangement. They would have to say something like. We are reducing the senior workforce because we believe they are less safe drivers. Then you have a case.

Lol random unproven reasons is the epitome of NOT discrimination


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

If we are independent contractors -
Why can’t we negotiate our fees?
Why can Uber change our fees without our approval?
Why does Uber have access to our customers info that we do not?
Why is Uber able to automatically raise our quest goal?
Why can Uber and Lyft assign riders to us without our consent?
Why can Lyft switch us to being online when we’ve Gone offline?


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

BUT didn't Uber get sued over deactivating drivers over acceptance rates---meaning they were telling the driver's what to do like an EMPLOYEE! Find another example like that and you might have a case!


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

OldBay said:


> So, if we signed a contract, then we are employees?


No. Why would you ask that?


----------



## Launchpad McQuack (Jan 8, 2019)

OldBay said:


> They can't remove your phone# from the telephone book because they don't like your business.


Of course they can. The publisher of the phone book is not obligated to include any numbers that they don't want to include (provided that the phone book is not published by a government entity using tax money).



OldBay said:


> This is like a restaurant saying that they don't want to take reservations from you because someone said something bad about you. Doesn't matter if the restaurant had you sign a piece of paper saying that they reserve the right to not serve you, its still arbitrary discrimination.


What people don't seem to understand is that arbitrary discrimination is legal. It is only specific forms of non-arbitrary discrimination that are illegal and only if the discrimination targets a legally protected class. Don't want to serve somebody because that person is black? Illegal because race is a federally protected class. Don't want to serve somebody because that person is gay? May be legal or illegal depending on what state you live in. Many state laws include sexual orientation as a protected class, but federal law does not. Don't want to serve somebody because your cousin Tony told you that he saw him park in a handicapped spot at the post office? Totally legal. Don't want to serve somebody because that person is a member of the Trump administration? As you should know if you have paid any attention to the news, totally legal.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

You and I both know its not that simple.


----------



## CTK (Feb 9, 2016)

OldBay said:


> I think not.
> 
> This would be like the BBB closing a business because of a complaint. They serve in an advisory capacity to consumers, but they don't have the legal authority to close a business.
> 
> ...


Imagine an Uber driver truly driving drunk, a passenger reporting it, Uber doing nothing, and that driver going on to later cause an accident and kill someone. Uber's liability is huge here, and their drivers are totally expendable.

Yes, Uber needs to have much better systems for dealing with this - as it stands now the time lag alone between report and action makes it almost useless. But are they within the law? I think that they are, and not only that but that they're obligated to take reports seriously and to take action.


----------



## Seamus (Jun 21, 2018)

OldBay said:


> Don't defend it. I think you realize that at best this is in a legal grey area.
> 
> Try to find another example of a service provider that can deny you service based upon arbitrary reputation score.


I'm not trying to defend them or justify them. Very few actually read the TOS you agreed to. They can deactivate you at any time for any reason. Worse, you agreed to an arbitration clause which means you can't even sue them, you may file for arbitration and they are all moving to a model where you pay an upfront arbitration fee.

Many have tried before you. Very few get any satisfaction.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

CTK said:


> Imagine an Uber driver truly driving drunk, a passenger reporting it, Uber doing nothing, and that driver going on to later cause an accident and kill someone. Uber's liability is huge here, and their drivers are totally expendable.
> 
> Yes, Uber needs to have much better systems for dealing with this - as it stands now the time lag alone between report and action makes it almost useless. But are they within the law? I think that they are, and not only that but that they're obligated to take reports seriously and to take action.


They seem to exert unprecedented power over "independent contractors".

In essence drivers can be deactivated/fired because of defamation.

As an independent contractor, if a ratings agency blacklisted you because of unfounded allegations, you would have a legal case against them.

Of course, the reality is they exert a level of control over drivers which makes it clear we arent independent contractors. Which destroys their whole business model. Which is the crux of the problem.



Seamus said:


> I'm not trying to defend them or justify them. Very few actually read the TOS you agreed to. They can deactivate you at any time for any reason. Worse, you agreed to an arbitration clause which means you can't even sue them, you may file for arbitration and they are all moving to a model where you pay an upfront arbitration fee.
> 
> Many have tried before you. Very few get any satisfaction.


Just because they have you sign a document does not necessarily mean it is legally binding if it was not legal to make the request.

This whole thing is a house of cards. The VCs are getting rich and everyone else gets cheap taxis, so people are just playing along.


----------



## No Prisoners (Mar 21, 2019)

OldBay said:


> I think not.
> 
> This would be like the BBB closing a business because of a complaint. They serve in an advisory capacity to consumers, but they don't have the legal authority to close a business.
> 
> ...


Answer this riddle and you'll be enlightened. Can you deactivate Uber for any reason? There's your answer.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

No Prisoners said:


> Answer this riddle and you'll be enlightened. Can you deactivate Uber for any reason? There's your answer.


You are quoting "at will" employment law. We are not employees.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

OldBay said:


> I think not.
> 
> This would be like the BBB closing a business because of a complaint. They serve in an advisory capacity to consumers, but they don't have the legal authority to close a business.
> 
> ...


They arent shutting your business down. They are removing you ability to utilize the Uber App to get rides for your transportation business. If all your rides were from the Uber App and you fail due to the lack of access to that app, that's just piss poor business management.

There are many examples in business where an independent contractor loses their contract due to customer complaint.



OldBay said:


> So, if we signed a contract, then we are employees?


Independent CONTRACTors....


----------



## Illini (Mar 14, 2019)

Based on the business relationship between Uber and the Drivers, I truly believe that Drivers should be classified as Employees. That said, this topic has been addressed many times, and here we still are -- IC's. The instant the courts deem us as Employees, Lyft and Uber are out of business - period. And since the attorneys and judges like their own Uber rides, we'll remain as ICs. 
With that said, I suspect Uber has deactivated thousands of Drivers, and I've heard of no successful lawsuits against Uber. If you have been deactivated, go ahead and start the lawsuit process and let us know what you're able to do what the thousands of other deactivated Drivers couldn't.


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

OldBay said:


> So, if we signed a contract, then we are employees?


I am going to guess you missed the "contractor" portion of the term "Independent Contractor" and treat this like you are seriously asking this.

See, just having a contract does not, in fact, make one an Employee. 
There are many different job classifications that are not as employee.
One can even be a volunteer with a contract.

But, in this case you agree to their contract terms every time you go online in which terms it is clearly stated we are Independent contractors...

But, hey, maybe in your world words don't actually mean what they mean.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

NotanEmployee said:


> You can deny service to anyone as long as it's not for a protected reason....you CAN deny service to ugly people, fat people or based on what they are wearing! Just not based on protected class like race, religion, gender or national origin.


No shirt, no shoes, no service!



ZenUber said:


> If we are independent contractors -
> Why can't we negotiate our fees?
> Why can Uber change our fees without our approval?
> Why does Uber have access to our customers info that we do not?
> ...


You can negotiate your fair. Uber just won't give. You can demand $3 an hour. Uber will say no. Now its your turn, do you accept no and keep driving or say $3 or I walk? Well, uber is perfectly fine if you walk.

The fee is to use the app. You set your fee by accepting the Uber TOS. If you do not approve, do not agree to the change in fee or the TOS. You are free to do so. No one is forcing you to use Uber for your transportation services.

They are Uber customers. You are also an uber customer, you pay for access to their network of individuals that need a ride. You are free to get pax from an alternate source.

Lyft is the only one that does it without your consent. Pool, you agreed to that system by accepting Pool.

I've never been logged on when im offline.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

steveK2016 said:


> No shirt, no shoes, no service!
> 
> 
> The fee is to use the app. You set your fee by accepting the Uber TOS. If you do not approve, do not agree to the change in fee or the TOS. You are free to do so. No one is forcing you to use Uber for your transportation services.


Its deeper than that. Uber is setting the rate the independent contractor charges HIS customer.

We are allowed to use their finder app, but then they set our rate?

Looks like price fixing to me.


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

NotanEmployee said:


> The biggest problem is 90% of uber drivers have only held jobs as employees. The don't understand what it is to BE an independent contractor. DRIVERS are business owners for their own delivery/transportation business. They choose to use ubers services to obtain customers. Where this gets muddled is where uber retains all customer information so we have no recourse to obtain unpaid fares, damages etc. That being said, the contract that we agreed to upon requesting their services states that they are the payment processor, and we agree to the amount they charge the passenger and the amount they pay us. If at any time we disagree with the contract we may terminate it at any time.
> 
> 
> My other business has contracts for service and those seem to drop every year as well. They demand more while paying less. That business can either accept the terms of the contract or cancel it. THIS IS HOW BUSINESS IS DONE. You just aren't aware of it because you have always been an employee.
> ...


I have not been an employee for two years now. Driving Uber for 4 months now. Before that, selling on eBay, in addition to some freelance work. In these other gigs, I have control, and a voice in negotiating my fees. The relationship with Uber seems to have some huge grey areas that I don't think have been fully explored. Uber seems to be much more coercive and manipulative towards its drivers/customers which to me blurs the lines that would otherwise exist in a relationship with sub contractors. I for one, will continue to challenge the legality and legitimacy of the relationship. It is my responsibility and my right to do so. I don't know what your other business experience is or how well it correlates to Uber, and you don't seem to be aware of my other business experience either. But it sounds like you have some sort of corporate or political agenda based on your defensive, over-reaction to my critique of Uber. In short, you are defending what is unacceptable and offensive to the vast majority of the rest of us on this site. This makes you sound a lot like a troll. Why are you arguing against our best interests?


----------



## Launchpad McQuack (Jan 8, 2019)

OldBay said:


> Its deeper than that. Uber is setting the rate the independent contractor charges HIS customer.
> 
> We are allowed to use their finder app, but then they set our rate?
> 
> Looks like price fixing to me.


This and they don't tell you the fee that they charge for use of their service until _after_ the service is provided and they have already charged you. These are two of the biggest holes in the independent contractor argument, in my opinion.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

OldBay said:


> Its deeper than that. Uber is setting the rate the independent contractor charges HIS customer.
> 
> We are allowed to use their finder app, but then they set our rate?
> 
> Looks like price fixing to me.


Yes, companies set rates to their ICs all the time. The lower skill and demand the labor is, the less negotiating power you have. I ran a wed development company. I got so busy i outsourced many of my programming work. I would tell programmers how much I was willing to oay, if they accepted it then they got the job. There was always enough programmers that I always got the rate I wanted. Theres Even more supply of drivees then there were supply of programmers,

I don't think you know what price fixing means.

You sound like someone tgats been an employee all your life...


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

steveK2016 said:


> Yes, companies set rates to their ICs all the time. The lower skill and demand the labor is, the less negotiating power you have. I ran a wed development company. I got so busy i outsourced many of my programming work. I would tell programmers how much I was willing to oay, if they accepted it then they got the job. There was always enough programmers that I always got the rate I wanted. Theres Even more supply of drivees then there were supply of programmers,
> 
> I don't think you know what price fixing means.
> 
> You sound like someone tgats been an employee all your life...


I like they way you keep saying people have been an employee all their life. You sound like someone who has been a troll all their life.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

steveK2016 said:


> Yes, companies set rates to their ICs all the time. The lower skill and demand the labor is, the less negotiating power you have. I ran a wed development company. I got so busy i outsourced many of my programming work. I would tell programmers how much I was willing to oay, if they accepted it then they got the job. There was always enough programmers that I always got the rate I wanted. Theres Even more supply of drivees then there were supply of programmers,
> 
> I don't think you know what price fixing means.
> 
> You sound like someone tgats been an employee all your life...


Questioning the status quo makes me sound like an employee, lol.

You've got it backwards.


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> I am going to guess you missed the "contractor" portion of the term "Independent Contractor" and treat this like you are seriously asking this.
> 
> See, just having a contract does not, in fact, make one an Employee.
> There are many different job classifications that are not as employee.
> ...


Yes, we all know what we signed. And we all know what a contractor is. But I have not agreed to the terms indefinitely. And there is nothing holding us to this contract nor the definitions found in it. We are free to define our own terms moving forward regardless of the terms Uber has been pushing up until now. There is nothing in the terms to prevent us from discussing a better deal and debating better terms here in this forum. You are either with us or against us. And your position defending the status quo makes it all too clear.


----------



## Launchpad McQuack (Jan 8, 2019)

steveK2016 said:


> I ran a wed development company. I got so busy i outsourced many of my programming work.


For a web development company, programming would almost definitely be considered employee work, not IC work. You may have classified them as ICs and paid them as ICs and got away with it, but if they filed an SS-8 to claim employee status, they almost definitely would have won.

One of the primary factors that determines whether somebody is an employee or an IC is whether the work is directly related to the business operations of the company. You can hire ICs to do stuff like cleaning bathrooms (as long as you are not in the business of cleaning bathrooms). You can't hire ICs to do things that are directly related to the business of the company, though. For a web development company, programming (or scripting) is a primary function of the company so the IC is doing work that is directly related to the company's business and is therefore not an IC. This is why Uber clings to this idea that they are a technology company and _not_ in the business of providing transportation. Uber knows that if they are in the business of providing transportation, then the work that the drivers are doing is directly related to their business and the drivers are not ICs. This is also why Uber clings to the imaginary pay structure in which the riders pay the drivers and the drivers pay Uber a service fee for use of their technology. In reality, we all know that the riders pay Uber and Uber pays the drivers. If Uber admits that they are paid by the riders, though, then they can no longer argue that they are not in the business of providing transportation. Uber is trying to walk this line so that their employees are not classified as employees.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

Is it legal for uber to deactivate me because I ask for a cash tip? No, it is not.

I am an IC and conduct My business as is necessary. I'm the one who decides how much risk to take and what it's worth.

I've been ubering for a month and starting to see how flimsy the whole thing is. Everyone though Facebook was great until they learned the business model is selling user data. Still in legal limbo..but ppl are figuring it out. Uber will have a similar reckoning.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

I've hired 100s of contractors over the years, and have had to discontinue those contracts when the contractor violated the terms of the contract.

They were never my employees



OldBay said:


> Is it legal for uber to deactivate me because I ask for a cash tip? No, it is not.
> 
> I am an IC and conduct My business as is necessary. I'm the one who decides how much risk to take and what it's worth.
> 
> I've been ubering for a month and starting to see how flimsy the whole thing is. Everyone though Facebook was great until they learned the business model is selling user data. Still in legal limbo..but ppl are figuring it out. Uber will have a similar reckoning.


Were you deactivated for asking for a cash tip?


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

Launchpad McQuack said:


> For a web development company, programming would almost definitely be considered employee work, not IC work. You may have classified them as ICs and paid them as ICs and got away with it, but if they filed an SS-8 to claim employee status, they almost definitely would have won.
> 
> One of the primary factors that determines whether somebody is an employee or an IC is whether the work is directly related to the business operations of the company. You can hire ICs to do stuff like cleaning bathrooms (as long as you are not in the business of cleaning bathrooms). You can't hire ICs to do things that are directly related to the business of the company, though. For a web development company, programming (or scripting) is a primary function of the company so the IC is doing work that is directly related to the company's business and is therefore not an IC. This is why Uber clings to this idea that they are a technology company and _not_ in the business of providing transportation. Uber knows that if they are in the business of providing transportation, then the work that the drivers are doing is directly related to their business and the drivers are not ICs. This is also why Uber clings to the imaginary pay structure in which the riders pay the drivers and the drivers pay Uber a service fee for use of their technology. In reality, we all know that the riders pay Uber and Uber pays the drivers. If Uber admits that they are paid by the riders, though, then they can no longer argue that they are not in the business of providing transportation. Uber is trying to walk this line so that their employees are not classified as employees.


Uber is one unfavorable judgement away from being worthless.


----------



## Wildgoose (Feb 11, 2019)

OldBay said:


> I think not.
> 
> This would be like the BBB closing a business because of a complaint. They serve in an advisory capacity to consumers, but they don't have the legal authority to close a business.
> 
> ...


Here Uber/Lyft ride-sharing platforms built.
(1) Uber/Lyft find their own customers by promising to provide rides whenever they need.
(2) Then U/L find cars and car owners (drivers) by signing contract agreements to transport their customers from Point A to B.
(3) U/L charge their customers and U/L pay car owners according to prior contract.

That is it. We are not U/L employees and riders are not our customers as well.
U/L can terminate the contract between us anytime. There is no reason required to provide to terminate the agreements between us.
But U/L need Cars and drivers to provide service to their customers. So they won't terminate the contract until a driver is a problem to their customers. So they create rating system to evaluate cars and drivers. When a driver rating go down, U/L will terminate the contract agreement with that driver.
That's why I am so pissed whenever I hear U/L deny to pay what a driver deserve to get paid for any trip for any reason.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> I've hired 100s of contractors over the years, and have had to discontinue those contracts when the contractor violated the terms of the contract.
> 
> They were never my employees
> 
> ...


No, but I'm finding that I'm unable to conduct my business as an IC. When pax makes odd request, my only legal option is to cancel ride and take a 1* or have my car vandalized..which can get me deactivated. (Or..what ive done..is violate rules for pax so i dont get bad rating.)Pax are essentially blackmailing drivers with bad ratings to get them to do what they want. And I'm hamstrung by uber "rules".


----------



## NotanEmployee (Apr 20, 2019)

ZenUber said:


> I have not been an employee for two years now. Driving Uber for 4 months now. Before that, selling on eBay, in addition to some freelance work. In these other gigs, I have control, and a voice in negotiating my fees. The relationship with Uber seems to have some huge grey areas that I don't think have been fully explored. Uber seems to be much more coercive and manipulative towards its drivers/customers which to me blurs the lines that would otherwise exist in a relationship with sub contractors. I for one, will continue to challenge the legality and legitimacy of the relationship. It is my responsibility and my right to do so. I don't know what your other business experience is or how well it correlates to Uber, and you don't seem to be aware of my other business experience either. But it sounds like you have some sort of corporate or political agenda based on your defensive, over-reaction to my critique of Uber. In short, you are defending what is unacceptable and offensive to the vast majority of the rest of us on this site. This makes you sound a lot like a troll. Why are you arguing against our best interests?


In your prior business based on what you said the only contract you had was with eBay. You agreed to pay their fee to use their service. And I'm betting you didn't negotiate that fee yet accepted what they charge. You are rated by your customers and if there is an issue eBay will correct it up to banning you from using their service..

I'm trying to educate people. I'm not arguing for or against, just telling you what is. Yes, laws do change daily regarding business and employment. At some point a judge will make precedent. Things that were once legal are now illegal because of court cases. Things could absolutely change in the future and they may. But it will be a special case, one with certain circumstances, only then is there a chance. Personally, I don't believe uber has crossed a line enough. Based on the loads of lawsuits they keep winning. At some point you'll have to accept that the courts have spoken frequently on this.

I'll be interested what the California courts say once the new law goes into effect that re classifies independent contractors.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

OldBay said:


> No, but I'm finding that I'm unable to conduct my business as an IC. When pax makes odd request, my only legal option is to cancel ride and take a 1* or have my car vandalized..which can get me deactivated. (Or..what ive done..is violate rules for pax so i dont get bad rating.)Pax are essentially blackmailing drivers with bad ratings to get them to do what they want. And I'm hamstrung by uber "rules".


Yes, I've said it many times. We all know that there was s handout passed around universities and over the net to get passengers free rides by screwing drivers.

I would think this amounts to organized criminal behavior. Why we don't demand the Justice Department investigate this is beyond me.


----------



## rideshareapphero (Mar 30, 2018)

Like others have said here you are asking a legal question in a forum to other drivers, your best bet is to print the contract you agreed with uber then take it to a lawyer and have him explain what our options are.


----------



## Illini (Mar 14, 2019)

OldBay said:


> Uber is one unfavorable judgement away from being worthless.


Agree 100%. If we get classified as employees, they cease to exist with their current business model. Heck, they're already losing billions of dollars with the current business model. They'll just attempt to hang on until they don't need us drivers anymore.


----------



## NotanEmployee (Apr 20, 2019)

I'd be satisfied if the only thing uber did was match with pax, we swipe their card and have them sign and uber gets a transaction fee. We set the price and determine the rest. That would make me happy.

Please, someone make that app!


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

NotanEmployee said:


> In your prior business based on what you said the only contract you had was with eBay. You agreed to pay their fee to use their service. And I'm betting you didn't negotiate that fee yet accepted what they charge. You are rated by your customers and if there is an issue eBay will correct it up to banning you from using their service..
> 
> I'm trying to educate people. I'm not arguing for or against, just telling you what is. Yes, laws do change daily regarding business and employment. At some point a judge will make precedent. Things that were once legal are now illegal because of court cases. Things could absolutely change in the future and they may. But it will be a special case, one with certain circumstances, only then is there a chance. Personally, I don't believe uber has crossed a line enough. Based on the loads of lawsuits they keep winning. At some point you'll have to accept that the courts have spoken frequently on this.
> 
> I'll be interested what the California courts say once the new law goes into effect that re classifies independent contractors.


The big difference with eBay is I get to set my price with my customer, and then eBay takes a percentage. With Uber, Uber decides what to charge the customer, and Uber's cut is not defined until after the ride.

I'm not a lawyer. And I haven't yet put my finger on it, but something has got to give here. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and smells like duck poop.........


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

OldBay said:


> You and I both know its not that simple.


Sure it is. The fallout may or may not be, though, for either or any combination of interested parties.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

BigRedDriver said:


> Yes, I've said it many times. We all know that there was s handout passed around universities and over the net to get passengers free rides by screwing drivers.
> 
> I would think this amounts to organized criminal behavior. Why we don't demand the Justice Department investigate this is beyond me.


Because the justice depth likes their cheap taxis...


----------



## Wildgoose (Feb 11, 2019)

OldBay said:


> No, but I'm finding that I'm unable to conduct my business as an IC. When pax makes odd request, my only legal option is to cancel ride and take a 1* or have my car vandalized..which can get me deactivated. (Or..what ive done..is violate rules for pax so i dont get bad rating.)Pax are essentially blackmailing drivers with bad ratings to get them to do what they want. And I'm hamstrung by uber "rules".


I don't think there can be a legal action for deactivation to drivers. But I think there can be a legal action for not disclosing of customer's reasons on their rating against drivers. We are independent contractors and we deserves to know what we got.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

OldBay said:


> Because the justice depth likes their cheap taxis...


And headlines.



Wildgoose said:


> I don't think there can be a legal action for deactivation to drivers. But I think there can be a legal action for not disclosing of customer's reasons on their rating against drivers. We are independent contractors and we deserves to know what we got.


There can be if the deactivation is the direct result of organized criminal behavior.


----------



## NotanEmployee (Apr 20, 2019)

I dislike this very much but I agreed to it when I signed their contract. I could choose not to use their service because of that. They charge up front pricing based on the longest customary route then give you the shortest route to follow. If their cut is more than 25% you are driving too fast and too efficient of a route. Their fee used to be 25% before up front pricing. I try to keep it that way.

I understand that it's easier for them to set the price as a customer seeing 100 different prices would be a nightmare. I really don't see a work around for that. But uber should only get a set % of each transaction no matter how small. I hate short trips because uber takes 75% of the fee. The longer the trip the more I keep.



ZenUber said:


> The big difference with eBay is I get to set my price with my customer, and then eBay takes a percentage. With Uber, Uber decides what to charge the customer, and Uber's cut is not defined until after the ride.


----------



## amazinghl (Oct 31, 2018)

"Legal" 

Is there law against it? If not, then it is legal.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

OldBay said:


> So the contract we signed must mean we are employees?
> 
> This is like a restaurant saying that they don't want to take reservations from you because someone said something bad about you. Doesn't matter if the restaurant had you sign a piece of paper saying that they reserve the right to not serve you, its still arbitrary discrimination.


Consider a high a class in high school business law. Your views are out there.

Low information.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

I


OldBay said:


> I think not.
> 
> This would be like the BBB closing a business because of a complaint. They serve in an advisory capacity to consumers, but they don't have the legal authority to close a business.
> 
> ...


n America
You have a Right to Face Your Accusors !


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

OldBay said:


> They seem to exert unprecedented power over "independent contractors".


Yup, they sure do. They did their legal homework before starting and figured out what they could LEGALLY get away with.



OldBay said:


> Of course, the reality is they exert a level of control over drivers which makes it clear we arent independent contractors.


We are not ICs, like they claim. But we are not employees either. We are something in between that has not been legally defined yet. I would categorize us as "dependent contractors".



OldBay said:


> Is it legal for uber to deactivate me because I ask for a cash tip? No, it is not.


Yes it is. It is legal for Uber to deactivate you without giving a reason. It is also legal for Uber to deactivate you based on customer complaints, whether you agree or not.



OldBay said:


> I've been ubering for a month


And here it is, the real issue. You have no idea of what others have gone thru. You jump to conclusions (based on your personal life experiences) without researching. That's why you sound like a troll. Do your homework. Research some of the HUNDREDS of lawsuits claiming improper employee classification, all of which have failed.


----------



## Karen Stein (Nov 5, 2016)

Of course they can.

You're doing business under their banner. The customer contracts with Uber, not you. You contract with Uber. Uber can choose to do business with someone besides you at any time -- just as you can turn the ap off at any time.


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

Illini said:


> Based on the business relationship between Uber and the Drivers, I truly believe that Drivers should be classified as Employees. That said, this topic has been addressed many times, and here we still are -- IC's. The instant the courts deem us as Employees, Lyft and Uber are out of business - period. And since the attorneys and judges like their own Uber rides, we'll remain as ICs.
> With that said, I suspect Uber has deactivated thousands of Drivers, and I've heard of no successful lawsuits against Uber. If you have been deactivated, go ahead and start the lawsuit process and let us know what you're able to do what the thousands of other deactivated Drivers couldn't.


Check out how fast uber went out of business in the UK wi


ZenUber said:


> Yes, we all know what we signed. And we all know what a contractor is. But I have not agreed to the terms indefinitely. And there is nothing holding us to this contract nor the definitions found in it. We are free to define our own terms moving forward regardless of the terms Uber has been pushing up until now. There is nothing in the terms to prevent us from discussing a better deal and debating better terms here in this forum. You are either with us or against us. And your position defending the status quo makes it all too clear.


Except that every single time you log in you are, specifically, accepting Their Terms.
Are you just thick that you don't get that.

Let's say you achieved something and got Uber to say "sure, okay, you got it your contract is the only one that is different ". Legally, the instant you went online you just reaccepted the regular terms and conditions.


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> Check out how fast uber went out of business in the UK wi
> 
> Except that every single time you log in you are, specifically, accepting Their Terms.
> Are you just thick that you don't get that.
> ...


Yes, I know. Every time we sign on we are agreeing to the terms. Everybody understands that, OK? We are discussing what needs to be changed, and how to change that. And also, what might not be legal about their agreement. Are you just too thick to get that through YOUR skull?


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

Some market have a "no tolerance drug policy" which is actually a 'no tolerance drug accusation'  policy. State law says driver must be suspended if TNC receives a drug or alcohol complaint.


----------



## Westerner (Dec 22, 2016)

OldBay said:


> We are independent contractors, not employees!


EXACTLTY! And you are an open ended contractor at that. There is no specific agreed upon time. Either party can cancel at will. Good luck with your lawsuit.


----------



## steveK2016 (Jul 31, 2016)

Launchpad McQuack said:


> For a web development company, programming would almost definitely be considered employee work, not IC work. You may have classified them as ICs and paid them as ICs and got away with it, but if they filed an SS-8 to claim employee status, they almost definitely would have won.
> 
> One of the primary factors that determines whether somebody is an employee or an IC is whether the work is directly related to the business operations of the company. You can hire ICs to do stuff like cleaning bathrooms (as long as you are not in the business of cleaning bathrooms). You can't hire ICs to do things that are directly related to the business of the company, though. For a web development company, programming (or scripting) is a primary function of the company so the IC is doing work that is directly related to the company's business and is therefore not an IC. This is why Uber clings to this idea that they are a technology company and _not_ in the business of providing transportation. Uber knows that if they are in the business of providing transportation, then the work that the drivers are doing is directly related to their business and the drivers are not ICs. This is also why Uber clings to the imaginary pay structure in which the riders pay the drivers and the drivers pay Uber a service fee for use of their technology. In reality, we all know that the riders pay Uber and Uber pays the drivers. If Uber admits that they are paid by the riders, though, then they can no longer argue that they are not in the business of providing transportation. Uber is trying to walk this line so that their employees are not classified as employees.


I hired a company on a one use basis for a project. No way that I'd be forced to make each company that i sent a project to be my employee. That is beyond impractical. No way that each developer would have to employ every freelancer they send a projecth t on a one job basis. Thats just crazy talk.

Does a general contractor make the subcontractor electrician his employee? Plumber? Roofer? All of which is important to building a home, is it not?



NotanEmployee said:


> I'd be satisfied if the only thing uber did was match with pax, we swipe their card and have them sign and uber gets a transaction fee. We set the price and determine the rest. That would make me happy.
> 
> Please, someone make that app!


Sidecar tried that, drivers setting their own rates, they defuct quickly. It was a race to the bottom and there will always be an ant driving their $2000 bucket on wheels that'll undercut you in a heart beat.



Mista T said:


> Yup, they sure do. They did their legal homework before starting and figured out what they could LEGALLY get away with.
> 
> We are not ICs, like they claim. But we are not employees either. We are something in between that has not been legally defined yet. I would categorize us as "dependent contractors".
> 
> ...


You are only a "dependent contractor" because you make yourself so. Nothing is stopping you, not Uber nor Lyft, from marketing your business and generating revenue without either app. You will need special licenses and permits (based on jurisdiction) and commercial insurance, but the only thing limiting your growis yourself. Just turning Uber app on and getting an instant passenger is super easy, and if thats all you do for your business, that is your fault. You make yourself dependent by your own choosing.


----------



## Christinebitg (Jun 29, 2018)

You guys are acting like this gig is some kind of primo job. In reality, it pays somewhere around the level of minimum wage.

If you dont enjoy the work, go do something else.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

amazinghl said:


> "Legal"
> 
> Is there law against it? If not, then it is legal.


Theft of services, the reason many of these complaints are made, is illegal.



Christinebitg said:


> You guys are acting like this gig is some kind of primo job. In reality, it pays somewhere around the level of minimum wage.
> 
> If you dont enjoy the work, go do something else.


Those making minimum have exactly the same amount of rights as anyone else.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

SuzeCB said:


> it says they can deactivate you for NO REASON, provided they give 7 days notice


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^



Pax Collector said:


> your relationship with Uber can be terminated at any time, with or without cause


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^and THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^.



Pax Collector said:


> The most you can do is pursue a civil action


,,,,,,,which in most states will fail.........................(ask me how I know this)



OldBay said:


> So the contract we signed must mean we are employees?


.........not at all.........................If for no other reason, the provision is legal because it was disclosed to you before you signed the contract. You _*can*_ terminate a contract for no reason and the contractors are not considered employees as a result. (ask me how I know this)

This passes over, of course, employment-at-will. In an employment-at-will state, you do not need a reason to sack an employee. You simply inform the employee that it is the decision of the Management that he is no l onger employed at the place of business,. In the District of Columbia, at least, if you do sack an employee for no reason, you will have to pay his unemployment. Sometimes, though, it is far less expensive to pay a few thousand dollars in unemployment costs than it is to pay tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees to defend against a suit brought by a dismissed employee, even if the employer prevails.

It was an incident involving a secretary at a District of Columbia law firm that gave rise to "confirm or deny" policies. The woman in question sued because she was sacked for cause. When prospective employers contacted her former employer, the people there gave a bad reference. She sued. She ADMITTED, *on the stand*, that the reasons given for her sacking were valid, that what her former employer said about her to the prospective employers was true and *the jury still awarded her extensive damages*. An appeal mitigated the damages, but, the judgment remained in favour of the plaintiff, thus setting a precedent.



OldBay said:


> Try to find another example of a service provider that can deny you service based upon arbitrary reputation score.


............a cab company where the drivers are not employees but independent contractors (...............and Uber thinks that its business model is something new......................ask me how I know this)



TomTheAnt said:


> pretty much any response you get will be just pure speculation.


_Ain't no speck-uh-lay-shinn right 'cheer._ Throughout my response, I have added "ask me how I know this". In the interest of brevity, for the present, I will simply state that _I dun' did been down that thar' road more than once_.

Despite that, Original Poster might do well to seek qualified legal advice. He is from Maryland, which is next door, but, there are some peculiarities of their employment and contract laws the existence of which I am aware, but with which I am not familiar. I am aware that there are more than a few cab and limousine companies in Maryland that operate under this "independent contractor" model. They terminate drivers for no reason all the time.


----------



## Ubergaldrivet (Feb 6, 2019)

BigBadJohn said:


> Uber just hopes that the mear threat of a spontaneous deactivation will keep us little ants in line and not explore the legal, or illegal terms of the "independent contractor" agreement we all reluctantly signed.


The reverse psychology never works for me


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Mista T said:


> Yup, they sure do. They did their legal homework before starting and figured out what they could LEGALLY get away with.
> 
> We are not ICs, like they claim. But we are not employees either. We are something in between that has not been legally defined yet. I would categorize us as "dependent contractors".
> 
> ...


Laws are open to Interpertation.

Such abuse WILL be reviewed by courts.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

Deactivation can be done for any and no reason, which is true, but when they state a cause for deactivation, intoxication etc, they then must justify it. 

Just like in “right to work” States, an employee can be fired without a reason, however, if the employer states the reason the employee is being fired, they must justify that reason.


----------



## jlong105 (Sep 15, 2017)

The biggest problem with rideshare, too many ants want to be treated like an employee and do not understand or appreciate the independent contractor relationship. They fail to grasp what they signed up for and give bad advice on forums.


----------



## RioRoja (Mar 13, 2017)

Seamus said:


> I'm not trying to defend them or justify them. Very few actually read the TOS you agreed to. They can deactivate you at any time for any reason.


Indeed. It's all there in black & white. (Hint: "without cause" means the same thing as "for any reason").











rideshareapphero said:


> Like others have said here you are asking a legal question in a forum to other drivers, your best bet is to print the contract you agreed with uber then take it to a lawyer and have him explain what our options are.


Or the OP could save his money and simply read the contract he signed.


OldBay said:


> Is it legal for uber to deactivate me because I ask for a cash tip? No, it is not.


Yes, it is.


OldBay said:


> I am an IC and conduct My business as is necessary.


I don't think I'll ever be able to wrap my head around the fact that so many drivers think "independent contractor" means "I should be able to do anything I want".


OldBay said:


> I've been ubering for a month and starting to see how flimsy the whole thing is.


There it is.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

RioRoja said:


> There it is.


With any luck I won't be doing this much longer.

It didn't take a month to figure out that the long term drivers have some attitude


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

ZenUber said:


> Yes, I know. Every time we sign on we are agreeing to the terms. Everybody understands that, OK? We are discussing what needs to be changed, and how to change that. And also, what might not be legal about their agreement. Are you just too thick to get that through YOUR skull?


Good we have finally established your comprehension level so I know how to address this properly. 
You are terribly confused.
Mainly you are confused about the difference between Kindness (or rather the lack thereof) and legality.
Specifically you are confused because you think, well several things actually but just to keep it on topic, immoral or unkind things should be illegal.

Such as a driver losing access to the App because some big bad meant claimed they were intoxicated just to get a free ride. (Fill in whatever complaints YOU think were erroneous it doesn't actually matter)
But, and this is the kicker for you, you are just plain wrong.

Your only option, legal or otherwise, is to Not Sign On and Stay Offline.
You can, whatever doesn't matter but feel free to try, attempt to negotiate a different "contract" and they will tell you the same thing everyone here has told you... Nope.
And there is not a thing you can do to change that short of becoming the CEO of Uber... and, hey, I am sure you are about as capable and qualified as TK was...


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

OldBay said:


> Don't defend it. I think you realize that at best this is in a legal grey area.


what part do you find a legal gray area?

I m free to log on and off at will, I can work for lyft while also uber.

That, to me screams ic. What are you not getting?


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

Just like middle class people are


Boca Ratman said:


> what part do you find a legal gray area?
> 
> I m free to log on and off at will, I can work for lyft while also uber.
> 
> That, to me screams ic. What are you not getting?


I get it now, alot of the longterm FTers don't want to rock the boat, they like it the way it is, other drivers discontent means more fares for them.

That was the lesson learned in this thread.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

OldBay said:


> Just like middle class people are
> 
> I get it now, alot of the longterm FTers don't want to rock the boat, they like it the way it is, other drivers discontent means more fares for them.
> 
> That was the lesson learned in this thread.


yeah, that's it


----------



## ChrisFZ (Aug 11, 2017)

Funny thread! The OP doesn't understand what an IC is, when he is one! ....or understand contracts he entered into?! ...or basic understanding of law and the way the world works??

Yikes.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

OldBay said:


> Absolutely they can! Can you sue? Yes but you probably wouldn't win.


Bingo


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

OldBay said:


> Just like middle class people are
> 
> I get it now, alot of the longterm FTers don't want to rock the boat, they like it the way it is, other drivers discontent means more fares for them.
> 
> That was the lesson learned in this thread.


The vets here have simply already gone through everything you're suggesting...... or did you think we were a bunch of illiterate idiots and you were going to save us all with your brilliance?

Do we get snarky? Yep. My own sense of humor leans towards dark and twisted and comes out snarky. That doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. Until I don't, and then when someone is able to point out my error and make the correction, I usually thank them for it. Ignorance is curable. Wanton clinging to ignorance in the face of facts is stupidity, and that's usually quite chronic, if not terminal.


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

Asificarewhatyoudontthink said:


> Good we have finally established your comprehension level so I know how to address this properly.
> You are terribly confused.
> Mainly you are confused about the difference between Kindness (or rather the lack thereof) and legality.
> Specifically you are confused because you think, well several things actually but just to keep it on topic, immoral or unkind things should be illegal.
> ...


 Very good. Your thoughts are coherent and well laid out. However: what do you think the law is based on if not morality and ethics? Fairness and justice? If you want to inject the word kindness into the argument, on my behalf, that's all on you. And if you think the drivers as a group don't have the power to change the corporation, what about when popular demand forced McDonald's to stop using Styrofoam containers? Tyson Foods stopped the use of human antibiotics. Mattel stop the production of sea world trainer Barbie after a backlash from animal rights activists. Pepsi stopped the use of aspartame due to requests from customers. The list goes on and on. When forced to, corporations do make changes. I think the drivers would be eager to exploit any legal weaknesses in the terms of service we can find. If not, we've always got popular demand. Uber is nothing. Nothing without its drivers.

It seems as though you're not just disagreeing with me, but that you really don't want Uber to change. That you think they shouldn't change. That you like them just the way they are. Oh, and by the way, your insults are not an argument. They are a sign that you have no argument.


----------



## Seamus (Jun 21, 2018)

SuzeCB said:


> The vets here have simply already gone through everything you're suggesting...... or did you think we were a bunch of illiterate idiots and you were going to save us all with your brilliance?


LOL, the thing that has changed recently is when I was new I came to "learn" from experienced drivers. Lately they come to "argue" with and "educate" drivers with thousands of rides and impart their wisdom based on the 38 rides they've given in the 1 month they've been driving. SMH


----------



## krbjmpr (Mar 12, 2019)

OldBay said:


> Try to find another example of a service provider that can deny you service based upon arbitrary reputation score.


Would politics count? Serving the people and all... Definitely out of there if people don't like you.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

krbjmpr said:


> Would politics count? Serving the people and all... Definitely out of there if people don't like you.


Not to mention construction... carpenter's, painters, electricians, plumbers, etc.

Customer complains to the GC that one of the subs was drunk, inappropriate,etc, and the worker's off that job. There's no "discussion"n and no recourse.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

SuzeCB said:


> Not to mention construction... carpenter's, painters, electricians, plumbers, etc.
> 
> Customer complains to the GC that one of the subs was drunk, inappropriate,etc, and the worker's off that job. There's no "discussion"n and no recourse.


I don't know. The GC may well go and see for himself. I posted this to someone..

Why would anyone do this as an only job when your "career" and livelihood is at the mercy of some low life passenger

Look at the twitter feeds of Uber and Lyft (tweets and replies). My driver is drunk, my driver left me, my driver hit the curb, my driver is doing 90, my driver said I was hot, my driver gave me a weird smile and I was scared

Look at this low life asking both Uber and Lyft for her money back for a cancel at the same time....LOL
Thousands like this and they respond to some scum swearing on a public forum...send us the drivers name

@*g0ldenswavy ?*‏ @*yunglenaaa*
FollowFollow @*yunglenaaa*
More
@*lyft* YALL TOOK MY @@@@ING MONEY CHARGING ME ON SHIT I WANT ALL MY MONEY BACK PERIODTT
-------------------------------
@







*g0ldenswavy ?*‏ @*yunglenaaa*
FollowFollow @*yunglenaaa*
More
@*uber* YALL GON NEED TO RUN ME MY MONEY BACK CAUSE EVERYTIME I CANCLE A RIDE YALL SEEM NOT TO PUT MY MONEY BACK IN MY ACCOUNT I DONT APPROVE OF THIS AND I NEED MY MONEY RIGHT NOW !!


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1122554565252063232
I would tell a person who spoke to me like that to............................... GTF Out and never come back

Lyft wants to know more, and who thinks she would care about the driver over her 2 dollar ride. She will say you raped her for 4 bucks

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1122810167915999232


----------



## krbjmpr (Mar 12, 2019)

Customer / Client complains to GC and sub is gone?!? Doesn't happen like that in my area. GCs become deaf and mute when you have a complaint and don't wave the check book around.

Tried my best to have a sub plumber walked off jobsite, caught the using duct tape to seal roof vent pipes / stacks on furnace and water heater. GC wouldn't listen. Called inspector, promised him $100 if he thought the trip was baseless.

And sub was back following week, working for relative...


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

SuzeCB said:


> The vets here have simply already gone through everything you're suggesting...... or did you think we were a bunch of illiterate idiots and you were going to save us all with your brilliance?


If there are Uber corporate shills, they would be active in the forums to destabilize any momentum in this kind of thinking.

I don't think anyone here is stupid, just surprised that so many people don't seem to see a problem. So its not that I don't believe everyone, its more surprise that people don't think positive change is possible. A new driver has a fresh perspective on the app and things like getting cancelled for negotiating a cash tip is a red flag I'm sure experienced "ICs" have just learned to live with.

My thought is that for FT drivers who do this as their livlihood, they don't want to rock the boat. Apparently herding ants is just as tough as herding cats.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

ZenUber said:


> popular demand forced McDonald's to stop using Styrofoam containers?


I do not know what happened where you live, but, in the Capital of Your Nation, the public, except for a few limousine liberals and "Community Activists", did not care if Icky-D's used styrofoam containers or did not. Icky-D's stopped using styrofoam containers because the City Council passed a law that told them to stop using them.

What is funny is that neither the limousine liberals nor the "Community Activists" ate at Icky-D's. The limousine liberals could afford better and the "Community Activists" are earthy-crunchy types whom you could not force, at gunpoint, to eat Icky-D's "food". This is one of the few things on which I agree with the earthy-crunchies.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

OldBay said:


> I think not.


Why would it be illegal?
If you are a driver with either Uber or Lyft, you entered into a legal, binding agreement with that company. Did you read the agreement before submitting your approval? It says that EITHER party to the agreement can cancel the agreement, without cause. As drivers, we have no legal grounds for a complaint if/when we are deactivated - regardless of the reason - because the TNCs do not need any reason at all.

That doesn't mean that you can't 'appeal' their decision by begging, pleading and providing all kinds of evidence to support your claim for re-activation. But it does mean that the ball isn't just in the TNCs court, it means they own the ball, the court and the game.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Pax Collector said:


> Illegal?
> 
> What section of the penal code is violated?


We need to differentiate between what's legal/illegal and current realities.

There's no question that IC laws are violated 24/7 in this country by the "gig" companies as well as others. I could list several but I'm too lazy right now to do it.

The REALITY has been that due to incompetence, corruption, laziness, political ideology, etc, the govt has chosen to look the other way in most cases.

With increased level of media attention on the plight of drivers, there's hope the govt will crack down.



Michael - Cleveland said:


> Why would it be illegal?
> If you are a driver with either Uber or Lyft, you entered into a legal, binding agreement with that company. Did you read the agreement before submitting your approval? It says that EITHER party to the agreement can cancel the agreement, without cause. As drivers, we have no legal grounds for a complaint if/when we are deactivated - regardless of the reason - because the TNCs do not need any reason at all.


Uber's contract acknowledges that any "binding" part of the contract could be declared "non-binding" by the govt.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

The subject needs a lawsuit and maybe a libel suit if someone lied about you. 
James Woods got the names of people who slandered him on Twitter anonymously. 
The problem is James Woods has the money.


----------



## reg barclay (Nov 3, 2015)

OldBay said:


> I think not.
> 
> This would be like the BBB closing a business because of a complaint. They serve in an advisory capacity to consumers, but they don't have the legal authority to close a business.
> 
> We are independent contractors, not employees! They can provide our rating to pax, but shutting down drivers is illegal.


They are not really closing down the driver's business. The driver is free to carry on their own transportation business, and advertise for themselves etc.


----------



## RipCityWezay (May 12, 2017)

Bro 

What’d you do?!?!?


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> We need to differentiate between what's legal/illegal and current realities.
> 
> There's no question that IC laws are violated 24/7 in this country by the "gig" companies as well as others. I could list several but I'm too lazy right now to do it.
> 
> ...


All contracts are subject to prevailing laws. An illegal clause within a contract is not enforceable.

That being said. Many of our drivers are deactivated by complaints that are part of a larger, and well organized plan by members of the public, to get free rides. That's not Uber or Lyfts fault. Someone needs to address this, at the time of deactivation, with a State Attorney Generals office so we can start getting the names of the pax's that have been using these tactics.

The Rideshare companies can ignore us, but can they ignore a State?


----------



## UberBeemer (Oct 23, 2015)

We are contractors. The contract is slanted in their favor. They can and do deactivate at the drop of a hat.


----------



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

Not at all.

If you were to hire an electrical CONTRACTOR to redo your homes electrical and he showed up drunk threw up on your cat and broke your TV I’m pretty sure you could fire them.

Independent contractors are an interesting thing. In the eyes of the law your just a 1 man business.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

BigRedDriver said:


> All contracts are subject to prevailing laws. An illegal clause within a contract is not enforceable.


The point I made was that whether or not the companies or their contracts violate the law means little if the govt chooses to look the other way.


BigRedDriver said:


> That being said. Many of our drivers are deactivated by complaints that are part of a larger, and well organized plan by members of the public, to get free rides. That's not Uber or Lyfts fault. Someone needs to address this, at the time of deactivation, with a State Attorney Generals office so we can start getting the names of the pax's that have been using these tactics.


Both companies' quick trigger fingers firing drivers due to complaints makes it their fault.

I've been an employee in customer service jobs and in food delivery, so I know complaints go with the territory. In no place that I've worked did employees get fired anywhere near as readily as rideshare drivers. There had to be a pattern of complaints, and even then there were usually less severe actions taken before firing.

The reasons are simple. Uber and lyft are unethical scumbags who can fire drivers with a mouse click from thousands of miles away and it costs them nothing.

That's in sharp contrast to employers, who may very well be on the hook to pay unemployment.


BigRedDriver said:


> The Rideshare companies can ignore us, but can they ignore a State?


A crackdown has been overdue for than 5 years.



UberBeemer said:


> They can and do deactivate at the drop of a hat.


Because they're unethical and firing drivers costs them nothing.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> I've been an employee in customer service jobs and in food delivery, so I know complaints go with the territory. In no place that I've worked did employees get fired anywhere near as readily as rideshare drivers. There had to be a pattern of complaints, and even then there were usually less severe actions taken before firing.


Similar occurred when I was an official of a cab company. Our drivers were not our employees. They were affiliated with the company by contract. There were provisions in the contract for the company to terminate the contract for cause or for "no reason". It was rare that we invoked the "no reason" clause. There was one notable time where we did and it cost us tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees. Several of those terminated for "no reason" sued the company on all sorts of things. One thing that was upheld was that we could enforce the "no reason" clause. There was a ruling that rose from the case, though, that was of greater import, but has little to do with the subject at hand.

As a rule, though, we terminated a contract for cause only after the accumulation of several incidents. When there was a complaint, we had a form that whoever took the complaint had to complete. At that point, the complaint was handed in to the Head Operator, Chief Dispatcher or another company official, depending on its nature and seriousness. Upon disposition, a copy was made of the form, and, any addenda, and one copy went into the driver's file. Thus, when we terminated a contract for cause, we had documentation of the offences and could point to them with date, time and nature or offence should the matter come into question.

Of course, for egregious offences, such as workplace violence, threats, criminal activity, we would terminate a contract immediately, but, even that was documented.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Another Uber Driver said:


> Similar occurred when I was an official of a cab company. Our drivers were not our employees. They were affiliated with the company by contract. There were provisions in the contract for the company to terminate the contract for cause or for "no reason". It was rare that we invoked the "no reason" clause. There was one notable time where we did and it cost us tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees. Several of those terminated for "no reason" sued the company on all sorts of things. One thing that was upheld was that we could enforce the "no reason" clause. There was a ruling that rose from the case, though, that was of greater import, but has little to do with the subject at hand.
> 
> As a rule, though, we terminated a contract for cause only after the accumulation of several incidents. When there was a complaint, we had a form that whoever took the complaint had to complete. At that point, the complaint was handed in to the Head Operator, Chief Dispatcher or another company official, depending on its nature and seriousness. Upon disposition, a copy was made of the form, and, any addenda, and one copy went into the driver's file. Thus, when we terminated a contract for cause, we had documentation of the offences and could point to them with date, time and nature or offence should the matter come into question.
> 
> Of course, for egregious offences, such as workplace violence, threats, criminal activity, we would terminate a contract immediately, but, even that was documented.


I assume one of the reasons your company didn't invoke the "no reason" clause more often is that unlike uber and lyft, your cab company had some ethics.

What was the reason for the firing that brought the law suit?

What was the most common reason for the other firings, drinking on the job?

In most states, employees can also be fired for no reason (except for violations of the 1964 Civil Rights Act)

On paper but not in reality, the Civil Rights Act does NOT apply to ICs, but if uber lyft or any other company was caught firing workers due to their race, the govt would go after the company.

I've said it on many occasions but I'll say it again...

If I'm going to be classified as an IC, I want to be TREATED like one, and the first step in that direction is to SHOW DESTINATIONS IN ADVANCE and not penalize drivers for choosing the trips they want.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> I assume one of the reasons your company didn't invoke the "no reason" clause more often is that unlike uber and lyft, *your cab company had some ethics*.


 (emphasis added)

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:..............................................................................:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:.......oh, my, I am:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:..........?.........?...I am sorry, I did not :roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:..... ?.......I am sorry, I did not mean to mock you ..it is just....................

We did not invoke the "no reason" clause because we did not want to pay tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees every time that we did it. As you are no doubt aware, every third person in this area is a lawyer and two thirds of them are looking to make a name for themselves. As a result, they will take these risky cases with no front money and hope to make something out of them. Most of them wind up getting paid very little, if anything. The company, on the other hand, through its officers and directors, must hire a decent lawyer to defend against these actions, if for no other reason than to protect the company from potential ruin and protect themselves from a breach of fiduciary duty action.



Nats121 said:


> What was the reason for the firing that brought the law suit?


They were trouble makers and malcontents of whom the company wanted to rid itself.



Nats121 said:


> What was the most common reason for the other firings, drinking on the job?


Actually, that was rare, but it did happen. Usually it was accumulated mistreatment of customers, repeated theft of other driver's calls (remember, we were dispatching by two-way radio. D.C. was late to the digital/computer/satellite/GPS based call assignment) or that the insurance department had deemed them uninsurable.



Nats121 said:


> If I'm going to be classified as an IC, I want to be TREATED like one, and the first step in that direction is to SHOW DESTINATIONS IN ADVANCE and not penalize drivers for choosing the trips they want.


I do not disagree. If I am a steamfitter, I go to a contract negotiation where the contractee tells me exactly what he wants done, how much he is willing to pay. At that point, I tell him if I can or can not do it for that price. If I can, we come to an agreement. If I can not, or, am unwilling to do it for his price, we can discuss it further, or, terminate the discussion and he can look for someone else to do it for his price and under his conditions.

It is not dissimilar for the TNCs. Uber offers me a project, tells me precisely what it wants done (haul the customer from Point A to Point B, both of which are named, stop at Point C for X minutes) and what Uber is willing to pay for that. If I am willing to take on the project under those conditions and for that pay, I accept it. If not, I decline it and Uber can look for someone else to do its project under the conditions and for the price that it is willing to pay. If it can not find anyone to do its project for that price and under those conditions, either it informs its customer of that fact, or, if given some authority by the customer, it ups the price or betters the conditions, or, both, in order to have the project done.

The ping comes in and the screen reads:

Julia, 1801 K-Gaylord, $18,50.

It is raining and it is 5:30 P.M. I do not need even to think about it. I reject it out of hand. Let Uber see if some ant is willing to lose his consecutive trip bonus and miss shorter surge trips for that ninety minute trip that pays eighteen dollars fifty. If Uber can not find an ant, either it must tell Julia to find another way to get there or, let it sweeten the pot. Put it this way: If Uber wants ME to run that trip at the height of P.M. rush and in the rain, it will have to be forty five dollars with a guaranteed ten dollar cash tip and I get surge bonuses for the next five trips after I drop it. If I can not have that, I am not interested. Perhaps an ant will be. I do not know and do not care.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Not at all.
> 
> If you were to hire an electrical CONTRACTOR to redo your homes electrical and he showed up drunk threw up on your cat and broke your TV I'm pretty sure you could fire them.
> 
> Independent contractors are an interesting thing. In the eyes of the law your just a 1 man business.


OK..
Now....you hire an electrical CONTRACTOR to redo your homes electrical and his ex wife calls you the next day and says he was drunk


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

OldBay said:


> Don't defend it. I think you realize that at best this is in a legal grey area.
> 
> Try to find another example of a service provider that can deny you service based upon arbitrary reputation score.


Any lending institution.


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

OldBay said:


> If there are Uber corporate shills, they would be active in the forums to destabilize any momentum in this kind of thinking.
> 
> I don't think anyone here is stupid, just surprised that so many people don't seem to see a problem. So its not that I don't believe everyone, its more surprise that people don't think positive change is possible. A new driver has a fresh perspective on the app and things like getting cancelled for negotiating a cash tip is a red flag I'm sure experienced "ICs" have just learned to live with.
> 
> My thought is that for FT drivers who do this as their livlihood, they don't want to rock the boat. Apparently herding ants is just as tough as herding cats.


Your perspective is Neither fresh nor unique.
Your suffering from a false sense of "expertise" and "skill" that many people are, as you are, completely blind to.
You assume everyone else can't possibly have thought of any of this and, because you don't see everyone else whining about the same crud you are you believe you have uncovered some "secrets of the universe" level insight.

Reality, other people, people that have been doing this far longer, some of whom have actually been other things like corporate level things and lawyers and such, have not only already thought of these ideas but weighed and measured them. Some going as far as attempting to overturn years and years of corporate law precedence by taking those very ideas into court. To be shot down because an established precedence invalidates their arguments.

Whining about getting fired because you offended a passenger while attempting to negotiate a "cash tip" is neither attempting to "herd" anyone, nor even attempting to enlighten anyone.

Hell, many of us make a point of telling people that brought up the whole "negotiate higher fees" thing that they were idiots bound for being kicked from the platform if they tried it.

What most never realized is that wording was Never in the ToS for the IC drivers but rather for Third Party Vendors like gogoGrandparents and medical transportation providers that bill Medicare at MTP pricing and then request an UberX to pick that passenger up.

Check out my thread I started today about how I am not risking liability providing transportation to someone that can't even get their corpse to my car...nope, uh uh, no way.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

[


Another Uber Driver said:


> :roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:.............


Tell us how you REALLY feel about that cab company LOL


Another Uber Driver said:


> The ping comes in and the screen reads:
> 
> Julia, 1801 K-Gaylord, $18,50.
> 
> It is raining and it is 5:30 P.M.


LMFAO


Another Uber Driver said:


> Perhaps an ant will be. I do not know and do not care.


U/L needs TWO things to keep our pay rates at 1976 taxi rates...

1) Hiding destinations from drivers

2) Perpetually high rates of Third World immigration

U/L CANNOT pay us poorly without BOTH of the above.


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

JimKE said:


> Any lending institution.


Credit score is based on actual, factual data. It's not like your neighbor can claim you didn't pay him the 1k you owed him and trash your credit score.


----------



## BigRedDriver (Nov 28, 2018)

JimKE said:


> Any lending institution.


Those can be challenged. And any credit reporting company that supplies false information can face both civil and criminal charges.

A lending institution has strict day laws it must obey. The consumer had considerable rights.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> Tell us how you REALLY feel about that cab company


...................and I was an OFFICIAL of it..................................


----------



## JamesBond008 (Mar 26, 2018)

OldBay said:


> I think not.
> 
> This would be like the BBB closing a business because of a complaint. They serve in an advisory capacity to consumers, but they don't have the legal authority to close a business.
> 
> ...


YAWN, yes they can. You signed an agreement saying they could without cause. End of story.


----------



## nash801 (Apr 17, 2016)

SuzeCB said:


> The contract you signed says they can.
> 
> As a matter of fact, it says they can deactivate you for NO REASON, provided they give 7 days notice (and they nail it right down to the minute!). Section 12.


7 days notice? Really? Never heard that before. Uber deactivates with zero warning as they did me recently. Do i have recourse?



NotanEmployee said:


> Most people don't understand discrimination. That would be almost impossible to prove in an electronic only arrangement. They would have to say something like. We are reducing the senior workforce because we believe they are less safe drivers. Then you have a case.
> 
> Lol random unproven reasons is the epitome of NOT discrimination


Which is why uber won't say why they deactivate


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

reg barclay said:


> They are not really closing down the driver's business. The driver is free to carry on their own transportation business, and advertise for themselves etc.


California decided otherwise.

Their decision was based on the fact that if a driver is deactivated, they really can't continue. At least not in the same capacity. There's Uber and there's Lyft. Past that, there really is little to no where else to go. Taxis require special licensing (no matter that it's easy to get, once you get the job), delivering food or packages really is substantially different from driving people. If you are deactivated, there really isn't anywhere else to go to do the same job. Only Black drivers, with limo licenses and plates can continue.



nash801 said:


> 7 days notice? Really? Never heard that before. Uber deactivates with zero warning as they did me recently. Do i have recourse?
> 
> 
> Which is why uber won't say why they deactivate


Read your contract. Section 12. They either told you why, or you received an email 7 days prior. You may have FELT they didn't provide a complete enough reason, or not recognized the notice for what it was. Those two are always possibilities.

When I got my 7 day notice, it didn't read like a done deal to me. I thought they were warning mevthatbthey still hadn't decided. They had.



OldBay said:


> Except that it IS different!
> 
> In this case, you didn't do anything disruptive in the theatre, another customer claims that you did. Can the theatre deny you access? No, of course not. You could sue their ass off if they did anything without proof.


Not true. I used to manage a theater. You can deny service to anyone so long as it's not for a legally-protected reason. Same way a driver can refuse service to a customer, Uber can refuse service to a driver. 1-800-DENTIST doesn't list EVERY dentist that tries to sign up with them.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

SuzeCB said:


> When I got my 7 day notice, it didn't read like a done deal to me. I thought they were warning me that they still hadn't decided. They had.


From whom did your notice come? Uber? Lyft? Was it over a specific incident or something else? How did it read?

Back in early 2016, in the last days of ACRO, I received a notice from Uber that I was "In danger of losing access to the Uber platform" due to my high cancellation rate. This was after several text messages that read "Looks like you're cancelling more than other partners in your area.......". I sent numerous e-Mail to Driver "Support" that asked specifically what I needed to do to ensure that Uber did not de-activate me. Of course, Driver "Support" was less than useless and I could not get an answer.

I simply decided to bring down my cancellation rate from thirty five per-cent to under ten per-cent. I did that, went to an onboarding event for Lyft and signed up for Lyft. While I was working for my Lyft sign-on bonus, I ran perhaps one or two Uber trips and covered them. Once my cancellation rate was down below ten per-cent, I kept it there, as a rule. If it did inch above ten per-cent, I made every effort to get it back below that quickly. No more nastygrams came after that. Uber does not show you your cancellation rate any more. I try to keep the majority of my cancellations for legitimate reasons, such as "Rider isn't here" or "Wrong address shown". Perhaps once in fifteen rides, or less. will I cancel just because I do not want to cover the job, once I see what it is.

Once I actually received my Lyft sign-on bonus, I started to decline pings to the point that my acceptance rate was less than thirty per-cent, which is what it is on Uber, as well. Almost immediately, I started to get nastygrams about that from Lyft, but, I ignored them. They stopped after a while, but, do re-appear from time-to-time. Most of them contain language such as "We have reached out to you several times about this......................."

Lyft does appear to be harder on appealing de-activations than does Uber. I know numerous drivers who have received de-activation notices from Uber who have gone to the Green Light Centre crying and have been re-instated with little trouble. On the other hand, I have known more than a few drivers whom Lyft has de-activated who went to the HUb crying and were rebuffed. I am aware only of one driver who got Lyft to re-instate him. Lyft de-activated him for too many cancellations. He went to the Hub several times and persisted with his e-Mails until Lyft agreed to re-instate him. It took him a while. It came with a warning that his "reprobate" conduct was not to be repeated.



SuzeCB said:


> You can deny service to anyone so long as it's not for a legally-protected reason.


The one problem with that is if they sue and claim that it was for a "legally protected" reason despite the presence of no evidence to support that claim. At that point, often the doctrine of "burden-shifting" comes into play. Essentially, this denies the accused his Constitutional protections. Instead of the accuser's being required to make his case, the burden shifts to the accused to disprove the accuser's case. The accuser is no longer required to prove his. All that a plaintiff need do is go running into court hollering "DISCRIMINATION!" and he no longer need prove his case. Instead, the accused must prove that he did not discriminate. While this applies only to certain kinds of civil cases, and, has pretty much stayed there since it came into play, it was, and is, a dangerous precedent. The next step easily takes it to all civil cases, after which it moves into criminal cases. Those in our society who would have this country turn into a repressive dictatorship could make use of this.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

I was deactivated by Lyft in January of 2018. I was waitlisted by Uber in February of 2018. In my case, the deactivation was for 3-in-3, none my fault, and there are police reports and court dispositions proving it. In all three cases, there was absolutely no way I could have avoided them, short of having just stayed home.

I explain this in this forum, not to avoid having people think I'm a bad driver (even though I am a good one), but to show that it doesn't matter with 3-in-3. In all honesty, this insurance company policy is the very best reason for ALL U/L drivers to stay home when the weather's bad. You can be great, but some other driver out at the same time could hit you and you're the one done for.

Ok... back to the question at hand.

Lyft didn't give me any prior notice. They blocked me from the app after a "random" background check (2 months after the approved the SAME information to sign me up), and sent me an email telling me I'd been deactivated for negatives on my DMV report.

The next month, Uber also ran a "random" check. With them, I got the 7 day notice. Probably because they already knew the accidents weren't my fault. With one, I had pax in the car. With another I was on my way to a p/u. With all 3, I was in an Enterprise rental through the program they had with them, so Uber was notified right away.

The 7 day notice comes with a subject line of "Pre-adverse action notice - Uber". It indicates that they "will be completing our review of your proposal to enter an independent contractor relationship request within the next few days and, based in whole or in part on the information in the report, may decide not to accept your proposal."

Now, I had already been driving with them since Aug. of 2016. I had over 3500 rides completed. I believe the 3-in-3, at least in my case, was actually a gray area, since there were 3, but none were my fault. Therefore, to cover their tail, Uber sent out the 7 day instead of just blocking me outright like Lyft did. Lyft also completely ignored me when I wrote, and the app no longer gave me access to the help phone number (put them in your contacts!!!). Even my liason wouldn't respond AT ALL to phone messages or texts. Lyft literally ghosted me, the effin' cowardly eunuchs!

I was insulted and confused about the whole thing, but didn't shed too many tears. After the honeymoon period, where I managed to get my new driver bonus (not a nearly-useless guarantee) and lots of rides for that first month, I really wasn't making much with them. It wasn't a big deal, just a big question.

With Uber, I went to the GLH armed with those police reports, court dispositions, and the files I kept on each accident with mail from the insurance companies and Enterprise, and my own notes of phone calls. I used to be a legal secretary, back in the day... LOL

At that time, the rep actually looked everything over, texted with "upstairs" and told me they said they would re-review. She scanned the police reports and dispositions and forwarded them all to someone with a higher pay grade and told me I should hear within a few days.

7 days after the date of the email notice I had received, right down to the MINUTE, I was blocked. On a Friday, of course. They always do these things immediately before weekends.

I went back to the GLH to the same rep. Her apologies were profuse. She made a phone call upstairs again, and later that day I received a call from Uber's Legal Dept. This was when I learned that the insurance companies had implemented new rules about this. It was a way to basically jump up the premiums. They did it to cab companies, too. Much as I hate it, I can see the logic. That's a lot of drivers driving an insane amount of miles. Lots of risk. I can even see why U/L don't want to pay the higher premiums. And if they can't insure you, they can't have you driving for them.

Legal changed my status from Deactivated to Waitlisted, and told me that, if I wished, when I was back down to 2 or less on the DMV report, they'd welcome me back. I don't think this is anything special, mind you. That's when I'll qualify again. It's probably also true for other drivers deactivated for 3-in-3, so long as their cancellation rates were low enough and ratings were high enough.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

^^^^^^^^Thank you, that was what I wanted to know, especially the text of the seven day notice.^^^^^^^^


----------



## Ubermcbc (Sep 25, 2016)

OldBay said:


> So, if we signed a contract, then we are employees?


That's what been going on in California. Technically we are employees because if we are 100% contractors, we have right to negotiate per mile rates with the pax. Tell me is there a fix price for fixing a house or any other work that you hire an independent contractor? Do they charge you 0.65 cents per minute? Lol. Guber just want to save buck load of money in overtime, health insurance, paid leaves etc but wants to treat us as an employee.


----------



## BigBadDriver (Sep 12, 2017)

OldBay said:


> No, but I'm finding that I'm unable to conduct my business as an IC. When pax makes odd request, my only legal option is to cancel ride and take a 1* or have my car vandalized..which can get me deactivated. (Or..what ive done..is violate rules for pax so i dont get bad rating.)Pax are essentially blackmailing drivers with bad ratings to get them to do what they want. And I'm hamstrung by uber "rules".


If you're worried about ratings, then close the thread.

There's no more to be said.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Ubermcbc said:


> That's what been going on in California. Technically we are employees because if we are 100% contractors, we have right to negotiate per mile rates with the pax. Tell me is there a fix price for fixing a house or any other work that you hire an independent contractor? Do they charge you 0.65 cents per minute? Lol. Guber just want to save buck load of money in overtime, health insurance, paid leaves etc but wants to treat us as an employee.


Independent contractors don't always get to negotiate pricing with the end user. Quite often, in construction for example, the GC negotiates the overall pricing for the job, then hires in electricians, plumbers, etc., by bid or by choice. Sometimes they say, "This is the job, and I need it done by [date] for $XXX."

The sub is an IC. S/he still doesn't have the right to negotiate a different price with the customer.

Of course, the IC in that case also gets very different tax info from the GC at the end of the year. Info that says that the sub did work for the GC, not that the GC did work for the sub, like U/L's indicates...


----------



## UberwhoIaM (Apr 26, 2016)

OldBay said:


> So, if we signed a contract, then we are employees?





OldBay said:


> Don't defend it. I think you realize that at best this is in a legal grey area.
> 
> Try to find another example of a service provider that can deny you service based upon arbitrary reputation score.


Is the OP serious? This kind of thinking is exactly the problem we have with clueless drivers.... we're employees???? We can't be deactivated??? This must be a joke.... right?

If this is a real post II'm going to have to seek a chemical high!


----------



## 10zin (Jan 15, 2019)

I know No one would but let’s just say for shiit ant giggles. 
I’m driving down the freeway with a pax and I decided to stop driving for Uber and kick the pax off in middle of freeway at 2 in morning and worst If he was on his way to airport. Since Uber and Driver can deactivate eachother whenever they feel like it. Without any reason


----------



## amazinghl (Oct 31, 2018)

UberwhoIaM said:


> Is the OP serious? This kind of thinking is exactly the problem we have with clueless drivers.... we're employees???? We can't be deactivated??? This must be a joke.... right?
> 
> If this is a real post II'm going to have to seek a chemical high!


OP is just making up things as he goes.


----------



## Christinebitg (Jun 29, 2018)

10zin said:


> I know No one would but let's just say for shiit ant giggles.
> I'm driving down the freeway with a pax and I decided to stop driving for Uber and kick the pax off in middle of freeway at 2 in morning and worst If he was on his way to airport. Since Uber and Driver can deactivate eachother whenever they feel like it. Without any reason:smiles:


Okay, let's suppose you felt the need to do that.

Your legal obligation to the passenger is to let the person off at a safe place.

Would it be the right thing to do? Probably not, although I can envision circumstances when it would be the best choice you have. For instance, if the passenger is becoming aggressive and is now threatening you.

It would be better, however, you managed to defuse the situation before it reached that point, if possible.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

OldBay said:


> I think not.
> 
> This would be like the BBB closing a business because of a complaint. They serve in an advisory capacity to consumers, but they don't have the legal authority to close a business.
> 
> ...


They do whatever they want for any reason or even for no reason.


----------



## tom1999 (Dec 5, 2018)

Christinebitg said:


> Okay, let's suppose you felt the need to do that.
> 
> Your legal obligation to the passenger is to let the person off at a safe place.
> 
> ...


Wouldn't that involve the legal principle of "duty of care" or criminal negligence? (if it was an unsafe place that they were dropped off)

But if you dropped someone off somewhere that is not unsafe, the customer could still argue that you had a contract with them that you violated. You could say that they are not privy to your contract with uber (your conctract is with uber and not the customer themselves) but I'm not sure if that would be the case.


----------



## 10zin (Jan 15, 2019)

Maybe I wasn’t clear enough on my earlier comment or maybe because English isn’t my first language, people seem to misunderstand what I said. I was sayin “ What If I Deactivate Uber while having a Pax in car” since Uber can deactivate us whenever they want. I’m sure we can do the same. That’s all.


----------



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

I’ve dealt with Mears taxi for years.


I would have to say most get fired by the safety department over tickets or being at-fault for accidents.


The rest get their contracts terminated for things like...

Failing the optional drug test to get on the paratransit account,

repeated proven long hauling complaints

Being argumentative with other drivers, company employees, or employees of our contracted partners.
(Including an incident of 2 drivers getting into a fist fight)

Getting pissy with Disney staff

Being a consistent asshole to the customers

I myself get the occasional complaint but when it’s 1/100 they realize who the problem really is and ignore the complaint.


Refusing service dogs,

Failing to keep the taxi clean,

Smoking in the company taxi

Not meeting Disney hygiene and dress code standards.
(This is in the contract. So failing to meet them is considered for cause termination)

Simply put... most “people person” issues that spring up are documentable causes for termination.

One guy I know got the boot for calling a dispatcher a stupid C word over the recorded phone line.

She WAS an idiot but that’s no excuse to use hurtful words.


It shouldn’t be hard to find cause for termination if the person is a pita.

Side note, I know one real jerk who got fired over turning in blank trip sheets, something that is virtually never enforced due to the fact that the meter/dispatch system generates a trip log anyway (good enough for the TLC). I don’t beleive that’s the real reason at all.

Firing someone without cause is simply a matter of not coming up with proper justification. If that’s the case keep digging.


----------



## NOXDriver (Aug 12, 2018)

ZenUber said:


> If we are independent contractors -
> Why can't we negotiate our fees?
> Why can Uber change our fees without our approval?
> Why does Uber have access to our customers info that we do not?
> ...


Because when you accept the ping you agree to the already set fee
Because they are you YOUR fees. Uber offers you a contract at a set rate. Take it or leave it.
Because they are NOT YOUR CUSTOMERS. Your agreement with Uber is to provide transport, not manage customers.
Because Ubers rules that you agreed to allows it.
Because you accept the ride knowing this, in advance, and agreed to it. 
Because using the app is agreeing to it.

It AMAZING what you can learn if you just read the agreement you accepted.


----------



## Christinebitg (Jun 29, 2018)

10zin said:


> I was sayin " What If I Deactivate Uber while having a Pax in car" since Uber can deactivate us whenever they want.


The problem is that you want Uber to pay you for the trip. If you deactivate Uber, how can you collect from Uber?


----------



## peteyvavs (Nov 18, 2015)

Almost every driver dreams of deactivating Uber, but medication is too expensive.


----------



## Ptuberdriver (Dec 2, 2018)

FedEx ground is the same model as Uber or any freelance work. If you fail to meet the standards of the parent company they can terminate the contract. Like FedEx ground is Independent contractor model but in the contract the IC is required to still wear the FedEx uniform. And deliver packages. If they(FedEx) finds out ur not wearing the uniform or deliver packages in a timely matter they will take the route and give it to another company.


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

JamesBond008 said:


> YAWN, yes they can. You signed an agreement saying they could without cause. End of story.


Not the end of story. It hasn't been fully challenged in court. It's still a work in progress. It's not he end of story, until it's end of story. Supreme Court decision, or U/L goes out of business. The drivers will never let it go.



NOXDriver said:


> Because when you accept the ping you agree to the already set fee
> Because they are you YOUR fees. Uber offers you a contract at a set rate. Take it or leave it.
> Because they are NOT YOUR CUSTOMERS. Your agreement with Uber is to provide transport, not manage customers.
> Because Ubers rules that you agreed to allows it.
> ...


What I'm arguing is a little more existential. 
I'm saying that Uber's system may not be legal if it defies the accepted definition of an independent contractor. 
You addressed every line of my statement, except for the first line, which is really the keystone of the point I was making. It sounds like you simply didn't understand what I was saying.


----------



## JamesBond008 (Mar 26, 2018)

ZenUber said:


> Not the end of story. It hasn't been fully challenged in court. It's still a work in progress. It's not he end of story, until it's end of story. Supreme Court decision, or U/L goes out of business. The drivers will never let it go.
> 
> 
> What I'm arguing is a little more existential.
> ...


Wow you sign an agreement, and then don't accept that agreement. Wow.


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

JamesBond008 said:


> Wow you sign an agreement, and then don't accept that agreement. Wow.


Doesn't it just blow your mind? Like - Wow.

Get over it. History is full of legal agreements being deemed corrupt. Not the first time, and it won't be the last. Don't worry, the older you get, the less your mind we be so blown by the world of reality.


----------



## JamesBond008 (Mar 26, 2018)

ZenUber said:


> Doesn't it just blow your mind? Like - Wow.
> 
> Get over it. History is full of legal agreements being deemed corrupt. Not the first time, and it won't be the last. Don't worry, the older you get, the less your mind we be so blown by the world of reality.


The older I get the more I realise people aren't men of their word, that they agree to something and then whine about it being unfair later, that they put their name to something and then don't mean it, that they can't even read an agreement (rather they ask on the internet, when the answer is right there in front of them, AND finally they can't find a decent job in this market and have to resort to Uber.

So yeah it does blow my mind there are people like that.


----------



## ZenUber (Feb 11, 2019)

JamesBond008 said:


> The older I get the more I realise people aren't men of their word, that they agree to something and then whine about it being unfair later, that they put their name to something and then don't mean it, that they can't even read an agreement (rather they ask on the internet, when the answer is right there in front of them, AND finally they can't find a decent job in this market and have to resort to Uber.
> 
> So yeah it does blow my mind there are people like that.


The older I get, the more I realize how good corporations are at deferring all of their liabilities onto their employees by switching them over to subcontractor status. It's a very common change occurring across the entire corporate community. It is one of the defining flaws that marks the decline of capitalism. The little people have little choice but to go along with the agreement in order to survive, because the practice is pervasive across the economy.

I don't have to agree with it. I don't have to be silent about it. I will scream it from the mountain top till the day I die. That's what the first amendment is for. Capitalism is past its peak and is in decline. Corporate power is way out of control from what the writers of the constitution intended. Those who get a toehold on power, always find a way to leverage and keep it. They leverage their wealth to change the laws. The only difference today is that we have the right of free speech. The older I get, the more I realize this is so.


----------



## JamesBond008 (Mar 26, 2018)

Good bye sir. I enjoy a good debate, throw in a bit of trolling, exchange of idea's, etc but mention the end of capitalism (yay, socialism?) and I'm out. That stuff belongs in arts departments and people who will be stuck in a dead end job for life; who blame other people for their lack of success.


----------

