# Austin Fingerprints - Uber/Lyft defeated



## Ziggy

> https://www.texastribune.org/2016/05/07/early-voting-austin-proposition-against/

Uber and Lyft have dumped more than $8 million into a campaign supporting Proposition 1, sponsoring glossy mailers, television ads and free rides to the polls. The relentless campaigning is a symptom of six months of sparring between the city and the ride-hailing companies.

---
*Voters reject Uber & Lyft's Prop. 1*
---
> http://www.kvue.com/news/local/uber-lyft-and-city-council-await-voters-decision/179212527

AUSTIN - After more than a month of inundating the Austin airwaves with advertisements, Uber and Lyft have gotten bad news on Proposition 1.

With 76 percent of the precincts reporting in the city of Austin, Proposition 1 was losing by a 56.07%-43.93% margin. A vote for the ordinance would have removed the city's requirement for fingerprint-based criminal background checks of drivers. A vote against the ordinance kept the current city council regulations in place.

"The people have spoken tonight loud and clear. Uber and Lyft are welcome to stay in Austin, and I invite them to the table regardless," Austin Mayor Steve Adler said in a statement as results were coming in. "Austin is an innovative and creative city, and we'll need to be at our most creative and innovative now."


----------



## shpana69

Just wondering, how much they pay to mayor to say that?


----------



## Sall_yahoo

Every city should do it ,no finger print ,no background check, no commercial insurance, means these bigger corporate giants should not be allowed to work.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Yay Austin!
A puddle of sanity in a psycho sea.


----------



## BostonTaxiDriver

It cost me an added $50 this year for my Boston taxi license renewal...because new taxi regulations here require fingerprinting of taxi drivers. 

It will be done EACH year for each driver.


----------



## ATX 22

shpana69 said:


> Just wondering, how much they pay to mayor to say that?


Nothing. Mayor Adler advocated voting against the Uber proposition. He's mistaken if he thinks they'll ever act like a big boy company that adapts to change.
Looks like Uber doesn't like being on the other side of disruption.


----------



## grams777

Amazing how these transportation innovators and giants fall flat on their face by a mere fingerprinting. Or is it the inability to stop in lanes of traffic to pickup and drop off pax that causes their demise?

It seems like it will take a whole new level of ingenuity to figure out how to fingerprint drivers. Apparently the pool of drivers is so bad off and churns so much that it only succeeds with substandard background checks.

They might even have to raise rates slightly and pay existing drivers a little more if they can't get 10 idle drivers on every block. This could lead to fewer trips and booking fees - a completely unacceptable outcome.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

Both here and in other places in cyberland, Uber's drivers are applauding Uber's black eye on this one.

The vote is a clear indication that Uber's customers want the fingerprinting and Law Enforcement background checks.


Am I the only one who sees these two items as indicators that Uber needs to take a good look in the proverbial mirror?


----------



## ATX 22

Another Uber Driver said:


> Am I the only one who sees these two items as indicators that Uber needs to take a good look in the proverbial mirror?


No, you aren't. 
Unfortunately for Uber, they are run by people with a bad case of cranial rectalitis.


----------



## I_Like_Spam

I can't see what the problem Uber and/or Lyft have with fingerprinting their partners. 

When I got my hack license from the city of Pittsburgh, I had to have a photo ID, criminal background and fingerprinting as part of the licensing procedure.

It provided some assurance to the traveling public that I wasn't a dangerous maniac.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

ATX 22 said:


> cranial rectalitis.


That is a good name for it.


----------



## Hackenstein

grams777 said:


> Amazing how these transportation innovators and giants fall flat on their face by a mere fingerprinting. Or is it the inability to stop in lanes of traffic to pickup and drop off pax that causes their demise?
> 
> It seems like it will take a whole new level of ingenuity to figure out how to fingerprint drivers. Apparently the pool of drivers is so bad off and churns so much that it only succeeds with substandard background checks.
> 
> They might even have to raise rates slightly and pay existing drivers a little more if they can't get 10 idle drivers on every block. This could lead to fewer trips and booking fees - a completely unacceptable outcome.


They're just running down the clock until they have driverless cars in a few years. Personally, I'll be looking fr a way out of this shitshow when these corporate neo-Nazis destroy tens of Millions of jobs so they can add another Billion to their bank account. The US is headed for Feudalism.


----------



## Ziggy

shpana69 said:


> Just wondering, how much they pay to mayor to say that?


The former Mayor (Lee Leffingwell) got paid $50K by Uber & Lyft to tell people to vote yes on Prop 1 so that U/L would not need fingerprints.

The current Mayor Adler didn't get paid anything.

All-in-all U/L spent over $8M to bully the Austin voters into choosing the "no fingerprints" option; and the voters didn't fall for the propaganda.


----------



## Hackenstein

Ziggy said:


> The former Mayor (Lee Leffingwell) got paid $50K by Uber & Lyft to tell people to vote yes on Prop 1 so that U/L would not need fingerprints.
> 
> The current Mayor Adler didn't get paid anything.
> 
> All-in-all U/L spent over $8M to bully the Austin voters into choosing the "no fingerprints" option; and the voters didn't fall for the propaganda.


They're getting sued for their robo-texts.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/05/04/uber-sued-over-robo-texts-delivered-austin-users/


----------



## Ziggy

Hackenstein said:


> They're getting sued for their robo-texts.
> https://www.texastribune.org/2016/05/04/uber-sued-over-robo-texts-delivered-austin-users/


Everyone should sue them ... if they win, they'll get $1,500 for each robo- text message ... could amount to several months worth trips. Unfortunately, I didn't get enough robo-texts to justify the legal expense.


----------



## Ziggy

I think the 2 reasons that Uber/Lyft don't want fingerprints are:

They don't want anyone to know how much money they are making ... as they currently are hiding all their money in offshore tax havens
They want to be able to hire ex-cons & illegal immigrants ... as they will be so grateful for the job that they are willing to drive for 30¢/mile and not complain about it.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

Ziggy said:


> I think the 2 reasons that Uber/Lyft don't want fingerprints are:They want to be able to hire ex-cons & illegal immigrants ... as they will be so grateful for the job that they are willing to drive for 30¢/mile and not [complain] about it


............and the TNCs are so myopic that they do not see that it could cause them some more expensive problems. most judges, regulators and legislators hold cab companies responsible for their drivers, even if the driver is an "independent contractor" and the cab company "provides services, only, to drivers". The leap from that to holding the TNCs responsible for their drivers is not a difficult leap. This goes double when you understand how much money that the drivers do not have, considering the princely sums that the TNCs pay versus how much money that the TNCs do have.

There will be more cases where a driver does something to a passenger that he has no business doing. There will be a lawsuit. In the right jurisdiction, a judge will hold the TNC responsible and the jury will take the attitude "they have money, they can pay" and hit the TNC with a huge award.


----------



## ChinatownJake

BostonTaxiDriver said:


> It cost me an added $50 this year for my Boston taxi license renewal...because new taxi regulations here require fingerprinting of taxi drivers.
> 
> It will be done EACH year for each driver.


Uber after Prop. 1 defeat stated that fingerprinting impedes the recruitment of new drivers. But I think that's a B.S. smoke screen from them. They just don't want to pay the money for fingerprinting. Extremely short-sighted. Better for everyone if Uber/Lyft did fingerprint check.


----------



## Ziggy

ChinatownJake said:


> Uber after Prop. 1 defeat stated that fingerprinting impedes the recruitment of new drivers. But I think that's a B.S. smoke screen from them. They just don't want to pay the money for fingerprinting. Extremely short-sighted. Better for everyone if Uber/Lyft did fingerprint check.


Actually, City of Austin will pay for fingerprints of all TNC drivers ... even with city paying Uber refuses fingerprints.


----------



## tohunt4me




----------



## Hackenstein

ChinatownJake said:


> Uber after Prop. 1 defeat stated that fingerprinting impedes the recruitment of new drivers. But I think that's a B.S. smoke screen from them. They just don't want to pay the money for fingerprinting. Extremely short-sighted. Better for everyone if Uber/Lyft did fingerprint check.


They spend a Billion bucks in China every year. The lawyer fees on one of their 50,000 lawsuits would pay for fingerprinting in every City on Earth for the next Century.


----------



## ChinatownJake

Ziggy said:


> Actually, City of Austin will pay for fingerprints of all TNC drivers ... even with city paying Uber refuses fingerprints.


Wow. Sorry; had not read that. Makes this even more insane. I guess some of the other theories are valid then. E.g., along the lines of Uber knowing it will greatly thin out their revolving driver pool. And thus make it harder for them to hold on until they get to promised land of driverless cars.


----------



## Ziggy

Unreal ... lukewarm coverage on CNN ... almost as if they have invested in Uber or just have lazy reporters
- http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/08/technology/uber-lyft-austin-vote-fingerprinting/


----------



## villetta

I_Like_Spam said:


> I can't see what the problem Uber and/or Lyft have with fingerprinting their partners.
> 
> When I got my hack license from the city of Pittsburgh, I had to have a photo ID, criminal background and fingerprinting as part of the licensing procedure.
> 
> It provided some assurance to the traveling public that I wasn't a dangerous maniac.


In Houston, you have to get all of that done on your own before the Taxi/limo companies will even talk to you about driving with them.


----------



## Yuri Lygotme

Uber and Lyft spent over $8.2 million pushing Proposition 1, apparently outspending their opponents by a 80:1 ratio. But on election day, the proposal to repeal ultimately received just 39,083 votes -- 44% of the total cast -- meaning the *Uber & Lyft lobbyists spent $209 for each vote received.*

Now you let those numbers sink in while you are still driving for peanuts a mile.


----------



## Hackenstein

Yuri Lygotme said:


> Uber and Lyft spent over $8.2 million pushing Proposition 1, apparently outspending their opponents by a 80:1 ratio. But on election day, the proposal to repeal ultimately received just 39,083 votes -- 44% of the total cast -- meaning the *Uber & Lyft lobbyists spent $209 for each vote received.*
> 
> Now you let those numbers sink in while you are still driving for peanuts a mile.


Astounding. 'Capitalism' is pretty disgusting.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

A good tune for uber would be Brahms Lullaby, They don't get their way so they pout like a spoiled rich kid.


----------



## Ignatiusreily

Uber & Lyft need a reason to continue operating in Austin, TX and get back to the negotiating table. Please consider signing and sharing this petition to "give drivers 4 more weeks to make the transition"

Regardless of how this thing pans out their are drivers like myself who depend on theses services for making money. The city wants Uber/Lyft to stay and so do most of the people who voted against Prop 1, they just got pissed off at Uber's bullying tactics.

Again please sign and consider sharing

[bc I am new to this forum I can't post the link. but go to CHANGE website that has the the first the letters of ORGANIZATION in its address.
*Austin rideshare drivers urge 4 week transition period before ceasing operation*

THANKS!


----------



## trickynikki

This is bad news for Uber. Where Uber is regulated, juristrictions made it fairly easy for Uber to set up shop. Elected officials wanted to look good and we're afraid of legal battles with Uber so they appeased Uber but knew that they would bring in new rules in the future. It appears now, after losing so many other battles and consumer sentiment is not what it once was, juristrictions would now feel empowered to take Uber to task. With more expenses and added time to become a driver Uber loses out. Customers are now use to having their ride arrive in only a few minutes, and with too many drivers, drivers are not really making any money. Money from investors will dry up quicker than you think. Without that money Uber will sink and sink fast.


----------



## I_Like_Spam

Ignatiusreily said:


> *Austin rideshare drivers urge 4 week transition period before ceasing operation*
> 
> THANKS!


There is a lot to be said for orderly transitions, but the people of Austin spoke at the polls and they want you guys fingerprinted and photographed like any other drivers.

I doubt that local politicians will diss the voters this quickly anyhow.

But the good news for those in your circumstance, is that there still will be a need to get people from where they are to where they need to be. Besides the usual cab and limo outfits, I'd suspect that a lot of the hotels and other institutions will be running their courtesy vans more with these changes, I'd really suggest that you treat this as an opportunity. The work is still out there, even though Uber has left the building.


----------



## trickynikki

Ignatiusreily said:


> Uber & Lyft need a reason to continue operating in Austin, TX and get back to the negotiating table. Please consider signing and sharing this petition to "give drivers 4 more weeks to make the transition"
> 
> Regardless of how this thing pans out their are drivers like myself who depend on theses services for making money. The city wants Uber/Lyft to stay and so do most of the people who voted against Prop 1, they just got pissed off at Uber's bullying tactics.
> 
> Again please sign and consider sharing
> 
> [bc I am new to this forum I can't post the link. but go to CHANGE website that has the the first the letters of ORGANIZATION in its address.
> *Austin rideshare drivers urge 4 week transition period before ceasing operation*
> 
> THANKS!


Why? Have you or Uber considered what taxi drivers have gone through? Uber comes in and disrupts the industry and now you what others to support this petition? People who support Uber to make money and to save money at the expense of others, others who have invested more time and money and now you feel your income is treated simply because you backed a bully. Uber will say what they want about their drivers, but they really don't. They care about winning, and when they lose they cry.
My comments are not directed at you, personally. Uber has created a problem that has taken money out of the pockets of taxi drivers and Uber drivers.


----------



## Ziggy

Ignatiusreily said:


> Uber & Lyft need a reason to continue operating in Austin, TX and get back to the negotiating table. Please consider signing and sharing this petition to "give drivers 4 more weeks to make the transition"
> Regardless of how this thing pans out their are drivers like myself who depend on theses services for making money. The city wants Uber/Lyft to stay and so do most of the people who voted against Prop 1, they just got pissed off at Uber's bullying tactics.


Obviously, you haven't been following anything about the TNC ordinance that has been discussed here or city hall for the past 8 months. The TNC Ordinance that was passed in December 2015 ... actually doesn't require Uber/Lyft to be fully compliant until 2017 ... and by fully, I mean only 90% ... because Austin gave U/L 10% variance on having all drivers fingerprinted.

So Uber & Lyft do not need an extra 4 weeks ... they have until 2017 (although there is a 25% compliance threshold due in July .... can't remember the exact date). Uber & Lyft know that they have until 2017 ... but they (Uber & Lyft) are deciding to leave town ... Austin isn't asking them or forcing them to leave town ... but they (Uber & Lyft) are the ones who decided to leave town. *BTW had they won, they probably would have cut fares again; just like they did after getting the petition passed earlier this year.


----------



## I_Like_Spam

Ziggy said:


> So Uber & Lyft do not need an extra 4 weeks ... they have until 2017 (although there is a 25% compliance threshold due in July .... can't remember the exact date). Uber & Lyft know that they have until 2017 ... but they (Uber & Lyft) are deciding to leave town .


They apparently decided on their own to leave town, under those circumstances, the city should tell them not to let the door hit them in the ass on the way out.

Nothing the city can do, or petitioners can do about that.

That's the real problem with corporations coming in with no ties to the community, or no license to operate as a public utility. They are free to leave at the drop of a hat, and that's what they did.


----------



## Ziggy

I_Like_Spam said:


> They apparently decided on their own to leave town, under those circumstances, the city should tell them not to let the door hit them in the ass on the way out. Nothing the city can do, or petitioners can do about that. That's the real problem with corporations coming in with no ties to the community, or no license to operate as a public utility. They are free to leave at the drop of a hat, and that's what they did.


Yep ... Uber & Lyft really haven't been good neighbors in any city that I know of ... though they'll spend millions on lobbyists and propaganda trying to ramrod their agenda into a city, state, country. I'm not sure I've ever read an article where Uber (the company) went a community in need and "saved the day"; I know that a few weeks ago when Houston was flooded up to their eyeballs ... Uber set surge to 8.8X citywide (not very neighborly). And just after Austin drivers collected 65,000 signatures to get Prop 1 on the ballot for yesterday's election ... Uber/Lyft both cut driver pay by 20%+ (nice reward for the drivers who got all the petitions signed) ... likely a good indicator of the reward drivers were going to get if Prop 1 had passed.


----------



## I_Like_Spam

Ziggy said:


> Yep ... Uber & Lyft really haven't been good neighbors in any city that I know of ...


They are the worst.

I'm a reasonable individual, I can understand if they find fingerprinting of the partners to be intolerable and feeling pushed out.

But they didn't have to leave, if they didn't want to comply, until January 2017. Enough time for an orderly transition to a new regime.

They are promoting chaos on purpose, I can't see a politician worth their salt putting up with this crapola at all. Particularly in this case, where the voters have spoken.


----------



## backstreets-trans

trickynikki said:


> This is bad news for Uber. Where Uber is regulated, juristrictions made it fairly easy for Uber to set up shop. Elected officials wanted to look good and we're afraid of legal battles with Uber so they appeased Uber but knew that they would bring in new rules in the future. It appears now, after losing so many other battles and consumer sentiment is not what it once was, juristrictions would now feel empowered to take Uber to task. With more expenses and added time to become a driver Uber loses out. Customers are now use to having their ride arrive in only a few minutes, and with too many drivers, drivers are not really making any money. Money from investors will dry up quicker than you think. Without that money Uber will sink and sink fast.


Another repercussion of the finger printing process is that local governments will see the actual number of people driving for uber and the driver churn rate. If uber states that they have 10,000 drivers but 50,000 people have been finger printed then the city knows 40,000 drivers started and quit. More regulation means more transparency. Investors will see that everything isn't so rosy behind the uber curtain.


----------



## Yuri Lygotme

backstreets-trans said:


> Another repercussion of the finger printing process is that local governments will see the actual number of people driving for uber and the driver churn rate. If uber states that they have 10,000 drivers but 50,000 people have been finger printed then the city knows 40,000 drivers started and quit. More regulation means more transparency. Investors will see that everything isn't so rosy behind the uber curtain.


DING DING DING DING DING DING DING !!!!!!!
WE HAVE A WINNER !!!!!!


----------



## ReviTULize

I don't see what the big deal is re: fingerprinting. I read somewhere that Uber released a statement saying it could impact the drivers financially. Well...not if they pay for it!! What's the big deal??


----------



## Teksaz

This is fantastic news and Houston is next. Goober will be losing millions of dollars a day over something so trivial. I love it. Glad to see Texas stand up to these overbearing, arrogant douch bags.

Is Lyft stupid? Lyft could comply with what the cities are requesting and have the state of Texas to themselves. What's wrong with these Silicon Valley ingrates. 

Unlike Texas, Goober is in the sack with Arizona Gov. Douchy and Phx. Mayor Stanton. Goober can do no wrong according to these jokers, sadly enough. 

They took the hook, line, and sinker and probably a nice payoff from Goober. Lol


----------



## I_Like_Spam

backstreets-trans said:


> Another repercussion of the finger printing process is that local governments will see the actual number of people driving for uber and the driver churn rate..


Even under ideal circumstances with less supervision and more compensation for drivers, not everyone is really wired to spend long hours, many alone in a car on the road.

The current situation may make it worse, but there will always be a lot of turnover in this kind of field. Especially since an Uber driver really can't build a clientele that calls for them specifically, like a cab driver with their steady riders.


----------



## I_Like_Spam

ATX 22 said:


> All fun and games until you are involved in an accident. Then your insurance company will become your proctologist.


If a driver has the proper insurance from their own insurance company, I don't see where it would be a problem. The fact that Uber was knocked out of the loop on a trip isn't a concern of the insurance company.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Hackenstein said:


> They spend a Billion bucks in China every year. The lawyer fees on one of their 50,000 lawsuits would pay for fingerprinting in every City on Earth for the next Century.


According to the news stories, they didn't spend $1bil in China last year - 
they LOST $1 bil in China last year!


----------



## LA Cabbie

ATX 22 said:


> Nothing. Mayor Adler advocated voting against the Uber proposition. He's mistaken if he thinks they'll ever act like a big boy company that adapts to change.
> Looks like Uber doesn't like being on the other side of disruption.


Right on!

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business...ion-its-own/ywjamDoXE2EphuNNuLcV3J/story.html

"We're more than happy for you to continue developing your app, but ask that you remove any features that list Uber's prices next to our competitors," Chris Messina wrote. "Please let us know if you have any questions. Thanks!"

Uber in its pax app brags about how much cheaper (20%, 30%, 40%) it is compared to taxi.

Uber's new motto:

It's OK for to Uber you but you don't Uber us back.


----------



## BurgerTiime

Well finally a city that gets it. All you have to do it look at the past actions of some drivers and find serious problems. This vote got it right. If you had nothing to hide you'd have no problem with finger printing. All other industries have it and also something called an "interview". Lol

*In other news: 
Yet another rape case: http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/ne...-raping-and-robbing-passenger-in-mexico-city/


----------



## Ziggy

Featured Thread.

If you're not in Austin, please forward this thread to your City Council, Mayor or news media ... maybe your city will join the fight


----------



## secretadmirer

Like most newbies on here, accept10... is still on the uber "pinkcloud". It'll wear off sooner or later.

"Featured Thread.

If you're not in Austin, please forward this thread to your City Council, Mayor or news media ... maybe your city will join the fight"

I will do that. Some times you have to go out there and win one for the zigler!!!!!!


----------



## Slavic Riga

ChinatownJake said:


> Uber after Prop. 1 defeat stated that fingerprinting impedes the recruitment of new drivers. But I think that's a B.S. smoke screen from them. They just don't want to pay the money for fingerprinting. Extremely short-sighted. Better for everyone if Uber/Lyft did fingerprint check.


Uber cannot quote that B/S line anymore "Fingerprinting impedes the recruitment of new drivers".
City of Houston Mayor has made it known to the entire world by quoting *"Its a Red Herring".* 
Uber may have to use a new line or Mantra.


----------



## Slavic Riga

Ziggy said:


> Unreal ... lukewarm coverage on CNN ... almost as if they have invested in Uber or just have lazy reporters
> - http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/08/technology/uber-lyft-austin-vote-fingerprinting/


All News Channels & Media do not want to say anything negative about Uber. They are all bought by *Uber Corporation with free rides & advertisement budgets.*


----------



## Ziggy

I_Like_Spam said:


> If a driver has the proper insurance from their own insurance company, I don't see where it would be a problem. The fact that Uber was knocked out of the loop on a trip isn't a concern of the insurance company.


Key operative phrase "proper insurance" - which means commercial livery insurance (about $400/mo); the other thing the driver will need is a permit to p/u pax in his city/airport ...


----------



## Slavic Riga

backstreets-trans said:


> Another repercussion of the finger printing process is that local governments will see the actual number of people driving for uber and the driver churn rate. If uber states that they have 10,000 drivers but 50,000 people have been finger printed then the city knows 40,000 drivers started and quit. More regulation means more transparency. Investors will see that everything isn't so rosy behind the uber curtain.


*The reason you mentioned is the main reason & it is the information, they don't want the public to have under the Freedom of Information Act (FIA).*


----------



## Yuri Lygotme

njn said:


> In the morning, the No Agenda Show discussed this exact topic. Interesting to learn about b status corporations. The seizure of operations is trying to set a precedence, but in the end it is all about the money.


ah yes the No Agenda show, hosted by Adam Curry, former MTV VJ, a birther, a truther and one nutty guy who believes the Sandy Hook shooting was fake (also believes the moon landing was fake). No surprise his wifes divorced him.

Amen fist bump!


----------



## Ziggy

Here's the map showing which precincts voted yes or no ... purple (NO) / blue (Yes).
Interestingly, it seems they areas that seem to generate the most trips (except DT) voted NO. And other than the people in DT, most of the Yes votes came from remote areas; that probably it's hard to get a cab in. [source = http://traviselectionresults.com/en...=201605&tabType=C&districtId=310&contestId=3]


----------



## Ziggy

Granted getting around downtown was a bit easier for people with U/L ... however, people have been flocking to ACL & SXSW for over 10 years before U/L existed ... and no one got stranded, ever (*except we ditched a roommate once for being a royal PITA; but when we went back to pick him up, he had already gotten a ride back to campus with someone else)


----------



## yoyodyne

Ziggy said:


> > https://www.texastribune.org/2016/05/07/early-voting-austin-proposition-against/
> 
> Uber and Lyft have dumped more than $8 million into a campaign supporting Proposition 1, sponsoring glossy mailers, television ads and free rides to the polls. The relentless campaigning is a symptom of six months of sparring between the city and the ride-hailing companies.
> 
> ---
> *Voters reject Uber & Lyft's Prop. 1*


So, the people of Austin win?

Austin Cab Co. Rates

Flag Pull (entry) for the first 1/6 mile: $2.50
Each additional 1/6 mile: $0.40
Rate per mile after 1st mile: $2.40
Wait time per minute: $0.483
Wait time per hour: $29.00


----------



## Jay Dean

Found after the election


----------



## Jay Dean

Ziggy said:


> Here's the map showing which precincts voted yes or no ... purple (NO) / blue (Yes).
> Interestingly, it seems they areas that seem to generate the most trips (except DT) voted NO. And other than the people in DT, most of the Yes votes came from remote areas; that probably it's hard to get a cab in.


So many comments on other news sites from people say everyone that voted "NO" never even use tncs...BS!


----------



## Old Rocker

Slavic Riga said:


> *The reason you mentioned is the main reason & it is the information, they don't want the public to have under the Freedom of Information Act (FIA).*


The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) only applies to the federal government, not to state or local governments.


----------



## Ziggy

Jay Dean said:


> So many comments on other news sites from people say everyone that voted "NO" never even use tncs...BS!


Problem for TNCs is that the spent so much money trying to win over voters ... something didn't smell right. You know that there's more to the story when you see 3 commercials from Uber/Lyft Pac during a 30 minute TV show ... you're not gonna buffalo a Texan with that much BS


----------



## Jay Dean

Ziggy said:


> Problem for TNCs is that the spent so much money trying to win over voters ... something didn't smell right. You know that there's more to the story when you see 3 commercials from Uber/Lyft Pac during a 30 minute TV show ... you're not gonna buffalo a Texan with that much BS


Yeah all the pax I took said they felt smothered in calls,txtx,pamphlets and email..one way to piss people off is to spam them lol, I think your right they just did not know that spam will turn off anyone more then anything....then again maybe I shouldn't say that lol


----------



## Ziggy

Jay Dean said:


> Yeah all the pax I took said they felt smothered in calls,txtx,pamphlets and email..one way to piss people off is to spam them lol, I think your right they just did not know that spam will turn off anyone more then anything....then again maybe I shouldn't say that lol


Typical Uber/Lyft arrogance ... "people love us, even though we gouge them on surge and we undercut the drivers ... people love us, they will vote for us"


----------



## Jay Dean

Ziggy said:


> Typical Uber/Lyft arrogance ... "people love us, even though we gouge them on surge and we undercut the drivers ... people love us, they will vote for us"


What is crazy is I really really enjoyed driving for lyft on airport runs, I guess I just got duped into thinking they were better, they could easily say we will stay be unlike our competitor and be different. But nope...they claim they can't sustain under the new regulations well I'm sure you can sustain for 2 ****ing weeks instead of ruining lives right away for those that drove for you and made you rich instead of firing them 2 days notice, I'm so unimpressed with both companies I am not sure I could ever take them seriously ever again, much less drive for them.


----------



## Ziggy

Jay Dean said:


> What is crazy is I really really enjoyed driving for lyft on airport runs, I guess I just got duped into thinking they were better, they could easily say we will stay be unlike our competitor and be different. But nope...they claim they can't sustain under the new regulations well I'm sure you can sustain for 2 &%[email protected]!*ing weeks instead of ruining lives right away for those that drove for you and made you rich instead of firing them 2 days notice, I'm so unimpressed with both companies I am not sure I could ever take them seriously ever again, much less drive for them.


Bear in mind ... if you ever watched Lyft spokesperson at COA meetings they would always say ... "Lyft doesn't operate in any city with fingerprint requirement" ... unfortunately, I never had the opportunity to call them out during the session (so that it was on tape) and say "What about NYC?" ... I did ask some staffer from Lyft (off camera) "What about NYC?" and her response was, "NYC is different" ... wtf? like fingerprints in NYC don't really count? How can Lyft claim that they don't operate in cities with fingerprints, when they operate in NYC and NYC requires TLC permit (fingerprints, drug test, medical test, etc)?


----------



## I_Like_Spam

yoyodyne said:


> So, the people of Austin win?
> 
> Austin Cab Co. Rates
> 
> Flag Pull (entry) for the first 1/6 mile: $2.50
> Each additional 1/6 mile: $0.40
> Rate per mile after 1st mile: $2.40
> Wait time per minute: $0.483
> Wait time per hour: $29.00


The price of cab transportation is pretty irrelevant to the discussion.

Uber and Lyft have flown the coop, but ride sharing lives on, as well as hotel and hospital courtesy vans and other transportation options other than taxis.

BTW, the referendum doesn't outlaw ride sharing at all, other ride sharing outfits are still in operation. Since Uber doesn't have any vehicles or driving staff, it should actually be a pretty seamless transition for Austin travelers as the same guys "driving with Uber" can be driving tomorrow with someone else.


----------



## Gilbert_Aus

Great News. Sucked in Uber!!


----------



## SafeT

I guess the lazy ass entitled millennials were too busy smoking pot and getting laid to bother voting for their favorite cheap ride services. I bet they will be crying like babies when they get the bad news.


----------



## JimS

Here's Austin this morning:


----------



## yoyodyne

I_Like_Spam said:


> the same guys "driving with Uber" can be driving tomorrow with someone else


For instance?


----------



## UberKim

Ziggy said:


> Obviously, you haven't been following anything about the TNC ordinance that has been discussed here or city hall for the past 8 months. The TNC Ordinance that was passed in December 2015 ... actually doesn't require Uber/Lyft to be fully compliant until 2017 ... and by fully, I mean only 90% ... because Austin gave U/L 10% variance on having all drivers fingerprinted.
> 
> So Uber & Lyft do not need an extra 4 weeks ... they have until 2017 (although there is a 25% compliance threshold due in July .... can't remember the exact date). Uber & Lyft know that they have until 2017 ... but they (Uber & Lyft) are deciding to leave town ... Austin isn't asking them or forcing them to leave town ... but they (Uber & Lyft) are the ones who decided to leave town. *BTW had they won, they probably would have cut fares again; just like they did after getting the petition passed earlier this year.


they are "suspending" operations as part of a ploy. They need to be able to point to Austin when this subject comes up as it is in Chicago, Atlanta, Los Angeles and other cities. Austin is being sacrificed so they can say "see! do you want us to suspend in your city?"


----------



## Slavic Riga

Ziggy said:


> Typical Uber/Lyft arrogance ... "people love us, even though we gouge them on surge and we undercut the drivers ... people love us, they will vote for us"


And the people did. People said *NO* & voted *NO.*


----------



## Ziggy

yoyodyne said:


> For instance?


GetMe, Wingz ... both approved TNCs in Austin.
More coming in near future


----------



## Slavic Riga

Ziggy said:


> Bear in mind ... if you ever watched Lyft spokesperson at COA meetings they would always say ... "Lyft doesn't operate in any city with fingerprint requirement" ... unfortunately, I never had the opportunity to call them out during the session (so that it was on tape) and say "What about NYC?" ... I did ask some staffer from Lyft (off camera) "What about NYC?" and her response was, "NYC is different" ... wtf? like fingerprints in NYC don't really count? How can Lyft claim that they don't operate in cities with fingerprints, when they operate in NYC and NYC requires TLC permit (fingerprints, drug test, medical test, etc)?


Lyft staffer "NYC is different" because NYC is in USA & Austin is in Texas. As, per her in her mind & geography its two different cities & countries. These are the ones who don't have a clue of reality.


----------



## I_Like_Spam

Ziggy said:


> GetMe, Wingz ... both approved TNCs in Austin.
> More coming in near future


I'm sure that the Austin Chamber of Commerce will be distributing this information at the airport as a public service.

For Uber and Lyft to think they are irreplaceable is pretty nuts.


----------



## Slavic Riga

Any Takers. Uber & LYFT will be back soon. They have to recover campaign finances. Fares will also be lowered.


----------



## I_Like_Spam

Slavic Riga said:


> Any Takers. Uber & LYFT will be back soon. They have to recover campaign finances. Fares will also be lowered.


They'll have to reduce fares , and probably substantially. Regain their share of the ridership, the premature shuttering of their service isn't going to be taken that well by the voters


----------



## Lack9133

I think the biggest takeaway from all of this is the fact that Uber’s assumed ability to organize the masses has taken a massive hit. Even while spending over 8M to push their agenda, only about 85,000 people showed up to vote which means only at 44%, only 38,000 voted in favor of Uber which is almost 30,000 individuals short of those who signed the petition to begin with (I think they had around 65,000 sign the petition in order to get the re-vote). 

Having 30,000 people sign the petition and then not show, or be legal to vote, sent a clear message that to regulators that Uber’s political clout is nothing to fear.


----------



## Lack9133

I_Like_Spam said:


> They'll have to reduce fares , and probably substantially. Regain their share of the ridership, the premature shuttering of their service isn't going to be taken that well by the voters


Agreed on shutting the doors isn't going to be taken well by the voters but let's not forget the drivers they are putting out of work. If Uber comes back, will those drivers trust Uber as a source of income once again knowing that they could pack up shop anytime they don't get their way? I'm curious to know how many of the drivers in general will come back if Uber reneges on their threat. Taking away the livelihood of so many individuals is going to leave a bad taste in the mouth of those who Uber depends on to pick up trips.

And if they do come back, I seriously doubt they will be able to do so by offering lower rates at the expense of those disgruntled drivers. They will either have to pass those costs onto an already displeased driver base leading to fewer drivers and longer wait times, or by eating the costs which will cost them millions.


----------



## tohellwithu

Nice ...weldone Austin. Thats the way to go. Thats good..loved this news and hope every city will do that pretty soon. Lets see how uber will survive with finger printing. ..


----------



## Novus Caesar

I don't mind background checks. But it is local governments and regulations that screwed over the industry and consumers for decades. That is why taxis are so screwed up.


----------



## Brooklyn

Lack9133 said:


> I think the biggest takeaway from all of this is the fact that Uber's assumed ability to organize the masses has taken a massive hit. Even while spending over 8M to push their agenda, only about 85,000 people showed up to vote which means only at 44%, only 38,000 voted in favor of Uber which is almost 30,000 individuals short of those who signed the petition to begin with (I think they had around 65,000 sign the petition in order to get the re-vote).
> 
> Having 30,000 people sign the petition and then not show, or be legal to vote, sent a clear message that to regulators that Uber's political clout is nothing to fear.


I don't get why it was so scary in the first place.. A couple of Facebook likes, pressing a button on the app... What does that really mean.. if that's the case all those online petitions should have scared Trump out of the US.. A lot of people will be political if it means pressing 1-2 buttons on an app... After that actually getting them to show up to vote is different.. Austin called their bluff and won.



Lack9133 said:


> Agreed on shutting the doors isn't going to be taken well by the voters but let's not forget the drivers they are putting out of work. If Uber comes back, will those drivers trust Uber as a source of income once again knowing that they could pack up shop anytime they don't get their way? I'm curious to know how many of the drivers in general will come back if Uber reneges on their threat. Taking away the livelihood of so many individuals is going to leave a bad taste in the mouth of those who Uber depends on to pick up trips.
> 
> And if they do come back, I seriously doubt they will be able to do so by offering lower rates at the expense of those disgruntled drivers. They will either have to pass those costs onto an already displeased driver base leading to fewer drivers and longer wait times, or by eating the costs which will cost them millions.


Drivers will flock back once Uber is back in Austin.. The puppets will dance. There will always be the "yo I made .15 cents a mile on this trip and I don't have any costs because it's my parents car"



Novus Caesar said:


> I don't mind background checks. But it is local governments and regulations that screwed over the industry and consumers for decades. That is why taxis are so screwed up.


Oh how we forget how much praise Uber received when they first started blowing up from the drivers.. In such a short period of time Uber/Lyft etc were able to screw all that up. Imagine if they had a monopoly and did all this stuff already.. Imagine how much of a shit show without regulation they would be down the line.


----------



## Old Rocker

Novus Caesar said:


> I don't mind background checks. But it is local governments and regulations that screwed over the industry and consumers for decades. That is why taxis are so screwed up.


I'm not so sure about that. In many cities, taxi companies 'worked closely' with city hall to enact anti-competitive rules. That's why taxi medallions in NYC, pre-Uber, were worth over a million dollars.

Even here in Houston there is a limit on how many taxi licenses the city issues, although the city does expand the number each year. Applicants sign up for a lottery for new licenses. I don't know the cost.


----------



## Novus Caesar

Brooklyn said:


> I don't get why it was so scary in the first place.. A couple of Facebook likes, pressing a button on the app... What does that really mean.. if that's the case all those online petitions should have scared Trump out of the US.. A lot of people will be political if it means pressing 1-2 buttons on an app... After that actually getting them to show up to vote is different.. Austin called their bluff and won.
> 
> Drivers will flock back once Uber is back in Austin.. The puppets will dance. There will always be the "yo I made .15 cents a mile on this trip and I don't have any costs because it's my parents car"
> 
> Oh how we forget how much praise Uber received when they first started blowing up from the drivers.. In such a short period of time Uber/Lyft etc were able to screw all that up. Imagine if they had a monopoly and did all this stuff already.. Imagine how much of a shit show without regulation they would be down the line.


I have no problem with Uber. I understand I cannot makes living off it. I work about 10 hrs a week on Friday and Saturday night to make about $600-750 a month supplemental income. The more government regulation, the less we will make.


----------



## Slavic Riga

*Here is the truth as to why Uber & Travis Kalanick is against finger printing?

Travis K was involved in fraud. Formed Two pirated companies, declared Bankruptcy. The reason he is fighting fingerprints & FBI based background checks.

Q. Are there certain crimes which will make me ineligible to obtain a MLO license?
A. Yes. *_The Department cannot grant a license to an individual who has any felony conviction or a conviction of misdemeanor involving fraud, dishonesty or any financial industry-related misdemeanor._

*Q. If I declare bankruptcy after receiving a license, do I need to notify the Department?
A. Yes. *_You must notify the Department within three business days after filing bankruptcy. In addition, there are other questions on the Form MU4 related to Financial Issues. You are required to update the answers to these questions within thirty days if there are new events or circumstances which would require you to answer "Yes" to any of those questions._

*Q. What factors will the Department consider in determining whether I am financially responsible?*
_*A.* _The Department will consider several factors, including, but not limited to, tax liens, judgments, patterns of serious delinquent accounts, and foreclosures.
*
Q. I filed for bankruptcy. Will I still be able to get a MLO license?*
_*A.* A bankruptcy does not automatically disqualify you from receiving a MLO license. The Department may consider the factors which led to the bankruptcy filing in making its determination as to whether the applicant is financially responsible

This I found under the state of Nebraska. 
Website is http://www.ndbf.ne.gov/mb/background-credit-checks-faqs.pdf_


----------



## Novus Caesar

Brooklyn said:


> I don't get why it was so scary in the first place.. A couple of Facebook likes, pressing a button on the app... What does that really mean.. if that's the case all those online petitions should have scared Trump out of the US.. A lot of people will be political if it means pressing 1-2 buttons on an app... After that actually getting them to show up to vote is different.. Austin called their bluff and won.
> 
> Drivers will flock back once Uber is back in Austin.. The puppets will dance. There will always be the "yo I made .15 cents a mile on this trip and I don't have any costs because it's my parents car"
> 
> Oh how we forget how much praise Uber received when they first started blowing up from the drivers.. In such a short period of time Uber/Lyft etc were able to screw all that up. Imagine if they had a monopoly and did all this stuff already.. Imagine how much of a shit show without regulation they would be down the line.


I have very little problem with Uber. I understand I cannot make a living off it. I work about 10 hrs a week on Friday and Saturday night to make about $600-750 a month supplemental income. The more government regulation, the less we will make.


----------



## Novus Caesar

Slavic Riga said:


> *Here is the truth as to why Uber & Travis Kalanick is against finger printing?
> 
> Travis K was involved in fraud. Formed Two pirated companies, declared Bankruptcy. The reason he is fighting fingerprints & FBI based background checks.
> 
> Q. Are there certain crimes which will make me ineligible to obtain a MLO license?
> A. Yes. *_The Department cannot grant a license to an individual who has any felony conviction or a conviction of misdemeanor involving fraud, dishonesty or any financial industry-related misdemeanor._
> 
> *Q. If I declare bankruptcy after receiving a license, do I need to notify the Department?
> A. Yes. *_You must notify the Department within three business days after filing bankruptcy. In addition, there are other questions on the Form MU4 related to Financial Issues. You are required to update the answers to these questions within thirty days if there are new events or circumstances which would require you to answer "Yes" to any of those questions._
> 
> *Q. What factors will the Department consider in determining whether I am financially responsible?*
> _*A.* _The Department will consider several factors, including, but not limited to, tax liens, judgments, patterns of serious delinquent accounts, and foreclosures.
> *
> Q. I filed for bankruptcy. Will I still be able to get a MLO license?*
> _*A.* A bankruptcy does not automatically disqualify you from receiving a MLO license. The Department may consider the factors which led to the bankruptcy filing in making its determination as to whether the applicant is financially responsible
> 
> This I found under the state of Nebraska.
> Website is http://www.ndbf.ne.gov/mb/background-credit-checks-faqs.pdf_


I work for the government and have security clearance for my fulltime job. This is correct. We can have people with misdemeanors be okay and get clearance, but owe money on some past credit cards? You are screwed. Credit history is one of the most important parts of government clearances and employment. Big with many civilian jobs as well.


----------



## Brooklyn

Old Rocker said:


> I'm not so sure about that. In many cities, taxi companies 'worked closely' with city hall to enact anti-competitive rules. That's why taxi medallions in NYC, pre-Uber, were worth over a million dollars.
> 
> Even here in Houston there is a limit on how many taxi licenses the city issues, although the city does expand the number each year. Applicants sign up for a lottery for new licenses. I don't know the cost.


It's not that the taxi companies worked closely with city hall... Bloomberg actually hated the big medallion guys. Hated them a lot. Bloomberg actually opened the market.. The reason there's so many regulations is because in NYC you can't have it like everywhere else where you don't need a license or anything to operate. Nyc would be a shit show. There is already Uber drivers holding up Uber signs gypsying airport here telling unsuspecting people to come with them straight out the gate and walk with them to their cars.. Can you imagine if that was legal?



Novus Caesar said:


> I have very little problem with Uber. I understand I cannot make a living off it. I work about 10 hrs a week on Friday and Saturday night to make about $600-750 a month supplemental income. The more government regulation, the less we will make.


Or... Just hear me out.. The government does it like the taxi industry and sets minimums so you can be guaranteed a certain amount instead of a private company saying "hey you guys earn too much in this city/town.. Time to take a pay cut"


----------



## Novus Caesar

Brooklyn said:


> It's not that the taxi companies worked closely with city hall... Bloomberg actually hated the big medallion guys. Hated them a lot. Bloomberg actually opened the market.. The reason there's so many regulations is because in NYC you can't have it like everywhere else where you don't need a license or anything to operate. Nyc would be a shit show. There is already Uber drivers holding up Uber signs gypsying airport here telling unsuspecting people to come with them straight out the gate and walk with them to their cars.. Can you imagine if that was legal?
> 
> Or... Just hear me out.. The government does it like the taxi industry and sets minimums so you can be guaranteed a certain amount instead of a private company saying "hey you guys earn too much in this city/town.. Time to take a pay cut"


Then we are no different and we lose our jobs. There is a reason most cities have taxi quotas. Rip off for the consumer as well.


----------



## Brooklyn

Novus Caesar said:


> Then we are no different and we lose our jobs. There is a reason most cities have taxi quotas. Rip off for the consumer as well.


How do you lose your job? That doesn't make sense. You're saying finger prints and wage minimums = you losing your job?

Taxi quotas also have a lot to do with

1. Guaranteeing a driver can earn a living wage
2. Traffic/pollution

You realize when each time NYC put a taxi medallion on the road they ran tests on how much traffic, pollution, and wage differences each would cause right?


----------



## Old Rocker

Brooklyn said:


> How do you lose your job? That doesn't make sense. You're saying finger prints and wage minimums = you losing your job?
> 
> Taxi quotas also have a lot to do with
> 
> 1. Guaranteeing a driver can earn a living wage
> 2. Traffic/pollution
> 
> You realize when each time NYC put a taxi medallion on the road they ran tests on how much traffic, pollution, and wage differences each would cause right?


If I'm not mistaken, and I could be, NYC awarded less than 1000 new taxi medallions between 1930 and 2014?


----------



## I_Like_Spam

Lack9133 said:


> Agreed on shutting the doors isn't going to be taken well by the voters but let's not forget the drivers they are putting out of work.


I don't see Uber putting any drivers out of work with this move at all. Any driver who was smart enough to sign on to Uber, can just as easily sign up for a different computer app on their smart phone. Uber isn't a unique service, its just a technology company.

Everything and everybody needed to transport Austin travelers from where they are to where they want to be is already in the city. Uber doesn't have a single livery vehicle or a single driver employee that they are pulling from the market.

A little temporary confusion, but nothing that is insurmountable at all.


----------



## Brooklyn

Old Rocker said:


> If I'm not mistaken, and I could be, NYC awarded less than 1000 new taxi medallions between 1930 and 2014?


More or less.. you're right.. but it's not as simple as that.. before yellow taxis used to be radio dispatched.. then the mayor at the time wanted to break them up which gave birth to the FHV so even though the amount of taxis didn't budge.. they were just spun off into a different market which obviously has no cap. A big reason they keep the cap is because of the congestion it can cause.. to guarantee a taxi driver can retire with atleast something reasonable opposed to nothing. Should the number of medallions increased? of course.. which is what Bloomberg did.. the city has over 2,000 taxi medallions sitting on the bench right now the city planned on selling to raise some revenue for the city.. they also planned on putting out an additional 18,000 green taxis to serve the outer boroughs.

I don't know about you, but a taxi system put in place to guarantee a driver a living wage and that passes all the safety inspections sounds a bit better than a system that clips the drivers pockets so much that it makes the drivers beg to not have any overhead. But that's just me man.. if you want to keep fighting your city hall from making you take a $50 finger print test because Uber has cut your earnings so much.. that's on you playa.



I_Like_Spam said:


> I don't see Uber putting any drivers out of work with this move at all. Any driver who was smart enough to sign on to Uber, can just as easily sign up for a different computer app on their smart phone. Uber isn't a unique service, its just a technology company.
> 
> Everything and everybody needed to transport Austin travelers from where they are to where they want to be is already in the city. Uber doesn't have a single livery vehicle or a single driver employee that they are pulling from the market.
> 
> A little temporary confusion, but nothing that is insurmountable at all.


Exactly.. you know how the saying goes... "same shit, different toilet"... I love the fear mongerors with their "but now we're all out of work".. relax.


----------



## Brooklyn

Old Rocker

Also.. to make sure the taxi industry didn't progress a lot of times city hall purposely stunted the taxi industries growth in NYC.. don't know about other cities but in NYC it was stunted.


----------



## Txchick

ChinatownJake said:


> Uber after Prop. 1 defeat stated that fingerprinting impedes the recruitment of new drivers. But I think that's a B.S. smoke screen from them. They just don't want to pay the money for fingerprinting. Extremely short-sighted. Better for everyone if Uber/Lyft did fingerprint check.


Drivers would pay for the finger print B/G checks. City of Dallas has a permit process, drivers pay for it.


----------



## Old Rocker

Brooklyn said:


> More or less.. you're right.. but it's not as simple as that.. before yellow taxis used to be radio dispatched.. then the mayor at the time wanted to break them up which gave birth to the FHV so even though the amount of taxis didn't budge.. they were just spun off into a different market which obviously has no cap. A big reason they keep the cap is because of the congestion it can cause.. to guarantee a taxi driver can retire with atleast something reasonable opposed to nothing. Should the number of medallions increased? of course.. which is what Bloomberg did.. the city has over 2,000 taxi medallions sitting on the bench right now the city planned on selling to raise some revenue for the city.. they also planned on putting out an additional 18,000 green taxis to serve the outer boroughs.
> 
> I don't know about you, but a taxi system put in place to guarantee a driver a living wage and that passes all the safety inspections sounds a bit better than a system that clips the drivers pockets so much that it makes the drivers beg to not have any overhead. But that's just me man.. if you want to keep fighting your city hall from making you take a $50 finger print test because Uber has cut your earnings so much.. that's on you playa.
> 
> Exactly.. you know how the saying goes... "same shit, different toilet"... I love the fear mongerors with their "but now we're all out of work".. relax.


Thanks for the great info. It's good to hear the real scoop from a local. BTW, I favor fingerprinting. If the cabbies and limo drivers have to do it, so should the Uber/Lyft drivers.


----------



## yoyodyne

Txchick said:


> Drivers would pay for the finger print B/G checks. City of Dallas has a permit process, drivers pay for it.


So perhaps Uber's issue is that it makes it more difficult to flood the market with drivers when there is a more strict background check, as well a cost prohibitive (matter of perspective) initial investment by the driver to submit to it?


----------



## Brooklyn

yoyodyne said:


> So perhaps Uber's issue is that it makes it more difficult to flood the market with drivers when there is a more strict background check, as well a cost prohibitive (matter of perspective) initial investment by the driver to submit to it?
> 
> Bingo.. They won't be able to flood the roads with cars.





Old Rocker said:


> Thanks for the great info. It's good to hear the real scoop from a local. BTW, I favor fingerprinting. If the cabbies and limo drivers have to do it, so should the Uber/Lyft drivers.


No problem. Don't get me wrong those big medallion owners are scum though. Bloodsuckers.


----------



## Lack9133

I_Like_Spam said:


> I don't see Uber putting any drivers out of work with this move at all. Any driver who was smart enough to sign on to Uber, can just as easily sign up for a different computer app on their smart phone. Uber isn't a unique service, its just a technology company.
> 
> Everything and everybody needed to transport Austin travelers from where they are to where they want to be is already in the city. Uber doesn't have a single livery vehicle or a single driver employee that they are pulling from the market.
> 
> A little temporary confusion, but nothing that is insurmountable at all.


Not sure how you can say that 10,000 people who just had their app shut off are not out of work. That's no different than saying Exxon just laid off 10,000 people but calling that "temporary confusion" because they can eventually get a job somewhere else. It doesn't matter if they are a tech company or any other company, if they are employees or IC's, not having an income stream is not having an income stream.


----------



## Ziggy

Lack9133 said:


> Agreed on shutting the doors isn't going to be taken well by the voters but let's not forget the drivers they are putting out of work. If Uber comes back, will those drivers trust Uber as a source of income once again knowing that they could pack up shop anytime they don't get their way? I'm curious to know how many of the drivers in general will come back if Uber reneges on their threat. Taking away the livelihood of so many individuals is going to leave a bad taste in the mouth of those who Uber depends on to pick up trips.
> 
> And if they do come back, I seriously doubt they will be able to do so by offering lower rates at the expense of those disgruntled drivers. They will either have to pass those costs onto an already displeased driver base leading to fewer drivers and longer wait times, or by eating the costs which will cost them millions.


Yep ... not to mention all the drivers that Uber "conned" into signing up for Uber Financing on a new car ... some of those guys might want to pull a Jason Dalton on Uber management


----------



## UberMensch2015

Novus Caesar said:


> I have very little problem with Uber. I understand I cannot make a living off it. I work about 10 hrs a week on Friday and Saturday night to make about $600-750 a month supplemental income. The more government regulation, the less we will make.


I don't think you understand how math works. If there is finger printing than there are less uber drivers and more surge. unless you are one of the drivers that can't pass a real background check in which case i'm glad you won't be allowed to drive, you are dangerous.


----------



## Txchick

yoyodyne said:


> So perhaps Uber's issue is that it makes it more difficult to flood the market with drivers when there is a more strict background check, as well a cost prohibitive (matter of perspective) initial investment by the driver to submit to it?


Exactly! Uber & Lyft will not be able to onboard new drivers as fast. Same reason they don't want finger printed BG checks in Houston.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

To any pax or drivers in Houston/Austin and wherever uber is shutting down, you can blame uber for pulling out, not the city. If uber can't abide by the rules, then good riddence.

This is an add on edit: I'm pretty certain most people. know why uber won't comply. It's been mentioned time and time, like others said, they wanna get as many drivers on as quickly as possible. You know I would respect uber a tad bit more if they actually admitted it.


----------



## Brooklyn

Lack9133 said:


> Not sure how you can say that 10,000 people who just had their app shut off are not out of work. That's no different than saying Exxon just laid off 10,000 people but calling that "temporary confusion" because they can eventually get a job somewhere else. It doesn't matter if they are a tech company or any other company, if they are employees or IC's, not having an income stream is not having an income stream.


Lmao dude it is nothing like the same.. No offense man... But wow. I don't like disrespecting people like that but does your name stand for lack of intelligence?


----------



## Ziggy

Old Rocker said:


> I'm not so sure about that. In many cities, taxi companies 'worked closely' with city hall to enact anti-competitive rules. That's why taxi medallions in NYC, pre-Uber, were worth over a million dollars.
> 
> Even here in Houston there is a limit on how many taxi licenses the city issues, although the city does expand the number each year. Applicants sign up for a lottery for new licenses. I don't know the cost.


The limit on how many taxis can be in any city is to provide a living wage for cab drivers ... and prevent cab companies from flooding the streets with more cabs than the city would ever need. Cab companies make the bulk of their money from leasing a cab to a driver or leasing the dispatch system or leasing the medallion ... left to their own devices and without city restrictions on how many cabs can be on the road; many Cab companies would behave just like Uber and would flood the streets with cabs so that they would make more income from leases. In some cities, the Cab companies have changed to a 2 or 3 shift model ... whereby the cab drivers have to pay lease for every 8 or 12 hour segment of the day ... this allows the Cab companies to make 2-3 times what they were making when each cab driver kept the car for 24 hours.

While Houston & NYC have fingerprints ... neither city has been successful in limiting the number of TNC drivers. Uber/Lyft do not care if a driver is taking 1 trip or 10 trips per day ... as long as the pax are getting picked up and they are making their cut. As a TNC driver whether you do this part-time or full-time; it's nearly impossible to make TNC driving profitable if you're only taking 1 trip per day .... unless each trip was a $100/trip. Hopefully, now that Austin has adopted fingerprints ... the city will lay-down some common sense limitations on how many TNC drivers can be registered/driving. *it's not an easy discussion to have with drivers or city leaders ... but from an economic and environmental standpoint, it's unsustainable for even a city like Austin, Houston or NYC to have unlimited drivers. To test the waters, let's say that Uber wants to onboard 100K drivers in Austin (NYC currently has ~35K TNC drivers); currently the Austin metro is ~2M people ... if Uber did onboard 100K drivers that would be 5% of the overall Austin metro population; totally unsustainable. As it stands now with over 10K drivers we have .5-1% of the Austin metro population; granted most are part-time ... but even so imagine how much more pollution is created by TNC cars deadheading all over town to pickup riders ... not to mention the 100's of TNC cars that will be idling & running A/C at the airport and downtown while waiting for pings. Ultimately, our next effort needs to be getting cities to limit the number of TNC cars on the road ... so that drivers can earn a living wage ... 'cause 1-2 trips a day isn't gonna cut it.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

Ziggy said:


> The limit on how many taxis can be in any city is to provide a living wage for cab drivers ... and prevent cab companies from flooding the streets with more cabs than the city would ever need. Cab companies make the bulk of their money from leasing a cab to a driver or leasing the dispatch system or leasing the medallion ... left to their own devices and without city restrictions on how many cabs can be on the road; many Cab companies would behave just like Uber and would flood the streets with cabs so that they would make more income from leases. In some cities, the Cab companies have changed to a 2 or 3 shift model ... whereby the cab drivers have to pay lease for every 8 or 12 hour segment of the day ... this allows the Cab companies to make 2-3 times what they were making when each cab driver kept the car for 24 hours.
> 
> While Houston & NYC have fingerprints ... neither city has been successful in limiting the number of TNC drivers. Uber/Lyft do not care if a driver is taking 1 trip or 10 trips per day ... as long as the pax are getting picked up and they are making their cut. As a TNC driver whether you do this part-time or full-time; it's nearly impossible to make TNC driving profitable if you're only taking 1 trip per day .... unless each trip was a $100/trip. Hopefully, now that Austin has adopted fingerprints ... the city will lay-down some common sense limitations on how many TNC drivers can be registered/driving. *it's not an easy discussion to have with drivers or city leaders ... but from an economic and environmental standpoint, it's unsustainable for even a city like Austin, Houston or NYC to have unlimited drivers. To test the waters, let's say that Uber wants to onboard 100K drivers in Austin (NYC currently has ~35K TNC drivers); currently the Austin metro is ~2M people ... if Uber did onboard 100K drivers that would be 5% of the overall Austin metro population; totally unsustainable. As it stands now with over 10K drivers we have .5-1% of the Austin metro population; granted most are part-time ... but even so imagine how much more pollution is created by TNC cars deadheading all over town to pickup riders ... not to mention the 100's of TNC cars that will be idling & running A/C at the airport and downtown while waiting for pings. Ultimately, our next effort needs to be getting cities to limit the number of TNC cars on the road ... so that drivers can earn a living wage ... 'cause 1-2 trips a day isn't gonna cut it.


Worst yet the city is under court order not to be able to disclose the #of drivers in Houston, and believe Austin. I'm not if that applies other cities. I think the amount of drivers should be of public record.


----------



## Ziggy

Txchick said:


> Exactly! Uber & Lyft will not be able to onboard new drivers as fast. Same reason they don't want finger printed BG checks in Houston.


They have fingerprints BG in Houston and Uber sued City of Houston and Texas Attorney General restricting either of them from disclosing how many drivers have been fingerprinted in Houston (my guess is it's a lot; otherwise, why sue for a gag order). But as Fuzzyelvis and others in Houston will attest ... there are far more drivers than Uber would lead you to believe in Houston. I know that it's not like Uber drivers in Houston are shooting fish in a barrel because they have so many trips; but rather, like most other cities, there are so many drivers in Houston that drivers may sit around for hours waiting for a trip.


----------



## Lack9133

Brooklyn said:


> Lmao dude it is nothing like the same.. No offense man... But wow. I don't like disrespecting people like that but does your name stand for lack of intelligence?


And bringing insults instead of facts to the table shows so much about who you are as a person.

You're right, 10,000 people who were just cut off from the platform is no big deal. Who cares about them anyway right? They were just people trying to survive.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

Lack9133 said:


> And bringing insults instead of facts to the table shows so much about who you are as a person.
> 
> You're right, 10,000 people who were just cut off from the platform is no big deal. Who cares about them anyway right? They were just people trying to survive.


 And uber is to blame, not the city.


----------



## Old Rocker

Ziggy said:


> The limit on how many taxis can be in any city is to provide a living wage for cab drivers ... and prevent cab companies from flooding the streets with more cabs than the city would ever need. Cab companies make the bulk of their money from leasing a cab to a driver or leasing the dispatch system or leasing the medallion ... left to their own devices and without city restrictions on how many cabs can be on the road; many Cab companies would behave just like Uber and would flood the streets with cabs so that they would make more income from leases. In some cities, the Cab companies have changed to a 2 or 3 shift model ... whereby the cab drivers have to pay lease for every 8 or 12 hour segment of the day ... this allows the Cab companies to make 2-3 times what they were making when each cab driver kept the car for 24 hours.
> 
> While Houston & NYC have fingerprints ... neither city has been successful in limiting the number of TNC drivers. Uber/Lyft do not care if a driver is taking 1 trip or 10 trips per day ... as long as the pax are getting picked up and they are making their cut. As a TNC driver whether you do this part-time or full-time; it's nearly impossible to make TNC driving profitable if you're only taking 1 trip per day .... unless each trip was a $100/trip. Hopefully, now that Austin has adopted fingerprints ... the city will lay-down some common sense limitations on how many TNC drivers can be registered/driving. *it's not an easy discussion to have with drivers or city leaders ... but from an economic and environmental standpoint, it's unsustainable for even a city like Austin, Houston or NYC to have unlimited drivers. To test the waters, let's say that Uber wants to onboard 100K drivers in Austin (NYC currently has ~35K TNC drivers); currently the Austin metro is ~2M people ... if Uber did onboard 100K drivers that would be 5% of the overall Austin metro population; totally unsustainable. As it stands now with over 10K drivers we have .5-1% of the Austin metro population; granted most are part-time ... but even so imagine how much more pollution is created by TNC cars deadheading all over town to pickup riders ... not to mention the 100's of TNC cars that will be idling & running A/C at the airport and downtown while waiting for pings. Ultimately, our next effort needs to be getting cities to limit the number of TNC cars on the road ... so that drivers can earn a living wage ... 'cause 1-2 trips a day isn't gonna cut it.


You make some good points.

Two comments. I don't think it's sensible to rely on Uber for a 'living wage.' It's great supplementary income, but that's all. Also, IMHO, I think people overestimate how many drivers are in Austin or Houston. Let me qualify. The number of 'driver hours' that are in Austin or Houston, like a business has FTEs, or Full Time Equivalents. When I log on, I drive my butt off, I'm so busy. Uber may be right that they need more drivers in Houston, but it's not fingerprinting that's killing it, it's the lower fares and higher commissions that turn away drivers.


----------



## ChinatownJake

Txchick said:


> Drivers would pay for the finger print B/G checks. City of Dallas has a permit process, drivers pay for it.


Do you know what the price is?


----------



## Ziggy

Old Rocker said:


> You make some good points.
> 
> Two comments. I don't think it's sensible to rely on Uber for a 'living wage.' It's great supplementary income, but that's all. Also, IMHO, I think people overestimate how many drivers are in Austin or Houston. Let me qualify. The number of 'driver hours' that are in Austin or Houston, like a business has FTEs, or Full Time Equivalents. When I log on, I drive my butt off, I'm so busy. Uber may be right that they need more drivers in Houston, but it's not fingerprinting that's killing it, it's the lower fares and higher commissions that turn away drivers.


Agreed ... I've personally never advocated that Uber should be someone's full-time gig; personally, my other business is my "bread & butter" and has the potential of making more money in a month than I could make in a year of driving Uber ... but Uber gets me out of the office to get ideas from new people. And I totally agree that lower fares and higher commissions are probably the biggest detractor from onboarding more drivers.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

I think one of the many uber blunders is screwwwing the drivers over with horrible rate cuts and encouraging pax not to tip. Most drivers will not support uber in these clashes with city regulations. The state senator could stick his nose in this all he wants, but it won't do any good if there's little or no drivers. Even more gullible drivers will evenually see the light. Their cars can't last forever!


----------



## Trebor

Ignatiusreily said:


> Uber & Lyft need a reason to continue operating in Austin, TX and get back to the negotiating table. Please consider signing and sharing this petition to "give drivers 4 more weeks to make the transition"
> 
> Regardless of how this thing pans out their are drivers like myself who depend on theses services for making money. The city wants Uber/Lyft to stay and so do most of the people who voted against Prop 1, they just got pissed off at Uber's bullying tactics.
> 
> Again please sign and consider sharing
> 
> [bc I am new to this forum I can't post the link. but go to CHANGE website that has the the first the letters of ORGANIZATION in its address.
> *Austin rideshare drivers urge 4 week transition period before ceasing operation*
> 
> THANKS!


Couldn't this be a violation of TWC policies? They basically laid of thousands of drivers with little notice. They need to pay a transition to each driver. At least to the ones who got Uber loans.


----------



## Txchick

Old Rocker said:


> Thanks for the great info. It's good to hear the real scoop from a local. BTW, I favor fingerprinting. If the cabbies and limo drivers have to do it, so should the Uber/Lyft drivers.


Yep! Cabs & Uber drivers do the same permit process in Dallas. Fair is fair!


----------



## I_Like_Spam

Lack9133 said:


> Not sure how you can say that 10,000 people who just had their app shut off are not out of work. That's no different than saying Exxon just laid off 10,000 people but calling that "temporary confusion" because they can eventually get a job somewhere else. It doesn't matter if they are a tech company or any other company, if they are employees or IC's, not having an income stream is not having an income stream.


The difference is that Exxon actually owns the refinery or other facility, and they are probably laying off people due to lack of demand for the product being manufactured.

In this case, Uber doesn't own or control the actual means of production, and the demand for the service is still out there.

The Austin Chamber of Commerce, and other interested parties just have to get the word out there and they could facilitate new ride sharing apps or other means of getting drivers and riders together within a few days at most.

Even without the civic leaders involved proactively, this kind of this will work itself out within 2-3 weeks in the market anyhow. A lot of smart people in Texas, I think their collective wisdom will solve this pretty quickly.


----------



## Txchick

Lack9133 said:


> And bringing insults instead of facts to the table shows so much about who you are as a person.
> 
> You're right, 10,000 people who were just cut off from the platform is no big deal. Who cares about them anyway right? They were just people trying to survive.


Uber & Lyfts fault. They had options.


----------



## Ziggy

Trebor said:


> Couldn't this be a violation of TWC policies? They basically laid of thousands of drivers with little notice. They need to pay a transition to each driver. At least to the ones who got Uber loans.


No one was laid off ... Uber & Lyft drivers are not employees, therefore they cannot be laid off. Drivers are Independent Contractors and the terms of their contracts with Uber changed ... as Uber decided not to offer service in the City of Austin. Unless the drivers had in their contract a clause that would give them compensation if Uber changed the terms, they are not entitled to anything. *besides, we've been talking about Prop 1 for 4 months and the fingerprints for over a year ... if the drivers had their head in the sand, that's on them. Granted Uber shouldn't have left, but they screwed the drivers over rates and commissions for years ... so it's not like drivers couldn't anticipate that Uber wouldn't pull a Richard move


----------



## Ziggy

I_Like_Spam said:


> In this case, Uber doesn't own or control the actual means of production, and the demand for the service is still out there.
> 
> The Austin Chamber of Commerce, and other interested parties just have to get the word out there and they could facilitate new ride sharing apps or other means of getting drivers and riders together within a few days at most.
> 
> Even without the civic leaders involved proactively, this kind of this will work itself out within 2-3 weeks in the market anyhow. A lot of smart people in Texas, I think their collective wisdom will solve this pretty quickly.


Several drivers were interviewed by news crews today and I think that at least 2 news crews took a ride in GetMe to show how people can still get around town


----------



## Txchick

Ziggy said:


> No one was laid off ... Uber & Lyft drivers are not employees, therefore they cannot be laid off. Drivers are Independent Contractors and the terms of their contracts with Uber changed ... as Uber decided not to offer service in the City of Austin. Unless the drivers had in their contract a clause that would give them compensation if Uber changed the terms, they are not entitled to anything. *besides, we've been talking about Prop 1 for 4 months and the fingerprints for over a year ... if the drivers had their head in the sand, that's on them. Granted Uber shouldn't have left, but they screwed the drivers over rates and commissions for years ... so it's not like drivers couldn't anticipate that Uber wouldn't pull a Richard move


Yep!


----------



## Slavic Riga

Lack9133 said:


> Not sure how you can say that 10,000 people who just had their app shut off are not out of work. That's no different than saying Exxon just laid off 10,000 people but calling that "temporary confusion" because they can eventually get a job somewhere else. It doesn't matter if they are a tech company or any other company, if they are employees or IC's, not having an income stream is not having an income stream.


*You have to direct your Question to Uber & LYFT.*
Can the drivers out of work get Employment Insurance benefits?
*If Answer is NO. Then please do not compare Exxon & other companies paying into Govt. Coffers *

As an Independent Contractor, the contract came to an end. 
*The main Contractors i.e. UBER & LYFT was not able to match the offer & bid on the table put forward by City of Austin & the bid was voted by the people of Austin. *Hence sub-contractors your gig is done.

New Contractors GetMe & Wingz now in Austin market If the 10,000 people did not join before, please inform them to do so.
*Ubereats is still in Operation, inform them to switch over. M*aking an assumption these 10,000 did not want finger printing background check. They will then have to wait for these two companies to come back.


----------



## Txchick

Ziggy said:


> Several drivers were interviewed by news crews today and I think that at least 2 news crews took a ride in GetMe to show how people can still get around town


Get me been in Dallas awhile. To bad app is crap for drivers. Like u said, they need to redo their app where it pings closest driver. If they don't, they will not be successful.


----------



## I_Like_Spam

Ziggy said:


> Several drivers were interviewed by news crews today and I think that at least 2 news crews took a ride in GetMe to show how people can still get around town


Probably mostly the same drivers using the same vehicles that they were using for Uber last week.


----------



## Ziggy

Slavic Riga said:


> *M*aking an assumption these 10,000 did not want finger printing background check.


I personally know 200+ drivers who did want fingerprints; additionally, many friends who drive U/L part-time are city or state employees (so they already had fingerprints), and friends who were real estate brokers as their FT job also had fingerprints ... I think the only people who didn't want fingerprints were U/L, criminals, illegal immigrants and lazy low information drivers


----------



## Slavic Riga

Ziggy said:


> They have fingerprints BG in Houston and Uber sued City of Houston and Texas Attorney General restricting either of them from disclosing how many drivers have been fingerprinted in Houston (my guess is it's a lot; otherwise, why sue for a gag order). But as Fuzzyelvis and others in Houston will attest ... there are far more drivers than Uber would lead you to believe in Houston. I know that it's not like Uber drivers in Houston are shooting fish in a barrel because they have so many trips; but rather, like most other cities, there are so many drivers in Houston that drivers may sit around for hours waiting for a trip.


It was also a ploy from Uber, which back fired. Uber was waiting for the Mayor to make a error & mention the numbers & he was about to. Until, the women standing behind him said we cannot & are prohibited by Uber's court order.
*Can you believe the legal wrangling that would have taken place if an error was committed. Uber would than have extracted a concession from the Mayor & City of Houston.* Every move by Uber is preplanned.

For Uber to even start talking to City of Houston. Uber has to drop the law suit. *The Mayor states he was a Lawyer for 30 years & a damn good one too. Lets wait & see how Houston negotiations spans out.*


----------



## Ziggy

ChortlingCrison said:


> I think the amount of drivers should be of public record.


You can dig through public records on a city by city basis and figure out how many taxi permits they've issued ... but the info is available. Driver counts for all companies should be public or at least accessible.


----------



## Slavic Riga

Txchick said:


> Get me been in Dallas awhile. To bad app is crap for drivers. Like u said, they need to redo their app where it pings closest driver. If they don't, they will not be successful.


GetMe needs a big server to transact their operations on full scale basis. Investment is key. But they are cautious, don't want to overspend & not see any returns.


----------



## Slavic Riga

Ziggy said:


> Nope. Wrong again ... pax waited 20 minutes for me to p/u and he gave me a nice tip after a $50 ride today. Bear in mind, most of my pax wait 15+ minutes for pickup because they don't live in central Austin. Took 2 GetMe trips and 3 Uber trips today ... got tips from both GetMe pax and only 1 Uber tip.


Is Uber still operating in Austin, TX.


----------



## MattyMikey

Slavic Riga said:


> Is Uber still operating in Austin, TX.


Your answer can be found on page 5. Happy to do your research for you.


----------



## Slavic Riga

MattyMikey said:


> Your answer can be found on page 5. Happy to do your research for you.


Read Ziggy's post again


Ziggy said:


> *Took 2 GetMe trips and 3 Uber trips today ... got tips from both GetMe pax and only 1 Uber tip.[/*QUOTE]


----------



## ChortlingCrison

Ziggy said:


> You can dig through public records on a city by city basis and figure out how many taxi permits they've issued ... but the info is available. Driver counts for all companies should be public or at least accessible.


I'm referring the amount of uberX drivers. Apparently there is a gag order by the courts, forbidding the mayor to disclose that info.


----------



## XUberMike

ReviTULize said:


> I read somewhere that Uber released a statement saying it could impact the drivers financially.


But closing up shop doesn't?


----------



## Old Rocker

Ziggy said:


> They have fingerprints BG in Houston and Uber sued City of Houston and Texas Attorney General restricting either of them from disclosing how many drivers have been fingerprinted in Houston (my guess is it's a lot; otherwise, why sue for a gag order). But as Fuzzyelvis and others in Houston will attest ... there are far more drivers than Uber would lead you to believe in Houston. I know that it's not like Uber drivers in Houston are shooting fish in a barrel because they have so many trips; but rather, like most other cities, there are so many drivers in Houston that drivers may sit around for hours waiting for a trip.


Any Houston driver who sits around for hours waiting for a trip is doing something wrong. In less than three hours today I traveled between the southern suburbs to the east side, to practically the Gulf of Mexico, back to the east side, then to the Medical Center, west side, and out to the suburbs. Sunday was crazy, too, not to mention the Beyoncé concert on Saturday. Some of those trips were $4-$5 admittedly.


----------



## Slavic Riga

Ziggy said:


> I really hate putting anything on a silver platter if drivers are too dumb to figure it out on their own ... and this post may self-destruct at any minute.
> Uber is still operating in almost every section of this map. Only thing is you cannot pickup in the "red" zones; but, you can drop-off in the "red" zones. So needless to say the 3 Uber trips I picked up today did not start in the "red" zones; though 2 of them were dropped off in "red" zones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> **This post will self-destruct **


Thank you. Let the destruction sequence START.


----------



## Lnsky

I love the pic for this because when Uber described the process they made it seem as if you had to go down to city hall to have your hands inked like when I signed up for the Peace Corp and had to go to uni police for it years ago.

The truth is if you have an iPhone it can be done from your phone and if not then it is no more trouble than walking into the Uber office like you do when you return a Teeshirt or whatever some rider is screaming bloody murder over and swipe your fingers over a scanner.


----------



## ldriva

Ignatiusreily said:


> Uber & Lyft need a reason to continue operating in Austin, TX and get back to the negotiating table. Please consider signing and sharing this petition to "give drivers 4 more weeks to make the transition"
> 
> Regardless of how this thing pans out their are drivers like myself who depend on theses services for making money. The city wants Uber/Lyft to stay and so do most of the people who voted against Prop 1, they just got pissed off at Uber's bullying tactics.
> 
> Again please sign and consider sharing
> 
> [bc I am new to this forum I can't post the link. but go to CHANGE website that has the the first the letters of ORGANIZATION in its address.
> *Austin rideshare drivers urge 4 week transition period before ceasing operation*
> 
> THANKS!


Get out of ridesharing. This is your chance! Sign-up with as many temp agencies as you can to get something to tie you over until you find a permanent job. Good luck!


----------



## Lnsky

ldriva said:


> Get out of ridesharing. This is your chance! Sign-up with as many temp agencies as you can to get something to tie you over until you find a permanent job. Good luck!


Temp agencies? Is that still a thing? Certainly not for clerical. You hire them on temp and fire them before they qualify for health care. No one wants to pay royalties to temp agencies and don't have to thanks to the internet unless you are a highly skilled worker.

The number one reason companies are against maternity leave is the cost of temps. Now most places just make your coworkers take on your load and let business suffer over temping a warm body.


----------



## Lack9133

ChortlingCrison said:


> And uber is to blame, not the city.


Exactly.


I_Like_Spam said:


> The difference is that Exxon actually owns the refinery or other facility, and they are probably laying off people due to lack of demand for the product being manufactured.
> 
> In this case, Uber doesn't own or control the actual means of production, and the demand for the service is still out there.
> 
> The Austin Chamber of Commerce, and other interested parties just have to get the word out there and they could facilitate new ride sharing apps or other means of getting drivers and riders together within a few days at most.
> 
> Even without the civic leaders involved proactively, this kind of this will work itself out within 2-3 weeks in the market anyhow. A lot of smart people in Texas, I think their collective wisdom will solve this pretty quickly.


Obviously Uber does control the whether or not these individuals work or not. They turn off the app and people are out of of the ability to make an income whether it's $50.00 here and there or if it's an individual who relies on the app as a full time job.

It generally does work out for individuals who are out of a paycheck whether it's short or long term but I'm not putting my faith in the Austin City Council to go out of their way to find a job for everyone impacted.


----------



## I_Like_Spam

Lack9133 said:


> Exactly.
> 
> Obviously Uber does control the whether or not these individuals work or not. They turn off the app and people are out of of the ability to make an income


Its not "obvious" at all. Any individual who gets turned off from the uber app can turn on to another app and not miss a beat.

The people needing rides are still out there, the people to deliver the service and the vehicles are out there too.


----------



## Old Rocker

I know we're off topic, but you are sooooooo right.


----------



## ldriva

Lnsky said:


> Temp agencies? Is that still a thing? Certainly not for clerical. You hire them on temp and fire them before they qualify for health care. No one wants to pay royalties to temp agencies and don't have to thanks to the internet unless you are a highly skilled worker.
> 
> The number one reason companies are against maternity leave is the cost of temps. Now most places just make your coworkers take on your load and let business suffer over temping a warm body.


There are companies that still use temp agencies. Temp work is just that....temporary. It something to tie you over until you find something permanent. Highly skilled jobs are not easy to get overnight. You don't cross your fingers and hope your temp job hires you. You continue to look for full-time jobs.


----------



## Brooklyn

Lack9133 said:


> And bringing insults instead of facts to the table shows so much about who you are as a person.
> 
> You're right, 10,000 people who were just cut off from the platform is no big deal. Who cares about them anyway right? They were just people trying to survive.


10,000 drivers who a majority invested NOTHING into the business is this big of a deal? how about the taxi drivers who were planning on retiring on their medallions but now can't?

Exxon who has X amount of open positions is NOTHING like Uber which puts drivers on the road like it's nothing...

Exxon gas stations for example can't/won't hire 10 people to run a gas station... but Uber doesn't care if 100 Uber cars are on a block.. those drivers who "lost their jobs due to Uber leaving" can literally download about one.. if not all the tens if not soon to be hundreds of apps to replace Uber.. don't try to over blow an app like it's the end of the world and Austin will be destroyed.


----------



## trickynikki

Brooklyn said:


> 10,000 drivers who a majority invested NOTHING into the business is this big of a deal? how about the taxi drivers who were planning on retiring on their medallions but now can't?
> 
> Exxon who has X amount of open positions is NOTHING like Uber which puts drivers on the road like it's nothing...
> 
> Exxon gas stations for example can't/won't hire 10 people to run a gas station... but Uber doesn't care if 100 Uber cars are on a block.. those drivers who "lost their jobs due to Uber leaving" can literally download about one.. if not all the tens if not soon to be hundreds of apps to replace Uber.. don't try to over blow an app like it's the end of the world and Austin will be destroyed.


Uber enters a market illegally. They tell new recruits that this is a new revolution and the laws that exist are for the protection of the taxi cartels who have been over charging customers for years. The new recruits go on to tell their friends about how bad cabs are. Uber offers drivers a high hourly rate at first. Each new customer gets a promo code. At this time the rates are good. Then there is a plethora of new promo codes sent to the contact list on the riders phones. Business is good. Cab drivers are hurting but Uber drivers who are not screened, do not have proper insurance or proper licensing smirk at the cabbies.

Several months later, there are now thousands of Uber drivers. People are making money and customers and drivers are giving the finger to the cabbies. And then Uber lowers it's rates. Not once but several times. Juristrictions start to bring in rules costing driver more money and time. Uber lowers the rates again. Uber drivers are stressed with lower rates and a dwindling income. This is the Uber model that so many people referred to as the future and to destroy that so called taxi cartels.

Now people should feel sorry for Uber drivers? I can feel for you but not that much. Nobody gave a second thought to cab drivers who invested their time for the training, licenses and the insurance they had to pay. And I'm not talking about the cost of medallions. These cab drivers have suffered a lot over the past few years. They don't work just to make some extra money. They have families to support. Children in school and mortgage payments to make, meanwhile Uber drivers take away their incomes and give cabbies the finger.

Looks to me that Uber is not what people thought it was. It's exploitation on an industrial level.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

ChinatownJake said:


> Wow. Sorry; had not read that. Makes this even more insane. I guess some of the other theories are valid then. E.g., along the lines of Uber knowing it will greatly thin out their revolving driver pool. And thus make it harder for them to hold on until they get to promised land of driverless cars.


The drivers pay in Houston. Along with medical exam, drug test, etc etc. It's not about money.


----------



## Flarpy

Yeah this was about control. They're playing a long game and losing Austin is chump change. This was more about sending a message "Do what we want or else."


----------



## Old Rocker

I had a doctor as a rider today in Houston. He asked me why all of his other drivers over the past month have only been on the job for a week or two.


----------



## Slavic Riga

Old Rocker said:


> I had a doctor as a rider today in Houston. He asked me why all of his other drivers over the past month have only been on the job for a week or two.


And your answer was..............


----------



## ChinatownJake

Fuzzyelvis said:


> The drivers pay in Houston. Along with medical exam, drug test, etc etc. It's not about money.


The anti-fingerprinting stance is high on the list of dumb-dumb-dumb Uber decisions. I wonder if there was any, much internal debate/disagreement about this.


----------



## Slavic Riga

ChinatownJake said:


> The anti-fingerprinting stance is high on the list of dumb-dumb-dumb Uber decisions. I wonder if there was any, much internal debate/disagreement about this.


There has & must have been discussions. But, No one must have challenged Travis K in the *war room* also known as,* all shit & no bull* room. Arrogance is a big part of Travis K personality. He must have said in the meeting either its My Way or the Highway. I'm invincible .


----------



## Ziggy

Old Rocker said:


> I had a doctor as a rider today in Houston. He asked me why all of his other drivers over the past month have only been on the job for a week or two.


Seems like we don't need info from the Mayor ... Uber has no problem onboarding tons of drivers in HOU.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

trickynikki said:


> Uber enters a market illegally. They tell new recruits that this is a new revolution and the laws that exist are for the protection of the taxi cartels who have been over charging customers for years. The new recruits go on to tell their friends about how bad cabs are. Uber offers drivers a high hourly rate at first. Each new customer gets a promo code. At this time the rates are good. Then there is a plethora of new promo codes sent to the contact list on the riders phones. Business is good. Cab drivers are hurting but Uber drivers who are not screened, do not have proper insurance or proper licensing smirk at the cabbies.
> 
> Several months later, there are now thousands of Uber drivers. People are making money and customers and drivers are giving the finger to the cabbies. And then Uber lowers it's rates. Not once but several times. Juristrictions start to bring in rules costing driver more money and time. Uber lowers the rates again. Uber drivers are stressed with lower rates and a dwindling income. This is the Uber model that so many people referred to as the future and to destroy that so called taxi cartels.
> 
> Now people should feel sorry for Uber drivers? I can feel for you but not that much. Nobody gave a second thought to cab drivers who invested their time for the training, licenses and the insurance they had to pay. And I'm not talking about the cost of medallions. These cab drivers have suffered a lot over the past few years. They don't work just to make some extra money. They have families to support. Children in school and mortgage payments to make, meanwhile Uber drivers take away their incomes and give cabbies the finger.
> 
> Looks to me that Uber is not what people thought it was. It's exploitation on an industrial level.


Until both Uber drivers and Taxi drivers make nothing.
Thanks, TravAss!


----------



## dpv

Fingerprinting needs to needs to be required for every city in the country and abroad. Other states will soon follow.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

yoyodyne said:


> Austin Cab Co. Rates
> 
> Flag Pull (entry) for the first 1/6 mile: $2.50
> Each additional 1/6 mile: $0.40
> Rate per mile after 1st mile: $2.40
> Wait time per minute: $0.483
> Wait time per hour: $29.00


Read enough of the posts and topics on these boards and you will read about UberX drivers' complaining that the princely Uber rates are not enough for them to pay for their car expenses and turn am acceptable profit.

Cab rates are what they are for a reason.



Ziggy said:


> ... I did ask some staffer from Lyft (off camera) "What about NYC?" and her response was, "NYC is different" ... wtf?


Right. New York City is a First Tier Market while Austin, Houston and San Antonio are Lass-Than-First-Tier? A provider is going to tell a customer that it does not value his custom as much as it does another customer, and tell said customer that it is due to where he lives? .............and the provider is going to try to tell a *Texan* that? You might get away with telling some people that they are third class human beings, but trying to tell that to a Texan will earn you a visit to the Cosmetic Dentist in short order, more often than not.



SafeT said:


> I guess the lazy ass entitled millennials were too busy smoking pot and getting laid to bother voting for their favorite cheap ride services. I bet they will be crying like babies when they get the bad news.


In Massachusetts, in the late 1970s, Ed King ran a one issue campaign for Governour: he was going to raise the drinking age to twenty (back then, in most places, you could drink at eighteen). The college students in the Commonwealth cried and wailed about it. To be sure, many of said students in the private institutions were from out-of-state, but, at the large State Institutions, they were Massachusetts residents. I will pass over the per-centages registered to vote to state that not only did they fail to come out and vote for someone other than King in the Democratic Primary, they failed to come out and vote for the Republican, in the General Election. Mr. Hatch did issue a statement that addressed Mr. King's drinking age agenda. He did admit that if the Legislature sent him a bill that raised the drinking age that he would sign it, but that he was not going to push the matter in the same fashion that his Opponent was. The students, who were making loud statements in opposition to Mr. King, were too busy smoking reefer, getting drunk and chasing the opposite gender to take an hour out of their busy debauchery schedule a) to register and b) actually to vote.



Slavic Riga said:


> Fares will also be lowered.


More _*"GREAT NEWS!"*_.



ChortlingCrison said:


> To any pax or drivers in Houston/Austin and wherever uber is shutting down, you can blame uber for pulling out, not the city. If uber can't abide by the rules, then good riddence.


A player in any market has a better chance of besting its rivals when it has no rules while its rivals are overburdened with rules. Part of Uber's equation for success is thumbing its nose at the rules and caterwauling when anyone tries to make it play by the same rules that everyone else must.



Old Rocker said:


> it's not fingerprinting that's killing it, it's the lower fares and higher commissions that turn away drivers.


This is why the TNCs can not keep drivers. If a driver can not receive a decent return for his efforts, he is going to find something else to do. To be sure, there always will be a few who can not find something else to do, but most will.



ChinatownJake said:


> Do you know what the price is?


It is something on the order of eighy bananas, down there. It varies place to place. Funny thing is that according to something that I read, Uber and Lyft spent about two-hundred-nine dollars per vote that it actually did receive (those who voted with the TNCs, that is). For every two votes that came in against the fingerprinting, the TNCs could have paid the fees for five drivers, bought each one a Starbuck's while he was waiting and still had a dollar or three left over.



Slavic Riga said:


> *TROLL alert.* Spoken like Travis K. Must be contracted to get Uber's views across.


..........or Ubershill. ......................more likely troll.................................



Slavic Riga said:


> He must have said in the meeting either its My Way or the Highway. I'm invincible .


My way, the highway, the railway or no way" is part of his business model. He goes into a place and tells the lawmakers and rule makers how he is going to do it and he dares them to do anything about it.


----------



## missbee

trickynikki said:


> Uber enters a market illegally. They tell new recruits that this is a new revolution and the laws that exist are for the protection of the taxi cartels who have been over charging customers for years. The new recruits go on to tell their friends about how bad cabs are. Uber offers drivers a high hourly rate at first. Each new customer gets a promo code. At this time the rates are good. Then there is a plethora of new promo codes sent to the contact list on the riders phones. Business is good. Cab drivers are hurting but Uber drivers who are not screened, do not have proper insurance or proper licensing smirk at the cabbies.
> 
> Several months later, there are now thousands of Uber drivers. People are making money and customers and drivers are giving the finger to the cabbies. And then Uber lowers it's rates. Not once but several times. Juristrictions start to bring in rules costing driver more money and time. Uber lowers the rates again. Uber drivers are stressed with lower rates and a dwindling income. This is the Uber model that so many people referred to as the future and to destroy that so called taxi cartels.
> 
> Now people should feel sorry for Uber drivers? I can feel for you but not that much. Nobody gave a second thought to cab drivers who invested their time for the training, licenses and the insurance they had to pay. And I'm not talking about the cost of medallions. These cab drivers have suffered a lot over the past few years. They don't work just to make some extra money. They have families to support. Children in school and mortgage payments to make, meanwhile Uber drivers take away their incomes and give cabbies the finger.
> 
> Looks to me that Uber is not what people thought it was. It's exploitation on an industrial level.


Then maybe cab drivers should treat their customers better and more important show up to pick the customer up!! People prefer U/L drivers because we show up promptly and are nice and glad to have you in our cars.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

missbee said:


> Then maybe cab drivers should treat their customers better and more important show up to pick the customer up!! People prefer U/L drivers because we show up promptly and are nice and glad to have you in our cars.


To read some of the posts on these boards:

1. TNC drivers are declining pings that are more than ten minutes away. If this is occurring, this means that no one is "showing up" to pick up the user. TNC drivers do not want to travel long distances to pick up people for the same reason cab drivers do not want to do it:

a. It might be a short trip, thus not worth the trouble.

b. It might cancel when you are half way there, at best; at worst, it cancels upon arrival.

c. It might not be there when you get there.

2. TNC drivers pull off in front of the customer for reasons that would earn a cab driver an appearance before a Tribunal for Refusal to Transport.

3. TNC drivers eject passengers from their cars for reasons that would earn a cab driver an appearance before a Tribunal for Refusal to Transport.

Who shows up "promptly" and who is "glad" to have whom in whose car?


----------



## Ziggy

Another Uber Driver said:


> Right. New York City is a First Tier Market while Austin, Houston and San Antonio are Lass-Than-First-Tier? A provider is going to tell a customer that it does not value his custom as much as it does another customer, and tell said customer that it is due to where he lives? .............and the provider is going to try to tell a *Texan* that? You might get away with telling some people that they are third class human beings, but trying to tell that to a Texan will earn you a visit to the Cosmetic Dentist in short order, more often than not.


We have 6 new TNC options that will be up and running in Austin within the next 2 weeks ... pretty soon we'll be showing TravAss the exit with a cattle prod in one hand and a shotgun in the other ... his choice


----------



## Ziggy

Trebor said:


> Sorry to be the one to tell you this, but your daughter is probably the one puking as the Uber pulls up at 4am.


After she finished her shift at the Yellow Rose


----------



## missbee

Well at least she has a job and chose to not drive drunk. Gotta find the positive not ALWAYS the negative.


----------



## Trebor

Uber claims they have 20,000 drivers background checked and activated by Uber, but those 20,000 have not completed the requirements get the Houston permit because it is too burdensome.

You may have a few that are too scared to get fingerprints 1) because they are criminals or 2) They are paranoid of big brother.

yea but there 20,000 criminals and paranoid people?

No. If your not from here, pull up a map of Houston. The real reason why the majority of drivers do not end up getting the Houston permit, is because they live and work in the cities surrounding Houston, which combined have way, way more residents that the actual city. 

Uber claimed that the cost is too much?
When the permits came out, they said I could make this money back in one weekend of driving! Reality was, I was able to make it back in one day.
I gotta find that e-mail and send it over to the Mayor's office. Now, I would have to have a really, really good weekend, like Beyonce mixed with Superbowl kind of weekend.

The process takes too long?:
I met a driver from Dallas when we(Houston) had the NCAA championship in March. He claimed that Uber told him to finish all of the permitting requirements to get a temporary permit (good for 30 days, while you wait for your fingerprints) in one day and they will put $100 in to his pay statement for the week. Ask around the Dallas, Austin, San Antonio forums. I am sure someone will vouch for this. He was getting a temp. airport permit when I met him and he said he did everything that day.


----------



## Ziggy

missbee said:


> Then maybe cab drivers should treat their customers better and more important show up to pick the customer up!! People prefer U/L drivers because we show up promptly and are nice and glad to have you in our cars.


To paraphrase Another Uber Driver ... IF Uber drivers had the same regulatory oversight that cab drivers have, many of you would have had your permit revoked. Aside from all the trip shenanigans that many Uber drivers play; probably the most annoying & dangerous is the lack of driving safety ... it's as if the Uber or Lyft trade dress deputized your car so that you can park illegally anywhere; drive the wrong way on one way street; drive 20+ MPH over the posted speed limit; pass school buses while offloading kids (yeah saw this on Cardinal Loop after someone got a ping to p/u at airport); and more. Uber & Lyft became a magnet for crappy drivers ... or the drivers can't separate themselves from the trip app while driving. There are some things you shouldn't do while the car is moving ... looking up an address and some rider's Uber/Lyft score are on that list. There's a reason why so many cities/states have a "Hands Free" law ... and that doesn't mean that you should strap your phone into a mount and send text to pax, lookup addresses, etc as if your car was parked ... while, in fact, you are rolling down the road.


----------



## Snowtop

Why did Uber lose this vote. It is quite simple.

Young People Uber....Older People do not. 

Older People Vote...Young People do not.

This is also another reason that politicians don't really give a damn if a bunch of 20 and 30 year old Uber riders are unhappy with the local pols.

I know this is gross generalization but any half experienced politician know this basic fact. That is a main reason that social security is considered the 3rd rail of politics.

I can pretty much guarantee that anytime Uber/Lyft decisions are left up to the electorate....Uber/Lyft will lose.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

Snowtop said:


> Why did Uber lose this vote. It is quite simple.
> 
> Young People Uber....Older People do not.
> 
> Older People Vote...Young People do not.
> 
> This is also another reason that politicians don't really give a damn if a bunch of 20 and 30 year old Uber riders are unhappy with the local pols.
> 
> I know this is gross generalization but any half experienced politician know this basic fact. That is a main reason that social security is considered the 3rd rail of politics.
> 
> I can pretty much guarantee that anytime Uber/Lyft decisions are left up to the electorate....Uber/Lyft will lose.


I have no idea where you get these theories from, the fingerprinting scenario is for public safety. It has nothing to do with age.


----------



## Snowtop

ChortlingCrison said:


> I have no idea where you get these theories from, the fingerprinting scenario is for public safety. It has nothing to do with age.


1st it is not a theory. During any election in the country the largest amount of turnout is from senior citizens.

Second....Since they do not care about Uber why would they vote in there favor.

Third...I am in favor of fingerprinting


----------



## I_Like_Spam

Snowtop said:


> 1st it is not a theory. During any election in the country the largest amount of turnout is from senior citizens.


How about in this election? The map of the election results are available--did Uber carry the neighborhoods dominated by UT, yet losing the adult-dominated neighborhoods?


----------



## Old Rocker

Snowtop said:


> Why did Uber lose this vote. It is quite simple.
> 
> Young People Uber....Older People do not.
> 
> Older People Vote...Young People do not.
> 
> This is also another reason that politicians don't really give a damn if a bunch of 20 and 30 year old Uber riders are unhappy with the local pols.
> 
> I know this is gross generalization but any half experienced politician know this basic fact. That is a main reason that social security is considered the 3rd rail of politics.
> 
> I can pretty much guarantee that anytime Uber/Lyft decisions are left up to the electorate....Uber/Lyft will lose.


There was an article in the Austin newspaper that said that only 3,000 students (out of 50,000+) early voted at the University of Texas polling station, and that exit polls showed they favored the Uber anti-fingerprinting proposal 3:2.

I get plenty of "older people" as riders.


----------



## Hackenstein

ChortlingCrison said:


> I have no idea where you get these theories from, the fingerprinting scenario is for public safety. It has nothing to do with age.


It's from some twitter guy, Huffington Post linked to it, it reads like Uber propaganda. I suspect the author is connected to HP. He tries to make the argument that Uber left because the 'key demographic' didn't vote. In reality, the 'key demographic' couldn't bring themselves to literally vote for no fingerprinting or proper background checks.


----------



## Old Rocker

Snowtop said:


> Why did Uber lose this vote. It is quite simple.
> 
> Young People Uber....Older People do not.
> 
> Older People Vote...Young People do not.
> 
> This is also another reason that politicians don't really give a damn if a bunch of 20 and 30 year old Uber riders are unhappy with the local pols.
> 
> I know this is gross generalization but any half experienced politician know this basic fact. That is a main reason that social security is considered the 3rd rail of politics.
> 
> I can pretty much guarantee that anytime Uber/Lyft decisions are left up to the electorate....Uber/Lyft will lose.


You're in St. Pete and you don't get a lot of older riders?


----------



## Ziggy

I_Like_Spam said:


> How about in this election? The map of the election results are available--did Uber carry the neighborhoods dominated by UT, yet losing the adult-dominated neighborhoods?


No Uber lost most of the neighborhoods near the University.


----------



## Snowtop

Old Rocker said:


> You're in St. Pete and you don't get a lot of older riders?


How did I know that someone would intentionally mischaracterize my post. Of course I get some older riders but the vast majority are under 30. I clearly stated in my original post that it was a generalization. But it is accurate.



Old Rocker said:


> I get plenty of "older people" as riders.


But not anywhere near the number of younger riders.


----------



## ATX 22

Trebor said:


> Couldn't this be a violation of TWC policies? They basically laid of thousands of drivers with little notice. They need to pay a transition to each driver. At least to the ones who got Uber loans.


Not independent contractors. Work at will, either party can terminate at any time.


----------



## ATX 22

Ignatiusreily said:


> Uber & Lyft need a reason to continue operating in Austin, TX and get back to the negotiating table. Please consider signing and sharing this petition to "give drivers 4 more weeks to make the transition"
> 
> Regardless of how this thing pans out their are drivers like myself who depend on theses services for making money. The city wants Uber/Lyft to stay and so do most of the people who voted against Prop 1, they just got pissed off at Uber's bullying tactics.
> 
> Again please sign and consider sharing
> 
> [bc I am new to this forum I can't post the link. but go to CHANGE website that has the the first the letters of ORGANIZATION in its address.
> *Austin rideshare drivers urge 4 week transition period before ceasing operation*
> 
> THANKS!


You gotta be kidding. Uber and Lyft are showing you right now exactly how valuable you and the passengers are to them.
There will be 3 or 4 different TNC'S beginning to take requests before the end of the week. Have some dignity and pride. Uber and Lyft do not determine your worth.
Austin is poised to show uber exactly what happens when you mess with Texas. This state has 4 major population centers, and I have confidence that without uber in the way, other ride services will prosper. There might not be any more $5 minimum fare rides, and that's a great thing.


----------



## Ziggy

There are 2 new TNCs in Austin now; 4 more starting within two weeks


----------



## Trebor

Ziggy said:


> There are 2 new TNCs in Austin now; 4 more starting within two weeks


 



ATX 22 said:


> You gotta be kidding. Uber and Lyft are showing you right now exactly how valuable you and the passengers are to them.
> There will be 3 or 4 different TNC'S beginning to take requests before the end of the week. Have some dignity and pride. Uber and Lyft do not determine your worth.
> 
> Austin is poised to show uber exactly what happens when you mess with Texas. This state has 4 major population centers, and I have confidence that without uber in the way, other ride services will prosper. There might not be any more $5 minimum fare rides, and that's a great thing.


Rates with this company are $2.05/mile. Min. fare payout is $4.00. That's like a constant 2x surge and according to the above e-mail, they are really, really busy. Riders don't care about paying that price. Yellow cab in Houston is $2.20 a mile. Drivers need to wake up. This company is still in the infancy stages and their app seems like it was made by a teenager overnight, but riders want to ride.

I am thinking about hitting them up on this offer over the weekend, so if anybody is driving for them in Austin, please let me know if it is really that busy.


----------



## villetta

BostonTaxiDriver said:


> It cost me an added $50 this year for my Boston taxi license renewal...because new taxi regulations here require fingerprinting of taxi drivers.
> 
> It will be done EACH year for each driver.


That's typical when some new kid comes into an industry wanting special favor, new regulation is enacted for all.


----------



## Old Rocker

Snowtop said:


> How did I know that someone would intentionally mischaracterize my post. Of course I get some older riders but the vast majority are under 30. I clearly stated in my original post that it was a generalization. But it is accurate.
> 
> But not anywhere near the number of younger riders.


I put a  on the end to show I was having some fun. Sorry you thought I "mischaracterized" your post.


----------



## Old Rocker

I really hope these new TNCs in Austin are successful in order to put some pressure on Uber to concentrate on improving their service to both riders and drivers instead of trying to conquer the world.

It doesn't matter how low Uber drops the rates to force out competition if no one is willing to drive at those rates.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

Slavic Riga said:


> *You have to direct your Question to Uber & LYFT.*
> Can the drivers out of work get Employment Insurance benefits?
> *If Answer is NO. Then please do not compare Exxon & other companies paying into Govt. Coffers *


That question should be directed to the Texas Workforce Commission actually. Uber and Lyft don't determine whether drivers are employees when it comes down to it.

The Austin drivers should all apply for unemployment. They should say they believe they were employees and then it us up to Uber to prove they weren't.

The Texas rules say you are an employee until proven otherwise.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

ChortlingCrison said:


> I'm referring the amount of uberX drivers. Apparently there is a gag order by the courts, forbidding the mayor to disclose that info.


The guy who inspected my car last year when I asked how many drivers there were told me he wasn't allowed to give out the information. I then asked how many drivers were out there without permits and he said Uber would not give the city that information and they were not happy about that.

From the way he spoke the city was not happy with Uber, period, and everyone there at the permitting office knew it.


----------



## Ziggy

Trebor said:


> Rates with this company are $2.05/mile. Min. fare payout is $4.00. That's like a constant 2x surge and according to the above e-mail, they are really, really busy. Riders don't care about paying that price. Yellow cab in Houston is $2.20 a mile. Drivers need to wake up. This company is still in the infancy stages and their app seems like it was made by a teenager overnight, but riders want to ride.
> 
> I am thinking about hitting them up on this offer over the weekend, so if anybody is driving for them in Austin, please let me know if it is really that busy.


I'm not sure that I'd make the drive from HOU to ATX on a non-event weekend; except for the fact that GM is the primary option at the moment. I will not say that I was swamped; but GM trips were a lot steadier than it has been for a long time. The challenge is that GetMe is hoping that the new media (TV newscasts & newspaper articles) will get the word out that they exist ... but most people don't pay attention to the news ... at least all the pax I've picked up in the past 48 hours told me that they had never heard of GetMe before the trip that they were on and often times when their Uber or Lyft app failed to connect them to a driver someone closeby (stranger, co-worker or friend) said "try GetMe" ... of the 14 trips I've taken in the past 48 hours only 1 person knew about GM on their own ... the rest were clueless until someone else prompted them to download the app.

So, while GetMe this week is definitely busier than it has been for months; GetMe's "no need to promote the app to pax, they'll come 'cause there's no other option" marketing strategy is unsustainable and ultimately will flop, especially since there will be at least 5 competing TNCs in Austin within the next few weeks. *You probably will make some cash in Austin ... but I'm not sure that it will cover your deadhead roundtrip drive from Houston.


----------



## Slavic Riga

Fuzzyelvis said:


> The guy who inspected my car last year when I asked how many drivers there were told me he wasn't allowed to give out the information. I then asked how many drivers were out there without permits and he said Uber would not give the city that information and they were not happy about that.
> 
> From the way he spoke the city was not happy with Uber, period, and everyone there at the permitting office knew it.


Don't want to mischaracterize dogs. 
Travis K must have definitely put his tail between his legs & thinking of all the other markets he had threatened & what will be the outcome.
Now the entire US city councils & local Govt. will take him on. Even Arianna Puffington will not be able to put a spin. The biatch is clueless.
Waiting when Uber & Travis K is going to man up & keep to their word & leave Houston.


----------



## Sall_yahoo

ABOUT THE THE GUILD....... I am in the black car industry from last 15 yrs and we had this union in executive transportation group in nyc and trust me guys its a biggest scam and garbage they will never do anything serious for the drivers we had them for 10 years in our company .and we had to through them out through vote which was held by the department of labor .thats why I completely know what they're ,this is the official mechanism by thecompanies like uber to control drivers for showing so much and doing nothing . Hopefully you guys understand from my experience with this union as adriver.


----------



## Trebor

Fuzzyelvis said:


> That question should be directed to the Texas Workforce Commission actually. Uber and Lyft don't determine whether drivers are employees when it comes down to it.
> 
> The Austin drivers should all apply for unemployment. They should say they believe they were employees and then it us up to Uber to prove they weren't.
> 
> The Texas rules say you are an employee until proven otherwise.


Yup and a few drivers around the country have been successful in this. Uber may have a team of lawyers, but TWC will equally represent you for free. Texas has always been favorable to employees.


----------



## Ziggy

Sall_yahoo said:


> ABOUT THE THE GUILD....... I am in the black car industry from last 15 yrs and we had this union in executive transportation group in nyc and trust me guys its a biggest scam and garbage they will never do anything serious for the drivers we had them for 10 years in our company .and we had to through them out through vote which was held by the department of labor .thats why I completely know what they're ,this is the official mechanism by thecompanies like uber to control drivers for showing so much and doing nothing . Hopefully you guys understand from my experience with this union as adriver.


I'm rarely confused ... but I can't tell what on earth you are talking about. This thread was for the fact that Uber/Lyft pulled out of Austin after the lost the election to remove fingerprints from the Austin TNC ordinance.


----------



## Trebor

Ziggy said:


> I'm rarely confused ... but I can't tell what on earth you are talking about. This thread was for the fact that Uber/Lyft pulled out of Austin after the lost the election to remove fingerprints from the Austin TNC ordinance.


NYC drivers Union formed a guild with Uber.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-agree-to-form-drivers-guild-in-new-york-city

It is totally off topic and should not be mentioned again on this thread.


----------



## Trebor

Ziggy said:


> I'm not sure that I'd make the drive from HOU to ATX on a non-event weekend; except for the fact that GM is the primary option at the moment. I will not say that I was swamped; but GM trips were a lot steadier than it has been for a long time. The challenge is that GetMe is hoping that the new media (TV newscasts & newspaper articles) will get the word out that they exist ... but most people don't pay attention to the news ... at least all the pax I've picked up in the past 48 hours told me that they had never heard of GetMe before the trip that they were on and often times when their Uber or Lyft app failed to connect them to a driver someone closeby (stranger, co-worker or friend) said "try GetMe" ... of the 14 trips I've taken in the past 48 hours only 1 person knew about GM on their own ... the rest were clueless until someone else prompted them to download the app.
> 
> So, while GetMe this week is definitely busier than it has been for months; GetMe's "no need to promote the app to pax, they'll come 'cause there's no other option" marketing strategy is unsustainable and ultimately will flop, especially since there will be at least 5 competing TNCs in Austin within the next few weeks. *You probably will make some cash in Austin ... but I'm not sure that it will cover your deadhead roundtrip drive from Houston.


Yea, I mean, anything of 10 trips is probably crazy demand to Get Me. Thanks for the inside info though.


----------



## ATX 22

http://m.statesman.com/news/news/lo...recommends-austins-cabs-be-deregulated/nrLLQ/

Interesting development.


----------



## ChinatownJake

Another Uber Driver said:


> It is something on the order of eighy bananas, down there. It varies place to place. Funny thing is that according to something that I read, Uber and Lyft spent about two-hundred-nine dollars per vote that it actually did receive (those who voted with the TNCs, that is). For every two votes that came in against the fingerprinting, the TNCs could have paid the fees for five drivers, bought each one a Starbuck's while he was waiting and still had a dollar or three left over.


That sums up the futility of Uber's ten-fingered approach beautifully. Here's an idea: add a Tip feature to the App, and we drivers will take some of the money out of that to pay for fingerprinting.


----------



## ChinatownJake

Slavic Riga said:


> There has & must have been discussions. But, No one must have challenged Travis K in the *war room* also known as,* all shit & no bull* room. Arrogance is a big part of Travis K personality. He must have said in the meeting either its My Way or the Highway. I'm invincible .


I'm starting to think maybe Travis has a whole posse of Driver friends who would fail the background check if there was fingerprinting.


----------



## Cou-ber

Hackenstein said:


> They're just running down the clock until they have driverless cars in a few years. Personally, I'll be looking fr a way out of this shitshow when these corporate neo-Nazis destroy tens of Millions of jobs so they can add another Billion to their bank account. The US is headed for Feudalism.


There are not going to be driverless cars in a couple of years. I don't know how the roads are where you live but in my city they blow and no driverless car will work here unless Uber is going to pay for total road overhaul. Apparently 65% of the roads in the US in their current conditions could not accommodate the technology of driverless cars. Finally, remember HDTV back in the early 1980's that were just a couple of years away from mass distribution? When'd they come? And that was just a tv. Sure the cars may exist as a prototype tomorrow but mass production. Psh. Nah.


----------



## uber strike

if riders want driver finger prints, then riders must finger print also. there have been more assaults by uber riders than by drivers.


----------



## Ziggy

uber strike said:


> if riders want driver finger prints, then riders must finger print also. there have been more assaults by uber riders than by drivers.


Never gonna happen. Bear in mind, many drivers want fingerprints too; as fingerprints and other city registration processes may slow down driver saturation in cities where uber is flooding the market with drivers


----------



## Another Uber Driver

Cou-ber said:


> HDTV back in the early 1980's that were just a couple of years away from mass distribution? When'd they come?


In the early 1960s, they told us that videotelephones would be commonplace by the mid-1970s. Skype did not show up until when?

The driverless cars will hit every tyre-busting pothole, so, if the flat tyres do not take it out, the destroyed front ends will. The result could be a collision, overturned car or something else that could result in passenger injury.


----------



## stuber

The little start up GetMe is taking a smarter approach. Just follow the regulations. They should grab a decent foothold in Austin.


----------



## Cou-ber

uber strike said:


> if riders want driver finger prints, then riders must finger print also. there have been more assaults by uber riders than by drivers.


That's just ridiculous. We are the ones offering a service. It isn't a democracy. That's about as logical as a student saying to a teacher, "If we have to wear uniforms then teachers do too." Wtf is the big fricken deal about getting finger printed? Ya wanna drive do it and find something worthwhile to be a bizatch about. Like ummmm I dunno how about the fact that Trump may be a candidate for one of the the highest offices in the US??


----------



## Cou-ber

stuber said:


> The little start up GetMe is taking a smarter approach. Just follow the regulations. They should grab a decent foothold in Austin.


They should but has getme impressed anyone all that much with its business finesse to date? Didn't they just reveal all Austin drivers' emails?? Hate to be a pissimist but I'm not very confident they will know how to use either of their feet here.


----------



## Cou-ber

Another Uber Driver said:


> In the early 1960s, they told us that videotelephones would be commonplace by the mid-1970s. Skype did not show up until when?
> 
> The driverless cars will hit every tyre-busting pothole, so, if the flat tyres do not take it out, the destroyed front ends will. The result could be a collision, overturned car or something else that could result in passenger injury.


Thank you!


----------



## ChortlingCrison

You're welcome.


----------



## uber strike

Cou-ber said:


> That's just ridiculous. We are the ones offering a service. It isn't a democracy. That's about as logical as a student saying to a teacher, "If we have to wear uniforms then teachers do too." Wtf is the big fricken deal about getting finger printed? Ya wanna drive do it and find something worthwhile to be a bizatch about. Like ummmm I dunno how about the fact that Trump may be a candidate for one of the the highest offices in the US??


if you want uber's top priority to be safety then safety should be for all people in the car.




i can post more assaults by uber passengers if you'd like.


----------



## uber strike

Cou-ber said:


> That's just ridiculous. We are the ones offering a service. It isn't a democracy. That's about as logical as a student saying to a teacher, "If we have to wear uniforms then teachers do too." Wtf is the big fricken deal about getting finger printed? Ya wanna drive do it and find something worthwhile to be a bizatch about. Like ummmm I dunno how about the fact that Trump may be a candidate for one of the the highest offices in the US??


what about drug dealers using uber to deal drugs out of our cars???




these type of uber riders should not be allowed on the platform. especially not allowed in our cars. this is dangerous. bad deals happen all the time, you can be killed just because you are apart of the transaction. riders should be finger printed if drivers are.


----------



## MoneyUber4

uber strike said:


> what about drug dealers using uber to deal drugs out of our cars???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> these type of uber riders should not be allowed on the platform. especially not allowed in our cars. this is dangerous. bad deals happen all the time, you can be killed just because you are apart of the transaction.


He got to be a brand new 5 Star driver.

I am pretty sure he got all the Finger Printing all over his head.

And No English is required. Don't worry driver, Uber has your back some how.

Where is Batman when you need him?


----------



## Another Uber Driver

Cou-ber said:


> Trump may be a candidate for one of the the highest offices in the US??


I complain about him, but I complain more about the other one. In all honesty, the only thing that I like about the one whom you do not like is that his name is not the one that I do not like.


----------



## stuber

Cou-ber said:


> They should but has getme impressed anyone all that much with its business finesse to date? Didn't they just reveal all Austin drivers' emails?? Hate to be a pissimist but I'm not very confident they will know how to use either of their feet here.


I know little about them. Many of these start up apps are kinda inept. Wingz, for instance, the airport trip app, is seemingly unable to on-board me, despite the fact that I have submitted all documents and I carry my own livery insurance.

It's a bit like the popular bar that has people waiting to be served their drinks. If you own a bar, you definitely don't want customers waiting for service. They'll just go elsewhere.


----------



## stuber

A side note, related to media coverage of the Austin vote, I have read about two dozen articles from the various outlets popping up on my phone, and I've noticed some very pronounced bias in many of these. Some stories are labeled OP ED, but most are purporting to be news items.

It's shockingly biased frankly. Pro Uber/Lyft.

Yet almost never do these writers make any serious effort at drilling down and exploring the fundamental problems with these "Rideshare" apps. The media is a huge part of the problem in this entire debate.

The public loves these apps because they're fun and ridiculously cheap. The media is selling articles for consumption, thus, I guess they won't sell as many stories that are critical of Uber/Lyft's deplorable business model.

I've quit these apps, as readers may know. I'd be happy to use one if only I could find one that actually works in concert with my prearranged transportation business. 

I have to believe there are huge numbers of drivers like me looking for the same thing.


----------



## Ziggy

stuber said:


> The little start up GetMe is taking a smarter approach. Just follow the regulations. They should grab a decent foothold in Austin.


While GetMe is working for now ... I personally think that they are underfunded as the app crashes on virtually every trip. And because all drivers see all trips in the city and can accept any trip no matter where they are in relation to the pax ... I don't think that GetMe is a very efficient platform. That said, GetMe is operational in Austin now ... and some part of something, is better than a lot of nothing. (made sense to me).

Personally, I'm looking forward to the impending launch of Fare; which appears to have the most solid platform of all that have started in Austin. Fare seems to have adequate funding and the app has all the features we would want in an app if we were building it ... plus a few we hadn't specifically thought of. Additionally, after talking with their CEO for a couple of hours; for what it's worth Fare gets a Ziggy (thumbs up) and it will be the platform we'll be moving our clients on to ... at least until we roll out our own app (jk). *we're keep the rest of the apps on the phone as a backup; but Fare will be our go-to service provide


----------



## Ziggy

stuber said:


> I'd be happy to use one if only I could find one that actually works in concert with my prearranged transportation business. I have to believe there are huge numbers of drivers like me looking for the same thing.


I too have quite a few regulars that I've built up over the years ... and quite honestly I started developing my own app 8 months ago; but I had too many other projects on the front burner at the time and I really didn't want to manage the back-office logistics required to do it right. The intent of my app was primarily for my own use only and I needed a better solution that was more tailored to my livery needs for my regulars ... something that was virtually impossible with Uber's platform/service; albeit many of the full-time drivers that know me well, were anxiously waiting for an option to use it too.

During the research process for developing my own app ... Fare came across my desk ... and while they still hadn't launched at the time, their concept and proposed feature set was virtually step-by-step in sync with what my developers wireframed for our app. It was then that I decided to shelf the internal app with the hopes of luring Fare to come to Austin after they launched ... fast forward 2 months from when Fare launched .... uber pulls out of Austin and Fare gets CoA TNC authority in a record 24 hours (or something very close to that).

Sounds like you are in sort of the same boat that I am in; with exception that I no longer operate a full-time prearranged livery biz .. but as driving is a passion ... I have a cadre of regulars I've had for years.

I had no intention for this to be a Fare (mmm... sales pitch) and I'm not getting compensated for my review. But everything I've seen thus far, lends me to believe that Fare is the solution/app for my livery clientele ... as the app handles both on-demand and prearranged bookings. The prearranged bookings functionality doesn't work exactly the way we need it to work for our clients; however, since they already have an API, I am confident that my development team can build the functionality I'd want on our servers. FYI ... I will likely keep the other TNCs as a backup plan; but I'm not planning on servicing my regulars on any other TNC platform that I've seen thus far.

Feel free to DM me if you have any questions ...


----------



## phillipzx3

yoyodyne said:


> So, the people of Austin win?
> 
> Austin Cab Co. Rates
> 
> Flag Pull (entry) for the first 1/6 mile: $2.50
> Each additional 1/6 mile: $0.40
> Rate per mile after 1st mile: $2.40
> Wait time per minute: $0.483
> Wait time per hour: $29.00


You forgot to include the surge rates cabs charge in your comparison. ;-)

From downtown Portland (Oregon) Uber is all of $2 cheaper than an (honest) cab ride. Just as there are dishonest cab drivers, there are dishonest Uber drivers.

Now.....let's compare surge. A $30 cab ride turns into a $100 Uber ride. This continual line of BS claiming how much cheaper Uber is, is just that....BS.

Work the surge.

And cabs don't have to hide what they're doing from their insurance agent like 75% of the Uber drivers do.

The grass isn't always greener......


----------



## Ziggy

phillipzx3 said:


> You forgot to include the surge rates cabs charge in your comparison. ;-)
> ..


*Austin Cabs*
Flag Pull (entry) for the first 1/6 mile: $2.50
Each additional 1/6 mile: $0.40
Rate per mile after 1st mile: $2.40
Wait time per minute: $0.483
Wait time per hour: $29.00
Minimum for Trips Originating From Airport: $13.10
Surcharge for trips originating from Austin Bergstrom International Airport: $1.00
Surcharge per passenger for trips taking place 9pm-4am: $1.00


----------



## ChortlingCrison

Ziggy said:


> *Austin Cabs*
> Flag Pull (entry) for the first 1/6 mile: $2.50
> Each additional 1/6 mile: $0.40
> Rate per mile after 1st mile: $2.40
> Wait time per minute: $0.483
> Wait time per hour: $29.00
> Minimum for Trips Originating From Airport: $13.10
> Surcharge for trips originating from Austin Bergstrom International Airport: $1.00
> Surcharge per passenger for trips taking place 9pm-4am: $1.00


Now this is more like it!!!!


----------



## Tim In Cleveland

Fingerprints are why the majority of taxi drivers are FOREIGNERS. Their background checks look up their US history only and the crap they pulled in other countries stays hidden.


----------



## villetta

stuber said:


> A side note, related to media coverage of the Austin vote, I have read about two dozen articles from the various outlets popping up on my phone, and I've noticed some very pronounced bias in many of these. Some stories are labeled OP ED, but most are purporting to be news items.
> 
> It's shockingly biased frankly. Pro Uber/Lyft.
> 
> Yet almost never do these writers make any serious effort at drilling down and exploring the fundamental problems with these "Rideshare" apps. The media is a huge part of the problem in this entire debate.
> 
> The public loves these apps because they're fun and ridiculously cheap. The media is selling articles for consumption, thus, I guess they won't sell as many stories that are critical of Uber/Lyft's deplorable business model.
> 
> I've quit these apps, as readers may know. I'd be happy to use one if only I could find one that actually works in concert with my prearranged transportation business.
> 
> I have to believe there are huge numbers of drivers like me looking for the same thing.


When even the weather person segment comes on the "news", and the weather person says, "It'll be a beautiful weekend to take an Uber" or "It'll be raining, be sure to take an Uber", I come to the conclusion they are paid advertisers.


----------



## ATX 22

Tim In Cleveland said:


> Fingerprints are why the majority of taxi drivers are FOREIGNERS. Their background checks look up their US history only and the crap they pulled in other countries stays hidden.


Right, in Texas teachers and school support staff are all fingerprinted and background checked. General contractors, subcontractors and all of their associated onsite personnel have to be fingerprinted and background checked to work on any school in the state, open or new campus.
To get a securities brokers license, whether it is series 7, 22, or 31 all require fingerprint background checks 
Real Estate agents and brokers have to be fingerprint background checked.
If the state Legislature does take action, fingerprinting is highly likely to be included in the package.


----------



## Ziggy

ATX 22 said:


> If the state Legislature does take action, fingerprinting is highly likely to be included in the package.


If Uber lobbyists get their grubby little hands on anyone in the lege ... their gonna toss fingerprints out with the bathwater. Uber's gonna claim that cities are costing them millions of dollars and many more DUIs are occurring in Midland, Galveston, Austin, etc ... because Uber cannot provide safe rides in those cities due to the anti-business restrictive fingerprints requirements.


----------



## stuber

Tim In Cleveland said:


> Fingerprints are why the majority of taxi drivers are FOREIGNERS. Their background checks look up their US history only and the crap they pulled in other countries stays hidden.


Hmmm. I thought it was cuz 'Mericans won't work 80 hours a week for $600.


----------



## chi1cabby

Tim In Cleveland said:


> Fingerprints are why the majority of taxi drivers are FOREIGNERS IMMIGRANTS.


I fixed THAT for you!


Tim In Cleveland said:


> Their background checks look up their US history only and the crap they pulled in other countries stays hidden.


Taxi driving has been a favoured profession amongst immigrants for decades, but not for the reason you think.
*Study of Taxi Drivers Finds More Immigrants at Wheel*
_''Certain immigrant groups have chosen to make taxi and limousine driving their niche business,'' he said. ''Just as you have Korean grocers, you have South Asian taxi drivers.

''It's the classic immigrant story. A few newcomers get started in the business. Their friends and relatives come over and join them in the business.''_


----------



## Another Uber Driver

Tim In Cleveland said:


> Fingerprints are why the majority of taxi drivers are FOREIGNERS. Their background checks look up their US history only and the crap they pulled in other countries stays hidden.


That is not necessarily true. I know of several people who could not receive a hack licence because what they did in their native countries _*did*_ come up in their background checks. When I applied for my hack licence, they told us that it would take four to eight weeks for the background check to come in. Mine took just over eight weeks. The people at the Hack Office told me that it was because I gave addresses in Canada, Corsica and Italy. The foreign-born here are required to give addresses in the country of their birth.


----------



## UofMDriver

There should be finger printing paid by Uber and Lyft. Only reason they fight it is cost and difficulties flooding the market with new drivers.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

ATX 22 said:


> Right, in Texas teachers and school support staff are all fingerprinted and background checked. General contractors, subcontractors and all of their associated onsite personnel have to be fingerprinted and background checked to work on any school in the state, open or new campus.
> To get a securities brokers license, whether it is series 7, 22, or 31 all require fingerprint background checks
> Real Estate agents and brokers have to be fingerprint background checked.
> If the state Legislature does take action, fingerprinting is highly likely to be included in the package.


I wonder why the senate thinks uber is so special, and shouldn't be regulated. He's obviously corrupt to some degree.


----------



## Ziggy

From El Gato - This seems like the best place to post this. Haven't seen this posted elsewhere on the forum but here is a lengthy response to post prop 1 week 1 from Delia Garza, City Council Place 2. She posted this on Facebook couple of days ago:

I had every intention of letting this Uber/Lyft issue go because I believe the voters have decided and it should be done. But after 3 days of calls and social media comments with completely absurd assertions, I feel I must respond. Let me begin with the simple fact that Uber and Lyft have CHOSEN to leave Austin. They VOLUNTARILY turned off their app on Monday and abandoned thousands of their drivers and customers. They once again have turned this into - Your council banned us. They then directed all their customers to contact City Council because according to them, "Due to City Council action, Lyft cannot operate in Austin." Again more false information. Nothing prohibits them from operating in Austin and they are not required to become completely compliant with fingerprinting all their drivers until February of 2017. Again, they voluntarily abandoned their drivers and customers Monday because 9 million dollars couldn't buy them the election results they wanted.

So let's talk about the petition drive and the election. I will keep this part as brief as possible so folks have the facts, not the twisted assertion of these two companies. Uber and Lyft decided to initiate the petition process because they didn't want to fingerprint their drivers even though they both operate successfully in New York City where fingerprinting is required and Uber operates in Houston where fingerprinting is required. They collected an unprecedented 65,000 signatures but again, let's be fair and remember that they were telling folks, "Your city council is trying to ban Uber and Lyft, please sign here." Again, not true.

They then turned in 23,000 signatures to the City Clerk. After the Clerk verified those signatures, the issue was before the council, we could either adopt their language that repealed the fingerprint requirements or let the voters decide. Their argument was - 65,000 people have spoken, just adopt the language (again they only turned in 23,000 signatures). I felt there were many more Austinites who hadn't signed that petition that deserved a voice too. I knew they would sink millions into the campaign and I knew that they would control the (misleading) message but all of Austin deserved a voice in the matter. So council decided to put the issue to the voters, what more democratic process than that could decide the issue? At that point it was in the voters hands. I'll also point out, that if they had gotten those 65,000 folks who supposedly signed that petition, to vote for Proposition 1, they would have won. What happened to those 65,000 voices?

That brings us to now and the voters have decided. And because Uber and Lyft didn't get the results they sunk millions into, they have turned their backs on their drivers and customers and turned the blame game back to council. There is also a lawsuit asking for another election. This is all so ridiculous. Austin is being held hostage by two billion dollar companies essentially because they refuse to fingerprint their drivers. Again, they have voluntarily left Austin.

Let me be clear, this has always been about public safety to me. I was not swayed by anything other than public safety. I know it's easy to insist that council was swayed by the "taxi lobby" but a convenient argument does not a factual argument make. All our public safety professionals have agreed that fingerprint based checks are best practice. And really, whether you agree with that or not, can you honestly say that all of this process was necessary? Was it prudent to spend 8 plus million dollars and force an election because you simply refuse to comply with basic safety standards? Standards that our pedicab drivers have been able to comply with? A company so innovative should be able to innovate a way to fingerprint their drivers.

Furthermore, this notion that the city "needs DWI money" is so absurd I debated addressing it. But since that seems to be the easy comment in this blame game, let me assure you the city does not "need DWI money" and in fact, fees from DWI's go to the county, the state, and attorney fees. And at the end of the day (or night), it is all our own personal responsibility whether we decide to get behind a wheel if we are impaired.

Lastly, I certainly feel for the thousands of drivers and riders who were abandoned by Uber and Lyft simply because they could. They turned off their app I guess to teach Austin a lesson. How dare you not vote their way! Again, nothing prohibits them from operating in Austin today. I hope driver and riders also direct your concerns with the only 2 entities who really have the power to turn that app back on.

In the meantime, whether they decide to come back or not, the city is working to connect drivers and riders with other TNC's who have not abandoned Austin. I hope we can all agree on one thing, there are many things that make Austin great, and not one thing can define who we are as a community. At the end of the day, I believe in Austinites to solve Austin problems and I know we can and will overcome adversity and continue to be one of the best cities to call home.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

Ziggy said:


> *1, *9 million dollars couldn't buy them the election results they wanted.
> 
> *2. *They then turned in 23,000 signatures to the City Clerk. Their argument was - 65,000 people have spoken, just adopt the language (again they only turned in 23,000 signatures). if they had gotten those 65,000 folks who supposedly signed that petition, to vote for Proposition 1, they would have won. What happened to those 65,000 voices?
> 
> *3. *Uber and Lyft didn't get the results they sunk millions into,
> 
> *4. *a convenient argument does not a factual argument make.
> 
> *5. *A company so innovative should be able to innovate a way to fingerprint their drivers.
> 
> *6. *They turned off their app I guess to teach Austin a lesson. How dare you not vote their way!


1. The TNCs just can not believe that they could not buy what they wanted. My goodness, it has worked almost everywhere else. What happened in Texas?

2. Austin is learning about Uber arithmetic. Just as lower rates mean higher earnings, lower signature figures are supposed to mean more signatures.

3. So now they are going ot pick up their ball and go home.

4. Any argument that favours the TNCs is factual. If you do not believe it, just ask the TNCs, they will tell you.

5. Delia Garza, have you considered running for President? I _*LOVE*_ that statement. It is the best one that I have seen from a politician in some time.

6. The TNCs have de-activated Austin for "failure to do it their way".


----------



## Cou-ber

uber strike said:


> if you want uber's top priority to be safety then safety should be for all people in the car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i can post more assaults by uber passengers if you'd like.


Nobody said it was a safe gig. But get real. Passengers have to get fingerprinted if they want to order an uber?? How does this not sound totally dumb to you?


----------



## Cou-ber

ATX 22 said:


> Right, in Texas teachers and school support staff are all fingerprinted and background checked. General contractors, subcontractors and all of their associated onsite personnel have to be fingerprinted and background checked to work on any school in the state, open or new campus.
> To get a securities brokers license, whether it is series 7, 22, or 31 all require fingerprint background checks
> Real Estate agents and brokers have to be fingerprint background checked.
> If the state Legislature does take action, fingerprinting is highly likely to be included in the package.


What's crazy though is that I can teach with a dui on my record but not drive for uber. I am not drug tested as a public school teacher and I personally know multiple teachers with warrants and felonies on record. In theory, Hoiston Uber drivers are squeaky...but...cmon now. Yeeehaw.


----------



## Cou-ber

Another Uber Driver said:


> That is not necessarily true. I know of several people who could not receive a hack licence because what they did in their native countries _*did*_ come up in their background checks. When I applied for my hack licence, they told us that it would take four to eight weeks for the background check to come in. Mine took just over eight weeks. The people at the Hack Office told me that it was because I gave addresses in Canada, Corsica and Italy. The foreign-born here are required to give addresses in the country of their birth.


Hey what's Corsica like??


----------



## Another Uber Driver

Cou-ber said:


> Hey what's Corsica like??


Corsica is a charming island in the Mediterranean with excellent beaches. The cities are not very large. My favourite is Porto Vecchio, which has an old fortress. It belongs to France, although most of the island's residents are ethnically Italian (Piemontesi and Liguri).

Corsica's most well known son is Bonaparte.


----------



## Ziggy

Cou-ber said:


> I personally know multiple teachers with warrants and felonies on record.


Seriously, that's a scary thought ...


----------



## uber strike

Cou-ber said:


> Nobody said it was a safe gig. But get real. Passengers have to get fingerprinted if they want to order an uber?? How does this not sound totally dumb to you?


yes it is dumb. that's why we shouldn't get finger printed either. there is no point if safety is not primary reason. and if safety is primary, then the ride should be safe for every person. that's all im saying.


----------



## Cou-ber

Another Uber Driver said:


> Corsica is a charming island in the Mediterranean with excellent beaches. The cities are not very large. My favourite is Porto Vecchio, which has an old fortress. It belongs to France, although most of the island's residents are ethnically Italian (Piemontesi and Liguri).
> 
> Corsica's most well known son is Bonaparte.


Yes, wickipedia, I know all this but what's it like??


----------



## Another Uber Driver

Cou-ber said:


> Yes, wickipedia, I know all this but what's it like??


Perhaps I do not understand the question, then.

Are you asking if I like it? The answer is "yes".

Are you asking what the people are like? The answer is that it is generally easy to get along with them. They treat tourists well, as the island's economy depends heavily on tourism. I did not get too much trouble about my Canadian French, there. If someone asked me to repeat myself, it was really because they did not understand me. They were not being snooty, as they were in and around Paris. Many people speak Italian, too, so I was able to get along and get around. There were not too many English speakers there, when I was there, but that was quite some time back.

Are you asking about the food? There are many seafood dishes (obviously). Some of the cuisine is French, some Italian.

Are you asking about crime? There was not much when I was there, at least not much that affected everyday life or visitors. There is a mob there, 
L'Unione Corsa, which is even worse than the 'Ndrangheta (Calabrese mob), but they do not have too much to do with most people there. If you do not deal with them, if you do not owe them money, they do not have, or want to have, too much to do with you.

Are you asking if it would be an enjoyable vacation? Yes.

Are you asking if I would live there? If I could find a job, I would. I am originally from the seashore in Massachusetts, so I like the beach and the ocean.

If you ask a more specific question, odds are that I can answer it better.


----------



## ChortlingCrison

Another Uber Driver said:


> 1. The TNCs just can not believe that they could not buy what they wanted. My goodness, it has worked almost everywhere else. What happened in Texas?
> 
> 2. Austin is learning about Uber arithmetic. Just as lower rates mean higher earnings, lower signature figures are supposed to mean more signatures.
> 
> 3. So now they are going ot pick up their ball and go home.
> 
> 4. Any argument that favours the TNCs is factual. If you do not believe it, just ask the TNCs, they will tell you.
> 
> 5. Delia Garza, have you considered running for President? I _*LOVE*_ that statement. It is the best one that I have seen from a politician in some time.
> 
> 6. The TNCs have de-activated Austin for "failure to do it their way".


It would be nice if uber/lyft admitted the real reason they object to FP/background checks. If the driver have no problem paying for it, then what's their problem. Of course we all know the real reason. lol


----------



## RockinEZ

BostonTaxiDriver said:


> It cost me an added $50 this year for my Boston taxi license renewal...because new taxi regulations here require fingerprinting of taxi drivers.
> 
> It will be done EACH year for each driver.


Why, do they expect your fingerprints to change every year?


----------



## Another Uber Driver

RockinEZ said:


> Why, do they expect your fingerprints to change every year?


ROTFLMFAOWIPMGDP

Post of the day.

Proof that in comedy, timing is everything.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

*Sore loser Lyft and Uber investors hint they'll pull support for Austin tech companies.*
https://pando.com/2016/05/18/sore-l...ies/94d6ecbd56f26de818986de9e4e766553085f5c7/


----------



## Another Uber Driver

^^^^^^^^Thank you for the link.


----------



## Yuri Lygotme

well those Ann Rand fanboys investor can go F themselves. Austin tech companies won't have any trouble finding other investors, of the ethical kind.


----------



## Cou-ber

Ziggy said:


> Seriously, that's a scary thought ...


One teacher I know personally became Teacher of the Year for the Houston ISD and she was a former stripper. This, of course, doesn't make her criminal but since the topic veered thought I'd share. Funny. She is still an awesome teacher...


----------



## Ziggy

Cou-ber said:


> One teacher I know personally became Teacher of the Year for the Houston ISD and she was a former stripper. This, of course, doesn't make her criminal but since the topic veered thought I'd share. Funny. She is still an awesome teacher...


I know a bunch of former Rick's girls who have gone on to have great "non-pole" careers ... one is a very successful realtor and another a doctor; for some the pole helps get them through school with virtually no debt. Kudos to them and your teacher friend


----------

