# Don't be tricked . AB5 is good for all drivers .



## moJohoJo (Feb 19, 2017)

AB5 the bill, Gavin Newsom as Governor of California imposed will benefit every driver . No, they will not set your hours for you . They want you to believe this because they want you to turn down this bill . You will still drive at the hours you choose but the difference is that you will be guaranteed a minimum wage of $18 plus per hour for your driving time and on top of that you will be paid for your mileage . We are already employees . Don't let them trick you . It's already been proven in Courts of Law that we are employees, not contractors .They tell us the year vehicles we can drive and what condition . They set the rates, they threaten us . They hire and fire any driver at their will but with bill AB5 we will not be fired with false accusations . Drivers will have recourse through employment Attorneys and by law . Contractors are not controlled by their employer but an employee is . You will still be able to determine your hours and days you work but they want you to believe otherwise . Uber / Lyft will need to cut back on employees because they will not want to pay drivers that sit idle . it will be money thrown away for drivers that are not picking up trips or if it is slow on any given day and when they limit the amount of drivers on the Road that means that there will be more trip requests available for drivers . They will no longer be able to afford an excess of drivers . They are oppossed to this bill because it will cost them money and we, as drivers will be treated respectfully, with dignity and paid better . Don't be fooled by their tactics of limiting your freedom . Nothing, if anything will change . It's a bill meant to improve your job as drivers with better pay, respect and job benefits .


----------



## AveragePerson (May 18, 2018)

Don't be silly. How many employees you know can work for their employer's competitor at the same time, get their job without resume or interview, turn down jobs and work whenever and wherever they want?

They won't set your hours? Why not, you are employees, so why wouldn't they set your hours, they don't need people when it's not busy and with oversupply of drivers, they will trim their "employees" massively. Know what that means? It means a large number of drivers will be let go and chances are, you'll be one of them. So no need to spend time protesting, spend more time dusting that resume in preparation of that pink slip. Becareful what you ask for because you just might get it.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

moJohoJo said:


> AB5 the bill, Gavin Newsom as Governor of California imposed will benefit every driver . No, they will not set your hours for you . They want you to believe this because they want you to turn down this bill . You will still drive at the hours you choose but the difference is that you will be guaranteed a minimum wage of $18 plus per hour for your driving time and on top of that you will be paid for your mileage . We are already employees . Don't let them trick you . It's already been proven in Courts of Law that we are employees, not contractors .They tell us the year vehicles we can drive and what condition . They set the rates, they threaten us . They hire and fire any driver at their will but with bill AB5 we will not be fired with false accusations . Drivers will have recourse through employment Attorneys and by law . Contractors are not controlled by their employer but an employee is . You will still be able to determine your hours and days you work but they want you to believe otherwise . Uber / Lyft will need to cut back on employees because they will not want to pay drivers that sit idle . it will be money thrown away for drivers that are not picking up trips or if it is slow on any given day and when they limit the amount of drivers on the Road that means that there will be more trip requests available for drivers . They will no longer be able to afford an excess of drivers . They are oppossed to this bill because it will cost them money and we, as drivers will be treated respectfully, with dignity and paid better . Don't be fooled by their tactics of limiting your freedom . Nothing, if anything will change . It's a bill meant to improve your job as drivers with better pay, respect and job benefits .


I agree that we are employees, but I disagree with some of your analysis of the effects of AB5.

While it's technically correct that AB5 doesn't require companies to take away flexible hours or layoff drivers, the economic reality of minimum wages for drivers would require Uber and Lyft to layoff, restrict hours, and put drivers on schedules.

Right now, there is such a glut of drivers that they're practically tripping over each other. Because drivers are paid nothing for sitting idle, it costs Uber nothing to have a driver glut.

If they're required to pay minimum wage, there's no way Uber will be able to keep all of the drivers they have now. There will have to be layoffs and cutbacks in the number of workhours for many drivers. In addition, drivers will have to be strategically allocated, which means the loss of flexible schedules for many if not all drivers.

Many drivers would benefit from becoming employees while others would be hurt by it.



AveragePerson said:


> Don't be silly. How many employees you know can work for their employer's competitor at the same time, get their job without resume or interview, turn down jobs and work whenever and wherever they want?


It's common in the pizza business for drivers to work for more than one company at the same time. I did and both companies knew about it.

I knew some pizza drivers who worked for three at the same time.

There are many jobs, particularly entry level that don't require resumes. I've never heard of McDonalds asking cashiers and hamburger flippers for resumes. As far as interviews are concerned, some interviews for entry level jobs consist of the manager asking the applicant if they're breathing. If the person says "yes", the manager responds with "you're hired".


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

moJohoJo said:


> No, they will not set your hours for you . They want you to believe this because they want you to turn down this bill . You will still drive at the hours you choose but the difference is that you will be guaranteed a minimum wage of $18 plus per hour for your driving time and on top of that you will be paid for your mileage .


You're lying to yourself if you believe this. They may not give you a schedule but bet your ass they will limit the amount of driver on the road at any given time.

Check out NYC if you doubt this


----------



## Cold Fusion (Aug 28, 2019)

Boca Ratman said:


> Check out NYC if you doubt this


Damn Skippy ! Can u say "locked out" = Zero Earnings
AB5 supporters are Cab drivers
and those easily Duped ✔
https://uberpeople.net/threads/let-the-tlc-know-the-lock-out-is-hurting-you.380534/
https://uberpeople.net/threads/the-new-lock-out-is-tight.380597/
https://uberpeople.net/threads/lock-out-help-plz.376511/New Years Eve Lock Out ⤵
https://uberpeople.net/threads/new-year-eve-lock-out.370178/


----------



## Julio DeGardner (Dec 6, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> It's common in the pizza business for drivers to work for more than one company at the same time. I did and both companies knew about it.
> 
> I knew some pizza drivers who worked for three at the same time.


By "at the same time", do you mean at the same moment (it's 10:00PM and I'm clocked in and getting paid at two places)? I'm sure that there's no way that we would be able to have both Uber and Lyft apps turned on and getting a minimum hourly rate by both companies at the same time.


----------



## dmoney155 (Jun 12, 2017)

moJohoJo said:


> AB5 the bill, Gavin Newsom as Governor of California imposed will benefit every driver . No, they will not set your hours for you . They want you to believe this because they want you to turn down this bill . You will still drive at the hours you choose but the difference is that you will be guaranteed a minimum wage of $18 plus per hour for your driving time and on top of that you will be paid for your mileage . We are already employees . Don't let them trick you . It's already been proven in Courts of Law that we are employees, not contractors .They tell us the year vehicles we can drive and what condition . They set the rates, they threaten us . They hire and fire any driver at their will but with bill AB5 we will not be fired with false accusations . Drivers will have recourse through employment Attorneys and by law . Contractors are not controlled by their employer but an employee is . You will still be able to determine your hours and days you work but they want you to believe otherwise . Uber / Lyft will need to cut back on employees because they will not want to pay drivers that sit idle . it will be money thrown away for drivers that are not picking up trips or if it is slow on any given day and when they limit the amount of drivers on the Road that means that there will be more trip requests available for drivers . They will no longer be able to afford an excess of drivers . They are oppossed to this bill because it will cost them money and we, as drivers will be treated respectfully, with dignity and paid better . Don't be fooled by their tactics of limiting your freedom . Nothing, if anything will change . It's a bill meant to improve your job as drivers with better pay, respect and job benefits .


And were does all that money to pay the $18 for time online would come from?



AveragePerson said:


> Don't be silly. How many employees you know can work for their employer's competitor at the same time, get their job without resume or interview, turn down jobs and work whenever and wherever they want?
> 
> They won't set your hours? Why not, you are employees, so why wouldn't they set your hours, they don't need people when it's not busy and with oversupply of drivers, they will trim their "employees" massively. Know what that means? It means a large number of drivers will be let go and chances are, you'll be one of them. So no need to spend time protesting, spend more time dusting that resume in preparation of that pink slip. Becareful what you ask for because you just might get it.


Exactly... amazes me how people don't think things through.
To the OP, let me break it down for ya:

Suppose you have 100,000 drivers who are online 10 hrs each day. That means uber needs to pay out: 1,000,000*18 = 18,000,000.
Now suppose that only half of these drivers actually made trips and generated revenue for uber. If uber was to keep 50,000 drivers, then the cost for uber would be 9,000,000.

So now tell me why uber would want to pay out 18,000,000 vs 9,000,000 to make same amount of revenue?....unlike drivers, uber has more business acumen and will not spend more than they have to. So hence, bye-bye 50,000 drivers, just like that.


----------



## moJohoJo (Feb 19, 2017)

AveragePerson said:


> Don't be silly. How many employees you know can work for their employer's competitor at the same time, get their job without resume or interview, turn down jobs and work whenever and wherever they want?
> 
> They won't set your hours? Why not, you are employees, so why wouldn't they set your hours, they don't need people when it's not busy and with oversupply of drivers, they will trim their "employees" massively. Know what that means? It means a large number of drivers will be let go and chances are, you'll be one of them. So no need to spend time protesting, spend more time dusting that resume in preparation of that pink slip. Becareful what you ask for because you just might get it.


DON'T BE FOOLED BY THOSE POSTING FROM THE CORPORATE OFFICES . THEY ARE PRETENDING TO BE DRIVERS ( DECEPTION ) TO PERSUADE YOU AGAINST BEING PAID A GUARANTEED WAGE, UNJUSTIFIABLE DEACTIVATIONS, TREATED RESPECTFULLY & HUMANLY BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THEY WILL END UP LOSING MONEY . YOU CAN SEE AB5 IS ALREADY WORKING WITH A CAP OF 25 % COMMISSION BY UBER IN CALIFORNIA HAVING DONE SO WITHOUT RAISING PRICES OR CUTTING BACK ON THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES .


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

moJohoJo said:


> YOU CAN SEE AB5 IS ALREADY WORKING WITH A CAP OF 25 % COMMISSION BY UBER IN CALIFORNIA


How has this cap on ubers commission affected drivers pay?



moJohoJo said:


> DON'T BE FOOLED BY THOSE POSTING FROM THE CORPORATE OFFICES . THEY ARE PRETENDING TO BE DRIVERS ( DECEPTION ) TO PERSUADE YOU AGAINST BEING PAID A GUARANTEED WAGE,


Poke your head in the NYC forums to see how guaranteed hourly wages affect drivers.


----------



## Jon77 (Dec 6, 2018)

If you think there won’t be cutbacks or schedules or restricted work hours you’re going to be sorely surprised.
I support a AB5 because there will be a lot of benefits, but I am not gonna be surprised by the downsides because there will be.
If they have to have a minimum guarantee of driver pay, then it can’t be the wild wild West like it is now, there will be more structure 
A lot of drivers will have to be let go or locked out of the system, including me because I’m just a part timer.
But even though I may get let go I don’t care F em I hate both companies.


----------



## Fusion_LUser (Jan 3, 2020)

moJohoJo said:


> BLAH BLAH BLAH


And of course there is no chance of any union backed shills posting here that we must submit to AB 5, right?

From what I've seen here most of those who support AB 5 are the type of need others to take care of them or union shills. Which one are you?


----------



## Jon77 (Dec 6, 2018)

Fusion_LUser said:


> And of course there is no chance of any union backed shills posting here that we must submit to AB 5, right?
> 
> From what I've seen here most of those who support AB 5 are the type of need others to take care of them or union shills. Which one are you?


 It's not that simple.
Things are generally not only black-and-white there's a lot of gray.
I definitely support A85 but I don't need anybody to take care of me, and I've never been a union member, and my working career started in 1987 .
These companies are flat out abusive.
I run a business 60 hours a week, we would never treat our employees the way these Rideshare companies are doing.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

NYC drivers are not employees. They are independent contractors.

In California, once an employee clocks in, they must be paid for a minimum of four hours wether they work or not.


----------



## moJohoJo (Feb 19, 2017)

Boca Ratman said:


> How has this cap on ubers commission affected drivers pay?
> 
> It has increased driver pay outs by aproxaimately 33 % with no less drivers then before bill AB5 was implemented however Lyft has been 100 % non compliant to bill AB5 .
> 
> Poke your head in the NYC forums to see how guaranteed hourly wages affect drivers.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Julio DeGardner said:


> By "at the same time", do you mean at the same moment (it's 10:00PM and I'm clocked in and getting paid at two places)? I'm sure that there's no way that we would be able to have both Uber and Lyft apps turned on and getting a minimum hourly rate by both companies at the same time.


No, you would not be able to log in to both apps at the same time.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

moJohoJo said:


> It has increased driver pay outs by aproxaimately 33 % with no less drivers then before bill AB5 was implemented however Lyft has been 100 % non compliant to bill AB5 .


Please share some screenshots and show me how your pay per mile and minute has gone up 33%


----------



## Zoomzoom321 (Jan 10, 2020)

moJohoJo said:


> AB5 the bill, Gavin Newsom as Governor of California imposed will benefit every driver . No, they will not set your hours for you . They want you to believe this because they want you to turn down this bill . You will still drive at the hours you choose but the difference is that you will be guaranteed a minimum wage of $18 plus per hour for your driving time and on top of that you will be paid for your mileage . We are already employees . Don't let them trick you . It's already been proven in Courts of Law that we are employees, not contractors .They tell us the year vehicles we can drive and what condition . They set the rates, they threaten us . They hire and fire any driver at their will but with bill AB5 we will not be fired with false accusations . Drivers will have recourse through employment Attorneys and by law . Contractors are not controlled by their employer but an employee is . You will still be able to determine your hours and days you work but they want you to believe otherwise . Uber / Lyft will need to cut back on employees because they will not want to pay drivers that sit idle . it will be money thrown away for drivers that are not picking up trips or if it is slow on any given day and when they limit the amount of drivers on the Road that means that there will be more trip requests available for drivers . They will no longer be able to afford an excess of drivers . They are oppossed to this bill because it will cost them money and we, as drivers will be treated respectfully, with dignity and paid better . Don't be fooled by their tactics of limiting your freedom . Nothing, if anything will change . It's a bill meant to improve your job as drivers with better pay, respect and job benefits .


Agreed. Uber and Lyft will do/say anything they can to fear-monger and try to get us to vote against ourselves. Don't fall for their blatantly desperate scare tactics! They probably even have fake accounts on here trying to discourage it. When they're spending millions of dollars to stop this bill, you KNOW it's good for the drivers.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Since drivers would have to pick one app or another this may actually create a driver shortage. 

Instead of 100 drivers being on two apps, you would have 50 drivers on one or the other.

If one app has more rides than the other and not enough drivers, they'll have to raise their rates.


----------



## DriverMark (Jan 22, 2018)

Proof is in the pudding..... are CA drivers making more with AB5? Like to see some figures.

I do think being able to now cherry pick is the biggest advantage to date with AB5. And "should" increase pay with that alone if drivers are smart. But those in CA need to post those details.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

DriverMark said:


> Proof is in the pudding..... are CA drivers making more with AB5? Like to see some figures.
> 
> I do think being able to now cherry pick is the biggest advantage to date with AB5. And "should" increase pay with that alone if drivers are smart. But those in CA need to post those details.


AB5 is being ignored by both Uber and Lyft, nothing has changed.

Both say the law doesn't apply to them.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

So same amount of trips been taken by the same amount of passengers? Were is the money going? Nobody is making any money the drivers are doomed?


----------



## moJohoJo (Feb 19, 2017)

observer said:


> NYC drivers are not employees. They are independent contractors.
> 
> In California, once an employee clocks in, they must be paid for a minimum of four hours wether they work or not.


You must be from back - east, either that or unknowledgable about bill AB5 because there is no such thing as being paid a minimum of 4 hours and no such thing as " clocking in " since we set our own time driving . I also have had a California realestate license and three ( yes, three ) California State Contactor's licenses making me quite familiar with State Contractor laws .


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

A lot has changed. The Rideshare companies formed a strategic alliance against AB5. In addition, they seem to be retaliating against the people behind the wheels who did not join their coalition against the AB5.


----------



## Jon77 (Dec 6, 2018)

DriverMark said:


> Proof is in the pudding..... are CA drivers making more with AB5? Like to see some figures.
> 
> I do think being able to now cherry pick is the biggest advantage to date with AB5. And "should" increase pay with that alone if drivers are smart. But those in CA need to post those details.


 One huge advantage is being able to cherry pick, and it's hard to understate how important that is, especially around large sporting/concert events you don't wanna fight with traffic to get a $2 ride.
I haven't done minimum fare ride since December 31.
Also not having the destination hidden anymore is gold, solid gold.

In addition the commission has been capped at 25%, no more of the surge rides where you get only half of what the passenger paid for.

But the thing that makes it hard to gauge if it's more profitable is that this is the slow time of the year, business across-the-board is down, always is around this time.
But the changes that have been made so far due to their fear of AB5 has made a big difference.
We will know in the coming months if it changes the bottom line as far as net income, but so far I have not seen a drop in net caused by turning away the crap rides.



DriverMark said:


> Proof is in the pudding..... are CA drivers making more with AB5? Like to see some figures.
> 
> I do think being able to now cherry pick is the biggest advantage to date with AB5. And "should" increase pay with that alone if drivers are smart. But those in CA need to post those details.


 I also forgot to include AB5 is not being followed by either companies yet, it's still going through the court system.
These improvements were made because they're trying to weasel through the loopholes, so they're willing to give a little bit to see if they can avoid AB5.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

moJohoJo said:


> You must be from back - east, either that or unknowledgable about bill AB5 because there is no such thing as being paid a minimum of 4 hours and no such thing as " clocking in " since we set our own time driving . I also have had a California realestate license and three ( yes, three ) California State Contactor's licenses making me quite familiar with State Contractor laws .


Nope, lived in California for 50 years.

Worked in California for 50 years too. Spent much of my working years managing 300-350+ employees.

I am well aware of employment laws in the state.

The four hour requirement is not AB5 dependent. It is a law that all employers must follow.

The only exceptions are acts of God, such as earthquakes, tornados etc.

Also, problems with utilities or dangerous situations.

If an employee regularly works an 8 hour shift, they must be paid for at least half a shift, which is four hours.

Uber can get around this by scheduling two hour blocks.

But after two hours the driver would have to be sent home.

BTW, real estate license, I had one of those too. Cost me 99 bux.


----------



## Phila-mena (Feb 18, 2020)

Does this bill affect drivers outside of California or only in California?


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Phila-mena said:


> Does this bill affect drivers outside of California or only in California?


California only but New York and Illinois are looking at similar bills.

Eventually, this or something similar will probably go nationwide.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

observer said:


> No, you would not be able to log in to both apps at the same time.


Or log on at will.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

Cold Fusion said:


> Damn Skippy ! Can u say "locked out" = Zero Earnings
> AB5 supporters are Cab drivers
> and those easily Duped ✔
> https://uberpeople.net/threads/let-the-tlc-know-the-lock-out-is-hurting-you.380534/
> ...


Strongly agree


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Boca Ratman said:


> Or log on at will.


Most likely.


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

For those who want to know more about the AB5:

California Assembly Bill 5 or AB 5 is a state statute that codifies into Supreme Court of California case, _Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court_. In that case, the court held that most workers are employees, ought to be classified as such, and the *burden of proof for classifying individuals as independent contractors belongs to the hiring entity. *

AB5 entitles workers classified as employees to greater labor protections, such as *minimum wage laws, sick leave, and unemployment and workers' compensation benefits*, which do not apply to independent contractors.

Concerns over employee misclassification, especially in the gig economy drove support for the bill, but it remains divisive. The law codifies the ABC test, which was first established by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Legislature on July 19, 2004. The test includes a three-prong assessment to determine if a worker was misclassified:

(A) that "the individual is free from direction and control," applicable both "under his contract for the performance of service and in fact,"

(B) that "the service is performed outside the usual course of business of the employer," and

(C) that the "individual is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, profession, or business of the same nature as that involved in the service performed."

AB5 allows businesses to apply for exemption, which Uber and Lyft attempted, but were both denied. Several businesses were granted exemptions because they were able to demonstrate the following:


Whether or not their independent contractors had the wherewithal to set or negotiate their own prices
Whether they had access to direct communication with customers
Whether they earned at least twice the minimum wage 
*Uber and Lyft both said they plan to continue "business as usual" and are refusing to reclassify their drivers as employees*, which potentially exposes the gig-work companies to litigation from state agencies. Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash have pledged to spend $30 million each on a 2020 ballot initiative to reverse AB 5.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

oh good grief. Yes, AB5 doesn't mention a 'schedule'. BUT if Uber is forced to make us employees there WILL be schedules. Anyone who has ever been an employee can explain it to you. sheesh.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> I agree that we are employees, but I disagree with some of your analysis of the effects of AB5.
> 
> While it's technically correct that AB5 doesn't require companies to take away flexible hours or layoff drivers, the economic reality of minimum wages for drivers would require Uber and Lyft to layoff, restrict hours, and put drivers on schedules.
> 
> ...


Damnit Natz what have I told you about using your head and logic! You're making Rohit cry somewhere on the otherside of the world.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

SHalester said:


> oh good grief. Yes, AB5 doesn't mention a 'schedule'. BUT if Uber is forced to make us employees there WILL be schedules. Anyone who has ever been an employee can explain it to you. sheesh.


Likely a core group of full timers and some part timers to fill in during peak hours.


----------



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

DriverMark said:


> I do think being able to now cherry pick is the biggest advantage to date with AB5. And "should" increase pay with that alone if drivers are smart. But those in CA need to post those details.


Uber is countering this by allocating work to drivers based on acceptance rate in CA. Cherry pickers are being deprioritised to discourage the practice.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Uber is countering this by allocating work to drivers based on acceptance rate in CA. Cherry pickers are being deprioritised to discourage the practice.


Says who? We can't even see AR any longer. I cherry pick at times, but haven't had any change in ping frequencies.


----------



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

SHalester said:


> Says who?


Uber


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Yeah, nope. AR is gone. Period.


----------



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

SHalester said:


> Yeah, nope. AR is gone. Period.


This reminds me of back in the day when I had one of the first production turbo cars. I was talking to a friend when a local bumpkin overheard. He walked up, looked in the car and said, "That ain't no turbo! It ain't got no turbo gauge!". :rollseyes: "Right...", I responded, "... so by your logic, cars that don't have rev counters don't have an engine. Is that correct?". "Huh?", replied the bumpkin. He was unable to understand the point that just because the indicator of a metric is not visible, it does not mean that the underlying event being measured does not exist, or that it is not being measured elsewhere.

Acceptance rate is indeed no longer visible in the app. However, this is not an indication either for or against Uber using acceptance rate for ride allocation. What indicates that Uber uses it for ride allocation is Uber's admission that it does so (which is covered in other threads). Anyway, I digress. There are several ways to find out what one's acceptance rate is. If you give Rohit a call he will tell you yours.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Why? AR has no meaning for drivers. Certainly Uber is keeping careful track of driver behavior change since no AR and full ping info was completely rolled out. They have said as much. I have posted as much before. But to say Uber is throttling or punishing cal drivers for cherry picking is bs. Entire point of changes would produce that behavior by default. Duh?


----------



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

SHalester said:


> Why? AR has no meaning for drivers. Certainly Uber is keeping careful track of driver behavior change since no AR and full ping info was completely rolled out. They have said as much. I have posted as much before. But to say Uber is throttling or punishing cal drivers for cherry picking is bs. Entire point of changes would produce that behavior by default. Duh?


Unfortunately I'm not going to copy the contents of entire other threads on this here in order to replicate the existing evidence that Uber is deprioritising drivers based on acceptance rate. Note that deprioritisation is not a "punishment" and it's not throttling.

If you don't accept the evidence then you don't accept it. There's nothing more to say on that.

However, if you have any evidence that Uber is not deprioritising CA drivers based on AR then feel free to post it and I'll be more than happy to take a look.


----------



## IR12 (Nov 11, 2017)

moJohoJo said:


> AB5 the bill, Gavin Newsom as Governor of California imposed will benefit every driver . No, they will not set your hours for you . They want you to believe this because they want you to turn down this bill . You will still drive at the hours you choose but the difference is that you will be guaranteed a minimum wage of $18 plus per hour for your driving time and on top of that you will be paid for your mileage . We are already employees . Don't let them trick you . It's already been proven in Courts of Law that we are employees, not contractors .They tell us the year vehicles we can drive and what condition . They set the rates, they threaten us . They hire and fire any driver at their will but with bill AB5 we will not be fired with false accusations . Drivers will have recourse through employment Attorneys and by law . Contractors are not controlled by their employer but an employee is . You will still be able to determine your hours and days you work but they want you to believe otherwise . Uber / Lyft will need to cut back on employees because they will not want to pay drivers that sit idle . it will be money thrown away for drivers that are not picking up trips or if it is slow on any given day and when they limit the amount of drivers on the Road that means that there will be more trip requests available for drivers . They will no longer be able to afford an excess of drivers . They are oppossed to this bill because it will cost them money and we, as drivers will be treated respectfully, with dignity and paid better . Don't be fooled by their tactics of limiting your freedom . Nothing, if anything will change . It's a bill meant to improve your job as drivers with better pay, respect and job benefits .


&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128515;&#128515;&#128515;&#128515;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;&#128514;


----------



## Zebonkey (Feb 2, 2016)

SHalester said:


> Yeah, nope. AR is gone. Period.


Here:


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

Towards the end of this month there should be a floor vote to suspend AB5 while corrective legislation is under consideration.The author of the AB5 has apologized for the law’s destructive effects and proposed substantial changes...


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

The Gift of Fish said:


> that Uber is deprioritising drivers based on acceptance rate.


i've seen those threads. A post here doesn't mean it is reality. Specially in Calif. You can speculate until the cows come home. It is pointless for Uber to 'punish' a driver and NOT tell them upfront about it. AR is history. There IS something that triggers a notice, but I suspect it has more to do with with the WHERE of the pu vs how many ignored pings. Simply put in calif it doesn't mean crap anymore beyond Uber carefully watching driver behavior change due to no AR and full into pings. Show me the code, and I'll believe and amen. Proof is in the pudding.


----------



## RogerJS (Aug 5, 2015)

moJohoJo said:


> AB5 the bill, Gavin Newsom as Governor of California imposed will benefit every driver . No, they will not set your hours for you . They want you to believe this because they want you to turn down this bill . You will still drive at the hours you choose but the difference is that you will be guaranteed a minimum wage of $18 plus per hour for your driving time and on top of that you will be paid for your mileage . We are already employees . Don't let them trick you . It's already been proven in Courts of Law that we are employees, not contractors .They tell us the year vehicles we can drive and what condition . They set the rates, they threaten us . They hire and fire any driver at their will but with bill AB5 we will not be fired with false accusations . Drivers will have recourse through employment Attorneys and by law . Contractors are not controlled by their employer but an employee is . You will still be able to determine your hours and days you work but they want you to believe otherwise . Uber / Lyft will need to cut back on employees because they will not want to pay drivers that sit idle . it will be money thrown away for drivers that are not picking up trips or if it is slow on any given day and when they limit the amount of drivers on the Road that means that there will be more trip requests available for drivers . They will no longer be able to afford an excess of drivers . They are oppossed to this bill because it will cost them money and we, as drivers will be treated respectfully, with dignity and paid better . Don't be fooled by their tactics of limiting your freedom . Nothing, if anything will change . It's a bill meant to improve your job as drivers with better pay, respect and job benefits .


You have a lot of comments that you have zero back up for... Are you a shill for the drivers union ?


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

RogerJS said:


> Are you a shill for the drivers union


need to be an employee for a union, no?


----------



## RogerJS (Aug 5, 2015)

observer said:


> NYC drivers are not employees. They are independent contractors.
> 
> In California, once an employee clocks in, they must be paid for a minimum of four hours wether they work or not.


That's not correct on the minimum hours .. the minimum of four hours only applies to workers who are normally scheduled full time 8 hours a day ..
If Uber under AB5 determines that drivers are PT you can be scheduled 6 two hour shifts if they want too



SHalester said:


> need to be an employee for a union, no?


No, unions can be established as a bargaining agent independent of a specific employer


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

RogerJS said:


> No, unions can be established as a bargaining agent independent of a specific employer


nope. union can only be formed via employees who VOTE to be unionized. kersplat. We ain't no stinkum employees and doubtful a vote would ever pass by a majority. Heck, AB5 isn't even majority supported. 
I'll keep the toys Uber gave us DUE to AB5, tho.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

RogerJS said:


> That's not correct on the minimum hours .. the minimum of four hours only applies to workers who are normally scheduled full time 8 hours a day ..
> If Uber under AB5 determines that drivers are PT you can be scheduled 6 two hour shifts if they want too
> 
> 
> No, unions can be established as a bargaining agent independent of a specific employer


Not going to fly that way.

It would equal a six hour scheduled shift and would require payment for three, if sent home. There's no way Uber would be sending drivers home early if they had work and had to pay them or someone else to do it.

If splitting up shifts in to two hour segments were easy to do, employers would be doing that now.

Uber will most likely go to scheduled 6 or 8 hour shifts with some part time drivers to pick up the overflow during busy hours.

So drivers being sent home early would be paid either 3 o 4 hours minimum.

If Uber has to pay drivers anyway, they won't send them home and keep them busy.


----------



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

SHalester said:


> i've seen those threads. A post here doesn't mean it is reality. Specially in Calif. You can speculate until the cows come home. It is pointless for Uber to 'punish' a driver and NOT tell them upfront about it. AR is history. There IS something that triggers a notice, but I suspect it has more to do with with the WHERE of the pu vs how many ignored pings. Simply put in calif it doesn't mean crap anymore beyond Uber carefully watching driver behavior change due to no AR and full into pings. Show me the code, and I'll believe and amen. Proof is in the pudding.


No speculation involved; the conclusions are base on evidence. Look at the post by @Zebonkey that is two posts above this one from you. It is from Uber support and confirms that, "refusing too many trips can result in fewer trips". There is also other evidence from Uber that it is now allocating rides according to acceptance rate.

Once more, you seem stuck on the notion that deprioritisation is Uber "punishing" drivers. I've tried to explain it but you don't seem to understand that it has nothing to do with punishment. Maybe someone else can come along who can perhaps explain it in a more digestible form - it's not punishment but simply a new way of allocating work for Uber.

As I said, if you choose to not accept what Uber says and prefer instead to believe something else, that's up to you and totally fine with me. I'm going to close off this particular back-and-forth with you now; there's nothing further to say on it!


----------



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

In california an employee driving 20 in an hour you would be entitled to $24.60- $27.19 per hour plus tips.

If you drive 60 miles in one hour you would be entitled to $47-50 plus tips.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

The Gift of Fish said:


> a
> Look at the post by @Zebonkey t


seen and I've posted already, several times. There is more to it and something specific triggers the 'warning'. Or as I have speculated it is a glitch left over from when AR was removed and the code wasn't modified. I've also posted Friday I ignored ALL my pings because I only wanted at least a 30 minute ride; rec'd no dialog box warning and that was with NO accepted pings AT ALL while I was online for HOURS.

So, perculate on that. This is all speculation as we don't know what triggers it and/or if it has any effect. Bottom line uber can't punish Calif drivers for low AR since we have none. And only a noob would call to 'see' what their AR is.


----------



## RogerJS (Aug 5, 2015)

observer said:


> Not going to fly that way.
> 
> It would equal a six hour scheduled shift and would require payment for three, if sent home. There's no way Uber would be sending drivers home early if they had work and had to pay them or someone else to do it.
> 
> ...


Hate to disagree but speaking as a labor law specialist before I retired..
A person can be hired as a part time, full time or temporary employee.
Full-time workers enjoy benefits such minimum hours as you suggested
Part time are employees working 24 hours or less. PT employees can be scheduled for 2 or more hours a day.. 
I can guarantee you Uber will list all drivers as PT not only because they can schedule drivers less hours but also provide reduced benefits overall



Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> In california an employee driving 20 in an hour you would be entitled to $24.60- $27.19 per hour plus tips.
> 
> If you drive 60 miles in one hour you would be entitled to $47-50 plus tips.


Says who?


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> n california an employee driving 20 in an hour you would be entitled to $24.60- $27.19 per hour plus tips.
> 
> If you drive 60 miles in one hour you would be entitled to $47-50 plus tips.


keep that dream alive. :whistling:


----------



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

RogerJS said:


> I can guarantee you Uber will list all drivers as PT not only because they can schedule drivers less hours but also provide reduced benefits overall


I believe that the court cases related to this and the appeals and the appeals of the appeals will take years. I think Uber will treat its drivers as employees during the Uber "careers" of very few people driving today. Unfortunately it looks like AB5 has turned out to be inadvertently detrimental to drivers, mainly by means of Uber returning to the days of increased control over drivers by effectively bringing back acceptance rate as a condition of working for them.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

RogerJS said:


> Hate to disagree but speaking as a labor law specialist before I retired..
> A person can be hired as a part time, full time or temporary employee.
> Full-time workers enjoy benefits such minimum hours as you suggested
> Part time are employees working 24 hours or less. PT employees can be scheduled for 2 or more hours a day..
> ...


Then, speaking as a labor law specialist, you already knew that six scheduled, two hour shifts in a day weren't going to fly.

Part time is anything under 40 hours. Thirty hours is where the ACA kicks in.

Hours worked daily have nothing to do with wether an employee is full time or part time. A part time employee could work three 8 hour shifts or three 8 hour shifts and 1 six hour shift and still be part time.

All speculation on both our parts because we don't know how Uber will schedule drivers.

You believe Uber will schedule short shifts.

I believe Uber will schedule 8 hour shifts with some 4 hour shifts during busy times.

It would make no sense for Uber to hire four employees to cover an 8 hour shift if they could do the same with one.

I don't believe Uber will hire drivers for more than 30 hours a week.

There's too many drivers.


----------



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

observer said:


> Then, speaking as a labor law specialist, you already knew that six scheduled, two hour shifts in a day weren't going to fly.
> 
> Part time is anything under 40 hours. Thirty hours is where the ACA kicks in.
> 
> ...


Could be a vicious circle. Fewer employee drivers would mean longer wait times for pax. Longer wait times for pax could mean fewer pax willing to wait, and fewer rides given. Fewer rides given mean fewer drivers can be employed. Fewer drivers mean longer wait times and so on and so forth, until rideshare effectively ends up being like taxis - service available in busy locations at busy times; service unavailable out in the 'burbs and at non-peak times.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Could be a vicious circle. Fewer employee drivers would mean longer wait times for pax. Longer wait times for pax could mean fewer pax willing to wait, and fewer rides given. Fewer rides given mean fewer drivers can be employed. Fewer drivers mean longer wait times and so on and so forth, until rideshare effectively ends up being like taxis - service available in busy locations at busy times; service unavailable out in the 'burbs and at non-peak times.


Or Uber could go back to surge if needed to attract drivers.

That was how it was originally supposed to work.

Uber is pretty smart. They'll figure out a way to balance supply and demand.


----------



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

observer said:


> Or Uber could go back to surge if needed to attract drivers.
> 
> That was how it was originally supposed to work.


I don't think they would need surge to relocate drivers who are already on-shift. As their employees, Uber could just tell them to go to x location and wait there.

But yes, they could use surge as they do now to get more drivers online when required.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

The Gift of Fish said:


> I don't think they would need surge to relocate drivers who are already on-shift. As their employees, Uber could just tell them to go to x location and wait there.
> 
> But yes, they could use surge as they do now to get more drivers online when required.


Yupp, if they know Driver A is going to be in Hayward in 5 minutes dropping off a pax and they get a ride request in Hayward or San Leandro, they"ll assign Driver A to it. If there are no rides requested, Uber will stage them in an area that is close and has more of a likely hood of a ride.

Yea, that's what I meant, if there's a shortage of drivers in say Hayward they could activate a surge just for drivers in Hayward. Once a couple drivers log on the surge would go away.


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

AB5 Will be the death of what is left of the profitable RS days.

Have fun with your $15 an hour.

I now dishwashers who make $25


----------



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

Amos69 said:


> AB5 Will be the death of what is left of the profitable RS days.
> 
> Have fun with your $15 an hour.
> 
> I now dishwashers who make $25


In that case maybe all rideshare drivers will become dishwashers. Got to go where the money is!


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

The Gift of Fish said:


> In that case maybe all rideshare drivers will become dishwashers. Got to go where the money is!


I understand that in most areas Goober and Gryft have lowered payments to obscene levels that are almost unprofitable. AB5 does nothing to raise rates or time payments.

AB5 is an abomination that punishes any good to great Gig worker and offers a pile of poop to bots those who are unmotivated or unskilled enough to succeed.

I have three friends who write that live in CA and have been fired from lucrative gigs because they live there.


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

From the moment you accepted a trip until you drop of your rider. You driver will be paid $15 per hour and $.58 per mile for your car depreciation. In addition to it driver will be payed extra for gas, car cleaning labor and chemicals, phone use monthly subscription, oil change, and car maintenence. Water and candy, Spotify monthly subscription. U/L will on a monthly bases pay, SS tax and Medicare tax. This is a minimum for par time employe.


----------



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

Amos69 said:


> I understand that in most areas Goober and Gryft have lowered payments to obscene levels that are almost unprofitable. AB5 does nothing to raise rates or time payments.
> 
> AB5 is an abomination that punishes any good to great Gig worker and offers a pile of poop to bots those who are unmotivated or unskilled enough to succeed.
> 
> I have three friends who write that live in CA and have been fired from lucrative gigs because they live there.


I'm not an expert on enforcement in this country but it does seem that companies can ignore laws if they don't like them and then sue the authorities over it. Which seems nucking futs to me, but I'm just a foreigner from one of those little socialist European countries where things are done diff'rent.

I stopped by a Lyft hub a couple of weeks ago and asked one of the support drones when Lyft was going to stop ignoring the AB5 law and implement the changes required by it. He said he didn't have a date for that, lol.

I think you're right that employee pay would settle around the minimum wage mark for CA, around $12 to $15 depending on location, if/when Uberlyft obeys AB5. I don't see why it would be higher - driving is an unskilled job and minimum wage is what other similar jobs such as airport hotel shuttle drivers get.

For skilled and semi-skilled contract jobs, AB5 is indeed over-regulation and it is causing clients to look for workers outside California. But every cloud has a silver lining - AB5 is great for workers outside CA who will be getting more contracts now.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

The Gift of Fish said:


> I'm not an expert on enforcement in this country but it does seem that companies can ignore laws if they don't like them and then sue the authorities over it. Which seems nucking futs to me, but I'm just a foreigner from one of those little socialist European countries where things are done diff'rent.
> 
> I stopped by a Lyft hub a couple of weeks ago and asked one of the support drones when Lyft was going to stop ignoring the AB5 law and implement the changes required by it. He said he didn't have a date for that, lol.
> 
> ...


Driving a tow truck requires a little more skill than TNC.

Driving a school bus not only requires a special license but also a background check.

Being a *paramedic *requires months of training.

They all pay minimum wage.


----------



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

observer said:


> Driving a tow truck requires a little more skill than TNC.
> 
> Driving a school bus not only requires a special license but also a background check.
> 
> ...


Right. Rideshare up to now has been a bubble, with huge amounts of cheap rides and artificially high driver pay being subsidised by tens of billions of dollars of investor money. With subsidies you can go against any economic fundamentals you like. I can't see how it can continue for much longer, once the investor money's gone.

Dara says "just one more year" to reach profitability. But it's been 11 years so far. Not buying it.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

The Gift of Fish said:


> Right. Rideshare up to now has been a bubble, with huge amounts of cheap rides and artificially high driver pay being subsidised by tens of billions of dollars of investor money. With subsidies you can go against any economic fundamentals you like. I can't see how it can continue for much longer, once the investor money's gone.
> 
> Dara says "just one more year" to reach profitability. But it's been 11 years so far. Not buying it.


Probly "just one more year" till he can cash out, like Kalanick did.

I don't like Kalanick much but he's one smart dude.


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

observer said:


> Driving a tow truck requires a little more skill than TNC.
> 
> Driving a school bus not only requires a special license but also a background check.
> 
> ...


Driving RS I average around $40 an hr.

Yeah I know, but we have yet to see the crippling rate cuts and I do drive XL ( 90% of my fares are X)

$per hour is a bad metric for measuring success at this gig but no one here understands margin so...

Someone mentioned unskilled labor, but becoming good at this requires intelligence and skill.

In 2019 I grossed $88,000 after Gryft and Goober cuts ( They only got 22.3% of my fares) I do this PT / FT. and average 3.2 days per week 9 hrs a day.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

The only thing tow truck drivers, school bus drivers and paramedics have going for them is they don't have any expenses.



Amos69 said:


> Driving RS I average around $40 an hr.
> 
> Yeah I know, but we have yet to see the crippling rate cuts and I do drive XL ( 90% of my fares are X)
> 
> ...


I've had back and forths here with drivers that don't understand the difference between revenue and profit.


----------



## dmoney155 (Jun 12, 2017)

The Gift of Fish said:


> ..... With subsidies you can go against any economic fundamentals you like. I can't see how it can continue for much longer, once the ....


Easy, replace money paid to driver with points. They have already started this. Dara is smart too.


----------



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

RogerJS said:


> Hate to disagree but speaking as a labor law specialist before I retired..
> A person can be hired as a part time, full time or temporary employee.
> Full-time workers enjoy benefits such minimum hours as you suggested
> Part time are employees working 24 hours or less. PT employees can be scheduled for 2 or more hours a day..
> ...


*29 CFR § 4.168*
(a) The wage requirements of the Act will not be met where unauthorized deductions, rebates, or refunds reduce the wage payment made to the employee below the minimum amounts required under the provisions of the Act and the regulations thereunder, or where the employee fails to receive such amounts free and clear because he "kicks back" directly or _indirectly_ to the employer or to another person for the employer's benefit the whole or part of the wage delivered to him.

The employee would be failing to make minimum wage because the employer is requiring them to "kick back" the use of their own personal vehicle.

Federal government says all employees are entitled to at least min wage free and clear of all impermissible deductions.

(Permissible deductions are limited to things like tax witholdings and don't include uniforms, paying register shortages ect)

In California that means $12.00-15.00 an hour...

AFTER EXPENSES...

if you drive 20 miles that's $11.60. 60 miles is $34.80.

so...

Pizza delivery companies (pappa john's and Pizza hut specifically) have lost lawsuits in regards to their employees making less than min wage after mileage is taken into account.

So on top of the law stating this there's recent applicable case law as well.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news...yday-after-2-m-lawsuit-settlement/1835920002/
_Delivery drivers were typically paid $7.25 an hour or less, plus $1 per delivery. But that didn't make up for the full costs of operating their own vehicles - gas, maintenance and insurance - resulting in net compensation that violated minimum wage laws, according to the suit.

So, The federal gubment of the United states of 'merica_



Polomarko said:


> From the moment you accepted a trip until you drop of your rider. You driver will be paid $15 per hour and $.58 per mile for your car depreciation. In addition to it driver will be payed extra for gas, car cleaning labor and chemicals, phone use monthly subscription, oil change, and car maintenence. Water and candy, Spotify monthly subscription. U/L will on a monthly bases pay, SS tax and Medicare tax. This is a minimum for par time employe.


Almost, you would get the .58 and you would not get the oil changes or car maintenance. Actual expenses would be so stupid hard/complicated to calculate en masse that uber would demand that we accept the standard mileage rate. Which legally isn't out of the question. It's a very arguable position to make us accept the standard mileage rate over actual expenses.

Now they would probably have to pay extra to get people to keep using escalades and Tesla's on the platform, so it would most likely be .58 for X/XL and some extra amount on top of that for the premium services.

And frankly i don't think there should be a price difference for XL.


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

thread title will attract ubercorp's troll farm employees. should be fun!

as far as my opinion on this - i believe ab5 is shortsighted and will backfire, having local rideshare unions is the answer.



Nats121 said:


> It's common in the pizza business for drivers to work for more than one company at the same time. I did and both companies knew about it.


before doing rideshare i bartended at two italian restaurants at the same time - well one mainly, and the other for half a year while my friend went to be with her sick mother. they were a few miles from each other so you could say they were in competition with each other.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

When you embrace a MINIMUM WAGE of any sort, I assure you that Uber and Lyft will devise a way to guarantee that's all you'll ever make. 

I don't want a minimum wage job, I want fair compensation for the job I'm doing. 

Any damn fool that's willing to accept minimum wage for driving rideshare deserves exactly what they get.


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

Fusion_LUser said:


> And of course there is no chance of any union backed shills posting here that we must submit to AB 5, right?
> 
> From what I've seen here most of those who support AB 5 are the type of need others to take care of them or union shills. Which one are you?


why are you against unions? unions are direct negotiations between the drivers and the company. ab5 is not a union it's a silly california law that was written by a lawyer who has never driven rideshare. she's clueless, but then again she lives in california so...



Zoomzoom321 said:


> When they're spending millions of dollars to stop this bill, you KNOW it's good for the drivers.


this isn't necessarily true, it looks like it will be bad for drivers AND the companies. if these guys treated the drivers with respect - the drivers would return the favor. in their haste they forgot the golden rule - gotta give respect to get respect :coolio: all this could have been avoided.



observer said:


> Driving a tow truck requires a little more skill than TNC.
> 
> Driving a school bus not only requires a special license but also a background check.
> 
> ...


driving a school bus where i live pays over 1.5 times minimum wage. i believe it is actually 1.8x the minimum wage.

my friend owned a tow truck and made BANK.

don't know what a paramedics pay is though. i do know that everyone is having to pay better wages over here though as there are so many jobs and not enough people to fill them, never seen anything like it in my life. it's hard to find anyone who is working for minimum wage, even people working a mcjob are making 20%-40% over minimum wage. it's an employees market at the moment.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

got a p said:


> why are you against unions? unions are direct negotiations between the drivers and the company. ab5 is not a union it's a silly california law that was written by a lawyer who has never driven rideshare. she's clueless, but then again she lives in california so...
> 
> 
> this isn't necessarily true, it looks like it will be bad for drivers AND the companies. if these guys treated the drivers with respect - the drivers would return the favor. in their haste they forgot the golden rule - gotta give respect to get respect :coolio: all this could have been avoided.
> ...


Have to be employees to be union and the union bargaining power is tied to their collective power to effect profits and productivity such as strikes.

Uber's business model makes it a company nearly impossible to hold a significant strike to effect uber's bottom line hence union would be a very weak one in the case of uber. At best the union would be a means for drivers to voice grievances with a centralized voice nothing more.


----------



## RogerJS (Aug 5, 2015)

SHalester said:


> nope. union can only be formed via employees who VOTE to be unionized. kersplat. We ain't no stinkum employees and doubtful a vote would ever pass by a majority. Heck, AB5 isn't even majority supported.
> I'll keep the toys Uber gave us DUE to AB5, tho.


Sorry , unions can be established as a bargaining group independently ... 
example trades , carpenters, plumbers, actors Etc. 
the group can set standards then negotiate with future employers...
The Ride Share Group that was established can will probably be the first maybe not final drivers union.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Only if it is voted on. Period.


----------



## RogerJS (Aug 5, 2015)

SHalester said:


> Only if it is voted on. Period.


The group established as the Ride Share group that has lead the AB5 process in behave of their group has voted. Has established rules has organizers. I'e union,, , may not represent you or I but is established..period :smiles:


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Roadster4 said:


> Towards the end of this month there should be a floor vote to suspend AB5 while corrective legislation is under consideration.The author of the AB5 has apologized for the law's destructive effects and proposed substantial changes...


Ha,Hahaaaaaa. It is time that Law inforcement go into these U/L offices


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

RogerJS said:


> I'e union,, , may not represent you or I but is established..period


Ask uber if there is a union. Ask Uber if they will change a thing due to that 'Union'. No power= no union. Period.


----------



## got a p (Jan 27, 2018)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> *Have to be employees to be union* and the union bargaining power is tied to their collective power to effect profits and productivity such as strikes.
> 
> Uber's business model makes it a company nearly impossible to hold a significant strike to effect uber's bottom line hence union would be a very weak one in the case of uber. At best the union would be a means for drivers to voice grievances with a centralized voice nothing more.


this is the part that i've been discussing with people. traditionally you are correct, however the times are a changin'...grab some popcorn and enjoy the show :wink:


----------



## XLnoGas (Dec 20, 2019)

AveragePerson said:


> Don't be silly. How many employees you know can work for their employer's competitor at the same time, get their job without resume or interview, turn down jobs and work whenever and wherever they want?
> 
> They won't set your hours? Why not, you are employees, so why wouldn't they set your hours, they don't need people when it's not busy and with oversupply of drivers, they will trim their "employees" massively. Know what that means? It means a large number of drivers will be let go and chances are, you'll be one of them. So no need to spend time protesting, spend more time dusting that resume in preparation of that pink slip. Becareful what you ask for because you just might get it.


You mean I can get a better car loan/mortgage? Until Uber partners with a loan company I'll keep pushing for employee status.


----------



## RogerJS (Aug 5, 2015)

SHalester said:


> Ask uber if there is a union. Ask Uber if they will change a thing due to that 'Union'. No power= no union. Period.


Whatever makes you happy


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

got a p said:


> why are you against unions? unions are direct negotiations between the drivers and the company. ab5 is not a union it's a silly california law that was written by a lawyer who has never driven rideshare. she's clueless, but then again she lives in california so...
> 
> 
> this isn't necessarily true, it looks like it will be bad for drivers AND the companies. if these guys treated the drivers with respect - the drivers would return the favor. in their haste they forgot the golden rule - gotta give respect to get respect :coolio: all this could have been avoided.
> ...


Around here driving school busses has been outsourced from the school district and a major national bus company has taken it over. They have a huge problem with turnover.

I owned a towing service for about 12 or so years. The last couple years made about 300K a year. But spent almost all of it on driver pay, maintenance, fuel and insurance. Lots and lots of headaches for the return. Wound up selling the biz to the drivers.

I also ran part of a major citys towing operation that made hundreds of millions of dollars a year. That business was very profitable.

Towing depends on the contracts and contacts you have. But can be very profitable to the owners.

Tow truck drivers on the other hand still make minimum wage here. Again they have a huge turnover problem, especially last few years.

My son went through paramedic training a few years ago. I think he paid a couple thousand bux, don't quite remember. Had to spend some time taking classes and pass a state exam. I, at the time, looked at driver pay to see if it would be a good long time career. It paid very little, starting at minimum. I told my son and he already knew about the pay. He just wanted to get the certification. He was a paramedic for about a year and a half but has since moved on.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

got a p said:


> this is the part that i've been discussing with people. traditionally you are correct, however the times are a changin'...grab some popcorn and enjoy the show :wink:


Teamsters member here, this isn't something that can be changed with a series of laws. It's more of the natural order operation of things. Regardless I do wish all drivers the best.


----------



## WEY00L (Mar 6, 2019)

So much misinformation here don't know where to start.
First of all anyone who thinks that AB5 will improve their lives they are delusional.
ALL of the improvements California drivers are enjoying since the beginning of the year are a result of Uber making a case that AB5 does not apply to them.
If the courts decide that AB5 does apply all of the changes you are enjoying will be gone.
Uber and Lyft will have to restrict access on way ore another.
For those of you who don't believe this please name on one other business who pays their employees by the hours and the employees can show up to work whenever the want.
There are many ways they could use and we could debate it forever but only a fool believes that some sort of loss of flexibility.

The minimum wage will also become your maximum wage.
If U/L have to pay the crappy drivers a supplement to bring their wages up to the minimum they are not going to take it from their own money they will simply adjust the pay of the good drivers until they are making the minimum as well.

A union in today's economic landscape isn't going to do squat.
There was a time when unions did a good job representing the interests of the workers but those days are long gone.
The unions of today are more concerned with the interests of the unions than those of the worker.
Amyone who promotes AB5 is nothing more than a union shill.


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

Roadster4 said:


> Towards the end of this month there should be a floor vote to suspend AB5 while corrective legislation is under consideration.The author of the AB5 has apologized for the law's destructive effects and proposed substantial changes...


-------------------------
You are correct. AB5 is causing major problems for non-RS drivers. The lawmakers never stopped to consider the damage that the bill would cause.


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

KK2929 said:


> -------------------------
> You are correct. AB5 is causing major problems for non-RS drivers.  The lawmakers never stopped to consider the damage that the bill would cause.
> View attachment 420001


What makes you exclude the Rideshare people?

https://calmatters.org/economy/2019/09/whos-in-whos-out-of-ab-5/


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

KK2929 said:


> -------------------------
> You are correct. AB5 is causing major problems for non-RS drivers. The lawmakers never stopped to consider the damage that the bill would cause.
> View attachment 420001


The lawmakers will just exclude those workers that have a legitimate complaint. Like they did for several industries.

Uber/Lyft have tried to get an exemption and have been rejected.

That suspension is not going to happen.



Roadster4 said:


> What makes you exclude the Rideshare people?
> 
> https://calmatters.org/economy/2019/09/whos-in-whos-out-of-ab-5/


Article is from six months ago. Before AB5 was passed and is irrelevant.


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

observer said:


> The lawmakers will just exclude those workers that have a legitimate complaint. Like they did for several industries.
> 
> Uber/Lyft have tried to get an exemption and have been rejected.
> 
> ...


I respectfully disagree with both your comments here!


----------



## Zebonkey (Feb 2, 2016)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Have to be employees to be union


Not necessarily: think actors, musicians, writers and so on.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

Zebonkey said:


> Not necessarily: think actors, musicians, writers and so on.


Yes and they have excessively weak unions. Their bargaining power is minimal. Hence all these sex cases just reaching the light of day.

The vast majority of actors, musicians, writers are homeless, and models to this list to. That's because what they have minimal impact on their respective industries bottom line.

A major actor, musician, etc can make studios bend over backward because they can make or break a movie.


----------



## RogerJS (Aug 5, 2015)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Yes and they have excessively weak unions. Their bargaining power is minimal. Hence all these sex cases just reaching the light of day.
> 
> The vast majority of actors, musicians, writers are homeless, and models to this list to. That's because what they have minimal impact on their respective industries bottom line.
> 
> A major actor, musician, etc can make studios bend over backward because they can make or break a movie.


That's not the discussion, one poster claims you cant gave a union without working for a specified employer, a couple of us have offered a different opinion. Be it a strong or weak or whatever isn't the point


----------



## Zebonkey (Feb 2, 2016)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Yes and they have excessively weak unions. Their bargaining power is minimal. Hence all these sex cases just reaching the light of day.
> 
> The vast majority of actors, musicians, writers are homeless, and models to this list to. That's because what they have minimal impact on their respective industries bottom line.
> 
> A major actor, musician, etc can make studios bend over backward because they can make or break a movie.


Actually, they have very strong unions, especially SAG.
The fact, that some of the actors and writers are homeless is not because of the unions.
It's because they are not getting jobs and choose not to wait tables, like most aspiring actors, writers and artists do.
Last writers strike shut down TV productions for half a year.
The backlash, however, was the rise of "reality TV".


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Roadster4 said:


> I respectfully disagree with both your comments here!


Why?


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

RogerJS said:


> That's not the discussion, one poster claims you cant gave a union without working for a specified employer, a couple of us have offered a different opinion. Be it a strong or weak or whatever isn't the point


Sorry I did say that then went on talk about how the strength of an union is established through it ability to effect companies. I'm jumping the gun without laying down full trains of thoughts.

If rideshare had a union it would essentially be a trade guild or trade association not an union. There are fundamental differences between the two and more importantly how to bargain to get what you want.

In an union employees and company come together to craft a bargaining agreement that is voted on by employees and acceptable to employer. Trade associations and guilds don't work this way.



Zebonkey said:


> Actually, they have very strong unions, especially SAG.
> The fact, that some of the actors and writers are homeless is not because of the unions.
> It's because they are not getting jobs and choose not to wait tables, like most aspiring actors, writers and artists do.
> Last writers strike shut down TV productions for half a year.
> The backlash, however, was the rise of "reality TV".


Did it effect the industry's pockets? Nothing else mattered to them.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Zebonkey said:


> : think actors, musicians, writers and so on


who all agreed and voted to become unionized.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

WEY00L said:


> So much misinformation here don't know where to start.
> First of all anyone who thinks that AB5 will improve their lives they are delusional.
> ALL of the improvements California drivers are enjoying since the beginning of the year are a result of Uber making a case that AB5 does not apply to them.
> If the courts decide that AB5 does apply all of the changes you are enjoying will be gone.
> ...


"If U/L have to pay the crappy drivers a supplement to bring their wages up to the minimum they are not going to take it from their own money they will simply adjust the pay of the good drivers until they are making the minimum as well."

What makes you think Uber isn't doing this now?

Every time drivers figure out a way to make a little money, Uber gets wise to it and plugs the hole.

At this point many drivers are making below minimum wage and all taxpayers are subsidizing Uber.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

observer said:


> all taxpayers are subsidizing Uber


how?


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

WEY00L said:


> So much misinformation here don't know where to start.
> First of all anyone who thinks that AB5 will improve their lives they are delusional.
> ALL of the improvements California drivers are enjoying since the beginning of the year are a result of Uber making a case that AB5 does not apply to them.
> If the courts decide that AB5 does apply all of the changes you are enjoying will be gone.
> ...


If Uber seriously believed the law didn't apply to them why did they make the "improvements"?


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

observer said:


> If Uber seriously believed the law didn't apply to them why did they make the "improvements"?


only did it to make drivers happy. It worked.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

SHalester said:


> how?


Mileage deductions. Every dollar deducted at a loss by a driver is a dollar that has to be made up by a taxpayer.



SHalester said:


> only did it to make drivers happy. It worked.


And if Uber has its way it will take them back as it is now.

All these "improvements" are just a temporary PR stunt by Uber.

Behind the scenes Uber is figuring out ways to negate those improvements.

Uber won't publicize those, I bet.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

observer said:


> is a dollar that has to be made up by a taxpayer


that is a stretch. RS income or loss is a nit. A fraction of a percent. Not material. And wouldn't your theory only apply to those whose only income is RS? I'd guess that is a minority as well. My 'loss' was a nit compared to just my investment income, not to mention wife unit wages. No subsidy here.



observer said:


> Behind the scenes Uber is figuring out ways to negate those improvements.


more wild speculation parading around as an opinion?  Watch what happens if Uber takes away full info ping or brings back AR. Just watch.
No matter: they are here now, and I for one enjoy them. Speculate away.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

SHalester said:


> that is a stretch. RS income or loss is a nit. A fraction of a percent. Not material. And wouldn't your theory only apply to those whose only income is RS? I'd guess that is a minority as well. My 'loss' was a nit compared to just my investment income, not to mention wife unit wages. No subsidy here.
> 
> 
> more wild speculation parading around as an opinion?  Watch what happens if Uber takes away full info ping or brings back AR. Just watch.
> No matter: they are here now, and I for one enjoy them. Speculate away.


Your own words.










BTW, i'm not saying it's illegal. I'm just saying taxpayers are subsidizing Uber.



SHalester said:


> that is a stretch. RS income or loss is a nit. A fraction of a percent. Not material. And wouldn't your theory only apply to those whose only income is RS? I'd guess that is a minority as well. My 'loss' was a nit compared to just my investment income, not to mention wife unit wages. No subsidy here.
> 
> 
> more wild speculation parading around as an opinion?  Watch what happens if Uber takes away full info ping or brings back AR. Just watch.
> No matter: they are here now, and I for one enjoy them. Speculate away.


With Uber everything is speculation.

Do you think Uber is going to say "drivers don't get penalized for rejecting rides" and "drivers make their own business decisions" and then publicly throttle drivers that do?


----------



## Crosbyandstarsky (Feb 4, 2018)

moJohoJo said:


> AB5 the bill, Gavin Newsom as Governor of California imposed will benefit every driver . No, they will not set your hours for you . They want you to believe this because they want you to turn down this bill . You will still drive at the hours you choose but the difference is that you will be guaranteed a minimum wage of $18 plus per hour for your driving time and on top of that you will be paid for your mileage . We are already employees . Don't let them trick you . It's already been proven in Courts of Law that we are employees, not contractors .They tell us the year vehicles we can drive and what condition . They set the rates, they threaten us . They hire and fire any driver at their will but with bill AB5 we will not be fired with false accusations . Drivers will have recourse through employment Attorneys and by law . Contractors are not controlled by their employer but an employee is . You will still be able to determine your hours and days you work but they want you to believe otherwise . Uber / Lyft will need to cut back on employees because they will not want to pay drivers that sit idle . it will be money thrown away for drivers that are not picking up trips or if it is slow on any given day and when they limit the amount of drivers on the Road that means that there will be more trip requests available for drivers . They will no longer be able to afford an excess of drivers . They are oppossed to this bill because it will cost them money and we, as drivers will be treated respectfully, with dignity and paid better . Don't be fooled by their tactics of limiting your freedom . Nothing, if anything will change . It's a bill meant to improve your job as drivers with better pay, respect and job benefits .


No way. It's a bad idea



observer said:


> Your own words.
> 
> View attachment 420049
> 
> ...


We don't. I have an acceptance rate of 10 percent. I get all the rides I want. I just don't take them over 2 miles away. I wait for them to be closer and they always are


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Crosbyandstarsky said:


> No way. It's a bad idea
> 
> 
> We don't. I have an acceptance rate of 10 percent. I get all the rides I want. I just don't take them over 2 miles away. I wait for them to be closer and they always are


It's been brought up in the California forums. No one is for sure it"s happening but there is a lot of speculation it is going on.

Uber obviously isn't publicizing it.


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

observer said:


> Why?


I'd be happy to explain.

Regarding the first comment, I agree that the exemption might not seem very likely at this point, however, no one can firmly state the exemption is not going to happen for Uber. We just don't know yet. I'm sure you're aware of the Uber's history on petitions and how they challenge the laws all over the planet. They have been banned from many markets and fought their way back to the same market relatively quickly. (London, Colombia and...) Arguably those are tougher fights to win than the AB5 battle...
The recent changes Uber made such as showing the pick up/destination, upfront trip fare estimates, or the pilots they are running in three differerent markets for drivers in California to set their own prices are all strictly designed to establish legal grounds for them to argue and possibly qualify them for the exemption. Please see my other posts on AB5 on other threads...

About the second comment, you probably meant to say, that the article posted is for September of last year and a lot has happened since. But let's keep in mind that the content of that article is still about AB5 and the subject matter of this thread is also about AB5. How much more relevant a post can be?


----------



## Aerodrifting (Aug 13, 2017)

I am a driver in California (LA county) and I can already tell you, Uber is afraid of AB5.

In order to circumvent the bill, Uber started providing drivers with *full trip information* including estimated time, distance and earning sometime in January. They also ended the highway robbery that used to be called "upfront pricing" which could be stealing anywhere from 30-60% fare *AFTER deducting their $3 service fee. *They are no longer showing the entire fare breakdown but they claim they only take 25% (or 20% if you joined earlier) after deducting their $3 service fee. Acceptance rating is gone but I bet they still track it in the background.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Roadster4 said:


> I'd be happy to explain.
> 
> Regarding the first comment, I agree that the exemption might not seem very likely at this point, however, no one can firmly state the exemption is not going to happen for Uber. We just don't know yet. I'm sure you're aware of the Uber's history on petitions and how they challenge the laws all over the planet. They have been banned from many markets and fought their way back to the same market relatively quickly. (London, Colombia and...) Arguably those are tougher fights to win than the AB5 battle...
> The recent changes Uber made such as showing the pick up/destination, upfront trip fare estimates, or the pilots they are running in three differerent markets for drivers in California to set their own prices are all strictly designed to establish legal grounds for them to argue and possibly qualify them for the exemption. Please see my other posts on AB5 on other threads...
> ...


Uber tried many times before AB5 passed to get an exemption.

They failed.

Between Uber and Lyft, they spent 750,000 dollars on lobbyists.

They failed.

The filed a lawsuit claiming the law was unconstitutional.

They failed.

The law passed.

All those "improvements" that Uber made can be taken away at any minute at Ubers sole discretion.

At any minute.

They are not laws.

At any minute.

My comment about the article being irrelevant is because @KK2929 posted in another thread that the law was going to be suspended.

To me posting of the article supports the idea that it will be suspended as evidenced by the floor vote for suspension he posted.

The article is irrelevant because it is already a law. Has nothing to do with Uber lobbying for an exemption. Uber tried for an exemption and lost.

Yes, there will likely be more exemptions for occupations that slipped through the cracks and have a legitimate reason for exemption.

Uber tried and was denied.

Uber and Lyft will go full court press on the ballot initiative.


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

observer said:


> Uber tried many times before AB5 passed to get an exemption.
> 
> They failed.
> 
> ...


I'm aware. That's how the legal Universe works...

Did you know Uber, Lyft and food delivery company DoorDash have earmarked $90 million for a planned November 2020 ballot initiative that would exempt them from the law?


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Roadster4 said:


> I'm aware. That's how the legal Universe works...
> 
> Did you know Uber, Lyft and food delivery company DoorDash have earmarked $90 million for a planned November 2020 ballot initiative that would exempt them from the law?


Yupp, that was my last comment.

I think that what is going to happen is that if U/L win the intiative the state will file a lawsuit.

By this time many other states will have jumped on the bandwagon and filed their own AB5 like bills.

Uber will have to fight it out on a state by state basis.

It will be very costly.


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

Roadster4 said:


> I'm aware. That's how the legal Universe works...
> 
> Did you know Uber, Lyft and food delivery company DoorDash have earmarked $90 million for a planned November 2020 ballot initiative that would exempt them from the law?


In addition, this is sort of like do or die for these companies. They are willing to fight this fight and spend much more than even the $90 million on it. And you know how things turn when you spend that much money... I don't think we can predict anything just yet. We need to sit and watch the process.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

observer said:


> . I'm just saying taxpayers are subsidizing Uber.


and I'm saying you are full of prunes. And we know what happens when that is the case? You must think customers who buy from Amazon and every corporation that doesn't pay any tax are subsidizing said corporation.

Sheesh, methinks you need to research budget deficit and federal debt. sheesh, my word.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Roadster4 said:


> In addition, this is sort of like do or die for these companies. They are willing to fight this fight and spend much more than even the $90 million on it. And you know how things turn when you spend that much money... I don't think we can predict anything just yet. We need to sit and watch the process.


New Jersey has already filed a lawsuit against Uber claiming they are owed 600 million dollars.

States are also not going to give up that type of money without a fight.

Eventually every state and the federal government will realize they are getting screwed over by Uber.

It"s just a matter of time.


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

observer said:


> Yupp, that was my last comment.
> 
> I think that what is going to happen is that if U/L win the intiative the state will file a lawsuit.
> 
> ...


That is very true, but as long as they have people giving pool rides for a price of a soda while they are charging the riders as much as they do, they will spend money... AB5 is the ultimate fight for these companies...


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

SHalester said:


> and I'm saying you are full of prunes. And we know what happens when that is the case? You must think customers who buy from Amazon and every corporation that doesn't pay any tax are subsidizing said corporation.
> 
> Sheesh, methinks you need to research budget deficit and federal debt. sheesh, my word.


Nope, I believe Amazon and companies that don't pay taxes should be made to pay taxes. Amazon has plenty of profits from where to pay.

But, that's a deflection. Taxes aren't being claimed as a loss on tax returns.

Anyways, good night to everyone. It's past my bed time. 

Good convos, even the ones where we don't quite agree.


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

Good night. :smiles:


----------



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

Fozzie said:


> When you embrace a MINIMUM WAGE of any sort, I assure you that Uber and Lyft will devise a way to guarantee that's all you'll ever make.
> 
> I don't want a minimum wage job, I want fair compensation for the job I'm doing.
> 
> Any damn fool that's willing to accept minimum wage for driving rideshare deserves exactly what they get.


When min wage is a 45-90% increase in pay... sure i'll argue for min wage....

In florida min wage would be about $18-19 an hour (depending on miles driven). Keep in mind that the min wage in florida is 8.40ish an hour.

Around here the uber drivers are only averaging like $10 an hour. And if they instituted min wage I'd go back to uber and start accepting every ping because hey... paid mileage.

If you were paid on every mile driven screw it... start taking those 4-5 mile away pings work the suburbs and average 30 miles driven per hour. That would be over $20 an hour...

For every driver that is in negative on their taxes... they are making less than the tax free mileage reimubursement would be. On top of that they would be entitled to making min wage BEYOND hitting zero gain on their taxes.

For us in Orlando?

that would no joke be $110+ in tax free reimbursements plus $101.ish per 12 hours driven. Right now it's way less than that.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> When min wage is a 45-90% increase in pay... sure i'll argue for min wage....
> 
> In florida min wage would be about $18-19 an hour (depending on miles driven). Keep in mind that the min wage in florida is 8.40ish an hour.
> 
> ...


The problem in Orlando is, and always has been, oversaturation of desperate ants. $8.40 + mileage would double or triple the number of rideshare drivers on the road, and all but guarantee a scarcity of rides for everyone.


----------



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

Fozzie said:


> The problem in Orlando is, and always has been, oversaturation of desperate ants. $8.40 + mileage would double or triple the number of rideshare drivers on the road, and all but guarantee a scarcity of rides for everyone.


They would have to deal with having too many drivers. Yeah they would simply have to say "no new drivers" and not hire for a long time. Limit the number of hours online ect. They could purge any car over 5 years old, ect. They could also raise their standards as well.

But Fozzie...

$8.40 plus mileage is what employees are ENTITLED TO.

ENTITLED...

If the subcontractor BS loophole is closed, equally across the board.
The possibility is that the prices for uber will explode into ridiculousness, wheras taxis won't have pay their driver's $20+ an hour, only $8.40 an hour.

$100.80

That's all a taxi driver has to go home with after covering their rental/gas to be at min wage. It's also the bare minimum i expect for 12 hours of driving. Coincidentally it's also the standard by which i measure whether the job is acceptable pay or not.

Reality is that I can go home with more than min wage for $20 an hour in total revenue driving a taxi. If i work 11 hours and get $20 an hour that gives me $220 minus $90-110. or $120-130 profit.

TRUTH IS, i can rent/fuel a taxi for less than the _standard mileage rate_.

If ICs are killed in Florida uber is screwed for a dozen different reasons.

If uber is FORCED to pay that much, i think it's the end cause the taxis will be able to charge less and undercut uber's pricing. Which to me would be the world's biggest fattest irony.


----------



## Youburr (Aug 22, 2019)

AB5 does nothing about false accusations.


----------



## Zebonkey (Feb 2, 2016)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> $8.40 plus mileage is what employees are ENTITLED TO.


So, basically, what they were paying a few years back before rate cuts.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Youburr said:


> AB5 does nothing about false accusations.


It also doesn't do anything about arbitrary deactivations.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article240264901.html


----------



## oldnavyht3 (Jul 17, 2019)

observer said:


> AB5 is being ignored by both Uber and Lyft, nothing has changed.
> 
> Both say the law doesn't apply to them.


Oh they can ignore it all the want but eventually when they start losing even more sponsors and the publicity sets in even more drastically financially on them they will want to come to the negotiation table like the truck drivers did. Nothing is forever because they love money and eventually they will do whatever it takes to make a compromise.

The problem is they came into the business of gig work, got alot of employees, started lowering the wages and figured like most jobs no one would listen to the drivers....well the govenor listened. And now all this would have never came to fruition if uber and lyft hadnt played with the drivers money the way they did and now their greed has become their demise.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

oldnavyht3 said:


> Oh they can ignore it all the want but eventually when they start losing even more sponsors and the publicity sets in even more drastically financially on them they will want to come to the negotiation table like the truck drivers did. Nothing is forever because they love money and eventually they will do whatever it takes to make a compromise.
> 
> The problem is they came into the business of gig work, got alot of employees, started lowering the wages and figured like most jobs no one would listen to the drivers....well the govenor listened. And now all this would have never came to fruition if uber and lyft hadnt played with the drivers money the way they did and now their greed has become their demise.


The longer Uber/Lyft stretch this out the more back pay and penalties they owe drivers.


----------



## oldnavyht3 (Jul 17, 2019)

Roadster4 said:


> A lot has changed. The Rideshare companies formed a strategic alliance against AB5. In addition, they seem to be retaliating against the people behind the wheels who did not join their coalition against the AB5.


They will live and eventually they will comply and compromise because they dont want the continued negative publicity that they are fighting hard to keep quiet. And we californians know when california sneezes law wise, the rest of the country... and world catches the cold.



Roadster4 said:


> Towards the end of this month there should be a floor vote to suspend AB5 while corrective legislation is under consideration.The author of the AB5 has apologized for the law's destructive effects and proposed substantial changes...


Because you are running scared and just want lyft and uber to be left alone to continue to lower our mileage and time rates so that you can get some semblance of pay. I remember when I used to get6 paid $3 per mile now .65 per mile. Yes sure lets hurry for an emergency vote to let uber and lyft continue to do what they want. I dont know about you but I am hungry for a change in my pay rate and rights.....AND I REFUSE TO STARVE!



observer said:


> Since drivers would have to pick one app or another this may actually create a driver shortage.
> 
> Instead of 100 drivers being on two apps, you would have 50 drivers on one or the other.
> 
> If one app has more rides than the other and not enough drivers, they'll have to raise their rates.


So where is this mysterious wording from lyft and uber that syas if and when this law goes either way in compliance that we are only going to be allowed to work for one app or the other? Where is there a law stating that you are not allowed to work for two different companies period? Fear mongering going wild.....


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

oldnavyht3 said:


> They will live and eventually they will comply and compromise because they dont want the continued negative publicity that they are fighting hard to keep quiet. And we californians know when california sneezes law wise, the rest of the country... and world catches the cold.
> 
> 
> Because you are running scared and just want lyft and uber to be left alone to continue to lower our mileage and time rates so that you can get some semblance of pay. I remember when I used to get6 paid $3 per mile now .65 per mile. Yes sure lets hurry for an emergency vote to let uber and lyft continue to do what they want. I dont know about you but I am hungry for a change in my pay rate and rights.....AND I REFUSE TO STARVE!
> ...


Once you log on to either app you will be working for that app. You won't be able to run both apps at the same time.

Not fear mongering just common sense.


----------



## UberTrent9 (Dec 11, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> I agree that we are employees, but I disagree with some of your analysis of the effects of AB5.
> 
> While it's technically correct that AB5 doesn't require companies to take away flexible hours or layoff drivers, the economic reality of minimum wages for drivers would require Uber and Lyft to layoff, restrict hours, and put drivers on schedules.
> 
> ...


Do you happen to have that list of "many jobs that don't require resumes" handy? Please provide it here, thanks.


----------



## Woohaa (Jan 15, 2017)

AB5 is the best thing to happen to drivers since seat cushions.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

UberTrent9 said:


> Do you happen to have that list of "many jobs that don't require resumes" handy? Please provide it here, thanks.


What "list" are you referring to and why are asking?


----------



## Transportador (Sep 15, 2015)

moJohoJo said:


> AB5 the bill, Gavin Newsom as Governor of California imposed will benefit every driver . No, they will not set your hours for you . They want you to believe this because they want you to turn down this bill . You will still drive at the hours you choose but the difference is that you will be guaranteed a minimum wage of $18 plus per hour for your driving time and on top of that you will be paid for your mileage . We are already employees . Don't let them trick you . It's already been proven in Courts of Law that we are employees, not contractors .They tell us the year vehicles we can drive and what condition . They set the rates, they threaten us . They hire and fire any driver at their will but with bill AB5 we will not be fired with false accusations . Drivers will have recourse through employment Attorneys and by law . Contractors are not controlled by their employer but an employee is . You will still be able to determine your hours and days you work but they want you to believe otherwise . Uber / Lyft will need to cut back on employees because they will not want to pay drivers that sit idle . it will be money thrown away for drivers that are not picking up trips or if it is slow on any given day and when they limit the amount of drivers on the Road that means that there will be more trip requests available for drivers . They will no longer be able to afford an excess of drivers . They are oppossed to this bill because it will cost them money and we, as drivers will be treated respectfully, with dignity and paid better . Don't be fooled by their tactics of limiting your freedom . Nothing, if anything will change . It's a bill meant to improve your job as drivers with better pay, respect and job benefits .


All this maybe true. Except they will pay you minimum wages in peanuts instead of dollars, LOL.



Woohaa said:


> AB5 is the best thing to happen to drivers since seat cushions.


Not sure about that. I was happy as heck before AB5, driving Uber, Lyft and Amazon Flex. After AB5 maybe I can only drive Uber. And since I drive part time, maybe I get 50 cents worth of "benefits" a month.

In the meantime, AB5 screws with all other trades in the "gig' economy.

You people who love AB5 are just morons. Don't make me vote for Trump. Cuz I will if stupid people keep screwing up free enterprise.


----------



## Woohaa (Jan 15, 2017)

Transportador said:


> You people who love AB5 are just morons. Don't make me vote for Trump. Cuz I will if stupid people keep screwing up free enterprise.


So anyone who supports something that isn't good for YOU is a "moron." &#128580;

Ok. Got it. And feel free to vote for Bum45. There's no law that says dumb fcuks can't support one another.


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

oldnavyht3 said:


> They will live and eventually they will comply and compromise because they dont want the continued negative publicity that they are fighting hard to keep quiet. And we californians know when california sneezes law wise, the rest of the country... and world catches the cold.
> 
> 
> Because you are running scared and just want lyft and uber to be left alone to continue to lower our mileage and time rates so that you can get some semblance of pay. I remember when I used to get6 paid $3 per mile now .65 per mile. Yes sure lets hurry for an emergency vote to let uber and lyft continue to do what they want. I dont know about you but I am hungry for a change in my pay rate and rights.....AND I REFUSE TO STARVE!
> ...


I am running scared? I want Uber/Lyft to be left alone? I want an emergency vote to let these companies do what they want? What made you think any of the above?

People, such as yourself, are rightfully asking for change. The position Uber/Lyft have taken towards some people behind the wheels has been causing literal starvation, or potential irreversible financial harm so far.

Reading peoples comments here, when they are not attacking/insulting each other or others, demonstrate, that *people don't seem to have a unified understanding of the issues that are effecting their livelihood. And when that's the case, an association of workers forming a Legal Personhood, or Legal Unit might be the best option for the workers. This Bargaining Unit will act as a Bargaining Agent and Legal Representative for unit of workers in All Matters of Law or Right arising from or in the administration of a Collective Agreement.*


----------



## Transportador (Sep 15, 2015)

Woohaa said:


> So anyone who supports something that isn't good for YOU is a "moron." &#128580;
> 
> Ok. Got it. And feel free to vote for Bum45. There's no law that says dumb fcuks can't support one another.


Damn right! Anyone who supports something they don't fully understand is a true moron. Has nothing to do with what I like.

And stupid people vote, lots of them. That's the danger of a true democracy. That's why we are a republic.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Roadster4 said:


> I am running scared? I want Uber/Lyft to be left alone? I want an emergency vote to let these companies do what they want? What made you think any of the above?
> 
> People, such as yourself, are rightfully asking for change. The position Uber/Lyft have taken towards some people behind the wheels has been causing literal starvation, or potential irreversible financial harm so far.
> 
> Reading peoples comments here, when they are not attacking/insulting each other or others, demonstrate, that *people don't seem to have a unified understanding of the issues that are effecting their livelihood. And when that's the case, an association of workers forming a Legal Personhood, or Legal Unit might be the best option for the workers. This Bargaining Unit will act as a Bargaining Agent and Legal Representative for unit of workers in All Matters of Law or Right arising from or in the administration of a Collective Agreement.*


"*people don't seem to have a unified understanding of the issues that are effecting their livelihood."*

Exactly how Uber likes it.


----------



## Loralie (Sep 22, 2016)

Your right I haven't been getting as many pings at all when I'm sitting in a surge zone I barely get any requests and the requests I do get are usually base rate rides that are only $5-$7 the rides that most drivers reject while waiting for a longer ride with a surge on it. It's really unfair what Uber is doing to drivers I'm in San Francisco been driving for 5 years now and I always used to get pings even during the slow hours now i leave my app on just to see and nothing will come in for an hour. Uber is manipulating this and it's very apparent. I'm not getting any rides in 45 mins or more. Nothing not one request.



The Gift of Fish said:


> I believe that the court cases related to this and the appeals and the appeals of the appeals will take years. I think Uber will treat its drivers as employees during the Uber "careers" of very few people driving today. Unfortunately it looks like AB5 has turned out to be inadvertently detrimental to drivers, mainly by means of Uber returning to the days of increased control over drivers by effectively bringing back acceptance rate as a condition of working for them.


----------



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

Loralie said:


> Your right I haven't been getting as many pings at all when I'm sitting in a surge zone I barely get any requests and the requests I do get are usually base rate rides that are only $5-$7 the rides that most drivers reject while waiting for a longer ride with a surge on it. It's really unfair what Uber is doing to drivers I'm in San Francisco been driving for 5 years now and I always used to get pings even during the slow hours now i leave my app on just to see and nothing will come in for an hour. Uber is manipulating this and it's very apparent. I'm not getting any rides in 45 mins or more. Nothing not one request.


Did you have a low acceptance rate before the pings dropped away?


----------



## Loralie (Sep 22, 2016)

Yeah I've had a low acceptance rate for years. Nothing changed there, but now Uber is throttling me and other drivers it's completely apparent this started happening more recently I would say in the last 2 weeks I've noticed a change in the amount of requests I receive now barely anything for an hour. 


The Gift of Fish said:


> Did you have a low acceptance rate before the pings dropped away?


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

observer said:


> Since drivers would have to pick one app or another this may actually create a driver shortage.


I disagree. Picture this... Uber cuts 60% of drivers, so they aren't straddled with min wage. Lyft cuts 65% of their drivers, same reason. We still have too many drivers.



The Gift of Fish said:


> I think you're right that employee pay would settle around the minimum wage mark for CA, around $12 to $15 depending on location, if/when Uberlyft obeys AB5.


Min wage, plus tips (always optional) plus reimbursement for mileage. That's my guess anyways.



SHalester said:


> Ask Uber if they will change a thing due to that 'Union'.


There is only one thing about a union that scares U/L, and that is the extremely unlikely possibility of a successful strike. The business would be crippled beyond belief if drivers actually had bargaining power! But I think we would have a better chance of success buying a Powerball ticket &#129315;



WEY00L said:


> Amyone who promotes AB5 is nothing more than a union shill.


Don't ya just love it when someone comes on and insults half the population because they have different views?


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

observer said:


> "*people don't seem to have a unified understanding of the issues that are effecting their livelihood."*
> 
> Exactly how Uber likes it.


I cannot agree with you more!


----------



## Loralie (Sep 22, 2016)

Here is more proof that Uber is throttling drivers. Another thread from last week. A lot of people are complaining about this. 
https://uberpeople.net/threads/silicon-valley-rides-decreased.380447/


Loralie said:


> Yeah I've had a low acceptance rate for years. Nothing changed there, but now Uber is throttling me and other drivers it's completely apparent this started happening more recently I would say in the last 2 weeks I've noticed a change in the amount of requests I receive now barely anything for an hour.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

I think Uber is purposely doing this now instead of later.

Most drivers that don't get rides will quit now.

After those veteran drivers quit, they won't be as likely to care one way or another about an employee/IC bill.

Low wage companies keep worker turnover high so workers don't start getting comfortable and start to think they are being abused.


----------



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

Loralie said:


> Yeah I've had a low acceptance rate for years. Nothing changed there, but now Uber is throttling me and other drivers it's completely apparent this started happening more recently I would say in the last 2 weeks I've noticed a change in the amount of requests I receive now barely anything for an hour.


Deprioritisation is not throttling, which would mean Uber deciding not to give pings to certain drivers. Uber isn't doing this - what it is doing is offering the rides first to drivers who have high acceptance rates. It may seem like it's the same thing because fewer pings are received, but it's different.

As said above, I don't blame Uber for doing it. I would too, if I were them. Imagine you have two fishing buddies. You phone up one of them on Friday and ask if he wants to go fishing and he says no. You him phone again on Saturday and he again says no. You phone again on Sunday and he says no. You phone again on Monday and he says no. But your other fishing buddy says yes every time you ask him. Imagine it's now Tuesday and you want to go fishing again. Which buddy are you going to call first?

It seems at this juncture that drivers who have been deprioiritised have three options - 1) start accepting the shit pings to get their acceptance rate high, and keep accepting whatever Uber throws their way to keep it high or 2) accept that Uber will not be offering them much work moving forwards or 3) accept that Uber is now a non-viable income source.

For me, (1) is not an option. I don't do Pool, for a start. For me, it's (2) and (3). I'll keep Uber on while doing Lyft, but have no expectations of earnings from Uber.



Mista T said:


> Min wage, plus tips (always optional) plus reimbursement for mileage. That's my guess anyways.


Good point; if (big if) they decide to comply with the law (which seems optional at this point) then that would involve the payment of mileage expense.

We're way off that, though, at the moment. Their offer of paying drivers something like $17 per hour, _but only when on a trip _makes me laugh. That'd be like McDonalds only paying their drive thru people when there is a car in the drive thru. Or a store only paying its cashiers when there are customers at the checkout.



observer said:


> I think Uber is purposely doing this now instead of later.
> 
> Most drivers that don't get rides will quit now.
> 
> ...


I think that they're doing it, as usual, because they can. Because of the winter slowdown + the constantly increasing driver numbers they have a huge driver pool from which they can pick and choose. I have been watching the airport and the constant Sunday night surge from 8pm to 1am at SFO is long gone. Last night there were apparently 230 cars in the airport lot at midnight; Sunday night peak time lol.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> When min wage is a 45-90% increase in pay... sure i'll argue for min wage....
> 
> In florida min wage would be about $18-19 an hour (depending on miles driven). Keep in mind that the min wage in florida is 8.40ish an hour.
> 
> ...


What is Uber paying per mile in your area?



The Gift of Fish said:


> Deprioritisation is not throttling, which would mean Uber deciding not to give pings to certain drivers. Uber isn't doing this - what it is doing is offering the rides first to drivers who have high acceptance rates. It may seem like it's the same thing because fewer pings are received, but it's different.
> 
> As said above, I don't blame Uber for doing it. I would too, if I were them. Imagine you have two fishing buddies. You phone up one of them on Friday and ask if he wants to go fishing and he says no. You him phone again on Saturday and he again says no. You phone again on Sunday and he says no. You phone again on Monday and he says no. But your other fishing buddy says yes every time you ask him. Imagine it's now Tuesday and you want to go fishing again. Which buddy are you going to call first?
> 
> ...


If drivers were employees Uber would never pay 230 drivers to sit around. They may have enough work to keep fifty drivers busy.

The reason they do it now is drivers sit around for free and are happy to do it.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Mista T said:


> There is only one thing about a union that scares U/L


um, not sure you got the gist of the thread. It would be a union created outside of driver's votes, so it really would NOT be a union to begin with. My point was to have a union you need employees OR votes. We ain't employees and there aren't even a sliver of votes.

Only one thing would get Uber's attn. If those who go online normally on this or that day, don't. And don't in huge, giant numbers. THAT won't happen, so here we are. Least in Calif drivers have toys from Uber due to AB5. Yay us.


----------



## Woohaa (Jan 15, 2017)

Transportador said:


> Damn right! Anyone who supports something they don't fully understand is a true moron. Has nothing to do with what I like.
> 
> And stupid people vote, lots of them. That's the danger of a true democracy. That's why we are a republic.


No, I said good for YOU, as in Transportador. That's quite presumptuous to assume anyone who doesn't agree with YOU obviously is not understanding the issue at hand.


----------



## WEY00L (Mar 6, 2019)

Mista T said:


> Don't ya just love it when someone comes on and insults half the population because they have different views?


I do love it when people come on here and speak the truth.
If you are unable to handle the truth then that is a you problem.


----------



## Phila-mena (Feb 18, 2020)

Interesting that other professions think AB5 hurts not helps...While Im also an Uber Driver I also work as an independent Translator and Interpreter. Translators and Interpreters are also complaining that AB5 will make things worse. There seems to be consensus that AB5 will complicate things....I am so smart about the professions I get into hey 😉.


----------



## Kashi03445 (Feb 24, 2020)

At the end uber doesn't give a shitt about employees


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

https://qz.com/1809297/regulators-a...g-for-the-gig-economy/?utm_source=google-news


----------



## Mash Ghasem (Jan 12, 2020)

moJohoJo said:


> AB5 the bill, Gavin Newsom as Governor of California imposed will benefit every driver . No, they will not set your hours for you . They want you to believe this because they want you to turn down this bill . You will still drive at the hours you choose but the difference is that you will be guaranteed a minimum wage of $18 plus per hour for your driving time and on top of that you will be paid for your mileage . We are already employees . Don't let them trick you . It's already been proven in Courts of Law that we are employees, not contractors .They tell us the year vehicles we can drive and what condition . They set the rates, they threaten us . They hire and fire any driver at their will but with bill AB5 we will not be fired with false accusations . Drivers will have recourse through employment Attorneys and by law . Contractors are not controlled by their employer but an employee is . You will still be able to determine your hours and days you work but they want you to believe otherwise . Uber / Lyft will need to cut back on employees because they will not want to pay drivers that sit idle . it will be money thrown away for drivers that are not picking up trips or if it is slow on any given day and when they limit the amount of drivers on the Road that means that there will be more trip requests available for drivers . They will no longer be able to afford an excess of drivers . They are oppossed to this bill because it will cost them money and we, as drivers will be treated respectfully, with dignity and paid better . Don't be fooled by their tactics of limiting your freedom . Nothing, if anything will change . It's a bill meant to improve your job as drivers with better pay, respect and job benefits .


Don't you be tricked, as I expected AB5 has turned many things upside down for may rideshare and non-rideshare owner/operators who have their own legitimate businesses, who are engaged in and want to continue to be engaged only contract work.

My tax accountant handles many Hollywood workers who are in the entertainment business. She said they've all been complaining that AB5 has needlessly turned their lives upside down.

Just because you want to be considered an Uber employee does not mean I do as well. I have my own interests, so please don't tread on them.


----------



## Zebonkey (Feb 2, 2016)

Mash Ghasem said:


> Just because you want to be considered an Uber employee does not mean I do as well. I have my own interests, so please don't tread on them.


I don't even understand, how they will be able to make me an emploee.
I am not Zebonkey, I am Zebonkey LLC with a fleet account.


----------



## Mash Ghasem (Jan 12, 2020)

Zebonkey said:


> I don't even understand, how they will be able to make me an emploee.
> I am not Zebonkey, I am Zebonkey LLC with a fleet account.


Anything to do with Zebonkey Brewery in South Africa??!!
http://zebonkey.co.za/


----------



## Zebonkey (Feb 2, 2016)

Mash Ghasem said:


> Anything to do with Zebonkey Brewery in South Africa??!!
> http://zebonkey.co.za/


Nope.
No connection. 
Love their logo.


----------



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

Transportador said:


> All this maybe true. Except they will pay you minimum wages in peanuts instead of dollars, LOL.
> 
> 
> Not sure about that. I was happy as heck before AB5, driving Uber, Lyft and Amazon Flex. After AB5 maybe I can only drive Uber. And since I drive part time, maybe I get 50 cents worth of "benefits" a month.
> ...


Do you want rates dropped to 30c a mile?

Or even lower?

With ab5 enforced you would be entitled to min wage after all expenses, most notably mileage expenses. You would also get paid "on call time" due to the labor standards. (Having seconds to respond mere minutes to get moving and not being able to go home between any pings would make "on call time" payable.

So it's 30c or even worse per mile, 30c is the lowest rate ever paid in the states per mile.

Vs 54c ALL miles and min wage including time between pings if you can't make use of your off time (the time between uber pings would fail epically as "on call time" by federal labor standards)

12 hours with 200 miles driven would entitle you to $115 in tax free reimbursements plus $144 in min wage in California. Plus tips...

That's bare minimum.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Do you want rates dropped to 30c a mile?
> 
> Or even lower?
> 
> ...


Many people don't inderstand how low Uber will push wages.

At 30 cents a mile we taxpayers are paying for 24 cents of every mile driven by drivers.

All taxpayers are now subsidizing Uber.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> That's bare minimum.


Ok, now detail the negatives of being an employee. To be fair n balanced. :notworthy:


----------

