# New Driver Anti-Competition Class Actions Against Uber & Lyft



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

It looks like Uber/Lyft's claims that we are independent contractors could backfire on them again. New class actions are brewing against them on the basis that Uber/Lyft violate antitrust regulations by price fixing the amounts that we charge customers. Now, we all know that we aren't real independent contractors and that pax are really Uber/Lyft's customers. But, the interesting thing about this class action is that its intention is not to claim that we are not IC, but to not let Uber/Lyft have their cake and eat it. It's pure poetry. Having already claimed in courts that we are independent contractors, Uber/Lyft won't be able to now say that we are not. And, if they say we are independent contractors and that the reality is that pax are our customers then Uber/Lyft's control over the prices we charge pax is price fixing - an anti-competitive practice that harms both drivers and pax. The crux of the argument is that Uber/Lyft don't get to say that we are independent and that they are simply our revenue collection agents and at the same time control us by preventing us from competing for business by means of the prices we allegedly charge the pax.

Other complaints in the proposed class action revolve around the amount of control and manipulation that the companies exercise over drivers, which would be inappropriate if we are IC.

More details and contact page for the lawyers here:






Press Release: Drivers Sue to Block Uber, Lyft’s Illegal Price Fixing – Towards Justice







towardsjustice.org


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

I would argue that I am in reality an independent contractor.
I refuse 95% of “my bosses orders” Ride requests.
How long would I last at Walmart if they told me to clean up the spill pickles on aisle five and I said no 95% of the time?

Today I’m not working. I didn’t call my boss and ask for the day off. Complete freedom as to when and where I work.

I don’t want to be an employee
I’m not stupid
Being an employee would mean a limit to how many drivers are out. To create an imbalance so there are more customers than drivers (like a cab company) Inability to decline rides. 
A schedule, an assigned area and a low minimum wage.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

elelegido said:


> It looks like Uber/Lyft's claims that we are independent contractors could backfire on them again. New class actions are brewing against them on the basis that Uber/Lyft violate antitrust regulations by price fixing the amounts that we charge customers. Now, we all know that we aren't real independent contractors and that pax are really Uber/Lyft's customers. But, the interesting thing about this class action is that its intention is not to claim that we are not IC, but to not let Uber/Lyft have their cake and eat it. It's pure poetry. Having already claimed in courts that we are independent contractors, Uber/Lyft won't be able to now say that we are not. And, if they say we are independent contractors and that the reality is that pax are our customers then Uber/Lyft's control over the prices we charge pax is price fixing - an anti-competitive practice that harms both drivers and pax. The crux of the argument is that Uber/Lyft don't get to say that we are independent and that they are simply our revenue collection agents and at the same time control us by fixing the prices we allegedly charge the pax.
> 
> Other complaints in the proposed class action revolve around the amount of control and manipulation that the companies exercise over drivers, which would be inappropriate if we are IC.
> 
> ...


I hope they make a big note of how Uber and Lyft ban people off their platform when the drivers are found to ask for more money than what they quote, what more proof is there?


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

wallae said:


> I would argue that I am in reality an independent contractor.
> I refuse 95% of “my bosses orders” Ride requests.
> How long would I last at Walmart if they told me to clean up the spill pickles on aisle five and I said no 95% of the time?
> 
> ...


Being 15% independent contractor doesn't make you 100%, you keep using Uber's single technicality to claim we are contractors.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Screwber driver north said:


> I hope they make a big note of how Uber and Lyft ban people off their platform when the drivers are found to ask for more money than what they quote, what more proof is there?


If we agree to use their platform we may agree to use their pricing
I may get banned but I’m limiting the time of my trips. About 12 miles or 35 minutes based on our slow roads with tons of lights and traffic.
Cabs here double the rate out of city limits.
They say you can’t discriminate against specific destinations but I’m using time to avoid long empty unpaid return trips. If someone offers money ok but I don’t ask.


----------



## Ted Fink (Mar 19, 2018)

Screwber driver north said:


> Being 15% independent contractor doesn't make you 100%, you keep using Uber's single technicality to claim we are contractors.


I think @wallae is saying that he/she likes that feature the best and therefore to them, they are an IC. I concur with this - my favorite aspect too.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

wallae said:


> If we agree to use their platform we may agree to use their pricing
> I may get banned but I’m limiting the time of my trips. About 35 minutes.
> They say you can’t discriminate against specific destinations but I’m using time to avoid long empty unpaid return trips. If someone offers money ok but I don’t ask.


A document does not override a status, be it employee or contractor.

If it were that easy, imagine all these people who could, through a document, re-label their workers as they see fit.

That's the thing, they are deep in shit, because only Lyft is their competition and they both have agreed behind closed doors to a price, that's duopoly, what's more they have "contractors" who should have a say on the pricing when they offer their services to a client, what you are doing is yet again direct result of jobs with a question sign, no information leads to conflict between their contract and between the fact you are a contractor, they let you go and fully treat you as if you were an employee when it's their fault for not letting you know of the job you were about to perform.


----------



## Ted Fink (Mar 19, 2018)

MAJOR ISSUE HERE: If, for some crazy reason, Uber ends up allowing drivers to set their own prices (LOLZ, but roll with me here)... it would be a race to the bottom. Riders would choose the cheapest driver they could get at any one time, thereby depressing prices, not increasing them. Because some nut job out there is desperate, stupid, or willing to take someone 5 miles for $1.00.

I think the best long term solution for Uber AND Drivers is to increase base rates to a more reasonable level, and give more modest quest bonuses. As for surge, leave it alone to do it's job. When there aren't enough drivers in an area, you want more drivers to go to that area. That's the whole purpose of surge. And hey Dara, if you're reading this, you don't have to charge the PAX $40 extra in order to give a driver $8.75. So either give the driver $30 of the $40, or give the driver $8.75 but only charge the PAX an extra $12 or so.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

Ted Fink said:


> MAJOR ISSUE HERE: If, for some crazy reason, Uber ends up allowing drivers to set their own prices (LOLZ, but roll with me here)... it would be a race to the bottom. Riders would choose the cheapest driver they could get at any one time, thereby depressing prices, not increasing them. Because some nut job out there is desperate, stupid, or willing to take someone 5 miles for $1.00.
> 
> I think the best long term solution for Uber AND Drivers is to increase base rates to a more reasonable level, and give more modest quest bonuses. As for surge, leave it alone to do it's job. When there aren't enough drivers in an area, you want more drivers to go to that area. That's the whole purpose of surge. And hey Dara, if you're reading this, you don't have to charge the PAX $40 extra in order to give a driver $8.75. So either give the driver $30 of the $40, or give the driver $8.75 but only charge the PAX an extra $12 or so.


Actually this was tested already in California and the opposite happened, the drivers who played with this design cursed the day Uber got rid of it (which was the day they manipulated prop22 to a win after AB5 came out).

There are stupid and desperate people out there but even they feel stupid when they realize everyone else is making more money so they raise the prices eventually, it's all demand, really, many drivers and no demand, race to the bottom.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

wallae said:


> I would argue that I am in reality an independent contractor.
> I refuse 95% of “my bosses orders” Ride requests.
> How long would I last at Walmart if they told me to clean up the spill pickles on aisle five and I said no 95% of the time?
> 
> Today I’m not working. I didn’t call my boss and ask for the day off. Complete freedom as to when and where I work.


Faulty logic.

The fact that you are not an avocado does not mean that you are a tomato.

The fact that you don't work as an employee at Walmart does not mean that you are an independent contractor.

Gig workers are neither employee nor IC. The app companies have created a new class of worker that has some elements of employment and some of IC, but is, at the same time, different from both.

The interesting thing about this new class action is not the "Are we IC or not" debate. That's irrelevant to this case. The plaintiffs are not challenging Uber/Lyft's claim that we're IC. The point of attack is that Uber/Lyft have sworn that we are IC, and they will now be grilled as to why they control the prices charged by IC.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Screwber driver north said:


> Being 15% independent contractor doesn't make you 100%, you keep using Uber's single technicality to claim we are contractors.


Exactly, it's not an either-or.


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

wallae said:


> I would argue that I am in reality an independent contractor.
> I refuse 95% of “my bosses orders” Ride requests.
> How long would I last at Walmart if they told me to clean up the spill pickles on aisle five and I said no 95% of the time?
> 
> ...


What does this have to do with the original post? This isn't a debate on whether we want to be independent contractors or employees. This is whether the companies are violating antitrust laws by price fixing. This being done with us being classified as independent contractors.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

wallae said:


> I don’t want to be an employee
> I’m not stupid
> Being an employee would mean a limit to how many drivers are out.


Lyft & uber don't want you to be employees either, they couldn't afford it and ot would be the death blow to the companies. 

The goal of the lawsuits isn't to become employees, it's to make them give up some of their power to control. Right now the only power you have is to not work.
When it comes down to it, that's not really control or power. If you refuse the work, you're not earning. It may feel like a win to at times, but the reality is, it's not.


----------



## _Tron_ (Feb 9, 2020)

I love the idea of Uber and Lyft's geometric logic turning back on them. But I'd like it a lot more if these companies were profitable and had great balance sheets.


----------



## _Tron_ (Feb 9, 2020)

elelegido said:


> Gig workers are neither employee nor IC. The app companies have created a new class of worker that has some elements of employment and some of IC, but is, at the same time, different from both.


I've have been screaming precisely this from my rooftop to the lawmakers in California since they hatched AB5. But the legislators have their heads to far up the special interest's asses to even think about getting outside that box.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Daisey77 said:


> What does this have to do with the original post? This isn't a debate on whether we want to be independent contractors or employees. This is whether the companies are violating antitrust laws by price fixing. This being done with us being classified as independent contractors.


Exactly - as I mentioned above, the "Are we IC / Are we not IC" debate is not relevant to the class action as claiming employee status is not in the plaintiffs' complaint.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Boca Ratman said:


> The goal of the lawsuits isn't to become employees, it's to make them give up some of their power to control. Right now the only power you have is to not work.
> When it comes down to it, that's not really control or power. If you refuse the work, you're not earning. It may feel like a win to at times, but the reality is, it's not.


As I see it, if U/L are forced to give up pricing control then it could be the end of them. If drivers had control over pricing, they would have to go back the percentage-split revenue model. As we know, U/L never made a dime in profit under the 80/20 or 75/25 model.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

_Tron_ said:


> I've have been screaming precisely this from my rooftop to the lawmakers in California since they hatched AB5. But the legislators have their heads to far up the special interest's asses to even think about getting outside that box.


Dara campaigned for a third way but, of course, his version of it was to simply take the best bits of employment (control over workers, control over pricing, ability to discipline/deactivate workers etc) and of IC (no benefits, no payroll expenses, no obligation to provide work etc) to the benefit of the gig companies only. 









Uber CEO advocates for 'third way' to classify gig workers while fighting California labor lawsuit


Dara Khosrowshahi suggests companies that rely on gig work should be required by law to create benefits funds that can be used by workers.




www.cnbc.com


----------



## _Tron_ (Feb 9, 2020)

elelegido said:


> As we know, U/L never made a dime in profit under the 80/20 or 75/25 model.


The thing is, these companies have managed to not make much more than a dime in profit regardless of the pay structure. The "uncomfortable truth" is that these entities are run so poorly they can't seem to turn a profit under any conditions. A human-less, machine-made match between passenger and driver should be a highly profitable venture, and allow both the driver and the company who owns the machine a good living.

The uncomfortable part of this truth is that RS as we know it may need to die, so that it can be re born under more rational management. I keep trying to buy Teslas to be in a position to jump on their rideshare bandwagon, but that project may or may not ever reach fruition with driver-based cars.

Anyone up for a new RS company named Phoenix?


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Boca Ratman said:


> Lyft & uber don't want you to be employees either, they couldn't afford it and ot would be the death blow to the companies.
> 
> The goal of the lawsuits isn't to become employees, it's to make them give up some of their power to control. Right now the only power you have is to not work.
> When it comes down to it, that's not really control or power. If you refuse the work, you're not earning. It may feel like a win to at times, but the reality is, it's not.


How can we fix the law of supply and demand ?
Unions have to limit the workers
Cabs too
Some here at the port go at 4 am and don’t get work
The friends and family of the union heads get to work first🤣
Now have all these total sheet boxes out and people who look homeless.
And their stupid too
Yesterday a girl was yelling at people to go offline so it would surge …
I went up to the airport and asked a Mexican couple if they were staying in town Yes
I knew they paid base and I’d get .60 a mile plus 7 surge 
Start trip 30 miles. Here that’s 60 minutes
I said I’m sorry and canceled unloaded the luggage
I went back and told her.. She took it saying I need numbers and comes back complaining it took 3 hours and she had to go 4 miles down a potholes filled dirt road for 25 bucks 🤣


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

_Tron_ said:


> The thing is, these companies have managed to not make much more than a dime in profit regardless of the pay structure. The "uncomfortable truth" is that these entities are run so poorly they can't seem to turn a profit under any conditions. A human-less, machine-made match between passenger and driver should be a highly profitable venture, and allow both the driver and the company who owns the machine a good living.
> 
> The uncomfortable part of this truth is that RS as we know it may need to die, so that it can be re born under more rational management. I keep trying to buy Teslas to be in a position to jump on their rideshare bandwagon, but that project may or may not ever reach fruition with driver-based cars.
> 
> Anyone up for a new RS company named Phoenix?


Now that there's very little left to be thrown in the rideshare investor cash incinerator, U/L are indeed basically taxi companies that are dispatched by algorithms instead of humans, with the disadvantage of not being able to do street hails. If they do survive then I think they'll have to become even more like taxi services - servicing the lucrative high-demand areas such as airports and city centres and abandoning the idea of having a car available on every street corner everywhere.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Boca Ratman said:


> The goal of the lawsuits isn't to become employees, it's to make them give up some of their power to control.


The govt could drastically reduce the power of the gig companies without changing drivers' work status by simply mandating that all dispatch of work be offered to the CLOSET DRIVER (TIMEWISE). In the event of a "tie" the offer would go the driver who's been waiting the longest.

The fact that the companies can choose who gets offered the jobs (good, bad, mediocre) and who doesn't gives them enormous power over the drivers in addition to their ability to fire any driver at any time.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> The govt could drastically reduce the power of the gig companies without changing drivers' work status by simply mandating that all dispatch of work be offered to the CLOSET DRIVER (TIMEWISE). In the event of a "tie" the offer would go the driver who's been waiting the longest.
> 
> The fact that the companies can choose who gets offered the jobs (good, bad, mediocre) and who doesn't gives them enormous power over the drivers in addition to their ability to fire any driver at any time.


I don’t see how that fixes the problems 
The last weeks it’s been going horrible here. Waiting 1.5 hours for a ride for .60 a mile 
Maybe a tiny surge 
One guy has done 2 rides since 7 am for 26 bucks 
That’s what I saw yesterday 
Today I’m not working


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

Granted this is an old article. so there's some information that's outdated or cases referenced that have already been ruled on. However I think the article itself is very interesting in terms of the antitrust aspect. It's a pretty in-depth read. It gave me a headache LOL there's a lot of information in this article. It's not a light read but gives us a lot to think about









Uber’s Antitrust Problem


Uber recently settled one lawsuit, but its drivers remain contractors and several court challenges loom—including one that puts the ride-sharing service in the crosshairs of antitrust law.




prospect.org


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

elelegido said:


> Dara campaigned for a third way but, of course, his version of it was to simply take the best bits of employment (control over workers, control over pricing, ability to discipline/deactivate workers etc) and of IC (no benefits, no payroll expenses, no obligation to provide work etc) to the benefit of the gig companies only.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Prop 22 is Dara's view of how the "third way" should be handled nationwide, which is why he's trying to spread it coast to coast.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

elelegido said:


> As we know, U/L never made a dime in profit under the 80/20 or 75/25 model.


They gave the money away, they didn't lose it in the actual business. That and creative accounting. 

Uber does 5-6 million rides per day world wide. $60 billion per year. 
20% of $60 billion is $12 billion. 
$2 per ride is 4 billion per year. 

I'd argue that the way for them make money is to go back to a simple commission based pay structure and stop trying to reinvent pay formulas. Do away with quests, and assorted bonus, be transparent with the surges pay drivers 75% and they could cut the % as quests. 50 rides get you 80%, 100 rides 90% or whatever. If we made 1.50 per mile on non surged rides, they wouldn't need to bribe drivers to get them to do 40 or 50 rides. People would be driving more. 

No they have this silly upfront pricing. Some rides I make $3.00/mile some $2.25 and some offers come in at 80 cents per mile. 

They just need to stop trying to reinvent the pay structure and go to a simple, transparent system.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

wallae said:


> I don’t see how that fixes the problems
> The last weeks it’s been going horrible here. Waiting 1.5 hours for a ride for .60 a mile
> Maybe a tiny surge
> One guy has done 2 rides since 7 am for 26 bucks
> ...


You're all over place man. 
That a completely different subject and has nothing to do with your original post that was off subject 😆 🤣 😂


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

wallae said:


> I don’t see how that fixes the problems


It drastically reduces their power over the drivers and in the process moves drivers closer to being actual ICs.

Right now Uber, Doordash, Lyft, etc can punish drivers they consider too "uppity" (low AR) by skipping over them during dispatch or offering them the crummiest jobs. They can feed or starve any driver they want. That's an enormous amount of power over the drivers.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Boca Ratman said:


> They gave the money away, they didn't lose it in the actual business. That and creative accounting.


They didn't give the money away or donate it etc, and nor did they lose it; they used the investor cash to purchase market share and revenue, which was part of their business plan.


> Uber does 5-6 million rides per day world wide. $60 billion per year.
> 20% of $60 billion is $12 billion.
> $2 per ride is 4 billion per year.
> 
> ...


I don't know how or even if they can achieve profitability. To know that we would need to know what their costs are, and for that we would need access to their internal management accounts, not the publicly-available statutory accounts.

This is the reason that Uber stock is taking such a hammering - nobody outside Uber has this information.


----------



## ubergrind (May 23, 2017)

Screwber driver north said:


> A document does not override a status, be it employee or contractor.
> 
> If it were that easy, imagine all these people who could, through a document, re-label their workers as they see fit.
> 
> ...


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Screwber driver north said:


> I hope they make a big note of how Uber and Lyft ban people off their platform when the drivers are found to ask for more money than what they quote, what more proof is there?


Uber's contract specifically prohibits drivers from charging pax additional fees. Years ago there was no such clause in their contract.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

elelegido said:


> Gig workers are neither employee nor IC. The app companies have created a new class of worker that has some elements of employment and some of IC, but is, at the same time, different from both.


There is ONE industry that is very close to this type of a setup.
Check out the relationship between a real estate agent and their brokerage.
Very unique.
And, also under fire from the lawyers.

.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

elelegido said:


> As we know, U/L never made a dime in profit under the 80/20 or 75/25 model.


That's a correlation, not a causation.

A 75/25 model could be extremely profitable provided the fares are high enough.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

UberBastid said:


> There is ONE industry that is very close to this type of a setup.
> Check out the relationship between a real estate agent and their brokerage.
> Very unique.
> And, also under fire from the lawyers.
> ...


I'm not in the real estate business but I do know that real estate companies charge their clients a helluva lot less than Uber charges their "clients" (the drivers) for services rendered.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Ted Fink said:


> And hey Dara, if you're reading this, you don't have to charge the PAX $40 extra in order to give a driver $8.75. So either give the driver $30 of the $40, or give the driver $8.75 but only charge the PAX an extra $12 or so.


So here’s the thing about that, they DO have to charge some customers $40 extra in order to pay. Let’s say 10 drivers pop into the $8.75 zone. That $87.50 in guaranteed payouts that Uber has to make up, not just the $8.75 for the one driver that gets the ride.

I follow the Surge tracker and use the pax app to test pricing. Unless it’s an event, by the time you see the $8.75 on the screen, the surge is already over. Some pax got screwed with +$40 charges and other pax got connected for base rates. But all the drivers still got their $8.75.

This is why Uber should find a legal way to not show the drivers what the pax pays. Most of the drivers can’t understand how decoupling works. It’s too much for them wrap around their brains that it’s NOT a one on one individual transaction between you and a driver.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> It drastically reduces their power over the drivers and in the process moves drivers closer to being actual ICs.
> 
> Right now Uber, Doordash, Lyft, etc can punish drivers they consider too "uppity" (low AR) by skipping over them during dispatch or offering them the crummiest jobs. They can feed or starve any driver they want. That's an enormous amount of power over the drivers.


How do you know that they cheat?


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> I'm not in the real estate business but I do know that real estate companies charge their clients a helluva lot less than Uber charges their "clients" (the drivers) for services rendered.


If the average cost of a ride was $300k I bet the take rate would be lower than the 25-30%ish that it’s currently at. I also highly doubt a real estate company would take 0% commissions on sales or pay out of pocket to make a sale. Uber does that all the time.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> I'm not in the real estate business but I do know that real estate companies charge their clients a helluva lot less than Uber charges their "clients" (the drivers) for services rendered.


But, do you know what the brokerage (uber) charges the agents (drivers)?
Up to 50%.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

wallae said:


> How do you know that they cheat?


I've experienced it many times over the years doing Eats and DD and so have other posters on this website.

Countless times over the years I've been stationed near restaurants for long periods of time waiting for offers only to watch other drivers pull up and walk away with orders, some of them are large orders. Other posters on this website have said the same thing happened to them.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

UberBastid said:


> But, do you know what the brokerage (uber) charges the agents (drivers)?
> Up to 50%.


I've seen fees as high as 85%.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> Countless times over the years I've been stationed near restaurants for long periods of time waiting for offers only to watch other drivers pull up and walk away with orders, some of them are large orders. Other posters on this website have said the same thing happened to them.


The only thing this proves is that you aren’t capable of adapting to a situation you aren’t accustomed to. Sounds more like a YOU problem, especially since it’s the other drivers making “your” money! 😂


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> "Cheat" is your term not mine.
> 
> I've experienced it many times over the years doing Eats and DD and so have other posters on this website.
> 
> Countless times over the years I've been stationed near restaurants for long periods of time waiting for offers only to watch other drivers pull up and walk away with orders, some of them are large orders. Other posters on this website have said the same thing happened to them.


That’s really anecdotal
Maybe that fellows been online empty longer than you and that’s how they work it


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Livekilometers96 said:


> If the average cost of a ride was $300k I bet the take rate would be lower than the 25-30%ish that it’s currently at. I also highly doubt a real estate company would take 0% commissions on sales or pay out of pocket to make a sale. Uber does that all the time.


But, that's not what I'm talking about.
I am talking about the IC vs employee legal relationship.

It is very similar to what Uber is trying to do.

In a RE brokerage, the broker is responsible for the actions of the licensees working under his license. BUT, the licensee is an independent contractor at the same time. If the agent does something illegal or immoral the broker can (and often is) brought up on charges of 'failure to supervise'. 
BUT, the agent is an IC and is therefore not subject to 'supervision'. 
A tough spot for the broker of record.

If the broker discovers illegal or forbidden actions he is legally bound to report to the Dept of Real Estate* AND sever the business relationship with the brokerage. 

* California Law


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> That's a correlation, not a causation.


No, it was a causative factor. There is a direct, causative link between labour cost and profit (or loss). The relationship between cost and profit is given by the simple formula profit = revenue - cost. The lower your cost, the lower your loss (or the higher the profit for profitable companies).

To put it another way, if you have $100 and I take only 25% of your money then I am in a worse financial position than if I take 40%.
Uber taking only 25% of drivers' earnings put it in a worse financial position than if it had taken 40%. Therefore taking only 25% contributed to (but was not the exclusive cause of) Uber's losses under the revenue split model more than a higher percentage take would have.

Another way to look it is that Uber only ever does things that are beneficial to Uber. If taking 25% from drivers was the best amount to take for Uber's bottom line, then it would have kept its take at 25%. However, they did not do this - taking 30%/40%/50%+ is better for them financially. Taking more from drivers puts more money in Uber's pocket and reduces its losses.



> A 75/25 model could be extremely profitable provided the fares are high enough.


Maybe. Maybe not. We don't know that. We don't know what Uber's total driver cost is in any market, nor do we know the total driver cost per mile (rate card + incentive cost + bonus cost) in any market, nor do we have access to Uber's data models that predict demand at different price levels in any market. It could be that "high enough" fares would shrink Uber's ride volume and revenue so much that they lose even more money than they do now.

If the answer to achieving profitability (i.e. Uber makes money now instead of losing it) was simply to go back to the 75/25 revenue split model then Uber would do that tomorrow.

It's easy to be an armchair CEO and say "Company A will make money if they do X, Y and Z", but without any access to management information, accounts or data it's just guessing.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

UberBastid said:


> If the agent does something illegal or immoral the broker can (and often is) brought up on charges of 'failure to supervise'.
> BUT, the agent is an IC and is therefore not subject to 'supervision'.


I think one of the big things that people fail to understand is the significant difference between business owner and independent contractor employment.

Being an independent contractor DOES NOT mean that you can do whatever you want without consequences. When a stylist rents out a chair at a salon, they still have to abide by the rules and regulations set forth in their contract with the salon. Doctors as well. Most ER doctor’s are IC’s, could you imagine if they were allowed to pick and choose which cases to handle when ambulances show up? They sign a contract agreeing to the rules set forth by the hospitals. If they don’t like those rules they sign a contract elsewhere. Professional golfers and tennis players are IC’s but still fall under the supervision and rules of the Tours and individual tournaments. You can 100% be supervised as an independent contractor.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Screwber driver north said:


> they both have agreed behind closed doors to a price, that's duopoly,


Source? Citation?


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> mandating that all dispatch of work be offered to the CLOSET DRIVER (TIMEWISE).


There goes ratings matchups. 5 star customers matched with 4 star drivers should be interesting for demand.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Boca Ratman said:


> You're all over place man.
> That a completely different subject and has nothing to do with your original post that was off subject 😆 🤣 😂


It’s all related


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Heisenburger said:


> Source? Citation?


I've wondered about this, but the evidence doesn't support a duopoly. When AB5 was passed, Lyft did nothing to its prices while Uber let drivers decide their own prices. U/L did work together to purchase their Prop 22 victory, but that's about it I think.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

wallae said:


> It’s all related


I share 50% of my DNA with the banana I ate yesterday. I'm related to it. Or I was. Did I just consume a relative? Am I a cannibal? 

Worried.......


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

elelegido said:


> I share 50% of my DNA with the banana I ate yesterday. I'm related to it. Or I was. Did I just consume a relative? Am I a cannibal?
> 
> Worried.......


No just 1/2 monkey


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Livekilometers96 said:


> The only thing this proves is that you aren’t capable of adapting to a situation you aren’t accustomed to. Sounds more like a YOU problem, especially since it’s the other drivers making “your” money! 😂


You've got zero credibility to lecture anyone. 

Once again you're here playing the part of Mr. Uber Boy Scout with your usual crocodile tears for "poor Uber" having to pay out all of that surge money to a bunch of undeserving ingrate drivers.

Mr. Uber Boy Scout, who advocated against transparency for the drivers (you cheered Uber on after they took full trip info away from the CA drivers) is at it again. Now you're advocating for Uber to hide how much the pax are paying.

You gave Uber a standing ovation for taking away the California goodies. You said it was necessary because the greedy and selfish drivers' use of the goodies was stranding pax and driving them into the arms of Lyft. In your best crocodile tears you boo-hooed and sniff-sniffed that the end result could be Uber going out of business!

The same guy who said that Uber needed to take away full trip info from the California drivers because they were using it to cherrypick is the same guy who used an app hack to get unlimited DFs for himself so he could cherrypick HIS rides. 

Your hero Dara would be SOOOOO disappointed if he knew that one of his biggest fans had caused lots of damage to customer service and Uber itself by stranding all those pax while he was using unlimited DFs to cherrypick his rides.

In his own crocodile tears Dara told the drivers how sorry he was that he had to take away the two measly extra DFs that Travis gave the drivers. He said he had no choice because the extra DFs were hurting customer service. Just think how he'd react to the damage that could be done to customer service by the use of UNLIMITED DFs!

You're a total hypocrite and a greedy fraud.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> You've got zero credibility to lecture anyone.
> 
> Once again you're here playing the part of Mr. Uber Boy Scout with your usual crocodile tears for "poor Uber" having to pay out all of that surge money to a bunch of undeserving ingrate drivers.
> 
> ...


Personal attack adds nothing to the discussion.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> There goes ratings matchups. 5 star customers matched with 4 star drivers should be interesting for demand.


Being a veteran driver I'm sure you're well aware that driver ratings can be very misleading.

Drivers who don't "play it safe" and pick up "high risk" pax get unfairly penalized with lower ratings than drivers who play it safe. 

I speak from experience on this because for the first six months I picked up almost everyone including LOTS of bar-closing drunks in DC on weekend nights and as a result my ratings took a hit to the 4.70s. Once I stopped picking up the drunks my ratings went up to the 4.90s and stayed there.

I had to lay down the law sometimes with the drunks and it got me some 1-star ratings as a result.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

elelegido said:


> Personal attack adds nothing to the discussion.


Yeah? Check out who made the first "attack". He's personally attacked many people on this website.

This dude is a hypocrite and a phony and I'm gonna call him out on it.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> There goes ratings matchups. 5 star customers matched with 4 star drivers should be interesting for demand.


Check out Youtube and watch Uber's training videos. They specifically stated that the "closest driver gets the ping" and they even tried to guilt-trip the drivers out of declining rides by saying that pax will have to wait longer for a driver further away to pick them up.

Like in so many other cases it turned out Uber was lying thru their teeth.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> They specifically stated that the "closest driver gets the ping"


While the following isn't exactly what I was thinking of earlier, it's close enough:



> Requests may be unfulfilled if no eligible drivers are available.





https://help.uber.com/riders/article/highly-rated-drivers-benefit-details?nodeId=0c5ae9d8-47f4-46e5-b916-49648b9186b1


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> While the following isn't exactly what I was thinking of earlier, it's close enough:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you noticed they were careful not to say the "highest" rated driver, they said "highly rated".

In any case that's not how they sold this job to potential drivers, especially to the cab drivers who wanted to get away from the favoritism, cronyism, and corruption of taxi dispatch. Being told that the closest driver gets the ping was very appealing to them.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> Once again you're here playing the part of Mr. Uber Boy Scout with your usual crocodile tears for "poor Uber" having to pay out all of that surge money to a bunch of undeserving ingrate drivers.


I made no reference to Uber other than to point out the very obvious thing that the poster was missing. I do not feel one bit bad for Uber, I was merely explaining how sticky surge is not an individual transaction between driver and rider.


Nats121 said:


> You gave Uber a standing ovation for taking away the California goodies. You said it was necessary because the greedy and selfish drivers' use of the goodies was stranding pax and driving them into the arms of Lyft. In your best crocodile tears you boo-hooed and sniff-sniffed that the end result could be Uber going out of business!


This is the alternative reality world you live in. Never said any of that. I said I understood why they would do that because of all the personal experiences I had actually living and working in the state that the goodies were taking place. I actually picked up stranded pax. Rather than quarterbacking from across the country while having not worked on the X platform since 2019. Set your own fares does not work. It never will. Seeing destinations comes at a cost. That cost is lower offer cards as almost every market that has gotten upfront fares has mentioned.



Nats121 said:


> Now you're advocating for Uber to hide how much the pax are paying.


Yes I am. After enough time has passed you’ll actually see drivers be happier. Too many idiots getting pissed and over reacting to the rides where Uber takes 35-50% on an individual ride but refuse to acknowledge the incentives offered or the rides where Uber takes a loss. It’s embarrassing to watch.



Nats121 said:


> The same guy who said that Uber needed to take away full trip info from the California drivers because they were using it to cherrypick is the same guy who used an app hack to get unlimited DFs for himself so he could cherrypick HIS rides.


Not sure I ever said that but the way you interpret things, I’m sure it’s what you think your read. As far as the DF hack, I’m not sure what your point is? I used the tools i had available to me to make my situation as profitable as possible. Just as I did when we had set your own multiplier with full destinations and service fee reduction to make as much as I could. That’s the point of the gig. Learn. ADAPT. EARN. REPEAT. Don’t recall ever saying I was a martyr that would only accept base rates. 


Nats121 said:


> Your hero Dara would be SOOOOO disappointed if he knew that one of his biggest fans had caused lots of damage to customer service and Uber itself by stranding all those pax while he was using unlimited DFs to cherrypick his rides.


I actually took WAY more rides with DF hack. I took almost any ride within 5 minutes of me, my acceptance rate was above 60% for the vast majority of time I had the hack. My current AR is 4%. Far more people are getting stranded now than then. Try again. 


Nats121 said:


> You're a total hypocrite and a greedy fraud


Learn. Adapt. Earn. Repeat.

Im not a hypocrite, I’m just way better at the above than you are.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> They specifically stated that the "closest driver gets the ping"


While that's *generally* true, it seems like this would throw a small spanner in the works:

*



What are Uber VIP benefits?

Click to expand...

*


> Uber VIP doesn’t offer much in terms of benefits, but *Uber VIP does provide a little more quality control* when you have selected an Uber VIP ride. Here’s what you can expect with Uber VIP.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


_What are Uber VIP benefits?_


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Nats121 said:


> Yeah? Check out who made the first "attack". He's personally attacked many people on this website.
> 
> This dude is a hypocrite and a phony and I'm gonna call him out on it.


I don’t think you quite understand hypocrisy.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Ted Fink said:


> MAJOR ISSUE HERE: If, for some crazy reason, Uber ends up allowing drivers to set their own prices (LOLZ, but roll with me here)... it would be a race to the bottom. Riders would choose the cheapest driver they could get at any one time, thereby depressing prices, not increasing them. Because some nut job out there is desperate, stupid, or willing to take someone 5 miles for $1.00.


Any time you allow drivers to set their own rates there's the risk that some zombie or desperate ant may be willing to give a ride for next to nothing. But by all indications that I saw just opposite happened in California. In CA it was a race to the TOP, so much so that Uber pulled the plug on it as soon as they could.

Unlike the new Radar system the CA drivers' pings were 15 seconds and included maps which enabled them to cherrypick effectively. As a result they were able to price their rides at profitable rates.

Because Radar was designed to make cherrypicking difficult for all but the most savvy drivers it's causing a race to the bottom.


----------



## Lord Summerisle (Aug 15, 2015)

elelegido said:


> Personal attack adds nothing to the discussion.


No but they're entertaining.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

Lord Summerisle said:


> No but they're entertaining.


I totally agree. As long as no threats are made, insults should be allowed. I mean do you have any clue how hard it is to NOT insult an Uber Eats driver from DC that’s trying to be and Uber X zen master in CA. Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one, but some just smell a lot more like shit!


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Lord Summerisle said:


> No but they're entertaining.


We need a Monty Python Argument Room and Abuse Room for them.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

elelegido said:


> No, it was a causative factor. There is a direct, causative link between labour cost and profit (or loss). The relationship between cost and profit is given by the simple formula profit = revenue - cost. The lower your cost, the lower your loss (or the higher the profit for profitable companies).
> 
> To put it another way, if you have $100 and I take only 25% of your money then I am in a worse financial position than if I take 40%.
> Uber taking only 25% of drivers' earnings put it in a worse financial position than if it had taken 40%. Therefore taking only 25% contributed to (but was not the exclusive cause of) Uber's losses under the revenue split model more than a higher percentage take would have.
> ...


None of the above provides any proof of causation. You simply said that a higher take rate means more money for Uber which is usually true but zero proof that 75/25 equates to Uber losing money.

My point stands that 75/25 can be extremely profitable provided the fares are high enough.

Travis claimed Uber was profitable in the US in 2016 with a 75/25 split...











Uber CEO Travis Kalanick Says Company Is Profitable In U.S.


Uber is officially profitable in the U.S., Uber CEO Travis Kalanick told Canadian publication BetaKit earlier this week. H/t to Fortune for peeling out the buried news in that story, which was titled “Travis Kalanick Speaks Out: Uber’s CEO On Risk, Regulation, and Women in Tech.” Here’s the key...




techcrunch.com


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> None of the above provides any proof of causation.


Yes, it does. Higher labour costs (or higher any costs, for that matter) directly cause increases in losses and decreases in profit. Again, the formula directly linking costs with profit (or losses) is:

Profit = revenue - costs

There is no disputing this formula as it is the literal definition of profit. The higher costs are, the greater losses will be or the lower profits will be. Costs are directly linked to and are a contributing directly causative factor in profit (or loss).


> You simply said that a higher take rate means more money for Uber which is usually true but zero proof that 75/25 equates to Uber losing money.


No, I didn't say that 75/25 split equates to Uber losing money. That's a misrepresentation of what I said. What I actually said in response to your claim that Uber could make 75/25 split profitable was "Maybe. Maybe not".










I certainly would not claim that there's no way that Uber could be profitable at that revenue split. My point is simply that we have never seen it profitable at that split, that decreasing driver costs does lessen Uber's losses, and that we can't know now if Uber will ever be profitable at that (or any) split. We simply don't have access to enough internal Uber cost or revenue modelling data to be able to assess with any accuracy their likelihood of achieving profit.



> My point stands that 75/25 can be extremely profitable provided the fares are high enough.


No, you haven't made your point. You can be of the opinion that Uber could some day be profitable with a 75/25 split, but there is no credible evidence available to us to suggest that it could.



> Travis claimed Uber was profitable in the US in 2016 with a 75/25 split...


If you think Kalanick was a credible source of truthful statement then you're in trouble!


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

Nats121 said:


> I've experienced it many times over the years doing Eats and DD and so have other posters on this website.
> 
> Countless times over the years I've been stationed near restaurants for long periods of time waiting for offers only to watch other drivers pull up and walk away with orders, some of them are large orders. Other posters on this website have said the same thing happened to them.





wallae said:


> How do you know that they cheat?


They don't "give you bad shit" on purpose or for shits and giggles, it's their algorithm, you see... their AI has different variables to cram in before making a decision, as it stood before it was based on proximity, well now they got all these clowns who have convoluted the variables and added crap like: the the driver new? has the driver gotten it's average meal for the day? is the driver black? is the driver white? is the driver gay? does the driver like short trips? all those variables are crammed before making a decision and one would think "wow that's amazing and perfect for accuracy" but no, in reality it is a cluster**** full of shit that yields mediocre random results at best and deprives those who learned the area and think they have the advantage by knowing more off a profitable ride, it can be viewed as hacking or manipulation by Uber, I just call it mediocrity.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

UberBastid said:


> But, do you know what the brokerage (uber) charges the agents (drivers)?
> Up to 50%.





Nats121 said:


> I've seen fees as high as 85%.


I've seen 90% splits.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

Heisenburger said:


> Source? Citation?


I forgot, but you can google it, it was when Lyft first came out and started making Uber lower the prices, all 3 founders had a meeting because they were competing themselves to the bottom, right after that meeting, something odd started happening, prices were more or less the same and whenever one cut the drivers pay the other followed, it's been like that for a while, both companies refrain from dropping prices, their competition today is about promos, who throws them better and who throws them the most.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Screwber driver north said:


> it was when Lyft first came out and started making Uber lower the prices, all 3 founders had a meeting because they were competing themselves to the bottom, right after that meeting, something odd started happening, prices were more or less the same


*Extremely* suspicious! You're right though, we've seen this same shit before from these other playas:

Home Depot vs Lowes
Walmart vs Amazon 
Wendy's vs Hardee's
Waffle House vs IHOP
Red Lobster vs Juicy Crab
Chili's vs Applebee's
McDonald's vs Burger King
Best Buy vs BrandsMart
Rooms To Go vs Ashley Home Store
Shell vs ExxonMobil
I remember all the meetings they held conspiring on pricing! Capitalist pigs, the whole lot of them!


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Livekilometers96 said:


> I made no reference to Uber other than to point out the very obvious thing that the poster was missing. I do not feel one bit bad for Uber, I was merely explaining how sticky surge is not an individual transaction between driver and rider.


You've got a long history of harloting yourself for Uber on these boards and this is your latest in a long line of attempts to defend Uber by claiming that they have no choice but to gouge pax in order to pay all those generous sticky surges to ungrateful drivers. You've also got a history of saying that drivers should be grateful for the wonderful opportunity Uber has given us.



Livekilometers96 said:


> This is the alternative reality world you live in. Never said any of that. I said I understood why they would do that because of all the personal experiences I had actually living and working in the state that the goodies were taking place. I actually picked up stranded pax. Rather than quarterbacking from across the country while having not worked


First of all this "you don't live here" stuff is irrelevant BS. I don't have to live in CA to get a decent idea of how rideshare works in that state. There's TV, print, Internet, social media, this site, Youtube, etc. All of those resources can give anyone a good education of what's happening pretty much anywhere in the world including CA.

You praised Uber for taking away the goodies for the reasons I've already stated. I'm well aware of your previous claims of picking up angry pax who had been left stranded by greedy and selfish drivers who were "abusing" the CA goodies. The fact that there was a pandemic emergency and far fewer drivers on the road didn't seem to matter to your arguments.




Livekilometers96 said:


> from across the country while having not worked on the X platform since 2019. Set your own fares does not work. It never will.


It worked great for the drivers who used it. Lots of screenshots of high-paying rides were posted. And those drivers deserved EVERY CENT and more for the dangerous risks they were taking.



Livekilometers96 said:


> Seeing destinations comes at a cost.


Yeah, to Uber because they can't pay drivers artificially low rates when drivers are armed with full trip info.



Livekilometers96 said:


> Seeing destinations comes at a cost. That cost is lower offer cards as almost every market that has gotten upfront fares has mentioned.


Legitimate full trip info like they had in CA (15 second pings, payout, pickup and drop-off addresses + maps) results in HIGHER pay for drivers.

This Radar/Upfront Fares scam is NOT full trip info and has resulted in LOWER pay for most drivers.




Livekilometers96 said:


> Yes I am. After enough time has passed you’ll actually see drivers be happier. Too many idiots getting pissed and over reacting to the rides where Uber takes 35-50% on an individual ride but refuse to acknowledge the incentives offered or the rides where Uber takes a loss. It’s embarrassing to watch.


What's "embarrassing" is your continued harloting for Uber in posts like this one. Now you've become paternalistic by telling us that Daddy Uber hiding stuff from us is good for our piece of mind. Gee, I thought we were supposed to be IC business owners as Uber and their apologists always tell us, yet here you are telling grown adult business owners that being kept in the dark about how much we're being charged for business services is good for us.



Livekilometers96 said:


> Not sure I ever said that but the way you interpret things, I’m sure it’s what you think your read.


Not only did you say it in previous posts you tried to double down on it in this thread by adding that it's also bad for drivers.




Livekilometers96 said:


> I actually took WAY more rides with DF hack. I took almost any ride within 5 minutes of me, my acceptance rate was above 60% for the vast majority of time I had the hack. My current AR is 4%. Far more people are getting stranded now than then. Try again.


What a truly lame ass attempt to justify your hypocritical behavior. Even Dara would say you're full of it. This is why he took away the two extra DFs and the reason he frequently shuts off DF during busy periods. He knows most drivers including you will use the DFs to screen their rides.

Even if the 60% (I don't buy it) was true you still stranded 40% of your potential pax which according to you is very bad for Uber. By your own admission you're now stranding 96% of your potential pax, causing much more harm to customer service and Uber itself.

In the process of attempting to deny hypocrisy you stepped deeper into it.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Screwber driver north said:


> They don't "give you bad shit" on purpose or for shits and giggles, it's their algorithm, you see... their AI has different variables to cram in before making a decision, as it stood before it was based on proximity


It makes sense from a business point of view to assign work based on workers' strengths. For example, if I am a building renovation project manager and I have 5 contractors turn up for painting work:

Beau is great at painting windows 
Joe is great at painting doors
Moe is great at painting ceilings
Flo's painting is just ok
Schmo is not good at painting anything and customers have complained about his work.

Obviously I'm going to ask Beau to paint the windows, Joe to paint the doors and Moe to paint the ceilings. I might have Flo hang around and use her as a backup in case she's needed, but I would not give any work to Schmo unless it was absolutely essential and there was no other option. I'm going to give preference to the workers who will best do the work for me. As a businessman I would select workers for the job in the way that best suits me and my business. Any smart businessman would do the same.

This is exactly what Uber is trying to do with its driver selection algorithms - choose drivers who serve customers better as evidenced by higher driver ratings, choose those who reach pax within the predicted time and those who drop pax off within the predicted time etc etc and choose those drivers who make it more money. If there's an ant who never refuses $3 pings then he's a great money-earner for Uber; they'll occasionally throw him a bone instead of another driver to keep him happy.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Travis claimed Uber was profitable in the US in 2016 with a 75/25 split...


And just 10 months later:



> Even in the U.S., Uber’s home market, the company continues to lose money. After turning a slight profit in the in the first quarter of this year, Uber lost $100 million in the U.S. in the second quarter. The loss increased in the third quarter, the person said.











Uber Isn't Profitable in the U.S. and Is On Track to Lose $3 Billion in 2016


Even as Uber Technologies Inc. exited China, the company's financial loss has remained eye-popping. In the first nine months of this year, the




skift.com


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> *Extremely* suspicious! You're right though, we've seen this same shit before from these other playas:
> 
> Home Depot vs Lowes
> Walmart vs Amazon
> ...


Proof of collusion isn't required for the govt to take anti-trust action. Various mergers have been blocked because the govt believed they'd be bad for consumers.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Proof of collusion isn't required for the govt to take anti-trust action. Various mergers have been blocked because the govt believed they'd be bad for consumers.


But can you believe all those races to the bottom for so many decades?!?!?!


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> And just 10 months later:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The article didn't mention (probably because the writer/s as usual didn't do their homework) that in January of 2016 Travis cuts fares yet again, including Detroit, which was cut to a shocking 30 cents per mile! It boomeranged so badly in Detroit that Uber had to raise Detroit's fares in April.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> But can you believe all those races to the bottom for so many decades?!?!?!


Elaborate on what you mean.


----------



## Be Right There (9 mo ago)

Ted Fink said:


> MAJOR ISSUE HERE: If, for some crazy reason, Uber ends up allowing drivers to set their own prices (LOLZ, but roll with me here)... it would be a race to the bottom. Riders would choose the cheapest driver they could get at any one time, thereby depressing prices, not increasing them. Because some nut job out there is desperate, stupid, or willing to take someone 5 miles for $1.00.


Sadly, he's right on the money (no pun intended). Way too many desperate and ignorant fools doing this out there.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Be Right There said:


> Sadly, he's right on the money (no pun intended). Way too many desperate and ignorant fools doing this out there.


That's certainly debatable if CA is any indication. Fares went UP during that period not down.

Ants aren't as clueless as many make them out to be. The rarity of good delivery orders is an indication of that.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Nats121 said:


> Elaborate on what you mean.


I was responding to this one:



Screwber driver north said:


> it was when Lyft first came out and started making Uber lower the prices, all 3 founders had a meeting because they were competing themselves to the bottom,


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> I was responding to this one:


It's certainly possible that there's been collusion but the question would be is there any proof of it? Probably not.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Screwber driver north said:


> Being 15% independent contractor doesn't make you 100%, you keep using Uber's single technicality to claim we are contractors.


I agree with wallae. We are contractors and I want to stay a contractor I appreciate that someone else is setting the fare. without that I think that there would be a race to the bottom. My guess is that no matter how low . I might set my prices, someone else will be willing to set the price lower.

Price fixing is an anticompetitive agreement between participants on the same side in a market to buy or sell a product, service, or commodity only at a fixed price, or maintain the market conditions such that the price is maintained at a given level by controlling supply and demand. 

So I can go into a different McDonalds every morning for my Bacon Egg and Cheese Biscuit , hash brown and orange juice. and the quality is the same the portion size is the same and the price is the same. . Thats not price fixlng



In my market we have up front pricing and it seems to be dynamic pricing ie the price seems to change based on market conditions at the time of the ride. For example, today I did 11 uber rides, coincidently two were 7 mile, 17 minute rides, One paid me $8.36 and the other paid $20.32. The way this works is that someone asks Uber to find them a ride, Uber prices it high enough that we drivers and they (Uber) can make some money. and low enough that the rider wont go to lyft or another car service or wake their spouse to tale them to the airport. Assuming the rider accepts the terms, .Uber then presents it to me. and I am free to accept it or not.., Thats not price fixing either.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Be Right There said:


> Sadly, he's right on the money (no pun intended). Way too many desperate and ignorant fools doing this out there.


That wasn't my experience when we were able to set our own prices. Uber was the most lucrative that it has ever been for me during this period. There were plenty of high fares to be had in the low-supply, high-demand times such as early AM airport runs, the drunk shift, the commute shift, weekend mornings etc.

I didn't see a huge amount of ants undercutting drivers, as evidenced by the high number of surge pings I got. 1x fares during peak times did not meet my earnings requirements and I had no problem getting fares at good surge multipliers.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

Heisenburger said:


> *Extremely* suspicious! You're right though, we've seen this same shit before from these other playas:
> 
> Home Depot vs Lowes
> Walmart vs Amazon
> ...


What you said is derpy at best.

Those are prices controlled by market and gov, the pricing for rideshare had no gov or market intervention as is the price of oil or building mats, you know... gold? silver? Uber didn't even look into pricing by cabs, they made their own and still ****ing do every day.

Christ you are a moron.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

oldfart said:


> I agree with wallae. We are contractors and I want to stay a contractor I appreciate that someone else is setting the fare. without that I think that there would be a race to the bottom. My guess is that no matter how low . I might set my prices, someone else will be willing to set the price lower.


Uber already conducted a lengthy trial in which drivers were allowed to set their own prices and there is no evidence that it caused a race to the bottom. The challenge I would set for you is to look through this forum and find California Uber drivers who posted complaints that set-your-own-price didn't work for them and caused their profits to decrease. My thoughts are that you won't be able to find any. Not one.


> Price fixing is an anticompetitive agreement between participants on the same side in a market to buy or sell a product, service, or commodity only at a fixed price, or maintain the market conditions such that the price is maintained at a given level by controlling supply and demand.











Nice direct lift from Wikipedia, lol. Anyway, Uber may be able to argue this point successfully, but there is much more to anti-trust law than price fixing. There are illegal acts which stifle competition, for example. It would be hard to argue that Uber's disallowing of IC drivers to compete with other drivers on price is not an anti-competitive and therefore illegal activity.


> So I can go into a different McDonalds every morning for my Bacon Egg and Cheese Biscuit , hash brown and orange juice. and the quality is the same the portion size is the same and the price is the same. . Thats not price fixlng


If the restaurants are independent franchises that agreed with each other to fix the price then that absolutely would be price fixing. If they were simply following a McDonalds corporate RRP with no such agreement between them then it would not be.


> In my market we have up front pricing and it seems to be dynamic pricing ie the price seems to change based on market conditions at the time of the ride. For example, today I did 11 uber rides, coincidently two were 7 mile, 17 minute rides, One paid me $8.36 and the other paid $20.32. The way this works is that someone asks Uber to find them a ride, Uber prices it high enough that we drivers and they (Uber) can make some money. and low enough that the rider wont go to lyft or another car service or wake their spouse to tale them to the airport. Assuming the rider accepts the terms, .Uber then presents it to me. and I am free to accept it or not.., Thats not price fixing either.


Possibly not, but it is anti-competitive because Uber's price setting prevents you from competing with other drivers for that business on price.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Screwber driver north said:


> They don't "give you bad shit" on purpose or for shits and giggles, it's their algorithm, you see... their AI has different variables to cram in before making a decision, as it stood before it was based on proximity, well now they got all these clowns who have convoluted the variables and added crap like: the the driver new? has the driver gotten it's average meal for the day? is the driver black? is the driver white? is the driver gay? does the driver like short trips? all those variables are crammed before making a decision and one would think "wow that's amazing and perfect for accuracy" but no, in reality it is a cluster**** full of shit that yields mediocre random results at best and deprives those who learned the area and think they have the advantage by knowing more off a profitable ride, it can be viewed as hacking or manipulation by Uber, I just call it mediocrity.


I don’t know if I believe that


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

elelegido said:


> It makes sense from a business point of view to assign work based on workers' strengths. For example, if I am a building renovation project manager and I have 5 contractors turn up for painting work:
> 
> Beau is great at painting windows
> Joe is great at painting doors
> ...


It's far more complex than that and definitely not the best jobs go to the best suited or rated person.

They simply put high rate with high rate and and by chance they get good results, this is because highly rated driver does gud and highly rated rider probably tips.

once they do that simple match, the other variables enter the matchmaker, even music preference... I believe someone made a thread about Lyft being racist, this is one of the results of such algorithmic "training" which stays in a passive and an active level on your account.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

wallae said:


> I don’t know if I believe that


You don't have to, those are my conclusions when I ran tests and drove, I was able to replicate situations based on training the system, found a way to reset it, cool shit, yo.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Screwber driver north said:


> Those are prices controlled by market and gov,


See, you're not even sure of what you're writing. Just tossing some mud against the wall to see if anything might stick.

Government is setting Applebee's prices?

Government is setting Waffle House's prices?


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Screwber driver north said:


> Christ you are a moron.


I might just be one of those, but at least I recognize hyperbole when it slaps me across the face like a soggy fish.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

elelegido said:


> No, I didn't say that 75/25 split equates to Uber losing money. That's a misrepresentation of what I said. What I actually said in response to your claim that Uber could make 75/25 split profitable was "Maybe. Maybe not".


_*None of the above provides any proof of causation. You simply said that a higher take rate means more money for Uber which is usually true but zero proof that 75/25 equates to Uber losing money.*_

The quote in bold is mine. You're getting hung up on the word "equates" but my point is that you've repeatedly maintained that there's a causation between a 75/25 split and Uber losing money and as I've already pointed out you've provided zero proof that there was any causation.

I've also said repeatedly that a 75/25 split could be highly profitable if the fares are high enough. All you've done is go on long tangents about costs and take rates but no proof of causation.

A 100% take rate can be a money-loser if the fares are too low.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Screwber driver north said:


> It's far more complex than that and definitely not the best jobs go to the best suited or rated person.


Yes, the above example was a simplified illustrative example only of how companies select IC based on criteria that suit them, not necessarily the contractor. 

And it's not necessarily a case of the best jobs going to the best-suited or best-rated driver. I once read an explanation written by Uber about this. They said that they will, for example often match up airport rides with drivers who have had good ratings on airport rides. This would be a very specific match-up based not on ride value but a match-up of pax' destination with good driver performance to that destination. Which would make perfect sense.
[/QUOTE]
They simply put high rate with high rate and and by chance they get good results, this is because highly rated driver does gud and highly rated rider probably tips.


> I haven't seen any evidence that Uber matches highly-rated drivers with highly-rated pax. Especially not given the kind of specimens Uber sends me.
> 
> 
> > once they do that simple match, the other variables enter the matchmaker, even music preference... I believe someone made a thread about Lyft being racist, this is one of the results of such algorithmic "training" which stays in a passive and an active level on your account.
> ...


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Screwber driver north said:


> found a way to reset it


Spill the beans.


----------



## Illini (Mar 14, 2019)

oldfart said:


> So I can go into a different McDonalds every morning for my Bacon Egg and Cheese Biscuit , hash brown and orange juice. and the quality is the same the portion size is the same and the price is the same. . Thats not price fixlng


Sorry, but McDonald's pricing is NOT the same. McDonald's dictates the menu, ingredients, quality, how it's made, etc, but they do not set prices for their independently owned and operated restaurants.

Anyway, per the legal definition, we are not ICs. I want to be a COMPLETE IC, which includes setting my own prices, and seeing the destination info up front. If that means no more bonuses of any kind, I'm 100% fine with that.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

Heisenburger said:


> See, you're not even sure of what you're writing. Just tossing some mud against the wall to see if anything might stick.
> 
> Government is setting Applebee's prices?
> 
> Government is setting Waffle House's prices?


Not for those, moron.

But an FYI because you clearly need to read more.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_controls











Price Gouging Laws by State - FindLaw


FindLaw's extensive state-by-state listing of price gouging laws.




www.findlaw.com





One recently created









Text - H.R.7688 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act


Text for H.R.7688 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act



www.congress.gov


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

Heisenburger said:


> I might just be one of those, but at least I recognize hyperbole when it slaps me across the face like a soggy fish.


Bravo, you can spell hyperbole and use it correctly in a sentence, still you are dim witted.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

Heisenburger said:


> Spill the beans.


Now you want to know? lol, I offered you a way in another post and you didn't take it, I figured now it's best people don't know about it, something about monkeys and AK47's.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

I started off replying to this:



Screwber driver north said:


> when Lyft first came out and started making Uber lower the prices, all 3 founders had a meeting because they were competing themselves to the bottom, right after that meeting, something odd started happening, prices were more or less the same


And now you're chiming in with this:



Screwber driver north said:


> One recently created
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Explain the relevance because the audience here isn't following your plotline. They're about to change the channel when they find their remote controller.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Screwber driver north said:


> I figured now it's best people don't know about it,


I can sense the fear inhabiting your reptilian mind. Fear of exposure.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Screwber driver north said:


> still you are dim witted


Still far superior to Mango Mussolini.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> _*None of the above provides any proof of causation. You simply said that a higher take rate means more money for Uber which is usually true but zero proof that 75/25 equates to Uber losing money.*_
> 
> The quote in bold is mine.


Yes, it is.


> You're getting hung up on the word "equates" but my point is that you've repeatedly maintained that there's a causation between a 75/25 split and Uber losing money and as I've already pointed out you've provided zero proof that there was any causation.


I'm not getting "hung up" on the word equates. You were the one who first used it when you said that I had given no proof that 75/25 equates to Uber losing money, but I never said that the 75/25 split equates to Uber losing money.


> I've also said repeatedly that a 75/25 split could be highly profitable if the fares are high enough. All you've done is go on long tangents about costs and take rates but no proof of causation.


No. I have already proven that increased costs do directly cause increased losses or lower profits. Mastering and understanding the link between costs and profit (or loss) is not only important in analysis of large companies - it's also important for anyone operating a business or as a contractor. For example, if one of your costs is insurance and you swap a $100 per month policy for a $200 per month policy with exactly the same coverage and conditions, this increased cost _will_ directly cause a decrease in your profits. There is no arguing that profit decreasing along with an increased insurance cost is "correlative and not causative" or just a coincidence - higher costs cause profit decreases and increases in losses by definition of the word profit; it's not debatable. If you were to look at your decreased profit figure after doubling your insurance cost and didn't see the causal link between the two, you'd be in a lot of trouble!

Where I think you're going wrong is as follows: The 75/25 split was not the entire cause of Uber's $2.8bn loss in 2016. If Uber's driver cost had been 50% of its revenue instead of the 75%, then Uber would _still_ have made a loss in 2016, but it would have made a smaller loss. Therefore, the 75/25 split was a contributing cause of the $2.8bn loss. Just because the 75/25 split did not cause all of the loss, it does not mean that it was not a contributing cause of the loss.

Anyway, I proved above that higher costs do directly cause increases in losses or reductions in profit.
I don't mean to disparage you, but understanding how costs directly impact a business' financial performance by lowering profit and increasing losses is a basic, basic business concept. The profit equation, given above, that defines this relationship is first-week-of-first-semester material in 101 Accounting class at business schools.

You asked me to prove that increased costs contribute to increased losses and I have done that, several times, as per the above. Given how simple the proof is; literally A = B - C, I suspect that you are now able to understand it and are just trolling me. I hope so , for your sake! However, if you still don't understand it, I can explain it no more simply than I have and we'll have to park it here.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

elelegido said:


> That wasn't my experience when we were able to set our own prices. Uber was the most lucrative that it has ever been for me during this period. There were plenty of high fares to be had in the low-supply, high-demand times such as early AM airport runs, the drunk shift, the commute shift, weekend mornings etc.
> 
> I didn't see a huge amount of ants undercutting drivers, as evidenced by the high number of surge pings I got. 1x fares during peak times did not meet my earnings requirements and I had no problem getting fares at good surge multipliers.


You and @Nats121 should consider the fact there was a severe shortage of drivers compared to pax as to why fares went up. Now that there’s closer to a full supply of drivers, you’d have a lot less desperate pax and a lot more desperate drivers.

Taking the entire situation into account and not just the parts that fit your narrative is important.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Livekilometers96 said:


> You and @Nats121 should consider the fact there was a severe shortage of drivers compared to pax as to why fares went up. Now that there’s closer to a full supply of drivers, you’d have a lot less desperate pax and a lot more desperate drivers.
> 
> Taking the entire situation into account and not just the parts that fit your narrative is important.


No, my discussion with Nats is about whether or not the 75%/25% revenue split was a causative factor in Uber's losses. (I say it was; he says it was not).

Your point above concerns driver supply and its effects on pricing, which is a separate topic from our topic of the sharing of pax' fares between Uber and its drivers, and therefore there is no reason to bring it into our discussion.

My advice to you would be to take into account what a discussion is about (its subject) before you tell the participants that they should interject separate and non-relevant discussion points into it.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

Ah.... when egos collide.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Screwber driver north said:


> Ah.... when egos collide.


Lol, no - it's just simple logic and reason. These are unaffected by ego.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

elelegido said:


> My advice to you would be to take into account what a discussion is about (its subject) before you tell the participants that they should interject your separate and non-relevant discussion points into it.


Maybe you should take your own advice……….I was not referring to your discussion of 75/25. To me that is a moronic conversation to have since Uber is more than just a rideshare company. Between the other business units, investor money and the fact they never calculated the “safe rider fee” as part of their 75/25 split makes your conversation utterly pointless. There NEVER was a true 75/25 split. To argue over the entire company’s profitability from a single business unit split is one of the silliest things I’ve seen in discussion.

I was however referring to the fact that you both keep countering the “race to the bottom” argument by saying prices went UP during the time period we were able to set our own fares. While true, it is not taking into consideration today’s factors and the significant increase in the driver pool since then. I was suggesting you guys use todays supply and demand in factoring whether people will pay more for rides than necessary if there’s plenty of drivers.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Livekilometers96 said:


> Maybe you should take your own advice……….


No, lol; I don't tell people what discussion points I believe they should be discussing.


> I was not referring to your discussion of 75/25.


In that case, you should have been more clear.


> To me that is a moronic conversation to have since Uber is more than just a rideshare company.


I'm sorry that it did not meet your requirements. I will rush your complaint over immediately to my Customer Experience team.


> Between the other business units, investor money and the fact they never calculated the “safe rider fee” as part of their 75/25 split makes your conversation utterly pointless. There NEVER was a true 75/25 split. To argue over the entire company’s profitability from a single business unit split is one of the silliest things I’ve seen in discussion.


Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion and, once again, it's most unfortunate that our conversation does not meet with your approval.


> I was however referring to the fact that you both keep countering the “race to the bottom” argument by saying prices went UP during the time period we were able to set our own fares. While true, it is not taking into consideration today’s factors and the significant increase in the driver pool since then. I was suggesting you guys use todays supply and demand in factoring whether people will pay more for rides than necessary if there’s plenty of drivers.


You're free to suggest that we discuss anything you like! And, after your poor assessment of our conversation so far, I'm indeed flattered that you would entrust us to be the custodians for you of your proposed analysis of pricing and demand. I will evaluate your request and let you know if I will be including it in my future discussions.


----------



## Livekilometers96 (Apr 5, 2021)

elelegido said:


> In that case, you should have been more clear.


How much more clear do you need than only quoting the part of the discussion where you discussed set your own fares?


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Livekilometers96 said:


> How much more clear do you need than only quoting the part of the discussion where you discussed set your own fares?


Again, it is unfortunate that you are dissatisfied. I will arrange for my Customer Experience Team to send you a cuddly fluffy bunny and a sticker.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

So far 4/10


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Screwber driver north said:


> So far 4/10


Dissatisfied? No cuddly fluffy bunny for you. No sticker either. 

Good try, though!


----------



## haji (Jul 17, 2014)

Most drivers want to be true independent contractor. Ability to see full pings info before accepting. No time out for refusing pings. Right now we are neither employee nor ic.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

haji said:


> Most drivers want to be true independent contractor. Ability to see full pings info before accepting. No time out for refusing pings. Right now we are neither employee nor ic.


Yes, that would work for me. As you will know, we had a brief taste of that in CA when Uber temporarily gave us the full ping info, set-your-own-price, no time-outs etc. It was great!


----------



## Atavar (Aug 11, 2018)

elelegido said:


> Faulty logic.
> 
> The fact that you are not an avocado does not mean that you are a tomato.
> 
> ...


It is much the same as how contracting firms will use subcontractors to fulfill jobs for customers. The top level contractor will negotiate one price with the customer and another with the sub contractor. The amount paid to the subcontractor is almost always less than what the customer pays.
The subcontractor rarely has any input on pricing other than to take the gig or not.
‘The general contractor is under no obligation to disclose what the customer pays to the subcontractor.
‘The subcontractor is obligated to complete all tasks within a timeframe and according to whatever rules the general contractor wants to stipulate in the contract. If the general contractor requires the subcontractor To wear a pink shirt and a tutu and the subcontractor accepts the contract then that’s what he’s going to do.
There is a huge difference between being the top level contractor (Lyft) or a lower tier contractor.
‘A general rule is "If you don’t like the terms of the contract then don’t accept the contract. "


----------



## OG ant (Oct 11, 2019)

wallae said:


> I would argue that I am in reality an independent contractor.
> I refuse 95% of “my bosses orders” Ride requests.
> How long would I last at Walmart if they told me to clean up the spill pickles on aisle five and I said no 95% of the time?
> 
> ...


I dont think you know what independent contractor means bud


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Atavar said:


> It is much the same as how contracting firms will use subcontractors to fulfill jobs for customers. The top level contractor will negotiate one price with the customer and another with the sub contractor. The amount paid to the subcontractor is almost always less than what the customer pays.
> The subcontractor rarely has any input on pricing other than to take the gig or not.
> ‘The general contractor is under no obligation to disclose what the customer pays to the subcontractor.
> ‘The subcontractor is obligated to complete all tasks within a timeframe and according to whatever rules the general contractor wants to stipulate in the contract. If the general contractor requires the subcontractor To wear a pink shirt and a tutu and the subcontractor accepts the contract then that’s what he’s going to do.
> There is a huge difference between being the top level contractor (Lyft) or a lower tier contractor.


Yes, if a contractor is hired to do a job and in the process of managing the project he hires several subcontractors to do the work, then the sum of all the payments he makes to the subcontractors is almost certainly going to be less than the amount that the contractor is paid by the customer. If it were the same amount, that would mean that the contractor did his work on the project for free. He's got to make a living, too.

I think drivers here accept that all the fares paid by pax cannot be a direct pass-through from the pax to drivers with Uber taking none of the money.

The main difference between contracting and Uber is, of course, that a contractor does not claim that it's not a contractor but a technology company, or that the business relationship is directly between the subcontractor and the customer as Uber claims. It is crystal clear among all that the subcontractor works for the contractor, and that the contractor works for the customer. Uber may come unstuck with this latest legal action because, since it claims that the driver works directly for the customer, courts may decide that it has no right to control what drivers (supposedly independent contractors directly engaged with the customer) charge the customer.


----------



## Atavar (Aug 11, 2018)

Personally I think that this whole "strike to hurt Uber" movement is going about it all wrong. Any drivers who want to take action and make a point should sacrifice one tank of gas and for as long as that tank lasts negotiate with the customer to reduce (as allowed by the contract) the price of all rides to $1. That would get Ubers attention more than the driver taking the day off. It would cost Uber more than the $1 just to administer the rides and the prices.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

wallae said:


> If we agree to use their platform we may agree to use their pricing
> I may get banned but I’m limiting the time of my trips. About 12 miles or 35 minutes based on our slow roads with tons of lights and traffic.
> Cabs here double the rate out of city limits.
> They say you can’t discriminate against specific destinations but I’m using time to avoid long empty unpaid return trips. If someone offers money ok but I don’t ask.


nobody likes you.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

nosurgenodrive said:


> nobody likes you.


That’s quite a blow
The lowest class of people, Uber drivers, don’t like me🤣


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

OG ant said:


> I dont think you know what independent contractor means bud


It doesn’t matter what you think. You are one.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

wallae said:


> That’s quite a blow
> The lowest class of people, Uber drivers, don’t like me🤣


Sorry, I forgot about car salesman.
Second lowest class


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Illini said:


> Sorry, but McDonald's pricing is NOT the same. McDonald's dictates the menu, ingredients, quality, how it's made, etc, but they do not set prices for their independently owned and operated restaurants.
> 
> Anyway, per the legal definition, we are not ICs. I want to be a COMPLETE IC, which includes setting my own prices, and seeing the destination info up front. If that means no more bonuses of any kind, I'm 100% fine with that.


in my experience pricing is pretty damn close, but I’ll take your word for it

that McDonalds dictates anything would according to your definition make McDonaldes owners, employees

I’m my market and others we do see all the details of the ride before accepting it, including the price. No I don’t set the price, but I am free to accept or reject that ride for any reason or no reason at all

more than that, we are free to accept rides from other services or even establish our own companies to offer the same transportation service in competition with uber 

I’m no lawyer, but I believe Uber got it right this time I am a contractor and I like it


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> Yes, it is.
> I'm not getting "hung up" on the word equates. You were the one who first used it when you said that I had given no proof that 75/25 equates to Uber losing money, but I never said that the 75/25 split equates to Uber losing money.
> No. I have already proven that increased costs do directly cause increased losses or lower profits. Mastering and understanding the link between costs and profit (or loss) is not only important in analysis of large companies - it's also important for anyone operating a business or as a contractor. For example, if one of your costs is insurance and you swap a $100 per month policy for a $200 per month policy with exactly the same coverage and conditions, this increased cost _will_ directly cause a decrease in your profits. There is no arguing that profit decreasing along with an increased insurance cost is "correlative and not causative" or just a coincidence - higher costs cause profit decreases and increases in losses by definition of the word profit; it's not debatable. If you were to look at your decreased profit figure after doubling your insurance cost and didn't see the causal link between the two, you'd be in a lot of trouble!
> 
> ...


I’m not familiar with the argument you guys are involved in so I don’t know who proved what, but increased costs don’t always result in lower profits. For example I bought a commercial insurance policy which pretty much doubled my insurance premium. But that policy allows me todo private rides I price my service at 50% more that what Uber charges. As a result my net income actually went up

I read a story about a guy that operated an ice cream store. He paid his employees minimum wage His turnover was high and as a result he often operated short handed or with new employees whose customer service skills were weak,

he decided to raise wages and his labor costs went up, but his training budget went Down, His employees took an interest in pleasing the customers, He was able to take a day off because now he could trust his employees his and repeat business and referrals went up.

Bottom line is that hemade more money when he raised wages

my message is absolutely you need to watch your expenses, but you need to keep an eye on revenue too


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

elelegido said:


> I might have Flo hang around and use her as a backup in case she's needed,


She can bring coffee and be available to play slap-n-tickle with the boys during lunch breaks.

Does Flo chew gum and roll up the sleeves of her flannel shirt and call the guys "honey"?
I got a real fantasy thing about uterus equipped people named "Flo".


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

elelegido said:


> They didn't give the money away or donate it etc, and nor did they lose it; they used the investor cash to purchase market share and revenue, which was part of their business plan.


I know they didn't literally give it away or donate the money.
They spent foolishly, and much of that money they invested unto the company was wasted.

They did however lose quite a bit of it. China was a huge loss. That investment cost Uber billions, which finally ended when they sold their stake in Didi for a $3 billion loss








They also lost quite a bit through fraud. Way back when I first signed up, I got, i think a $1500.00 sign up bonus. Not a guarantee, a bonus. I had to complete 30 rides or something like that, it was a fairly insignificant number of rides.

They were also giving up to 1500.00 referral bonuses even more in bigger markets for drivers. I remember it going as high as $2500.00 in Los Angeles It wasn't hard to sign up using a relative's or friend's name back then. You could refer your relative, sign them up, do the 30 or 50 rides and collect the $3 or $4 grand. It was too easy. I stopped when the referral/ sign up bonuses dipped below $1000 combined. I figured this out ony own, in bigger cities it had to be happening on a massive scale. 

So when I say they gave it away, they basically did.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

oldfart said:


> in my experience pricing is pretty damn close, but I’ll take your word for it
> 
> that McDonalds dictates anything would according to your definition make McDonaldes owners, employees
> 
> ...


Let's stop comparing the restaurant industry to this, it's far more competitive and devoid of any cost locks by regulations, if it's stuck everywhere at a price, it's the competition, escaping that competition pricing comes with "gourmet" insertion.

McDonald's is a franchise, you cannot compare that to price fixing or monopoly, Uber isn't even sure if it's a taxi company, they will say they are whatever gets them off the hook.


----------



## Eman1210 (Sep 22, 2021)

The reason Uber can’t make money in due to the fact that they are all over paid. CEO pay. 50 million per year. executive pay at Uber 500k all the way to 5 million per year. Running ads for new drivers 250 million to 500 million worlds wide. There bleeding money cause they have no idea how to manage it. There Philosophy is drivers are a dime a dozen let’s just keep making our money. 75/25 it should be even 70/30. But Uber keeps taking more cause there’s always new ants to continue farming for them.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Boca Ratman said:


> So when I say they gave it away, they basically did.


"Give away" means to give something as a gift with no conditions, which I don't see evidence of. Their generous incentive schemes had conditions attached, even if they were easy to meet. But it's just semantics - you're using "give away" to mean "spend unwisely", which Uber undoubtedly did.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

UberBastid said:


> She can bring coffee and be available to play slap-n-tickle with the boys during lunch breaks.
> 
> Does Flo chew gum and roll up the sleeves of her flannel shirt and call the guys "honey"?


Probably


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

oldfart said:


> I’m not familiar with the argument you guys are involved in so I don’t know who proved what


Nats asked for proof that the higher labour costs of the 75%/25% split were a causal factor in Uber's losses, and I gave him the proof.


> but increased costs don’t always result in lower profits. For example I bought a commercial insurance policy which pretty much doubled my insurance premium. But that policy allows me todo private rides I price my service at 50% more that what Uber charges. As a result my net income actually went up


You're conflating two different things here. It is indeed true that increased costs reduce profits. That's what costs do. They reduce profits (or increase losses). However, in the example you give above, you didn't just increase your costs - you also increased your revenue. If we go back to the very useful Profit = Revenue - Costs formula, you'll appreciate that if you increase your revenue by a larger amount than you increase your costs by, your profit will increase. So, in your example, your more costly insurance permitted you to increase your revenue by taking on lucrative private rides.

This is different from the first scenario in which Uber had higher labour costs because of the 75%/25% split. In the context of split or share of revenue of fares between Uber and drivers, whether Uber takes 25% or 35%, it does not affect revenue. So, with revenue staying the same, increased costs caused an increase in Uber's losses.


> I read a story about a guy that operated an ice cream store. He paid his employees minimum wage His turnover was high and as a result he often operated short handed or with new employees whose customer service skills were weak,
> 
> he decided to raise wages and his labor costs went up, but his training budget went Down, His employees took an interest in pleasing the customers, He was able to take a day off because now he could trust his employees his and repeat business and referrals went up.
> 
> Bottom line is that hemade more money when he raised wages


This is another great example of a business being able to increase its revenue, this time via an increased investment in labour. Increasing costs is not necessarily bad; it's only bad when it does not result in an increase in revenue. In this case, the ice cream store owner was shrewd and realised that if he purchased morale and buy-in from his employees via higher wages, the increases sales would more than compensate for the added cost and result in higher profit. Costco has a similar policy - they believe that by paying higher wages and treating their employees decently, they purchase staff retention and performance. It's a great strategy IMO.


> my message is absolutely you nwe’d to watch your expenses, but you need to keep an eye on revenue too


Correct - in the two examples you give, revenue increased more than costs, leading to increased profit.

Of course, if Uber increased its take rate to 80% on all rides and gave drivers just 20% on all rides then its revenue would be negatively affected as there would be very few drivers willing to give rides for such little pay. But there is little evidence that the abandoning of the 75%/25% split and going to up-front fares caused a driver shortage for Uber or consequent revenue reduction. On the contrary, under the up-front we'll-take-whatever-commission-we-like scheme, Uber's revenue kept growing exponentially until the pandemic.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

elelegido said:


> "Give away" means to give something as a gift with no conditions, which I don't see evidence of. Their generous incentive schemes had conditions attached, even if they were easy to meet. But it's just semantics - you're using "give away" to mean "spend unwisely", which Uber undoubtedly did.


You're being obtuse, whether deliberate or not, I do not know. Reading your posts over the years I know you're not dumb so I'd guess it's deliberate. Or maybe you only read the one sentence in my post that you quoted. It starts off with me saying " I know they didn't literally give it away... "



Boca Ratman said:


> I know they didn't literally give it away or donate the money.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

oldfart said:


> in my experience pricing is pretty damn close, but I’ll take your word for it


The Sherman Act outlaws vertical price fixing, which is when manufacturers of goods control prices in an independent distribution chain. It doesn't prevent manufacturers from issuing recommended retail prices(RRP), which franchisees are free to adopt or ignore.


> that McDonalds dictates anything would according to your definition make McDonaldes owners, employees


Whether or not workers are employees or independent does not depend on only one factor, such as the degree of control another entity has over them. Being told how to work is indeed indicative of employment, however other factors in franchise agreements outweigh this and indicate an independent business:

-- McDonalds does not set retail prices. The franchisee is free to sell the products at whatever prices he likes.

-- McDonalds does not provide the premises. Franchisees have to purchase the land and then pay to build the restaurant, or purchase an existing restaurant

-- McDonalds does not provide equipment fixtures or fittings; franchisees have to purchase them themselves

-- Financial risk: the risk of running each restaurant is borne by the franchisee - it is possible for a franchisee to make financial losses and for the franchise to fail

Of all of the above, the ability of the franchisee to set his own prices is the most significant factor that determines that the franchise is an independent business. Uber uses all of the above, and more, to claim that drivers are IC. Except the most important one - control over pricing.


> I’m my market and others we do see all the details of the ride before accepting it, including the price. No I don’t set the price, but I am free to accept or reject that ride for any reason or no reason at all


Yes, Uber work does feature some traits of IC. Years ago, neither Uber or Lyft gave that concession to drivers, with it being common for drivers to be fired if they let their acceptance rate fall below 90%. However, they were forced to stop that practice in settlement of a class action in which drivers righty claimed that requiring work was not indicative of IC.


> more than that, we are free to accept rides from other services or even establish our own companies to offer the same transportation service in competition with uber


Yes, there are some traits of IC in the driver agreement.


> I’m no lawyer, but I believe Uber got it right this time I am a contractor and I like it


Would you like it better if you were even more of a contractor and were able to set your prices?


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Boca Ratman said:


> You're being obtuse, whether deliberate or not, I do not know. Reading your posts over the years I know you're not dumb so I'd guess it's deliberate. Or maybe you only read the one sentence in my post that you quoted. It starts off with me saying " I know they didn't literally give it away... "


No, I said that I agreed with you, acknowledging what you were saying. As I mentioned, it's just a matter of semantics, with you calling Uber's imprudence "giving it away" and me calling it "spending unwisely".


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

elelegido said:


> McDonalds does not provide the premises. Franchisees have to purchase the land and then pay to build the restaurant, or purchase an existing restaurant


Actually you're wrong on this. McDonald's is one of the largest landowners in the US. They make a large portion of their profits from renting the properties & buildings to tje franchisees. It's really a brilliant plan.










There's a documentary / movie about McDonald's with Michael Keaton that is pretty good. Incidentally, there's a house down here on Palm Beach Island, a mansion really, that I drove past about 30 minutes ago that Ray Kroc used to own, my pax pointed it out to me. He left it to his secretary when he died.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Boca Ratman said:


> Actually you're wrong on this. McDonald's is one of the largest landowners in the US. They make a large portion of their profits from renting the properties & buildings to tje franchisees. It's really a brilliant plan.
> 
> View attachment 668138
> 
> ...


I stand corrected. However, the franchisee is still responsible for paying for the premises in the case of leased/rented restaurants.


----------



## Floyd Morrissette (Jul 3, 2019)

elelegido said:


> why they control the prices charged by IC.


The IC does not charge the pax. We agree to what Uber/Lyft has offered to pay the IC. There is a contract between Uber/Lyft and the pax. There is a contract between Uber/Lyft and the IC. But there is no relationship between the IC and the pax. The IC does not charge the pax and the pax does not pay the IC. The pax is not the IC's customer. The IC's customer is Uber/Lyft.

If I say I will give you $20 to pick up my friend. You can take it or leave it. You may say you will do it for $40. I will say no thanks. Whatever the case the friend has no say in the matter. Same with Uber/Lyft. The pax has no say in the matter between the IC and Uber/Lyft.


----------



## LuxMark Transport (7 mo ago)

wallae said:


> I would argue that I am in reality an independent contractor.
> I refuse 95% of “my bosses orders” Ride requests.
> How long would I last at Walmart if they told me to clean up the spill pickles on aisle five and I said no 95% of the time?
> 
> ...


You would get fired just like Uber/lyft would deactivate you which is essentially the same thing


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Floyd Morrissette said:


> But there is no relationship between the IC and the pax. The IC does not charge the pax and the pax does not pay the IC. The pax is not the IC's customer. The IC's customer is Uber/Lyft.


Of course, in reality, the IC's customer is Uber/Lyft and the pax is not the IC's customer. That's obvious to anyone with half a brain. 

However, have a read of the driver agreement. Uber claims in it that the commercial agreement to give/receive a ride is between the IC and the pax, that Uber acts only as the collection agent for the driver, and that fare money received by Uber on behalf of the driver is to be construed as payment directly from the pax to the driver. These are the mis-statements by Uber that this new class action is going to use against Uber: if the transportation relationship is between the driver and the pax as Uber claims, then Uber should not be controlling the price. The fact that Uber's claims in their driver agreement are false is neither here nor there as far as this class action goes.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> The Sherman Act outlaws vertical price fixing, which is when manufacturers of goods control prices in an independent distribution chain. It doesn't prevent manufacturers from issuing recommended retail prices(RRP), which franchisees are free to adopt or ignore.
> Whether or not workers are employees or independent does not depend on only one factor, such as the degree of control another entity has over them. Being told how to work is indeed indicative of employment, however other factors in franchise agreements outweigh this and indicate an independent business:
> 
> -- McDonalds does not set retail prices. The franchisee is free to sell the products at whatever prices he likes.
> ...


I’m not going to respond to all your points except. To say, I agree there isn’t a list of things a company must do or not do to treat their workers as contractors or employees. And I’ve never seen anything that says the ability for contractors to set their own prices is is the most important y to hing

here what the IRS says:
“Businesses must weigh all these factors when determining whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor. Some factors may indicate that the worker is an employee, while other factors indicate that the worker is an independent contractor. There is no “magic” or set number of factors that “makes” the worker an employee or an independent contractor and no one factor stands alone in making this determination. Also, factors which are relevant in one situation may not be relevant in another.

The keys are to look at the entire relationship and consider the extent of the right to direct and control the worker. Finally, document each of the factors used in coming up with the determination.”

so it’s not a cut and dried thing.


Boca Ratman said:


> Actually you're wrong on this. McDonald's is one of the largest landowners in the US. They make a large portion of their profits from renting the properties & buildings to tje franchisees. It's really a brilliant plan.
> 
> View attachment 668138
> 
> ...


As you say the local operator pays rent to McDonalds and unlike rent most businesses pay, it is not a fixed expense Rent paid to McDonalds goes up when store revenue goes up. So the better job an owner does the higher his rent


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

oldfart said:


> Rent paid to McDonalds goes up when store revenue goes up. So the better job an owner does the higher his rent


----------



## Wil Mette (Jan 15, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> Uber's contract specifically prohibits drivers from charging pax additional fees. Years ago there was no such clause in their contract.


But they let us charge less! 
Thank you, Uber. 
Ha Ha Ha! 
I do not know anyone who has done this.


----------



## Driftinginn (Mar 22, 2017)

wallae said:


> I would argue that I am in reality an independent contractor.
> I refuse 95% of “my bosses orders” Ride requests.
> How long would I last at Walmart if they told me to clean up the spill pickles on aisle five and I said no 95% of the time?
> 
> ...


You obviously don't get it. We want to be treated as independent operators and with that comes the right to charge customers a rate that we set and not a rate that is determined by uber and lift. Its a pretty simple concept.


----------



## Wil Mette (Jan 15, 2015)

OG ant said:
I dont think you know what independent contractor means bud.

Most courts use the famous 20 questions. Each "Yes" answer makes it more likely that the courts will rule that we are employees, each no, ICs. There is no place that says how much weight each question gets. This is why there is no clear answer to the are we ICs question. Has any court ruled that we are ICs?

 Must the individual take instructions from the management staff regarding when, where, and how work is to be done? Maybe. Must start driving to passengers in 2 minutes or less, pick up passengers at a specific location, drop off at a specific location, and drivers must not get low passenger ratings or complaints. Drivers may be given a second chance if they go to a company-approved school. The driver gets to pick his own route.

 Does the individual receive training from the company? No, not really. The company does train drivers on how to use their app.

 Is the success or continuation of the business somewhat dependent on the type of service provided by the individual? Yes.

 Must the individual personally perform the contracted services? Yes

 Has the company hired, supervised, or paid individuals to assist the worker in completing the project stated in the contract? Yes, there are Greenlight Hubs, phone, & in-app support. This support is limited by the lack of training given to the support teams, but if drivers keep trying, they usually get an answer.

 Is there a continuing relationship between the company and the individual? Yes

 Must the individual work set hours? No. 

 Is the individual required to work full-time at the company? No.

 Is the work performed on company premises? No.

 Is the individual required to follow a set sequence or routine in the performance of his work? No, but it is a little complicated. The driver must pick up passengers in a timely manner. We get to pick our own route.

 Must the individual give you reports regarding his/her work? Yes. The driver reports his arrival, the passenger pick up, & passenger drops off via the app. The app reports the drivers' every movement, speed, & much more.

 Is the individual paid by the hour, week, or month? Yes, by the minute.

 Do you reimburse the individual for business/travel expenses? Yes, by the mile.

 Do you supply the individual with needed tools or materials? Yes, drivers supply a car, and the company supplies a billion-dollar app.

 Has the company made a significant investment in facilities used by the individual to perform services? Yes, the company has spent billions for an app & computer time to run the app.

 Is the individual free from suffering a loss or realizing a profit based on his work? Yes, except for auto accidents. Even then, the company offers insurance.

 Does the individual only perform services for the company? 50% do.

 Does the individual limit the availability of his services to the general public? Yes, in most cases, drivers can not pick up passengers without a company sponsoring the driver. Usually, there are 1 or 2 companies serving the area where the driver works. 50% work for only one rideshare company.

 Do you have the right to discharge the driver? Yes, often for no cause, and the company does so several times every week.

 May the driver terminate his services at any time? Yes


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

LuxMark Transport said:


> You would get fired just like Uber/lyft would deactivate you which is essentially the same thing


Uber hasn’t 
Under 10% accept 
40% cancel 
4 + years


----------



## robert2 (Nov 7, 2015)

wallae said:


> I would argue that I am in reality an independent contractor.
> I refuse 95% of “my bosses orders” Ride requests.
> How long would I last at Walmart if they told me to clean up the spill pickles on aisle five and I said no 95% of the time?
> 
> ...


No one is saying you have to be an employee- but the vast number of Uber driver s will be employee s


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

robert2 said:


> No one is saying you have to be an employee- but the vast number of Uber driver s will be employee s


I don’t think that’s accurate
If they have to pay a minimum type wage I believe they will cut 1/2 of the drivers so drivers are slammed busy
Cut your ability to refuse rides
Put drivers on a 12 hour schedule
Just like a cab
Be careful what you wish for🤣


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

LuxMark Transport said:


> You would get fired just like Uber/lyft would deactivate you which is essentially the same thing


my agreement with Uber says

1.2. Your Choice to Provide P2P Service to Riders. We do not, and have no right to, direct or control you. Subject to Platform availability, you decide when, where and whether (a) you want to offer P2P Service facilitated by our Platform and (b) you want to accept, decline, ignore or cancel a Ride

The Fare is a recommended amount. You shall always have the right to: (i) charge a Fare that is less than the pre-trip Fare; or (ii) negotiate, at your request, a Fare that is lower than the pre-trip Fare (each of (i) and (ii) herein, a “Negotiated Fare”).


Floyd Morrissette said:


> The IC does not charge the pax. We agree to what Uber/Lyft has offered to pay the IC. There is a contract between Uber/Lyft and the pax. There is a contract between Uber/Lyft and the IC. But there is no relationship between the IC and the pax. The IC does not charge the pax and the pax does not pay the IC. The pax is not the IC's customer. The IC's customer is Uber/Lyft.
> 
> If I say I will give you $20 to pick up my friend. You can take it or leave it. You may say you will do it for $40. I will say no thanks. Whatever the case the friend has no say in the matter. Same with Uber/Lyft. The pax has no say in the matter between the IC and Uber/Lyft.


 According to the agreements with Uber the passenger is the drivers customer and the driver is Ubers customer

We pay Uber to find us passengers, and handle the money. And the passenger pays us for the ride (through Uber)


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

wallae said:


> I don’t think that’s accurate
> If they have to pay a minimum type wage I believe they will cut 1/2 of the drivers so drivers are slammed busy
> Cut your ability to refuse rides
> Put drivers on a 12 hour schedule
> ...


Exactly


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Wil Mette said:


> But they let us charge less!
> Thank you, Uber.
> Ha Ha Ha!
> I do not know anyone who has done this.


In a previous post someone made the point that the pax has no say in the pricing. As you point out they can negotiate with the driver to reduce their fare

and whether or not you know any drivers that would do this , we could, 
So contrary to the OPs post, we do have the ability to set our rate


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

oldfart said:


> Exactly


I’m the ceo
I’m going to pay Wallae to sit at Dinkey Donuts refusing rides🤣🤣


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Driftinginn said:


> You obviously don't get it. We want to be treated as independent operators and with that comes the right to charge customers a rate that we set and not a rate that is determined by uber and lift. Its a pretty simple concept.


It’s a simple concept, simplistic in fact

And it’s just. not true

whether we set are own rate is not the only test of being an IC


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

oldfart said:


> It’s a simple concept, simplistic in fact
> 
> And it’s just true. not true
> 
> whether we set are own rate is not the only test of being an IC


The way they deactivate I see that as a risk (if you care about losing the job
Although I’ve reviews two rides now in two days
Guess that’s risk too


----------



## premsoma161 (11 mo ago)

Screwber driver north said:


> I hope they make a big note of how Uber and Lyft ban people off their platform when the drivers are found to ask for more money than what they quote, what more proof is there?


You have 498 -5 * and one pax give a 1* and the system accepts it without any questions. And someone complain about the ride to get full refund, they deactivate you. Without asking your side of the story. What kind of justification policy they have? They protect customers only.


----------



## RYDE TRANSPORT (6 mo ago)

Well.. long time driver, new visitor here. 

I notice most people are not happy with Uber or Lyft. 

Neither drivers, nor passengers are very thrilled by them. They seem to be the only games in town besides whatever local, perhaps sketchy cab companies might exist. I can only speak to places I've spent considerable time in, but I've never seen a taxi company that is efficient, quick, and not sketchy with some questionable drivers. 

That being said, Uber and Lyft are ripe to be plucked by competition. 

I have started my company, RYDE TRANSPORT here in Missoula MT.

I will be brining on IC drivers in the near future as well as offering expansion opportunities for franchise owners in their own areas. 

My business model is quite different. As a IC driver, and part of a controlled franchise, yes.. prices WILL be set by your current local market owner (franchise owner) but you would be responsible to directly collect your own fares. You then OWE a dispatch/trade fee of 15%. That's it. It's your responsibility to carry ANY and ALL insurance and licensing required in YOUR area. 
The company provides only marketing, dispatch and the use of company app. Customers do NOT pay RYDE . 

So far, the local community here is super pumped and I've grown exponentially in less then a year with ZERO mainstream advertising. 
Locally, my rates are : $12 minimum charge which includes up to 7 miles then $1.25 per mile after. $2 airport fee (since there is a commercial usage charge here).
$1 fee for credit card (thru square)
I accept PayPal, venmo, cashapp. Cash, and SQUARE CC. 

All drivers would be required to follow , and have available the payment methods mentioned. All on their own. Like a true IC. 

RYDE would have no liability to passengers, as it is literally just a dispatch company. 

Let me know if you feel like discussing. 

Why play in Uber and Lyfts pool.....???

Truly be your own boss, not a pawn.

Oh, and customers are NOT automatically assigned a driver based on anything. They get to SEE all online drivers and pick one. The fee is based on their pickup and destination, NOT where the driver has to drive from. BUT , the driver can choose to accept or not. There will be no metrics based off of acceptance, cancelation...etc. there will not be a rating system, just phone number where riders can make a complaint or statement. Drivers will only be deactivated if there were valid issues, which would be addressed with customers having to phone interviewed depending on severity. BUT customers will be made aware that they are in fact hiring an independent driver and RYDE is not responsible. 

Customers can use their favorite driver.  You can effectively build your own business then and wouldn't need to rely on getting 'good ride requests' by chance. 

All rides must be entered thru the app, all off app rides would be considered theft of service and would be prosecuted as such. 

Realize, an off app ride would not only be theft of service, BUT unless you had personally gotten the business license in your name, you WILL NOT be conducting legal business and would be at serious risk if anything occurred. (Guys taking cash rides are Soooo taking a chance )

Either way, this is much more beneficial for both riders AND drivers. 

Hit me up with any questions!


----------



## ButtHurt Report (6 mo ago)

Screwber driver north said:


> A document does not override a status, be it employee or contractor.
> 
> If it were that easy, imagine all these people who could, through a document, re-label their workers as they see fit.
> 
> That's the thing, they are deep in shit, because only Lyft is their competition and they both have agreed behind closed doors to a price, that's duopoly, what's more they have "contractors" who should have a say on the pricing when they offer their services to a client, what you are doing is yet again direct result of jobs with a question sign, no information leads to conflict between their contract and between the fact you are a contractor, they let you go and fully treat you as if you were an employee when it's their fault for not letting you know of the job you were about to perform.


Well you would be correct except it’s a document you “signed and accepted” when you agreed to do this. It’s funny how many internet lawyers are out there these days.


----------



## UberSux25 (7 mo ago)

Ted Fink said:


> MAJOR ISSUE HERE: If, for some crazy reason, Uber ends up allowing drivers to set their own prices (LOLZ, but roll with me here)... it would be a race to the bottom. Riders would choose the cheapest driver they could get at any one time, thereby depressing prices, not increasing them. Because some nut job out there is desperate, stupid, or willing to take someone 5 miles for $1.00.
> 
> I think the best long term solution for Uber AND Drivers is to increase base rates to a more reasonable level, and give more modest quest bonuses. As for surge, leave it alone to do it's job. When there aren't enough drivers in an area, you want more drivers to go to that area. That's the whole purpose of surge. And hey Dara, if you're reading this, you don't have to charge the PAX $40 extra in order to give a driver $8.75. So either give the driver $30 of the $40, or give the driver $8.75 but only charge the PAX an extra $12 or so.


Uber has increased their rates dramatically. They just keep 80% of it and laugh at the idiots that still drive for $4/hr profit.


----------



## painfreepc (Jul 17, 2014)

Did everyone have brain fart or did everyone just forget there was a rideshare called sidecar, not only could you set your own prices, you could set a working radius of how far you wanted to go from point A, and you could present yourself and your car, the nicer car you had the more money you could obviously ask, I drive a beautiful 2017 MKZ Hybrid Black Label sapphire blue tan leather perforated seats, I should be able to ask more money than someone driving a 2012 Corolla and I'm at 4.95 driver and 7 years with uber, I should be able to ask for more than someone who installed their app yesterday and driving a car that looks like it needs to go to the junkyard.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

wallae said:


> I’m the ceo
> I’m going to pay Wallae to sit at Dinkey Donuts refusing rides🤣🤣


you are free to do that but if I was wallae I wouldn’t count on it.


elelegido said:


> Nats asked for proof that the higher labour costs of the 75%/25% split were a causal factor in Uber's losses, and I gave him the proof.
> You're conflating two different things here. It is indeed true that increased costs reduce profits. That's what costs do. They reduce profits (or increase losses). However, in the example you give above, you didn't just increase your costs - you also increased your revenue. If we go back to the very useful Profit = Revenue - Costs formula, you'll appreciate that if you increase your revenue by a larger amount than you increase your costs by, your profit will increase. So, in your example, your more costly insurance permitted you to increase your revenue by taking on lucrative private rides.
> 
> This is different from the first scenario in which Uber had higher labour costs because of the 75%/25% split. In the context of split or share of revenue of fares between Uber and drivers, whether Uber takes 25% or 35%, it does not affect revenue. So, with revenue staying the same, increased costs caused an increase in Uber's losses.
> ...


The way I read your post is that increased costs always reduce profit if that’s wrong I apologize. 

I’d bet that Uber rideshare profits were pretty good once they had established a presence in all the markets they were in. But the Marketing and legal costs to get there were quite high. Not to mention the self driving car program


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

ButtHurt Report said:


> Well you would be correct except it’s a document you “signed and accepted” when you agreed to do this. It’s funny how many internet lawyers are out there these days.


Great idea
Does internet lawyer pay better than internet cab driver?


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

elelegido said:


> No, I said that I agreed with you, acknowledging what you were saying. As I mentioned, it's just a matter of semantics, with you calling Uber's imprudence "giving it away" and me calling it "spending unwisely".


I read your reply differently, I apologize. 



elelegido said:


> I stand corrected. However, the franchisee is still responsible for paying for the premises in the case of leased/rented restaurants.


I don't have any knowledge about that, I assume you're correct. 

I replied only because, well because I have a little bit of knowledge on the matter but mainly because not 30 minutes prior I had a short discussion about Ray Krok & McDonald's after my pax pointed out his estate that he left to his secretary. Really, what are the odds?


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

Floyd Morrissette said:


> The IC does not charge the pax. We agree to what Uber/Lyft has offered to pay the IC. There is a contract between Uber/Lyft and the pax. There is a contract between Uber/Lyft and the IC. But there is no relationship between the IC and the pax. The IC does not charge the pax and the pax does not pay the IC. The pax is not the IC's customer. The IC's customer is Uber/Lyft.
> 
> If I say I will give you $20 to pick up my friend. You can take it or leave it. You may say you will do it for $40. I will say no thanks. Whatever the case the friend has no say in the matter. Same with Uber/Lyft. The pax has no say in the matter between the IC and Uber/Lyft.


That's funny because as far as Uber claims, they are a middle man that facilitates the transactions between both pax and driver, they aren't a transportation company "setting the prices", a middle man does not regulate prices, it takes a chunk of the transaction, so which are they?


----------



## wallyruss1958 (11 mo ago)

wallae said:


> I would argue that I am in reality an independent contractor.
> I refuse 95% of “my bosses orders” Ride requests.
> How long would I last at Walmart if they told me to clean up the spill pickles on aisle five and I said no 95% of the time?
> 
> ...


Your assertion that you could not accept 95% of requests in a word is BULLSHIT!
Last month I started screening out unprofitable rides and my acceptance rate fell. I was promptly notified by Uber Support that if it fell anymore I would be subject to termination.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

wallyruss1958 said:


> Your assertion that you could not accept 95% of requests in a word is BULLSHIT!
> Last month I started screening out unprofitable rides and my acceptance rate fell. I was promptly notified by Uber Support that if it fell anymore I would be subject to termination.


Talking through your azz
Note the time
1:41


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

A few months ago I was 5%
Goes up and down better 5 and 10
Never heard a word from anyone


----------



## Escoman (Jun 28, 2016)

elelegido said:


> View attachment 668028
> 
> 
> It looks like Uber/Lyft's claims that we are independent contractors could backfire on them again. New class actions are brewing against them on the basis that Uber/Lyft violate antitrust regulations by price fixing the amounts that we charge customers. Now, we all know that we aren't real independent contractors and that pax are really Uber/Lyft's customers. But, the interesting thing about this class action is that its intention is not to claim that we are not IC, but to not let Uber/Lyft have their cake and eat it. It's pure poetry. Having already claimed in courts that we are independent contractors, Uber/Lyft won't be able to now say that we are not. And, if they say we are independent contractors and that the reality is that pax are our customers then Uber/Lyft's control over the prices we charge pax is price fixing - an anti-competitive practice that harms both drivers and pax. The crux of the argument is that Uber/Lyft don't get to say that we are independent and that they are simply our revenue collection agents and at the same time control us by preventing us from competing for business by means of the prices we allegedly charge the pax.
> ...


I only keep my account active to participate in all the litigation. I have made more from settlements than profit from driving.Indont even read the suits I just sign up and wait for the checks


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

oldfart said:


> As you say the local operator pays rent to McDonalds and unlike rent most businesses pay, it is not a fixed expense Rent paid to McDonalds goes up when store revenue goes up. So the better job an owner does the higher his rent


Yeah, I'm not sure how that all works with McDonald's. I know they used / use the lease as a way to control their franchisees and that McDonald's probably would exist today if it weren't for their real estate division.



Wil Mette said:


> But they let us charge less!
> Thank you, Uber.
> Ha Ha Ha!
> I do not know anyone who has done this.


I have. Several times. Coincidentally, I received large cash tips on every single one of these rides.


----------



## RulerK (10 mo ago)

Ted Fink said:


> MAJOR ISSUE HERE: If, for some crazy reason, Uber ends up allowing drivers to set their own prices (LOLZ, but roll with me here)... it would be a race to the bottom. Riders would choose the cheapest driver they could get at any one time, thereby depressing prices, not increasing them. Because some nut job out there is desperate, stupid, or willing to take someone 5 miles for $1.00.
> 
> I think the best long term solution for Uber AND Drivers is to increase base rates to a more reasonable level, and give more modest quest bonuses. As for surge, leave it alone to do it's job. When there aren't enough drivers in an area, you want more drivers to go to that area. That's the whole purpose of surge. And hey Dara, if you're reading this, you don't have to charge the PAX $40 extra in order to give a driver $8.75. So either give the driver $30 of the $40, or give the driver $8.75 but only charge the PAX an extra $12 or so.


I’m going to weigh in here and tell you that is only partially true. I’ve been living in Ukraine the past 15 years and there they have no Lyft, but both Uber and a competing riadeshare app called Tachka. Tachka works by being a reverse auction: the customs designates a trip and offers a price. Drivers within a nearby area see this and have some options: they can either accept the trip out right, decline the trip outright, or counter offer what they think is a reasonable price for the trip. Then the customer either accepts this counter offer or if no one accepts their trip, they can easily adjust their offer and resubmit to the auction marketplace do drivers. This works wonderfully as a pure capital market because every ride is worth exactly as much as the two participants are willing to exchange for it. A perfect example, I’d definitely take a half price ride that lands me a few blocks away from my house at the end of the night rather than a full or even double-price ride that ends me very far away from home.


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

wallyruss1958 said:


> I was promptly notified by Uber Support that if it fell anymore I would be subject to termination.


I do not believe you. You'd be the first person threatened with deactivation over acceptance rate since around 2014 or 15. Forcing you to take work you do not want violate your rights as an independent contractor.


----------



## EM1 (Apr 28, 2019)

elelegido said:


> View attachment 668028
> 
> 
> It looks like Uber/Lyft's claims that we are independent contractors could backfire on them again. New class actions are brewing against them on the basis that Uber/Lyft violate antitrust regulations by price fixing the amounts that we charge customers. Now, we all know that we aren't real independent contractors and that pax are really Uber/Lyft's customers. But, the interesting thing about this class action is that its intention is not to claim that we are not IC, but to not let Uber/Lyft have their cake and eat it. It's pure poetry. Having already claimed in courts that we are independent contractors, Uber/Lyft won't be able to now say that we are not. And, if they say we are independent contractors and that the reality is that pax are our customers then Uber/Lyft's control over the prices we charge pax is price fixing - an anti-competitive practice that harms both drivers and pax. The crux of the argument is that Uber/Lyft don't get to say that we are independent and that they are simply our revenue collection agents and at the same time control us by preventing us from competing for business by means of the prices we allegedly charge the pax.
> ...


Perhaps the easiest way to resolve this is to restore the driver multiplier. Uber/Lyft set a base rate & we as drivers set our additional commission/override. I know some of us feel that creates a race to the bottom but if Im a pax and need a ride bad enough then I’ll pay extra for the speediness & convenience of the nearest driver and still often meets or beats taxi pricing. RS Companies & drivers both have the likely potential to make more money overall. If this multiplier pricing reduces demand I think it would be temporary as paxes will see this is how its going to be going forward. Im not really driving anymore now precisely b/c theres no driver decided multiplier anymore - and maybe never will be again(?). Just my thoughts.


----------



## ReneeMcK (Aug 26, 2021)

elelegido said:


> View attachment 668028
> 
> 
> It looks like Uber/Lyft's claims that we are independent contractors could backfire on them again. New class actions are brewing against them on the basis that Uber/Lyft violate antitrust regulations by price fixing the amounts that we charge customers. Now, we all know that we aren't real independent contractors and that pax are really Uber/Lyft's customers. But, the interesting thing about this class action is that its intention is not to claim that we are not IC, but to not let Uber/Lyft have their cake and eat it. It's pure poetry. Having already claimed in courts that we are independent contractors, Uber/Lyft won't be able to now say that we are not. And, if they say we are independent contractors and that the reality is that pax are our customers then Uber/Lyft's control over the prices we charge pax is price fixing - an anti-competitive practice that harms both drivers and pax. The crux of the argument is that Uber/Lyft don't get to say that we are independent and that they are simply our revenue collection agents and at the same time control us by preventing us from competing for business by means of the prices we allegedly charge the pax.
> ...


What state is this in?


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

oldfart said:


> so it’s not a cut and dried thing.


That's the problem with this whole IC racket and you can bet lots of lobbying $$$$ have been responsible for its implementation and perpetuation.


----------



## Superfreedomfighter (Sep 8, 2020)

Uber may already have figured out how beat this argument, with the upfront pricing to drivers scam. Can’t Uber argue in court with upfront pricing that they are negotiating on behalf of their independent contractors with customers , giving drivers the price of fare or job and other information upfront and giving them the choice to take the fare ( job) or not.?


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Superfreedomfighter said:


> Uber may already have figured out how beat this argument, with the upfront pricing to drivers scam. Can’t Uber argue in court with upfront pricing that they are negotiating on behalf of their independent contractors with customers , giving drivers the price of fare or job and other information upfront and giving them the choice to take the fare ( job) or not.?


Uber could argue that it sets the prices for / on behalf of contractors, but that's the entire point of the class action. Drivers are saying that having someone else set their prices for them is anti-competitive; they want to set the prices themselves.


----------



## That American (Apr 22, 2021)

wallae said:


> I don’t think that’s accurate
> If they have to pay a minimum type wage I believe they will cut 1/2 of the drivers so drivers are slammed busy
> Cut your ability to refuse rides
> Put drivers on a 12 hour schedule
> ...


If they do all of that then the court will rule they are employees. Once you start controlling work times it is all over.


----------



## That American (Apr 22, 2021)

Superfreedomfighter said:


> Uber may already have figured out how beat this argument, with the upfront pricing to drivers scam. Can’t Uber argue in court with upfront pricing that they are negotiating on behalf of their independent contractors with customers , giving drivers the price of fare or job and other information upfront and giving them the choice to take the fare ( job) or not.?


Only if they let the driver counter offer.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

That American said:


> If they do all of that then the court will rule they are employees. Once you start controlling work times it is all over.


I’m saying that is what happens after we are employees
It’s not going to help anyone 
That’s a dream of unskilled workers


----------



## Rideshare drv (Aug 8, 2019)

Can any body from this forum explain to me why in the heck you guys keep driving for this apps?
as a former rideshare driver i have submitted multiple points of view with plain and simple clear facts
on how you actually are loosing money in the long run as a driver, but yet you people continue driving and debating with similar questions. just to put it simple a half is a half and what do i mean by this quote?
it means if you buy a pie and you ask give me half of pie you will get exactly half of pie. not a quarter not 3 quarters of the pie but a plain and simple HALF OF THE PIE. the same rule applies to the answers to your questions .
no matter what Uber and Lyft and ANY gig app it is going to treat you like an employee but yet they tell you you are an INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR but in reality YOU ARE NOT.
let me give you this perspective: lets say you wish to start a business but you do not have the capitol (money) to hire employees but you believe your product or business has potential to make money. then you decide to (allow) people to use your product or business in exchange for a 20% commission since this product or business does not requires a physical material and can be reuse over and over again with out having to pay a single cent to make it again.
and BAM your product or business is a success. Now you are making great money and you start expanding by allowing more people to use your product or business on a different cities, but since you are reaching too far now greedy takes place because now you have the capitol (Money) to change the rules from all those drivers that made you 20% each time they used your app, since the original owner of the product or business now wants to expand go to another country he does follows the exact same steps but since this product or business is now operating in a global scale the owner now needs more capitol (Money) and that is when a board of directors is made and takes over the business or product and the first thing they are going to do is to start cutting the percentage the driver makes and they will continue to do that until they keep the majority of the fare since they know there will be foolish people driving for them for cents on the dollar. While the CEO AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS make MILLIONS OR BILLIONS with out paying a single cent to drivers. that is the reality of UBER AND LYFT and any other gig app because all of them follow the same rules. like a said multiple times if you really want to be an independent contractor YOU MUST DROP UBER AND LYFT OR ANY OTHER GIG APP.
IF YOU DO NOT HAVE CONTROL ON HOW MUCH YOU CHARGE FOR YOUR WORK AND WHO TO REFUSE AND WHEN YOU DECIDE TO START THE WORK WITH OUT PENALTIES . THEN YOU ARE NOT INDEPENDENT.
YOU ARE A SLAVE OF THOSE APPS. because an employee at least he or she has some limited benefits,
like workers comp, a guarantee hourly earning, and if you end up with a good employer you will have a lot of benefits
like a retirement account, full paid vacations, sick paid leave, plus a good salary or hourly rate, and a set weekly schedule to work, plus you will have time to enjoy with your family on your days offs or vacation,
but with any of those apps you get NONE


----------



## Driftinginn (Mar 22, 2017)

oldfart said:


> In a previous post someone made the point that the pax has no say in the pricing. As you point out they can negotiate with the driver to reduce their fare
> 
> and whether or not you know any drivers that would do this , we could,
> So contrary to the OPs post, we do have the ability to set our rate


As an independent operator we should have total controll to set a rate. That would include being able to increase the fare.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Rideshare drv said:


> Can any body from this forum explain to me why in the heck you guys keep driving for this apps?
> as a former rideshare driver i have submitted multiple points of view with plain and simple clear facts
> on how you actually are loosing money in the long run as a driver, but yet you people continue driving and debating with similar questions. just to put it simple a half is a half and what do i mean by this quote?
> it means if you buy a pie and you ask give me half of pie you will get exactly half of pie. not a quarter not 3 quarters of the pie but a plain and simple HALF OF THE PIE. the same rule applies to the answers to your questions .
> ...


Question: why do I drive Uber and Lyft?
Answer: because it’s an easy way to make some money

the folks that say that it’s costing me money to drive are just wrong. I know my expenses, and I know my income. And I know I’m making money, Not a lot of money, but enough to satisfy my needs

if you are in fact losing money, you are doing something wrong


----------



## Rico Suave (Jan 20, 2020)

Rideshare drv said:


> Can any body from this forum explain to me why in the heck you guys keep driving for this apps?
> as a former rideshare driver i have submitted multiple points of view with plain and simple clear facts
> on how you actually are loosing money in the long run as a driver, but yet you people continue driving and debating with similar questions. just to put it simple a half is a half and what do i mean by this quote?
> it means if you buy a pie and you ask give me half of pie you will get exactly half of pie. not a quarter not 3 quarters of the pie but a plain and simple HALF OF THE PIE. the same rule applies to the answers to your questions .
> ...


Very true, there are the + for retired citizens. I do agree 100% what you explained. Well explained.... thanks.


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

oldfart said:


> Question: why do I drive Uber and Lyft?
> Answer: because it’s an easy way to make some money
> 
> the folks that say that it’s costing me money to drive are just wrong. I know my expenses, and I know my income. And I know I’m making money, Not a lot of money, but enough to satisfy my needs
> ...


Can you tell me how you calculate your expenses?


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

wallyruss1958 said:


> Your assertion that you could not accept 95% of requests in a word is BULLSHIT!
> Last month I started screening out unprofitable rides and my acceptance rate fell. I was promptly notified by Uber Support that if it fell anymore I would be subject to termination.


Are you talking about acceptance rate or cancellation rate?


----------



## Maggiemae (Jul 3, 2016)

I agree 100%! Those who say uber and lyft are ripping them off don't understand business at all! I decline rides more than 8 minutes away, it works for me! I use Rideshare as an extra income, not a full time income...maybe these people need to get another source of income?


----------



## Ritter (Jan 2, 2016)

It seems like people get very upset because Uber is not what they want it to be.

Rideshare drivers are neither employees nor independent contractors. They are, well, rideshare drivers. A third classification that didn't exist a generation ago and does not fit into either of the two binary options.

To me, the whole argument is like asking "is a giraffe a dog or a cat?"

Participation is voluntary. If you don't like it, don't do it.

If a paradigm must be forced, ok, in one sense, as human beings and participants in the labor force, we are ALL independent contractors in that we make the choice on an ongoing basis to exchange our time for money and other resources.

When you turn on the Uber app, you are agreeing to provide a service to Uber for the rate that Uber is willing to pay.

Want to set higher rates? Do so. Dump Uber as a client and charge your customers whatever you want. Just don't use the Uber app. It's very simple.

You want a better job with different benefits? Go get one. Stop driving. Again, simple.

Uber works for me - that doesn't mean it will work for you.

I like being able to work whenever I choose.
I like not having a traditional boss or supervisor.
I like not wearing a uniform or a name tag.
I like quitting whenever I feel like it, sometimes months at a time.
I like that I net more money than I can by sacrificing the above.

I just am so tired of all the whining. We are in a market-driven society. If you don't like Uber's terms, don't agree with them and do something else with your time.

As drivers decrease, their value will increase. Rates will change. If you believe you are worth more than you are getting paid - go get it!

There is not a single complaint about Uber (in my mind) that can't be solved by simply saying "no" and refusing to participate. If Uber needs to change its policies to attract drivers, they will. They currently do not.


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

Ritter said:


> It seems like people get very upset because Uber is not what they want it to be.
> 
> Rideshare drivers are neither employees nor independent contractors. They are, well, rideshare drivers. A third classification that didn't exist a generation ago and does not fit into either of the two binary options.
> 
> ...


Oops, your educated, upper class arrogance is is showing..........
A very high percentage of drivers in developed countries like the US are immigrants, many with language difficulties or a usable educational background. Many others have to work around disabilities or age discrimination and another large percentage have children to take care of or aged or disabled family members they have to care for. Read these forums and then go look at GoFundMe for the thousands of US people caught in financial binds like the ones I just mentioned and are trying to keep their heads above water. Nearly all of them do not have the same freedoms that you seem to take for granted. We should support work and pay schemes that keep people off welfare (30% of NY city rideshare drivers are on some form of public assistance) or living in a tent udder an overpass.


----------



## waznboi03 (Mar 9, 2018)

KevinH said:


> Oops, your educated, upper class arrogance is is showing..........
> A very high percentage of drivers in developed countries like the US are immigrants, many with language difficulties or a usable educational background. Many others have to work around disabilities or age discrimination and another large percentage have children to take care of or aged or disabled family members they have to care for. Read these forums and then go look at GoFundMe for the thousands of US people caught in financial binds like the ones I just mentioned and are trying to keep their heads above water. Nearly all of them do not have the same freedoms that you seem to take for granted. We should support work and pay schemes that keep people off welfare (30% of NY city rideshare drivers are on some form of public assistance) or living in a tent udder an overpass.


What is this shit ass "argument"? what are you trying to say? Immigrants have no other opportunities EXCEPT lyft and Uber? what does this have to do with ANYTHING @Ritter says? He literally is just referring to the idiots that keep saying that a rideshare driver CANT make money and it doesn't work for ANYONE, when thats clearly not the case. The people that it doesnt work for will continue to believe that it sucks for everyone, and the people who continue to make money will continue to drive.

if you want to talk about the unfairness in Uber/Lyft driver income and the affect on Immigrant drivers, go complain about it in another thread, moron.


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

waznboi03 said:


> What is this shit ass "argument"? what are you trying to say? Immigrants have no other opportunities EXCEPT lyft and Uber? what does this have to do with ANYTHING @Ritter says? He literally is just referring to the idiots that keep saying that a rideshare driver CANT make money and it doesn't work for ANYONE, when thats clearly not the case. The people that it doesnt work for will continue to believe that it sucks for everyone, and the people who continue to make money will continue to drive.
> 
> if you want to talk about the unfairness in Uber/Lyft driver income and the affect on Immigrant drivers, go complain about it in another thread, moron.


Perfect response, thanks!


----------



## Nique0201 (Apr 29, 2017)

Boca Ratman said:


> Yeah, I'm not sure how that all works with McDonald's. I know they used / use the lease as a way to control their franchisees and that McDonald's probably would exist today if it weren't for their real estate division.
> 
> 
> 
> I have. Several times. Coincidentally, I received large cash tips on every single one of these rides.


We should negotiate down to $1 with a upfront cash tip equaling 10% less than what Uber/Lyft charged then... That way we get all the insurance protections make probably 70% more money and the customer pays 10% less .... I drove someone 100 miles on a comfort ride from O'Hare airpor to Milwaukee Wisconsin I maid 118 (before tip).... Don't get me wrong that's fine but I had to basically drive back empty 2 hours that cuts it from 59 a hour to basically 30 a hour.... She paid 287 then tipped 33.... -_- I cudda said nope this ride is a dollar ... Give me 275 out the door as a tip. I wonder how this will work


----------



## Ritter (Jan 2, 2016)

KevinH said:


> Oops, your educated, upper class arrogance is is showing..........
> A very high percentage of drivers in developed countries like the US are immigrants, many with language difficulties or a usable educational background. Many others have to work around disabilities or age discrimination and another large percentage have children to take care of or aged or disabled family members they have to care for. Read these forums and then go look at GoFundMe for the thousands of US people caught in financial binds like the ones I just mentioned and are trying to keep their heads above water. Nearly all of them do not have the same freedoms that you seem to take for granted. We should support work and pay schemes that keep people off welfare (30% of NY city rideshare drivers are on some form of public assistance) or living in a tent udder an overpass.


I'm 55 and have a high school diploma.

Uber is my sole source of income.

I've been married and divorced twice and live by myself in a one bedroom apartment.

I have experienced age discrimination with regard to employment.

If believing in personal responsibility for one's life makes me arrogant, I suppose I am, but I certainly don't view myself as better than anybody else.

I take full responsibility for my life. I blame nobody and expect nothing.

As much as I may sympathize with the troubles or challenges faced by anyone such as homelessness, lack of education or an inability to speak English while living in America, I just don't believe these issues are Uber's responsibility to solve.

It's like wanting to sue Hershey's for not providing nutritionally sound food. It is what it is, do with it what you will and take responsibility for the results.

Life is hard. Life is harder for some than others. That was true before Uber and it will be true after.


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

Ritter said:


> I'm 55 and have a high school diploma.
> 
> Uber is my sole source of income.
> 
> ...


As someone who lives alone, and "take full responsibility" do you have enough savings to cover medical bills and keep paying rent and expenses if you are injured on the job and take a while to recover?


----------



## Ritter (Jan 2, 2016)

KevinH said:


> As someone who lives alone, and "take full responsibility" do you have enough savings to cover medical bills and keep paying rent and expenses if you are injured on the job and take a while to recover?


I imagine that would depend on severity and duration.

My grandparents didn't.
My parents didn't.
I might, but I'm not wealthy by any means. 

I do the best I can, as we all do.

I consider myself very blessed to live in this country with the opportunities I have.

It's nothing more than dumb luck I exist here and am not starving in Somalia or being bombed and shot at in Ukraine.

Complain all you want, but there are many humans on this planet with far greater problems and far fewer complaints than many people on this forum who expect success and security spoon fed to them by a company that has never even booked a profit.


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

Ritter said:


> I imagine that would depend on severity and duration.
> 
> My grandparents didn't.
> My parents didn't.
> ...


While I certainly laud your efforts to be responsible, my point along this line of inquiry is that all those expenses I listed would be covered if you were an employee rather than an independent contractor. 100% of all medical expenses, even into the future, a replacement income while you are recovering, paid transportation to doctors and therapy, even training for another line of work if your injuries keep you from driving again.

You are currently in America's riskiest line of work, operating a motor vehicle. This accounts for the highest rate of on-the-job injuries and on-the-job-deaths in the U.S.. Rideshare puts those risks even higher with passenger assaults, robberies, and car jackings. Without those economic safeguards, landlords, credit card companies, hospitals and ambulance services are out the money or must get offset by government handouts. I am not a taxpayer where you live but I think those in your community "have a dog in this fight" and need you to pay your bills, get back on the job and once again fend for yourself in the proud way you do now. That risk is greatly expanded when the worker has family that needs to be supported, even after death of the worker.

I am "picking on you" because many others on this forum believe that it is solely their choice whether to be an IC or not. Universally, courts discount those desires or even written agreements because of the greater social consequences of unprotected work injuries, dismissal, disability etc. Thanks for putting up with me.


----------



## Ritter (Jan 2, 2016)

I appreciate all your valid and we'll articulated points.

I think once this discussion concludes I'll be permanently removing myself from this forum. I'm not wired for it.

I agree with many strong ideals.

I don't believe anyone should go to bed hungry, yet millions do every day.

I believe if you're sick or hurt, you have a right to medical care.

I believe in equality of opportunity.

I think our society and our culture are in big trouble. Inflation and rents continue to rise and wages remain stagnant. We're collapsing.

I am biased by my personal experience.

I was an actor. I never have had any of the benefits you mention. No safety net, no security.

I borrowed money and opened my own business. I operated for 10 years and employed many people. I paid my bills, but never made any money or had any security.

I was raised and lived on an ethic of "you only eat what you kill". This puts bias in my opinion.

It is difficult for me to work up much ire against Uber, an unprofitable company, when there are so many profitable companies exploiting workers and humanity in much more egregious ways (Amazon, Walmart, Apple).

Sure, the programmers at Apple have swell insurance to go with their 6 figure salaries but we all like our iPhones too much to worry about the Chinese factory worker working 16 hours a day for $0.26/hour.

Plus there's all the legitimate entrepreneurs and independent contractors who have no such safety net - lawyers, graphic designers, franchise owners, small business people... It goes on and on...

Also, Uber saved my life. If I hadn't had the rideshare opportunity 6 years ago after my business and marriage collapsed, I would have been fed into unemployment fuelled homelessness that would have truly put me at the mercy of the system of generosity.

Today, my bills are paid, I'm in my own home, and I have dignity and self-respect. For me, rideshare made that possible.

I find many people on this forum to find such comments worthy of ridicule and insult. So I will respectfully keep them to myself moving forward.

I am genuinely happy for anybody who has access to the benefits you discuss. I hope someday I can be one of them. I just don't believe I'm going to acquire those benefits driving an Uber.

Best wishes,

Ritter


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

KevinH said:


> Can you tell me how you calculate your expenses?


Sure

I accept your challenge

Four categories of expenses, at least the way I categorize expenses in in four categories 

1) gas has ranged between $2 and $5 since I started Uber 4.5 years ago and I get 20 mpg so gas has cost me between 10 and 25 cents a mile 

2) my actual repair and maintenance expenses have been 5 cents a mile. I have spread sheets listing everything that’s been done, the date it was done and the cost to do it 

3) I buy commercial insurance at at $3500/ yr which works out to be 5 cents a mile

4) my car is fully depreciated so currently no expense there.When I started I assumed that I’d be doing this for 3 years and I estimated the car was worth $18000. So $6000 a year for 3 years, nothing now.


1) $0.20
2) $0.05
3) $0.05
4) $0
total =$0.30 per mile

so far this year my gross income has been $0.80 per mile. (Total miles) Leaving $0.50 per mile for me
over 70000 miles a year = $35000


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Judge and Jury said:


> Are you talking about acceptance rate or cancellation rate?


either one in my market is a non issue, our agreement spells it out clearly


Ritter said:


> I'm 55 and have a high school diploma.
> 
> Uber is my sole source of income.
> 
> ...


Regarding age discrimination. Wait till you are my age


----------



## Midwester (6 mo ago)

Nats121 said:


> That's a correlation, not a causation.
> 
> A 75/25 model could be extremely profitable provided the fares are high enough.


Yep, because Uber could still charge the passengers whatever they want (as they are now); with the driver's take being higher Uber would charge the passenger that much more. Obviously, there's a ceiling... I guess the passengers that are actually still tipping would just stop tipping.


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

oldfart said:


> Sure
> 
> I accept your challenge
> 
> ...


I think your detailed accounting is potentially a tremendous resource for drivers and policy makers. So I have a few other questions:
What kind of car do you drive (age, model, mileage)?
How many miles do you drive in a year?
Have you had to do any substantial repairs? Timing chain, transmission/clutch, CV bearings if it is a front wheel drive, ball joints-idler arm, air conditioning, uphholstery -carpeting, cracked windshield type of repair
There may be more questions if you don't mind.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

I am happy being ****ed by Uber guys, let me be, don't ruin my dreams of neo slavery.


----------



## Jenga (Dec 10, 2018)

Screwber driver north said:


> A document does not override a status, be it employee or contractor.
> 
> If it were that easy, imagine all these people who could, through a document, re-label their workers as they see fit.


This is exactly true. I once had a signed IC agreement with an employer who fired me unjustly. I contacted the state unemployment agency, and they asked me a series of 12 questions regarding my employment. As a result, they determined I was an employee in contradiction to the contract. There was no court involved, but the courts are known to use the same criteria when judging whether an IC agreement is valid or not. I got the unemployment and the employer had to pay retroactively into the system. I'm sure I could have done the same for the unpaid FICA but never did.


> That's the thing, they are deep in shit, because only Lyft is their competition and they both have agreed behind closed doors to a price, that's duopoly, what's more they have "contractors" who should have a say on the pricing when they offer their services to a client, what you are doing is yet again direct result of jobs with a question sign, no information leads to conflict between their contract and between the fact you are a contractor, they let you go and fully treat you as if you were an employee when it's their fault for not letting you know of the job you were about to perform.


Correct again, signing on to an agreement to use an app that forces you to accept rides not knowing the destination and not being able to deal directly with your "client" is not a valid IC status. In truth though, the Uber driver is actually a hybrid - part IC and part employee. And this is not a desirable situation, since we don't get the full benefits of either. 

Hopefully, these lawsuits will eventually resolve in our favor having complete independence to accept/reject all rides, know the destinations prior, and while theyre at it they should outlaw the 5 second ping which is extremely dangerous while driving. They should allow us to set parameters on the app as to where we are willing to drive, for how much, and to bargain with pax - prior to pickup - for additional money if the "recommended" fare is not enough.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

ButtHurt Report said:


> It’s funny how many internet lawyers are out there these days.


Ahh, the classic Appeal to Authority fallacy rears its head again. Very common on these forums.

It is not necessary to have a formal qualification in an activity to have a degree of familiarity with or skill in it. If that were the case, people would not be able to:

-- Cook themselves breakfast unless they were a qualified chef
-- Change the oil on their car unless they were a qualified mechanic
-- File their own tax returns unless they were a qualified accountant

Etc etc.

I am an accountant, but I have no IT qualifications whatsoever, yet I spent my career designing and implementing complex financial analysis IT systems in corporations.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

painfreepc said:


> Did everyone have brain fart or did everyone just forget there was a rideshare called sidecar, not only could you set your own prices, you could set a working radius of how far you wanted to go from point A, and you could present yourself and your car, the nicer car you had the more money you could obviously ask, I drive a beautiful 2017 MKZ Hybrid Black Label sapphire blue tan leather perforated seats, I should be able to ask more money than someone driving a 2012 Corolla and I'm at 4.95 driver and 7 years with uber, I should be able to ask for more than someone who installed their app yesterday and driving a car that looks like it needs to go to the junkyard.
> 
> View attachment 668176


Some people who knew about Sidecar may have forgotten about it. Others may not. I had not previously mentioned Sidecar because my area of interest is not so much in defunct companies as the companies that I earn money from here and now.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

wallae said:


> I’m saying that is what happens after we are employees
> It’s not going to help anyone
> That’s a dream of unskilled workers


You're missing the point. These new class actions are not trying to convince the courts, or anyone, that drivers are employees. They are not trying to get any judgment that makes drivers employees. What they are doing is using Uber's claims that we are IC against Uber.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Maggiemae said:


> I agree 100%! Those who say uber and lyft are ripping them off don't understand business at all! I decline rides more than 8 minutes away, it works for me!


As indeed you should, but that has nothing to do with discussion topic of Uber controlling prices.


> I use Rideshare as an extra income, not a full time income...maybe these people need to get another source of income?


Again, the adequacy of rideshare income vs. individual drivers' income needs, and therefore whether or not people need to get another source of income, has nothing to do with the discussion topic of Uber controlling prices.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

ButtHurt Report said:


> Well you would be correct except it’s a document you “signed and accepted” when you agreed to do this. It’s funny how many internet lawyers are out there these days.


I'm one of those internet lawyers myself. Illegal contract clauses are not enforceable, regardless of whether or not they were "signed and accepted".


----------



## TexChuck (Jan 14, 2020)

I believe we not Employees or Contractors, We Agents to Uber. What we do better fits an Agency definition than the other two. My Profession is Insurance. Farmers and Statefarm businesses are Agents to those companies. They sell Products that these businesses have set up. They can’t change the rates or the products being offered but they can decline to write a client, much like us, we can decline a ride we don’t want to do. Every company can have different rules and agreements with their Agents. We more flexible with Rideshare, you don’t have to work if you don’t want to. In my above example these Agents to insurance companies can’t just not work, they have targets etc and if you don’t perform they can cut you off, much like rideshare can do to us. Insurance companies have arranged benefits for any agency that starts , but they don’t have to offer that, in their environment they have competition and the more attractive the benefits the more chance of their business model is successful. Rideshare don’t have that competition and slow to offer anything to us agents.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

TexChuck said:


> We Agents to Uber.











Now we're Uber's agent?!? That's a new one!


> What we do better fits an Agency definition than the other two. My Profession is Insurance. Farmers and Statefarm businesses are Agents to those companies. They sell Products that these businesses have set up. They can’t change the rates or the products being offered but they can decline to write a client, much like us, we can decline a ride we don’t want to do. Every company can have different rules and agreements with their Agents. We more flexible with Rideshare, you don’t have to work if you don’t want to. In my above example these Agents to insurance companies can’t just not work, they have targets etc and if you don’t perform they can cut you off, much like rideshare can do to us. Insurance companies have arranged benefits for any agency that starts , but they don’t have to offer that, in their environment they have competition and the more attractive the benefits the more chance of their business model is successful. Rideshare don’t have that competition and slow to offer anything to us agents.


Uber wouldn't accept that because, if we are its agents, that would mean that Uber is a transportation company.

Drivers wouldn't accept an argument that we are Uber's agents, because it is we who do the work. It's not as if we go out and find the pax for Uber to drive around.

Generally, an agent is a party that negotiates on behalf of a client company with potential and existing clients _of that client company. _The client / agent model simply doesn't fit in the case of rideshare drivers.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

KevinH said:


> I think your detailed accounting is potentially a tremendous resource for drivers and policy makers. So I have a few other questions:
> What kind of car do you drive (age, model, mileage)?
> How many miles do you drive in a year?
> Have you had to do any substantial repairs? Timing chain, transmission/clutch, CV bearings if it is a front wheel drive, ball joints-idler arm, air conditioning, uphholstery -carpeting, cracked windshield type of repair
> There may be more questions if you don't mind.


Ill answer your questions, but I have one for you

What help could recording this info be for other drivers and policy makers?


2011 Ford Explorer 3,5 L V6 "limited" 380,000 miles
70,000 miles a year since I started rideshare in Dec 2017
I drive a car that is comparatively expensive to use for rideshare because its the car I happened to own when I started rideshare. There are some things that if I had repaired them properly would have been expensive, The motor that operates the sunroof, needed to be replaced, I didnt replace it. There were water leaks from the sunroof and around the hinges for the rear door(tailgate) I used "Gorilla Tape" I was "bumped" in a parking lot. and one side of the plastic bumper cover was damaged. and the clips holding it in place broken. I re secured it with sheet metal screws patched the "cuts" with epoxy and painted it with a brush. Also the hood on these cars tends to rust along the front edge, I painted that over it with a brush too


You use the term "repairs" I distinguish between "maintenance" and "repairs" Things that wear out will wear out. You extend their useful life with maintenance and when they wear out you (or better yet, before they wear out). replace them. 
Repairs are different, When something breaks or is damaged, you repair it. and if it cant be repaired or if the repair would cost more than than replacing it, you replace it

I live in SW Florida, so no snow and few potholes, and no hills, the body doesn't rust, the suspension lasts longer, and the transmission ought to last longer

Other than what I consider to be routine maintenance, the one big item, wasn't a repair at all. It was a preemptive water pump replacement*
I just had the ac blower motor replaced $380

*The water pump on this engine is mounted internally and if it fails, will drop oil into the oil sump. and without warning can take out the engine. After learning about this "fatal flaw" and knowing that waterpumps are a "wear" item.. I chose to replace it before it failed. and while the engine was open also replaced the timing chain, guides, oil pump and front crank seal...This was in Dec 2019 at just over 200,000 miles. It is getting to be time to do it again, but Its also past time for for me to quit doing this thing. I may just drive it until it dies (or I do) We are both coming to the end of our economic lives


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

TexChuck said:


> I believe we not Employees or Contractors, We Agents to Uber. What we do better fits an Agency definition than the other two. My Profession is Insurance. Farmers and Statefarm businesses are Agents to those companies. They sell Products that these businesses have set up. They can’t change the rates or the products being offered but they can decline to write a client, much like us, we can decline a ride we don’t want to do. Every company can have different rules and agreements with their Agents. We more flexible with Rideshare, you don’t have to work if you don’t want to. In my above example these Agents to insurance companies can’t just not work, they have targets etc and if you don’t perform they can cut you off, much like rideshare can do to us. Insurance companies have arranged benefits for any agency that starts , but they don’t have to offer that, in their environment they have competition and the more attractive the benefits the more chance of their business model is successful. Rideshare don’t have that competition and slow to offer anything to us agents.


Excellent post and I agree completely, but for tax purposes agents I think have to be either employees or independent contractors. There is no separate classifications under the law


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

wallae said:


> If we agree to use their platform we may agree to use their pricing


The driver agreement says the driver and rider can negotiate a lower fare. But we are not permitted to charge a higher fare. That, by definition, puts Uber in control over fares.


> I may get banned but I’m limiting the time of my trips. About 12 miles or 35 minutes...


Again - control is in the hands of the company, not the driver.

Sure, you are an IC when you are NOT working (eg; not accepting a ride). 
But when you accept a ride on the platform, you are working. And when you are working, Uber/Lyft have the overwhelming control: pickup location, drop-off location, what you will earn/charge, what they will compensate you, ('how much they allow you to charge the pax and the service).

*It is the amount of control you or the company have when you are working ('earning') that determines worker classification - and Uber/Lyft have far more control over the work than you do.* IMO, this claim of worker misclassification has a good chance of succeeding.

So, you say "but I am working when I am rejecting rides!: 
Uh, no, you're not. If you are not earning, then you are not working - you are looking for work.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The driver agreement says the driver and rider can negotiate a lower fare. But we are not permitted to charge a higher fare. That, by definition, puts Uber in control over fares.
> 
> Again - control is in the hands of the company, not the driver.
> 
> ...


Give me a call when the court agrees


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> IMO, this claim of worker misclassification has a good chance of succeeding.


Interestingly, this proposed class action is _not _a worker misclassification lawsuit. The plaintiff's plan of attack is not to challenge that we are IC, but to accept it and demand that we, as IC, have the right to set our own prices. 

It's a completely different plan of attack.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

elelegido said:


> Interestingly, this proposed class action is _not _a worker misclassification lawsuit. The plaintiff's plan of attack is not to challenge that we are IC, but to accept it and demand that we, as IC, have the right to set our own prices.
> 
> It's a completely different plan of attack.


I already do that. By rejecting no or low surge rides


----------



## jtk131604 (Apr 12, 2017)

Getting past all the lawyer-speak (and I’m barely into my first cup of coffee), if it involves screwing over these scum and getting some GD money back, I’m in! Sign me up. As far as IC, they call me whatever they want in the courts, just as long as the end result is the decision that we were all screwed over on some level and we deserve to get a little back. I’m done analyzing when it comes to these crooks. F ‘em.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

wallae said:


> I already do that. By rejecting no or low surge rides


No, rejecting no or low surge rides is not the same as demanding the right to set one's prices.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

elelegido said:


> No, rejecting no or low surge rides is not the same as demanding the right to set one's prices.


Yes it is


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> You're missing the point. These new class actions are not trying to convince the courts, or anyone, that drivers are employees. They are not trying to get any judgment that makes drivers employees. What they are doing is using Uber's claims that we are IC against Uber.


To what end


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

wallae said:


> Yes it is


No, lol, choosing which rides to take is a different concept from setting prices.  One has to do with accepting rides and the other has to do with setting prices.

Anyway, it's no problem if you support Uber in this. There will be no requirement for any driver to be part of this class action, if it happens. You will be free _not _to sign up for it and to _not _receive money from it if it's successful. Uber will also inevitably be looking for drivers to testify on their behalf as they have before, asking the drivers to proclaim that they don't want to be able to set their own prices and that they would rather have Uber select prices for them and then pay them as much or as little as Uber wishes.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

oldfart said:


> To what end


It's been discussed several times over the preceding pages.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> It's been discussed several times over the preceding pages.


So you are suing Uber to have a court decide that the single test to IC classification is the ability to set your own price'. 

I thought there must be something else, because thats not true


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

elelegido said:


> No, lol, choosing which rides to take is a different concept from setting prices.  One has to do with accepting rides and the other has to do with setting prices.
> 
> Anyway, it's no problem if you support Uber in this. There will be no requirement for any driver to be part of this class action, if it happens. You will be free _not _to sign up for it and to _not _receive money from it if it's successful. Uber will also inevitably be looking for drivers to testify on their behalf as they have before, asking the drivers to proclaim that they don't want to be able to set their own prices and that they would rather have Uber select prices for them and then pay them as much or as little as Uber wishes.


I don’t really support anyone 
I think there should be someone from the dept of transportation in there to make sure it’s fair (that drivers are not discriminated against and that they are not fired for declining or canceling unprofitable rides) 
I doubt it’s true but someone said pax are saying that pax are being charged more than they show us on rides payment. 
This is odd as when I check rider price I’m showing a huge price but I get a low price and show they paid a low price.


----------



## painfreepc (Jul 17, 2014)

wallae said:


> Yes it is


it is not, you still did not set the price, UBER DID, it's simple supply and demand - YOU the driver or the rider had nothing to do with the price.

the rider has more control than you the driver as the rider can click no and wait for a lower price, as i have done many times, as i have said, i am a driver and a rider,

in time the price will go down for the rider, you the driver can not make the price go up.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

wallae said:


> I don’t really support anyone
> I think there should be someone from the dept of transportation in there to make sure it’s fair (that drivers are not discriminated against and that they are not fired for declining or canceling unprofitable rides)


The judge (or jury) is the only authority in a court. Each side will be free to call as a witness anyone they choose (including representatives from the DoT, although they likely no expertise in labour law) in stating their respective case.


> I doubt it’s true but someone said pax are saying that pax are being charged more than they show us on rides payment.


People say a lot of things.


----------



## Steven Seagull (Feb 5, 2019)

elelegido said:


> View attachment 668028
> 
> 
> It looks like Uber/Lyft's claims that we are independent contractors could backfire on them again. New class actions are brewing against them on the basis that Uber/Lyft violate antitrust regulations by price fixing the amounts that we charge customers. Now, we all know that we aren't real independent contractors and that pax are really Uber/Lyft's customers. But, the interesting thing about this class action is that its intention is not to claim that we are not IC, but to not let Uber/Lyft have their cake and eat it. It's pure poetry. Having already claimed in courts that we are independent contractors, Uber/Lyft won't be able to now say that we are not. And, if they say we are independent contractors and that the reality is that pax are our customers then Uber/Lyft's control over the prices we charge pax is price fixing - an anti-competitive practice that harms both drivers and pax. The crux of the argument is that Uber/Lyft don't get to say that we are independent and that they are simply our revenue collection agents and at the same time control us by preventing us from competing for business by means of the prices we allegedly charge the pax.
> ...


Most taxi drivers who work using Yellow or Checker, etc. cabs are considered independent contractors as well. But they can set their own fare rates as long as it doesn't go above the taxi companies maximum rate. They are also informed of the riders destination when they are offered a fare and they are not penalized for refusing a fare. I think they can even request a rider going to a specific destination. So what's Uber and Lyft's problem? Shouldn't independent contractors have more control over their work?


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> Would you like it better if you were even more of a contractor and were able to set your prices?


Whether I would like something or not, doesnt make it so. But to answer your question No, I dont want the ability to set my own prices

Setting prices is not an easy thing for businesses, Set it to high and you lose business, Set it to low you go bankrupt, or get into a price war.

I used to do vacation rentals, I would make reservations more than a year in advance for certain, high value, times and places. Primarily for Mardi Gras and other festivals in New Orleans. I set my prices at pretty much what the major hotels would charge. When they filled up and I was the only game in town, my phone would ring

Now I have the permits and commercial insurance to do private rides. I set my price at what Uber would charge

Bottom line I dont do the research and marketing necessary to set Goldilocks prices (not too high, not too low...just right) I just follow the leader, In my past life, the major hotels, today, Uber


----------



## MasterC (Jan 31, 2018)

Nothing is going to change people 
Uber has higher paid lawyers


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

oldfart said:


> I dont want the ability to set my own prices


That's fair enough. When Uber trialled its set-your-own-price feature for CA drivers, it was optional. For those who wanted to let Uber take care of pricing, no problem. And, for those who realised that there was money being left of the table at high-demand places and times and who wanted to [💰Cha-Ching💰] cash in big and improve their profits for the shift, then that was an available option.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

painfreepc said:


> it is not, you still did not set the price, UBER DID, it's simple supply and demand - YOU the driver or the rider had nothing to do with the price.
> 
> the rider has more control than you the driver as the rider can click no and wait for a lower price, as i have done many times, as i have said, i am a driver and a rider,
> 
> in time the price will go down for the rider, you the driver can not make the price go up.


I still think it is 
Ask all the people I have get out of the car if they have more control than I do
In the past I would leave these clowns looking for cheaper at the terminal, I would go off-line and it said no drivers available🤣


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

oldfart said:


> So you are suing Uber to have a court decide that the single test to IC classification is the ability to set your own price'.
> 
> I thought there must be something else, because thats not true


California recently adopted Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5), authored by Asm. Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego).
AB 5 places into law an independent contractor test known as the “ABC” test. In order to be considered an independent contractor, a* worker must satisfy all 3 parts of the test*:

A. The person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity, both in contract and in fact.
B. The person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business.
C. The person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed.

Fail 1 and you are an employee, thems the rulz, What they need to do is void prop 22 and patch any future holes Uber may find to try to ride the loophole again, we know now that bribing and lobbying is a tactic and paying off people to vote or scaring them is another, question is, what's the next move?


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Steven Seagull said:


> Most taxi drivers who work using Yellow or Checker, etc. cabs are considered independent contractors as well. But they can set their own fare rates as long as it doesn't go above the taxi companies maximum rate. They are also informed of the riders destination when they are offered a fare and they are not penalized for refusing a fare. I think they can even request a rider going to a specific destination. So what's Uber and Lyft's problem? Shouldn't independent contractors have more control over their work?


I understood most jurisdictions set the rates for taxi service. I remember when I lived in Washington DC, the rates were written on the taxis

The Taxi service that has the contract at RSW airport, uses a zone system for rates..
The drivers are independent contractors and have no control over their rates


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

MasterC said:


> Nothing is going to change people
> Uber has higher paid lawyers


A lot depends on the plaintiff's lawyers. For example, in the O'Connor vs. Uber case, the drivers' lawyer, Shannon Lies-Riordan, tried to sell her driver clients down the river with a derisory settlement she had hatched up in cahoots with Uber. Her firm would walk away with $30m in fees while each driver would get a couple hundred bucks each.

The judge in that case threw her settlement proposal out as unfair to the drivers. Now, when a judge throws _your own attorney's_ settlement proposal out the window because it's unfair to you, you know that your counsel is trying to shaft you, and with no lube at that.

So it depends on how good these drivers' lawyers are, and how honest / conscientious they are. As we know, lawyer / honest / conscientious are typically _not_ words that are found together, so it will be an uphill struggle all around, no doubt.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

oldfart said:


> The Taxi service that has the contract at RSW airport, uses a zone system for rates..
> The drivers are independent contractors and have no control over their rates


In that case, if this class action is successful, taxi services might also like to sue for their rights to set their rates!


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Screwber driver north said:


> California recently adopted Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5), authored by Asm. Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego).
> AB 5 places into law an independent contractor test known as the “ABC” test. In order to be considered an independent contractor, a* worker must satisfy all 3 parts of the test*:
> 
> A. The person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity, both in contract and in fact.
> ...


FedEx drivers used to own their routes, trucks carry their own insurance. They had no control of rates, they had to wear uniforms and paint their trucks in certain ways

They lost several lawsuits on the matter, The way they reacted was to change their ways.. They now contract with established delivery companies. These contractors own multiple routes and they hire the drivers

Bottom line is the drivers lost and Fedex didnt change the terms of their contracts, except to require their contractors to be corporations or LLCs


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

elelegido said:


> In that case, if this class action is successful, taxi services might also like to sue for their rights to set their rates!


Well... they are transportation companies, remember Uber is "not a transportation company" 🤣 That may make a difference.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

oldfart said:


> FedEx drivers used to own their routes, trucks carry their own insurance. They had no control of rates, they had to wear uniforms and paint their trucks in certain ways


No clue about Fedex complaints, truckers in California are a handful of discontents exploiting the syste, and they ride a technicality that shouldn't be happening, they use a f"ace company" insurance to avoid paying their own, I pay my own insurance for my trucks and I manage to make money, if they can't, go do something else, don't label all the truckers in that handful of scumbags trying to abuse the system.



oldfart said:


> They lost several lawsuits on the matter, The way they reacted was to change their ways.. They now contract with established delivery companies. These contractors own multiple routes and they hire the drivers


They don't hire drivers, they make deals with owner operators and give them insurance discounts to run under their flag, they also broker deals to them, again, that's an exploit to a technicality, loophole closed, time to find another loophole or pay your own stuff.



oldfart said:


> Bottom line is the drivers lost and Fedex didnt change the terms of their contracts, except to require their contractors to be corporations or LLCs


Again, not familiar with the FedEx problem and haven't seen news worth headlines.


----------



## robert2 (Nov 7, 2015)

Escoman said:


> I only keep my account active to participate in all the litigation. I have made more from settlements than profit from driving.Indont even read the suits I just sign up and wait for the checks


Perfect


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Screwber driver north said:


> California recently adopted Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5), authored by Asm. Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego).
> AB 5 places into law an independent contractor test known as the “ABC” test. In order to be considered an independent contractor, a* worker must satisfy all 3 parts of the test*:
> 
> A. The person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity, both in contract and in fact.
> ...


So, you are advocating for part time, minimum wage status and the disappointing employer provided benefits that go hand in hand with part time employment?

Further, accept every offer or be fired for cause.

Log into your midnight til four am assigned shift five days a week or be fired for cause.

Seems the only drivers clamoring for protection from IC status are the unprofitable ones.

Prop. 22 was an improvement over the previous status.

AB5 was gonna be a disaster.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Judge and Jury said:


> Seems the only drivers clamoring for protection from IC status are the unprofitable ones.
> 
> Prop. 22 was an improvement over the previous status.
> 
> AB5 was gonna be a disaster.


People with zero skills or education looking for a free easy meal


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Judge and Jury said:


> Seems the only drivers clamoring for protection from IC status are the unprofitable ones.
> 
> Prop. 22 was an improvement over the previous status.
> 
> AB5 was gonna be a disaster.


People with zero skills or education looking for a free meal


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Judge and Jury said:


> So, you are advocating for part time, minimum wage status and the disappointing employer provided benefits that go hand in hand with part time employment?
> 
> Further, accept every offer or be fired for cause.
> 
> ...


True. But government solutions to problems have rarely been solutions. 

AB5 was _not _designed for the benefit of workers. It was designed for California, so that it could charge and benefit from payroll taxes. CA was sick and tired of Uber paying no payroll taxes, yet the State would have to pay out for Medi-Cal, unemployment, disability etc for Uber's drivers.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

Judge and Jury said:


> So, you are advocating for part time, minimum wage status and the disappointing employer provided benefits that go hand in hand with part time employment?


If they refuse to make everyone an IC, sure, it pays more after you do the math or did you think you were going to be paid less?



Judge and Jury said:


> Further, accept every offer or be fired for cause.


80% of drivers already do this.



Judge and Jury said:


> Log into your midnight til four am assigned shift five days a week or be fired for cause.


IF you are available to do that, sure, why not? they can let you go and pay unemployment, though.



Judge and Jury said:


> Seems the only drivers clamoring for protection from IC status are the unprofitable ones.


Which is the vast majority of drivers, according to Uber's own median.



Judge and Jury said:


> Prop. 22 was an improvement over the previous status.


Prop 22 was a n exit strategy paid for by Uber, see how quickly they removed your ability to make the good money? the money you were making when AB5 was making them take a shit? I remember a huge "I told ya so" post in this website, they won't stop after that, you'll see the bottom of the barrel as soon as they regain all their desperate ants, pre AB5 rates, promos, surges and overall free labor.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

> >>you'll see the bottom of the barrel as soon as they regain all their desperate ants


So the real problem is too many drivers
🤣


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Screwber driver north said:


> California recently adopted Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5), authored by Asm. Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego).
> AB 5 places into law an independent contractor test known as the “ABC” test. In order to be considered an independent contractor, a* worker must satisfy all 3 parts of the test*:
> 
> A. The person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity, both in contract and in fact.
> ...


I knew that about California and nothing there mentions the freedom to set rates. and thats all the plaintiffs want. The way I understand it, If we fail the test, we become employees. and the plaintiffs dont want that


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

wallae said:


> So the real problem is too many drivers
> 🤣


You've seen how the leaks expose them flooding the pool for their nefarious purposes, if they don't want to create a fully IC friendly app, they can pay employees ( I know for a god damn fact they won't last a year that way) so it's not an option for them, they are just playing chicken, they know there is no chance at employee based Uber drivers, it means the end, they just scare you ants into submission to let them get away with it.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

oldfart said:


> I knew that about California and nothing there mentions the freedom to set rates. and thats all the plaintiffs want. The way I understand it, If we fail the test, we become employees. and the plaintiffs dont want that


Again, no clue about who you are talking about.

Who is "them"?


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Screwber driver north said:


> You've seen how the leaks expose them flooding the pool for their nefarious purposes, if they don't want to create a fully IC friendly app, they can pay employees ( I know for a god damn fact they won't last a year that way) so it's not an option for them, they are just playing chicken, they know there is no chance at employee based Uber drivers, it means the end, they just scare you ants into submission to let them get away with it.


Thank god Cheech and Chong have made some money


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

wallae said:


> So the real problem is too many drivers
> 🤣


I think a problem is too few drivers. If there were more drivers, I wouldnt get those 10 mile pickups


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

wallae said:


> Yes it is


no, it's not.


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

oldfart said:


> I think a problem is too few drivers. If there were more drivers, I wouldnt get those 10 mile pickups


Can’t speak for your area but we can sit an hour or two with no ride
Rates don’t fix sitting empty


----------



## wallae (Jun 11, 2018)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> no, it's not.


Is too


----------



## TexChuck (Jan 14, 2020)

elelegido said:


> Now we're Uber's agent?!? That's a new one!
> Uber wouldn't accept that because, if we are its agents, that would mean that Uber is a transportation company.
> 
> Drivers wouldn't accept an argument that we are Uber's agents, because it is we who do the work. It's not as if we go out and find the pax for Uber to drive around.
> ...


Well we don’t fit the Employee or Contractors definition either. So pick 1 and you’ll be wrong no matter what.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Screwber driver north said:


> If they refuse to make everyone an IC, sure, it pays more after you do the math or did you think you were going to be paid less?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So, part time, minimum wage pays more? Is that your position? Ha Ha!

80% of drivers accept every offer? Pulled that statistic from where?

By the way, what is your AR? If low, as with most profitable drivers, why would a gig app company even offer you a job?

In CA, you are not eligible for unemployment if you are fired for cause.

As a delivery driver, I get an adjustment of 100 to over 300 dollars per week cherry picking in the same manner as before prop. 22 was instituted.

Seems you are creating facts and statistics out of thin air to augment your bias.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> no, it's not.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

TexChuck said:


> Well we don’t fit the Employee or Contractors definition either. So pick 1 and you’ll be wrong no matter what.


Correct, we're not employees, IC or agents. 

And that's what's so interesting and novel about this class action. It's the first one to say, "Uber claims we're IC. Clearly we're not IC. So let's have the courts allow us to be true, full IC instead of this mish-mash that's somewhere between employee and IC".

Being a true, full IC would work for me!


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Screwber driver north said:


> Again, no clue about who you are talking about.
> 
> Who is "them"?


I didnt refer to "them" in this post....Now I dont know what or who you are talking about

Or perhaps Im lost here.

elelegido in his(her) original post talked about class action lawsuits to require Uber to give us drivers, as independent contractors, the ability to set our own rates

I was talking about the plaintiffs



wallae said:


> Can’t speak for your area but we can sit an hour or two with no ride
> Rates don’t fix sitting empty


No kidding. I face that problem in the summer. We are a second home/retirement home market. And we are overrun with snowbirds in the winter. Summer not so much

Million dollar condos in buildings like these line the Gulf Coast. from Naples to Fort Myers (roughly 50 miles) If they are 25% occupied in the summer, that would be a lot


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> Correct, we're not employees, IC or agents.
> 
> And that's what's so interesting and novel about this class action. It's the first one to say, "Uber claims we're IC. Clearly we're not IC. So let's have the courts allow us to be true, full IC instead of this mish-mash that's somewhere between employee and IC".
> 
> Being a true, full IC would work for me!


So why dont you put us in touch with the lawyers?

or buy commercial insurance, get the necessary permits and go in business for and by yourself. I did that, I set my own rates and I use Uber to find my new customers


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> True. But government solutions to problems have rarely been solutions.


Gotta say, Social Security & Medicare work for me. Not to mention the air traffic controllers and the Interstate Highway System and much more


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

oldfart said:


> So why dont you put us in touch with the lawyers?


Take another look at my original post. There is a link to the legal group promoting the class action. On that linked page you will find a contact form in which you can register your details with them. They will ask in which state you drive, the dates you drive/drove, which services you drove for etc.


> or buy commercial insurance, get the necessary permits and go in business for and by yourself. I did that, I set my own rates and I use Uber to find my new customers


Yes, setting oneself up as a private hire business is also an option. Drivers are free to do that while campaigning for Uber/Lyft to treat drivers as full IC - the two activities are not mutually exclusive.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

oldfart said:


> Gotta say, Social Security & Medicare work for me. Not to mention the air traffic controllers and the Interstate Highway System and much more


Well, those topics are a whole different rabbit hole! We could spend hours talking about the waste, fraud and corruption in Medicare as well as in Social Security, and how a private enterprise could run both of these a whole lot better.

Better not get into that one!


----------



## stimps90 (Jan 7, 2016)

WHY do you people drive for these arseholes?? The reason why they sign you up on these very "flexible" contracts is so they can legally rip you off.
No you don't have control over pricing. 
Yes they can sign up an unlimited number of drivers
No you can't stop the app tricks they use to fudge the system in their favour
Yes you must pay the rising running costs, no uber won't care. 
Yes uber will continue to basically steal more money from you and the passenger by increasingly blur the clarity of the tranaction between driver and passenger all the time.

This is because they are corporate theives.
Please stop doing it. I quit in May last year and wish I did earlier. Life is great without being robbed everyday.


----------



## UberNeophyte (6 mo ago)

wallae said:


> I would argue that I am in reality an independent contractor.
> I refuse 95% of “my bosses orders” Ride requests.
> How long would I last at Walmart if they told me to clean up the spill pickles on aisle five and I said no 95% of the time?
> 
> ...



The lawsuit is not about an employer or IC, but it's written to pressure Uber and Lyft... if employer they can do as they do but as ICs they need to allow drivers to have a say in trip pricing. Also the rating by riders is a flawed system as well not to mention...being axed for a low completion rate is an act of an employer not a IC situation. 

If you are an IC what is it to anyone? The trip goes to someone else. 

I'm all for being an IC but Uber/Left need to get a clue.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

stimps90 said:


> WHY do you people drive for these arseholes??


Most people drive rideshare to earn money. 

There are also a few "hobbyist" drivers who do it to get out of the house, to meet new people etc.


> The reason why they sign you up on these very "flexible" contracts is so they can legally rip you off.


I wouldn't classify U/L contracts as "flexible". The terms in them are quite rigid, in fact.


> No you don't have control over pricing.


Not news. Indeed, the purpose of this thread is to discuss the fact that we don't have control over pricing, and that there is a new set of class actions planned to challenge this.


> Yes they can sign up an unlimited number of drivers


Again, not news.


> No you can't stop the app tricks they use to fudge the system in their favour


There are a few driver fudges left. There were more fudges but over the years clowns who evidently don't like fudge have published them on the internet for Uber / Lyft to see and patch.


> Yes you must pay the rising running costs, no uber won't care.


Again, not news. Yes, we are responsible for the running costs of our vehicles.


> Yes uber will continue to basically steal more money from you and the passenger by increasingly blur the clarity of the tranaction between driver and passenger all the time.


"Stealing" is taking without consent, which does not apply here to either drivers or pax.


> This is because they are corporate theives.


I can't say if they are thieves or not. I haven't seen any evidence that they have stolen, but I can't rule it out.


> Please stop doing it.


Request denied.


> I quit in May last year and wish I did earlier.


Good for you.


> Life is great without being robbed everyday.


I wouldn't want to get robbed every day either!


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

elelegido said:


> The plaintiff's plan of attack is not to challenge that we are IC, but to accept it and demand that we, as IC, have the right to set our own prices.


How is that an anti-trust matter under the Sherman Act?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

UberNeophyte said:


> ... but as ICs they need to allow drivers to have a say in trip pricing.


No, they don't.
I hire IC's all the time and tell them what I am going to pay them for the job - and they have absolutely no say whatsoever in what I charge the customer.


----------



## UberNeophyte (6 mo ago)

I will add that the lawsuit is designed to either have Uber/Lyft admit they are employers or guilty on all counts hence have drivers more atomeny.


----------



## UberNeophyte (6 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> No, they don't.
> I hire IC's all the time and tell them what I am going to pay them for the job - and they have absolutely no say whatsoever in what I charge the customer.


We don't have a say about what is charged the rider. Hence price fixing. Your ics are not directly involved.


----------



## UberNeophyte (6 mo ago)

UberNeophyte said:


> I will add that the lawsuit is designed to either have Uber/Lyft admit they are employers or guilty on all counts hence have drivers more atomeny.


Drivers are also penalized for not accepting or even canceling a ride.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

UberNeophyte said:


> We don't have a say about what is charged the rider. Hence price fixing. Your ics are not directly involved.


Read the Sherman Act: that's not price fixing. Price fixing requires collusion among competitors.

Both Uber and Lyft can easily demonstrate their the fare structure is based on many different elements including supply & demand, type of service, location, etc... and also demonstrate that Their pricing for a particular service at a particular time in a particular location differs from their competitors in every market they serve.

I just got his text from my cousin, literally 5 minutes ago about a ride just took from the airport to his home: "_While I was waiting for my pre-scheduled ride with Lyft, I switched over to see what it would be with Uber and it was just about double the cost due to a periodic surcharge_."

Case dismissed.


*Here's the basis of the claim, as I understand it:*

The claim is that DRIVERS - as ICs - are violating the anti-trust act because the pricing we charge - as set by the TNC - is 'fixed' among all drivers vying for a specific ride. This came about because of 'upfront pricing' - where the TNC quotes a rider the price for the trip and all of the drivers - who are ICs - are competitors vying for that ride, by definition are charging the same price.

The TNCs argue that, drivers are not competitors for the same ride because each has different expenses and comes to the job from a different location. Or as we call it: "UberSpeak".

I can't recall where, but someone tried to make that case and named TNC drivers as the defendants.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> No, they don't.
> I hire IC's all the time and tell them what I am going to pay them for the job - and they have absolutely no say whatsoever in what I charge the customer.


This is one of the reasons the current "IC" classification needs to thrown in the trash and replaced with an all-new system.


----------



## UberNeophyte (6 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Read the Sherman Act: that's not price fixing. Price fixing requires collusion among competitors.
> 
> Both Uber and Lyft can easily demonstrate their the fare structure is based on many different elements including supply & demand, type of service, location, etc... and also demonstrate that Their pricing for a particular service at a particular time in a particular location differs from their competitors in every market they serve. Case dismissed.


Please read the lawsuit. 


https://towardsjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Uber-Lyft-Complaint.6.20.2022-3.pdf



There Sherman Anti trust law IS NOT alleged.


----------



## UberNeophyte (6 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Read the Sherman Act: that's not price fixing. Price fixing requires collusion among competitors.
> 
> Both Uber and Lyft can easily demonstrate their the fare structure is based on many different elements including supply & demand, type of service, location, etc... and also demonstrate that Their pricing for a particular service at a particular time in a particular location differs from their competitors in every market they serve.
> 
> ...



The Sherman Anti Trust Act is NOT alleged.

Please read the lawsuit. 



https://towardsjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Uber-Lyft-Complaint.6.20.2022-3.pdf


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> How is that an anti-trust matter under the Sherman Act?


I don't see that it would be.

Someone earlier digressed and mentioned McDonalds and fixing prices among its franchisees, which I mentioned would be vertical price fixing in contravention of the Sherman Act.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Both Uber and Lyft can easily demonstrate their the fare structure is based on many different elements including supply & demand, type of service, location, etc... and also demonstrate that Their pricing for a particular service at a particular time in a particular location differs from their competitors in every market they serve.


U and L both claim that they are not principals, though, so they should not have "their pricing for a particular service". That's the whole point of the lawsuit - the ones who should have prices are the individual drivers.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

UberNeophyte said:


> Please read the lawsuit.
> 
> 
> https://towardsjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Uber-Lyft-Complaint.6.20.2022-3.pdf
> ...


There doesn't need to be proof of price-fixing for the govt to take action against companies. They can take action for other reasons as well including "too much control of a market". Too much control has been the reason various mergers have been blocked by the govt.

Years ago the govt wouldn't allow Hostess Snack Cakes to acquire one of their competitors because they said it would give Hostess too much pricing control.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

elelegido said:


> View attachment 668028
> 
> 
> It looks like Uber/Lyft's claims that we are independent contractors could backfire on them again. New class actions are brewing against them on the basis that Uber/Lyft violate antitrust regulations by price fixing the amounts that we charge customers. Now, we all know that we aren't real independent contractors and that pax are really Uber/Lyft's customers. But, the interesting thing about this class action is that its intention is not to claim that we are not IC, but to not let Uber/Lyft have their cake and eat it. It's pure poetry. Having already claimed in courts that we are independent contractors, Uber/Lyft won't be able to now say that we are not. And, if they say we are independent contractors and that the reality is that pax are our customers then Uber/Lyft's control over the prices we charge pax is price fixing - an anti-competitive practice that harms both drivers and pax. The crux of the argument is that Uber/Lyft don't get to say that we are independent and that they are simply our revenue collection agents and at the same time control us by preventing us from competing for business by means of the prices we allegedly charge the pax.
> ...


So, I went back to your op and the link.

Price fixing is when two or more entities agree to maintain prices at a certain level.

What you and the law firm are describing is not price fixing.

Understandable for you but ridiculous for a law firm.

Seems the gig app companies may actually be guilty of price discrimination, not price fixing.

Price discrimination is a violation of federal and CA state law.

Either the law firm is dumbing down the definition for public consumption or they are inept.

By the way, did you notice that at least two of the plaintiffs are totally clueless ants?


----------



## Lord Summerisle (Aug 15, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> Years ago the govt wouldn't allow Hostess Snack Cakes to acquire one of their competitors because they said it would give Hostess would have too much pricing control.


I remember the brutal reign of the Hostess Snack Cake Cartel. The bodies of employees from rival bakeries were regularly found in dark alleys with Twinkies stuffed in their mouths.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> This is one of the reasons the current "IC" classification needs to thrown in the trash and replaced with an all-new system.


Is that a euphemism for "law" lol

Congress stopped doing its job years ago (when the cost of getting re-elected meant all their time and focus is now spent fund-raising instead of legislating. They've collectively decided to just let the supreme court figure things out since the justices don't have to worry about getting re-elected.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

UberNeophyte said:


> Please read the lawsuit.
> 
> 
> https://towardsjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Uber-Lyft-Complaint.6.20.2022-3.pdf
> ...


I didn't say it was... the OP said the suit was based on anti-trust. The anti-trust laws are found in the Sherman Act.


----------



## TeaintheD (Jul 11, 2021)

wallyruss1958 said:


> Your assertion that you could not accept 95% of requests in a word is BULLSHIT!
> Last month I started screening out unprofitable rides and my acceptance rate fell. I was promptly notified by Uber Support that if it fell anymore I would be subject to termination.


Yeah, that's not true. My acceptance rate is 40%


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Judge and Jury said:


> So, I went back to your op and the link.
> 
> Price fixing is when two or more entities agree to maintain prices at a certain level.
> 
> ...


The claim is that the TNCs foster price fixing by not permitting their ICs to set their own pricing, but instead, quote riders a price of the TNCs choosing and not permitting their ICs to determine the price - which leaves the ICs - who are competitors - no choice but to participate in a price fixing scheme with other drivers. 

(see the bottom portion of this post: New Driver Anti-Competition Class Actions Against Uber...)


----------



## Midwester (6 mo ago)

My very rudimentary understanding of this case (I had to look at some articles to make some sense of it) is that the price fixing is based off the idea that by Uber controlling the prices, drivers are denied the opportunity to offer _lower_ fares. Essentially, the normal economic forces that would drive competition are suppressed by Uber. The price is consideted set, or fixed, precisely because no other entity but Uber themself exerts influence over it.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Ted Fink said:


> MAJOR ISSUE HERE: If, for some crazy reason, Uber ends up allowing drivers to set their own prices (LOLZ, but roll with me here)... it would be a race to the bottom. Riders would choose the cheapest driver they could get at any one time,


That would not happen. If by some chance driver's were able to set their own pricing, the TNC's computers would simply adjust the total fare to the rider to be the same as it was.

Driver A accepts ride at TNC's quoted price of $10 uber puts the request through to the rider at $10.​​Driver B accepts ride at $7, $3 less than driver A Uber puts the request through to the rider at $10 (and pockets the other $3)​


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Judge and Jury said:


> So, I went back to your op and the link.
> 
> Price fixing is when two or more entities agree to maintain prices at a certain level.
> 
> What you and the law firm are describing is not price fixing.


As Michael Cleveland said, Uber forces drivers to fix prices by forcing their prices on the driver pool. Price fixing is still price fixing if one of the other parties is coerced into it as a condition of doing business.

To use the McDonalds example someone else mentioned - if McDonalds forces a franchisee into selling at the prices McDonalds wants by telling him that unless he agrees then they will stop giving him access to McDonalds products, then that's price fixing.

The same applies to Uber - Uber refuses to give access to the app unless drivers agree to let Uber dictate the prices.


> Understandable for you but ridiculous for a law firm.


Gee... that's not too patronising! 


> Seems the gig app companies may actually be guilty of price discrimination, not price fixing.


Of course, Uber and Lyft do price discriminate. As to the price fixing, that's what the courts will decide upon.


> Either the law firm is dumbing down the definition for public consumption or they are inept.


That's what Uber's hoping, I suppose. But I wouldn't be so quick to write off the lawsuit.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

wallyruss1958 said:


> Your assertion that you could not accept 95% of requests in a word is BULLSHIT!
> Last month I started screening out unprofitable rides and my acceptance rate fell. I was promptly notified by Uber Support that if it fell anymore I would be subject to termination.


The notification is nothing but nonsense. Uber was forced to change its policy after the Lis-Riordin lawsuit so that a driver could not denied access to the app based on acceptance rate alone. You CAN be tossed for a high cancellation rate, as Uber rightfully (and successfully in court) claims the cancellations hurt their business.

So, if what you mean by 'screening unprofitable rides' is actually accepting rides to see the details and then cancelling those you don't want, then yes, you can get unplugged for that.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Midwester said:


> My very rudimentary understanding of this case (I had to look at some articles to make some sense of it) is that the price fixing is based off the idea that by Uber controlling the prices, drivers are denied the opportunity to offer _lower_ fares.


Lower fares than what, though? The whole contention of the lawsuit is that there should not be a dictation of price by Uber, therefore there should be no fixed price that drivers could want to be lower than. What's being demanded by the plaintiffs is a free market without artificial price controls set by a controlling entities.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The claim is that the TNCs foster price fixing by not permitting their ICs to set their own pricing, but instead, quote riders a price of the TNCs choosing and not permitting their ICs to determine the price - which leaves the ICs - who are competitors - no choice but to participate in a price fixing scheme with other drivers.
> 
> (see the bottom portion of this post: New Driver Anti-Competition Class Actions Against Uber...)


Yes.

That is not price fixing as defined by federal and CA state law.

Lawyer's PR personnel can claim whatever they choose.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The claim is that the TNCs foster price fixing by not permitting their ICs to set their own pricing, but instead, quote riders a price of the TNCs choosing and not permitting their ICs to determine the price - which leaves the ICs - who are competitors - no choice but to participate in a price fixing scheme with other drivers.
> 
> (see the bottom portion of this post: New Driver Anti-Competition Class Actions Against Uber...)


The gig app is setting the price. The gig app is not colluding with other apps to set the price. That would be price fixing.

I am not stating that the lawsuit does not have merit.

I am stating that if the law firm pursues a price fixing argument, they are gonna lose.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Ritter said:


> It seems like people get very upset because Uber is not what they want it to be.
> 
> Rideshare drivers are neither employees nor independent contractors. They are, well, rideshare drivers. A third classification that didn't exist a generation ago and does not fit into either of the two binary options.
> 
> ...


You are right about most of your points, but not all.
First, in the US you are working either as an employee or as IC/sole proprietor/owner, etc. There is no 3rd option - yet. Only Congress can create that. The difference to the worker is what entity is responsible for paying certain taxes and benefits. Under the FLSA, employers are required to provide certain benefits (unemployment, half the employees SSDI, overtime, etc.). The fun part is that the government does not initially determine worker classification - the employer does. The government only gets involved when someone files a challenge to classification with either the IRS or the Dept of Labor. YES, labor and employers in this country deserve to have a new classification of "Independent Employee" or "Contractor Employee" or something like that - and that requires Congress to update the FLSA. Lazy ass congress-people do not want to piss off their biggest corporate donors - so it hasn't gotten done and likely won't until just before hell freezes over.

Second, I know everyone thinks we're free... but we're not quite as free as you might think. The FLSA specifically does not allow a worker to waive any of the rights or benefits granted them under the FLSA. That was congress' way of preventing exploitation of labor and making the federal minimum wage unenforceable.

Third, yes, we make our own choices. But those choices have different meaning and impact for different individuals. Part of Congress' job is to protect all citizens from both government and corporate malfeasance - in other-words, not just to protect the well off among us or the brightest, but also the weakest, poorest and dumbest. To a certain extent, Government tires to make laws that prevent people from being their own worst enemy. Seatbelt laws come to mind - in fact all traffic laws, for that matter. In this country, you are not even allowed to kill yourself. : )


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Judge and Jury said:


> The gig app is setting the price. The gig app is not colluding with other apps to set the price. That would be price fixing.


Yes, the plaintiffs are not accusing the gig companies of colluding with each other. The accusation is that the price fixing is carried out by each gig company individually - fixing prices for their respective contractor drivers, leaving the drivers no choice but to go along with the prices fixed by the company.


> I am stating that if the law firm pursues a price fixing argument, they are gonna lose.


Time will tell.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Judge and Jury said:


> The gig app is setting the price. The gig app is not colluding with other apps to set the price. That would be price fixing.
> I am not stating that the lawsuit does not have merit.
> I am stating that if the law firm pursues a price fixing argument, they are gonna lose.


That's not what the suit is claiming.

Drivers are competitors to each other. 
Because they use an app that sets the price they can offer a rider, drivers are therefore in violation of price fixing regulations of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. 

The suit may fail, but's it's really a brilliant argument.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The claim is that the TNCs foster price fixing by not permitting their ICs to set their own pricing, but instead, quote riders a price of the TNCs choosing and not permitting their ICs to determine the price - which leaves the ICs - who are competitors - no choice but to participate in a price fixing scheme with other drivers.
> 
> (see the bottom portion of this post: New Driver Anti-Competition Class Actions Against Uber...)


A few years ago a video surfaced of some guy supposedly "directing" other drivers to turn off their apps at Dulles Airport in order to trigger surges. In addition to some complaints from pax there was a little bit of laughable talk of supposed violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act by the drivers.

You can bet your ass that Dara would be EXTREMELY opposed to any type of anti-trust action against the drivers because it would open up a disastrous can of worms that would ultimately bring down Uber's entire business model and business itself.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

elelegido said:


> Yes, the plaintiffs are not accusing the gig companies of colluding with each other. The accusation is that the price fixing is carried out by each gig company individually - fixing prices for their respective contractor drivers, leaving the drivers no choice but to go along with the prices fixed by the company.
> Time will tell.


That is not price fixing.

Possibly price discrimination as defined by federal and CA state law in the same statutes that define price fixing.

Google is your friend.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> A few years ago a video surfaced of some guy supposedly "directing" other drivers to turn off their apps at Dulles Airport in order to trigger surges. In addition to some complaints from pax there was a little bit of laughable talk of supposed violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act by the drivers.
> 
> You can bet your ass that Dara would be EXTREMELY opposed to any type of anti-trust action against the drivers because it would open up a disastrous can of worms that would ultimately bring down Uber's entire business model and business itself.


I recall that situation. Uber wnet to some airports and watched to see what was going on. The participants got booted from the driver app for violating the driver agreement terms (manipulating the app). The company would indeed not want to have to deal with conspiring to create a price fixing environment.

All of this because they do not want to forced to move away from the supply & demand model they use. It's all so avoidable. If only Kalanick had thouight about creating a fair system that could still be profitable.

The courts have already determined that MAP (minimum advertised pricing) is enforceable. (It's why we don't see retailers lowering prices on high demand, highly visible brand items)

If the TNC's model were to set MAP pricing for each ride (ie, a price below that, the driver would not be able to offer the rider)... then a driver could accept a trip knowing what the map pricing is and offering to the ride for whatever they want... the TNC cold tell the rider Joe Jetta has offered to do your trip for $X, "accept or decline or counter". That puts the driver in control of pricing but sets a floor below which a driver cannot make an offer and allows riders to decline an offer and hope they get a better offer from another driver.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Judge and Jury said:


> That is not price fixing.


Time will tell.


> Possibly price discrimination as defined by federal and CA state law in the same statutes that define price fixing.


You've already said that.


> Google is your friend.


It's useful for facts and figures, but for interpretation of legal matters, not so much.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> If the TNC's model were to set MAP pricing for each ride (ie, a price below that, the driver would not be able to offer the rider)... then a driver could accept a trip knowing what the map pricing is and offering to the ride for whatever they want... the TNC cold tell the rider Joe Jetta has offered to do your trip for $X, "accept or decline or counter".


Doesn't MAP apply to the principals in a given industry? I.e. Sony, an electronics manufacturer, can specify MAPs for its products advertised by electronics resellers. However, Uber claims not to be a principal in the rideshare industry. Heck, it claims that it isn't even in the transportation industry at all. "We're a technology company, not a transportation company". So I don't see how it could legitimately set a MAP for a service in an industry in which it (allegedly) does not operate.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I recall that situation. Uber wnet to some airports and watched to see what was going on. The participants got booted from the driver app for violating the driver agreement terms (manipulating the app). The company would indeed not want to have to deal with conspiring to create a price fixing environment.


Admittedly I didn't look very hard but so far I haven't been able to find any info about drivers being fired for that. Do you have a link?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

elelegido said:


> Doesn't MAP apply to the principals in a given industry? I.e. Sony, an electronics manufacturer, can specify MAPs for its products advertised by electronics resellers. However, Uber claims not to be a principal in the rideshare industry. Heck, it claims that it isn't even in the transportation industry at all. "We're a technology company, not a transportation company". So I don't see how it could legitimately set a MAP for a service in an industry in which it (allegedly) does not operate.


No, MAP pricing is perfectly legal for manufacturers of goods and services - and the manufacturer/supplier can terminate a distributor/retailer for selling below the company's MAP price. 

MAP pricing is why we as consumers see identical highly visible products sold at basically the same price everywhere.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Is that a euphemism for "law" lol
> 
> Congress stopped doing its job years ago (when the cost of getting re-elected meant all their time and focus is now spent fund-raising instead of legislating. They've collectively decided to just let the supreme court figure things out since the justices don't have to worry about getting re-elected.


Plenty of those fundraising dollars come from corporate "donors" who want to make sure that the current bad system stays in place.

As far as the term "law" is concerned I don't think it really applies here because there doesn't seem to be any laws governing IC status, just a bunch of wishy-washy vague "guidelines" that create more questions than answers.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> Admittedly I didn't look very hard but so far I haven't been able to find any info about drivers being fired for that. Do you have a link?


Long time ago... I've no idea if a few drivers being kicked off the app would have made the news. But here's article about who the manipulation was being done, along with Uber & Lyft's comments about drivers manipulating the app.








Uber, Lyft drivers manipulate fares at some airports, causing artificial price surges


ARLINGTON, Va. (Sam Sweeney, WJLA) — Every night, several times a night, Uber and Lyft drivers at Reagan National Airport simultaneously turn off their ride share apps for a minute or two to trick the app into thinking there are no drivers available---creating a price surge. When the fare goes...




abc6onyourside.com


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Long time ago... I've no idea if a few drivers being kicked off the app would have made the news. But here's article about who the manipulation was being done, along with Uber & Lyft's comments about drivers manipulating the app.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've seen that story on the news on more than one occasion but I haven't seen any follow-up stories about Uber actually firing any drivers involved. I'm guessing Uber wanted the story to go away quickly and thus they probably didn't fire anyone involved or if they did fire anyone they used another pretext.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> I've seen that story on the news on more than one occasion but I haven't seen any follow-up stories about Uber actually firing any drivers involved. I'm guessing Uber wanted the story to go away quickly and thus they probably didn't fire anyone involved or if they did fire anyone they used another pretext.


Well, first, you can't fire someone who isn't an employee. lol - so we wouldn't have seen that!
But I doubt Uber had anything to do with keeping this out of the news. 
More like the news kept it out of the news because it wasn't news. 

What interest does the public have in hearing that a gadzillion dollar corporation with 50,000 employees worldwide ended their relationship with a half dozen independent contractors who broke the terms of their agreement by manipulating the company's software to the detriment of consumers and to line their own pockets?

The only people who care about stuff like that are ambulance chasing attorneys and rideshare drivers. (no offense intended to any ambulance chasing attorneys here who drive Uber)


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> Plenty of those fundraising dollars come from corporate "donors" who want to make sure that the current bad system stays in place.
> 
> As far as the term "law" is concerned I don't think it really applies here because there doesn't seem to be any laws governing IC status, just a bunch of wishy-washy vague "guidelines" that create more questions than answers.


The 'law' always applies - it just depends on a court wants to apply it. But yes, from the very fact that it's the employer who gets to determine a worker's classification - to the IRS and DoL's 'employee' tests to determine 'control', it can be very difficult to make a determination of classification when the parties each side can make pretty solid and convincing arguments. (thank you congress)


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> I've seen that story on the news on more than one occasion but I haven't seen any follow-up stories about Uber actually firing any drivers involved. I'm guessing Uber wanted the story to go away quickly and thus they probably didn't fire anyone involved or if they did fire anyone they used another pretext.


For me it comes down to I talked to someone I know who heard from someone he knew who knew someone who got kicked off the app. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

Our guess (my driver friends here at the time) was that Uber told them they were caught manipulating the app and they were kicked off for the specific reason of breaking the Uber Driver Agreement along with low acceptance rate and canceled rides.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> Take another look at my original post. There is a link to the legal group promoting the class action. On that linked page you will find a contact form in which you can register your details with them. They will ask in which state you drive, the dates you drive/drove, which services you drove for etc.
> Yes, setting oneself up as a private hire business is also an option. Drivers are free to do that while campaigning for Uber/Lyft to treat drivers as full IC - the two activities are not mutually exclusive.


I missed that, thanks


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The 'law' always applies - it just depends on a court wants to apply it. But yes, from the very fact that it's the employer who gets to determine a worker's classification - to the IRS and DoL's 'employee' tests to determine 'control', it can be very difficult to make a determination of classification when the parties each side can make pretty solid and convincing arguments. (thank you congress)


The IRS will take information from an employer and decide how that employer should treat their workers


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> Well, those topics are a whole different rabbit hole! We could spend hours talking about the waste, fraud and corruption in Medicare as well as in Social Security, and how a private enterprise could run both of these a whole lot better.
> 
> Better not get into that one!


I dont want to go down that rabbit hole either, at least not in this thread

So Ill only say this...
I disagree, There is as much waste fraud and corruption , not to mention greed in corporations... maybe more than in government

Its interesting to note (at least to me) that we never tire of accusing the Uber Corporation of waste fraud and corruption (and greed) and you want the government (through the judicial branch) to set them straight. Something seems wrong there

Ok ... Im done, thats all I got


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

Judge and Jury said:


> So, part time, minimum wage pays more? Is that your position? Ha Ha!


It's not my position, it's reality and if math escapes your reach, add everything they are supposed to pay to that minimum wage, including my car's use (that's 57 cents per mile, deadmiles paid), it's damage, insurance, unemployment, medical, ROFL, you have no idea how much MORE you would be making as an employee and the tsunami of bills that would flood Uber.



Judge and Jury said:


> 80% of drivers accept every offer? Pulled that statistic from where?


That was a done a while back, the morons used it to measure the median pay to talk about how you would become rich driving for Uber, I dunno if it was 70 or 80%



Judge and Jury said:


> By the way, what is your AR? If low, as with most profitable drivers, why would a gig app company even offer you a job?


Rofl, it's complicated and would be hard for you to understand, my AR was 98% but I was a magician.

Son, I am the original cherry picker of Rideshare, cherry pickers are a minority ergo the 70-80% I wrote.

The question is, why the hell would I want to work for Uber? but entering the context and situation of how you asked, I would answer, they can let me go and pay unemployment, life doesn't end after Uber.



Judge and Jury said:


> In CA, you are not eligible for unemployment if you are fired for cause.


Cherry picking wouldn't be allowed under employment, duh.



Judge and Jury said:


> As a delivery driver, I get an adjustment of 100 to over 300 dollars per week cherry picking in the same manner as before prop. 22 was instituted.


That's fine I used to make 300-400 a day in half your rate and without any of your CA surges or even promos yet somehow you see me support this, cause that's what Uber deserves and that's what's right, playing with the system is a risk to your account and wastes everyone's time, best everything is paid correctly and everything runs smoothly.



Judge and Jury said:


> Seems you are creating facts and statistics out of thin air to augment your bias.


If the vast majority of people would cherry pick, there wouldn't be strikes nor the vast majority of people would want this change, cherry picking can only feed so many and not everyone has low morals to do what it takes to make money cherry picking, dunno what your definition of cherry picking is if you deliver since what I think you can do at best is skip trips as they mark how much you earn already, lol, real cherry picking is harder than that, requires a special set of skills and mischief.


----------



## ZippityDoDa (9 mo ago)

Rideshare drv said:


> Can any body from this forum explain to me why in the heck you guys keep driving for this apps?
> as a former rideshare driver i have submitted multiple points of view with plain and simple clear facts
> on how you actually are loosing money in the long run as a driver, but yet you people continue driving and debating with similar questions. just to put it simple a half is a half and what do i mean by this quote?
> it means if you buy a pie and you ask give me half of pie you will get exactly half of pie. not a quarter not 3 quarters of the pie but a plain and simple HALF OF THE PIE. the same rule applies to the answers to your questions .
> ...



You’re right. A driver is a slave to the app. It’s set up for us folks that like to drive (I’ve always liked driving just to get out, think, relax, etc.) And are (can be) addicted to the app as it’s always pulling one in with its little surges and promotions (like a video game addiction).

I’ve been Uber driving for way too long because of this but also initially because it’s (I thought) a good side income while starting different online businesses. But what I keep finding is I just drive more and more due to the addiction and keeping up with the faster and faster maintenance therefore needed. On top of the maintenance there’s those additional car accidents where people rear end me or I run into some damn object in a dark parking lot that a customer says they’re in! Or this last time cuz I was stupid enough to listen to the guy at Discount tire correct me and say it’s okay to drive on a spare tire until the new proper matching tire comes in (he’d told me I could drive 50 miles, stop rest and then drive more on it. I’d then have to take money out of my pocket for the Uber rent car. (Car was in shop 2 months because of wZiting on parts).

It’s a crazy racket. Always more expenses than one would think that completely takes away from that job of driving individuals at the times you choose (nights) and leaves one stressed and poor with no social life or coworkers to talk to.

Yes, much better to get “any” other job with benefits.

For instance: It drives me nuts seeing other drivers jump out of their cars and load pax luggage for them at the airport like they’re a baggage handler. Baggage handlers (at the airport) are paid to baggage handle just like those shuttle bus workers. BUT a driver for Uber is not! We did not sign up for that. If you hurt your back picking up someone’s luggage (and you can simply pinch a nerve) you’re not getting workers comp or sick pay. That pax isn’t going to take care of your doctor bills or sick pay - the driver is on their own. So much for that extra tip you think you’re getting!

Yeah, I “thought” I enjoyed this driving gig but in the end it’s such a scam on those of us who simply like driving and can be sooo addicted to an app of surges and promotional bonuses to do so many rides per 3.5 days.


----------



## injunred73 (10 mo ago)

elelegido said:


> View attachment 668028
> 
> 
> A lot of states dislike Uber and Lyft, not the people but the government of those states. But Uber/Lyft are too popular and powerful to shut down and people rely too heavily on them. It's all about the people that use the services. The pax don't complain to the government (much) because the rates are low, and i've had many pax say they accept "random" service and prices because it's affordable to them. I agree the rates need to rise so drivers can get a bigger share BUT if its a pricing free for all expect people to complain in mass and expect increased government regulation. Uber/L survive because they keep pax happy.
> ...


----------



## Inspector Gadget 56 (Feb 22, 2020)

elelegido said:


> View attachment 668028
> 
> 
> It looks like Uber/Lyft's claims that we are independent contractors could backfire on them again. New class actions are brewing against them on the basis that Uber/Lyft violate antitrust regulations by price fixing the amounts that we charge customers. Now, we all know that we aren't real independent contractors and that pax are really Uber/Lyft's customers. But, the interesting thing about this class action is that its intention is not to claim that we are not IC, but to not let Uber/Lyft have their cake and eat it. It's pure poetry. Having already claimed in courts that we are independent contractors, Uber/Lyft won't be able to now say that we are not. And, if they say we are independent contractors and that the reality is that pax are our customers then Uber/Lyft's control over the prices we charge pax is price fixing - an anti-competitive practice that harms both drivers and pax. The crux of the argument is that Uber/Lyft don't get to say that we are independent and that they are simply our revenue collection agents and at the same time control us by preventing us from competing for business by means of the prices we allegedly charge the pax.
> ...


JUSTICE ? @ UBER , R U HIGH. How about a class action civil lawsuit for LOSS OF WAGES DUE TO GROSS CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE , FAILURE TO PAY PROMOTIONAL FEES FOR RIDES AFTER 7PM ON FRI & SAT. , Or paying drivers the cancellation fee YOU promised to pay after sending me 16 miles away and made me wait 33 minutes only to be told to cancel and I would receive a fee . I did Cancel as instructed 2 minutes later just to be sure you would not try to screw me as you have so many times in the past. I did not receive the fee even after contacting several of your useless reps who are as clueless as the idiots who designed the algorithms for the app. It is time for all drivers to join together as one ,contact your local Department of Labor, File Complaints, then join a class action Lawsuit and Make UBER pay us for all the times they stole from us plus for all the calls they made some excuse up to avoid paying us, to say nothing of price setting or sending us to sit in somebodies driveway for over 30 minutes idling away gas that cost over 5 $ per gal, and their GPS is so bad. Flood every Social Media site with your complaints , Hit them right in their wallet, like they did to us .Boycott Driving as Much As possible especially during rush hours where they whack us the hardest. Take their $$$ ans show them we are in control we are strong and our numbers speak for themselves. Take CONTROL ANDPUT UBER IN THEIR PLACE. I owned several taxi companies in my State and never did I send a driver to an address more than 5 minutes early, its rude and stupid because it makes the client feel rushed, the driver pissed off and now the ride is not going to go as well as it would have if Uber had a clue as to how to run a transportation business while building public support and acceptance . This in turn would promote great public relations ,UBER would thrive drivers could make more money and be happy doing it.


----------



## Lord Summerisle (Aug 15, 2015)

Inspector Gadget 56 said:


> JUSTICE ? @ UBER , R U HIGH. How about a class action civil lawsuit for LOSS OF WAGES DUE TO GROSS CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE , FAILURE TO PAY PROMOTIONAL FEES FOR RIDES AFTER 7PM ON FRI & SAT. , Or paying drivers the cancellation fee YOU promised to pay after sending me 16 miles away and made me wait 33 minutes only to be told to cancel and I would receive a fee . I did Cancel as instructed 2 minutes later just to be sure you would not try to screw me as you have so many times in the past. I did not receive the fee even after contacting several of your useless reps who are as clueless as the idiots who designed the algorithms for the app. It is time for all drivers to join together as one ,contact your local Department of Labor, File Complaints, then join a class action Lawsuit and Make UBER pay us for all the times they stole from us plus for all the calls they made some excuse up to avoid paying us, to say nothing of price setting or sending us to sit in somebodies driveway for over 30 minutes idling away gas that cost over 5 $ per gal, and their GPS is so bad. Flood every Social Media site with your complaints , Hit them right in their wallet, like they did to us .Boycott Driving as Much As possible especially during rush hours where they whack us the hardest. Take their $$$ ans show them we are in control we are strong and our numbers speak for themselves. Take CONTROL ANDPUT UBER IN THEIR PLACE. I owned several taxi companies in my State and never did I send a driver to an address more than 5 minutes early, its rude and stupid because it makes the client feel rushed, the driver pissed off and now the ride is not going to go as well as it would have if Uber had a clue as to how to run a transportation business while building public support and acceptance . This in turn would promote great public relations ,UBER would thrive drivers could make more money and be happy doing it.


I'd like to see a lawsuit for unpaid miles driven to the pickup.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

UberNeophyte said:


> Drivers are also penalized for not accepting or even canceling a ride.


Not in all markets, not in mine


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> That would not happen. If by some chance driver's were able to set their own pricing, the TNC's computers would simply adjust the total fare to the rider to be the same as it was.
> 
> Driver A accepts ride at TNC's quoted price of $10 uber puts the request through to the rider at $10.​​Driver B accepts ride at $7, $3 less than driver A Uber puts the request through to the rider at $10 (and pockets the other $3)​


What you say is probably right, but that wont stop a race to the bottom, If driver B always bids less than drover A 
Pretty soon Driver A will either walk away from the gig, or he will try to under bid driver B 
And dont forget driver C is always there to underbid A and B... Thats what a rece to the bottom looks like, and as you nsay Uber dosent care,, They are charging the customer $10 no matter what


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

If I can cut through all the tangents and unrelated posts I think what I see as the basis of this class action is that Uber is guilty of price fixing and they need to stop that so we are free to compete with other drivers on the basis of price for rides. But thats not what Price Fixing is 

Price fixing is an agreement (written, verbal, or inferred from conduct) among competitors to raise, lower, maintain, or stabilize prices or price levels. Generally, the antitrust laws require that each company establish prices and other competitive terms on its own, without agreeing with a competitor. When purchasers make choices about what products and services to buy, they expect that the price has been determined on the basis of supply and demand, not by an agreement among competitors.

Uber is free to set prices on their own and I think thats what their doing. To find Uber guilty of price fixing you need to find evidence that Uber and Lyft have conspired to fix prices the customer pays not what they pay us. Which might be the case, but it has nothing to do with us


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

oldfart said:


> What you say is probably right, but that wont stop a race to the bottom, If driver B always bids less than drover A
> Pretty soon Driver A will either walk away from the gig, or he will try to under bid driver B
> And dont forget driver C is always there to underbid A and B... Thats what a rece to the bottom looks like, and as you nsay Uber dosent care,, They are charging the customer $10 no matter what


This is demand based, race to the bottom happens when you have a person who cannot compete with the other at all, that person starts the downward spiral, this you learn from Lyft v Uber, in the end they agreed to a price, I'm sure drivers will agree to a bottom of the barrel pricing, informally.


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

oldfart said:


> Excellent post and I agree completely, but for tax purposes agents I think have to be either employees or independent contractors. There is no separate classifications under the law


The agency issue is almost as big as the employee vs IC issue. Since its inception, Uber has had both drivers and riders agree that Uber is not responsible for whatever happens when using the service. This not only affects drivers and passengers but the public as well. While courts have looked askance at that clause when finding liability Uber&Lyft's recent prop 22 and Massachusetts' ballot proposal ruling looked closely at buried clauses that would insure that those company's drivers were not agents and therefore no liability would extend to them for actions or circumstances that left harm to those involved.
As we have learned over the last 10 years is that the rideshare realm is incredibly risky resulting in inujuries, deaths, property damage and economic hardship that went beyond just drivers and passengers. These clauses banning agent reliability caused both of these cases to void the related actions (prop 22 & Mass. proposition).
While Uber/Lyft has tried to defend themselves with limited insurance coverage, courts have found for far larger liability amounts in serious cases. One of the essential flaws in the rideshare model is to attach a $multi-billion corporation to the world's riskiest service. Across America you can see how the accident attorney sector is on to this opportunity with rideshare accident websites and many formes of advertising.
So are they liable for rapes and assaults? Yes
Are they liable for injuries and deaths? Yes
Are they liable for Fraud on the part of workers? Yes
Are they liable for VAT taxes in the UK. Yes
It goes on, 2022 Q2 financials are due out in about 3 weeks. It will be very interesting to see how the recent litigation losses affect the balance sheet.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

Rideshare drv said:


> Can any body from this forum explain to me why in the heck


...you keep producing copypasta?


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

KevinH said:


> We should support work and pay schemes that keep people off welfare


Our household income with my rideshare and delivery income has qualified our household for at least $600 in food assistance (AKA SNAP) for 5 of the past 6 years.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

KevinH said:


> You are currently in America's riskiest line of work, operating a motor vehicle. This accounts for the highest rate of on-the-job injuries and on-the-job-deaths in the U.S..


Citation?


----------



## injunred73 (10 mo ago)

ZippityDoDa said:


> You’re right. A driver is a slave to the app. It’s set up for us folks that like to drive (I’ve always liked driving just to get out, think, relax, etc.) And are (can be) addicted to the app as it’s always pulling one in with its little surges and promotions (like a video game addiction).
> 
> I’ve been Uber driving for way too long because of this but also initially because it’s (I thought) a good side income while starting different online businesses. But what I keep finding is I just drive more and more due to the addiction and keeping up with the faster and faster maintenance therefore needed. On top of the maintenance there’s those additional car accidents where people rear end me or I run into some damn object in a dark parking lot that a customer says they’re in! Or this last time cuz I was stupid enough to listen to the guy at Discount tire correct me and say it’s okay to drive on a spare tire until the new proper matching tire comes in (he’d told me I could drive 50 miles, stop rest and then drive more on it. I’d then have to take money out of my pocket for the Uber rent car. (Car was in shop 2 months because of wZiting on parts).
> 
> ...


 Interesting that you brought up the addiction side of Uber. Because that is what I experience whenever I do go out for a full day it's like an addiction like I must reach a certain amount of money and how much can I get from each ride and I watch the money slowly accumulate. And you think to yourself oh wow at a regular job you would have would make a set amount of money. But driving Uber you can set a goal and just keep driving until you reach it within reason. It's kind of like pizza delivery delivery which I do work for a company doing pizza delivery part time outside of Uber. I start my shift and I watch my delivery fees add up and my tips set up as I get closer to a nightly goal and that kind of has some excitement to it. But searches and promotions and Surges Dust further push you to want to Chase the rabbit and get that additional Almighty dollar. Honestly if you catch surges and you're out during the right times when it's busy it's busy and you do get a promotion ocean you can make a decent amount of money doing Uber but but I personally cannot rely on it as a sole form of income because yes there's no consistency.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

injunred73 said:


> but but I personally cannot rely on it as a sole form of income because yes there's no consistency.


I recommend considering this:









How To Pay Yourself as a Business Owner


How you pay yourself as a business owner depends on the type of business you own and operate. Learn how to pay yourself from an LLC, S corp, and more.




www.thebalance.com


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

KevinH said:


> You are currently in America's riskiest line of work,


Well, perhaps in the top 25 technically, but they specified "delivery" so maybe that's extra risk from being hit by vehicle during the pedestrian parts of delivery itself.

But it's quite surprising to me to find jobs like grounds maintenance workers and mechanics in the top 25.









Top 25 most dangerous jobs in the United States


Roofers, power lineman, construction jobs are among the most dangerous jobs in the United States based on data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries and studied by AdvisorSmith.




www.ishn.com


----------



## injunred73 (10 mo ago)

Heisenburger said:


> I recommend considering this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 It's a really good article although just my opinion it doesn't seem to apply to Uber. My reasoning is that Uber really isn't being a business owner. As others have mentioned it's a hybrid. Not quite independent contractor not quite employee. Honestly I typically don't have to pay taxes or very little because of write-off I am sure that mileage and anything else that I can write-off along with mileage Brings me down solo taxwise that I pay very little in taxes so I can't really complain about the tax part. Now getting down to you can only make as much as Uber allows you to make As you have no control over what you charge. Gas oil changes tires maintenance those are all things I've take into consideration and they do come out of the bottom line but basically most everything I make except for those expenses is mine. While the article does address different forms of businesses and while legally illegally you operate as a business owner that's only on paper with Uber. You can't advertise for trips you can only do the trips through their app and at whatever rate they tell you otherwise you after decline the work.


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

injunred73 said:


> It's a really good article although just my opinion it doesn't seem to apply to Uber. My reasoning is that Uber really isn't being a business owner.


Seems like you may have entirely missed the point of how to pay yourself a fixed (steady) income regardless of how much your sole proprietorship business earns above that amount.


----------



## Lightatendofthetunnel (6 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> What interest does the public have in hearing that a gadzillion dollar corporation with 50,000 employees worldwide ended their relationship with a half dozen independent contractors who broke the terms of their agreement *by manipulating the company's software to the detriment of consumers and to line their own pockets*?


 Doesn't Uber manipulate the software to the detriment of riders and drivers in order to line their own pockets? Why would they have a problem with drivers manipulating the software to line their own pockets? Uber just stopped drivers from being able to use destination filter to stay in a hot area. Drivers, at least in DC, can no longer change the destination arrival time.


----------



## Sonoran Uber (Feb 15, 2020)

Nats121 said:


> Any time you allow drivers to set their own rates there's the risk that some zombie or desperate ant may be willing to give a ride for next to nothing. But by all indications that I saw just opposite happened in California. In CA it was a race to the TOP, so much so that Uber pulled the plug on it as soon as they could.
> 
> Unlike the new Radar system the CA drivers' pings were 15 seconds and included maps which enabled them to cherrypick effectively. As a result they were able to price their rides at profitable rates.
> 
> Because Radar was designed to make cherrypicking difficult for all but the most savvy drivers it's causing a race to the bottom.


Base rates were around $1.00, 1.25 & 1.45 on the 'economy rides' at the time. I would set my rate at 3 or more typically & makes big $ until I felt I had made enough then set my rates up higher (3.8-4.5) & still get rides I did not feel like taking at 3, the problem was that riders would see a pairing for say $18 (15 mins away) & that driver passes, then it tells them they have a driver for $24 (10 mins away) that driver passes, and so on until a driver close enough with a rate they can accept will take it, Understand we operate a $60K Lux SUV so min fares even with tips & bonuses can't even make enough to show a marginal profit. It is in fact a totally seasonal job here with the surge disappearing on the off season & only some minimal 'sticky' here and there at times.


----------



## g.manicus (6 mo ago)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Well, first, you can't fire someone who isn't an employee. lol - so we wouldn't have seen that!
> But I doubt Uber had anything to do with keeping this out of the news.
> More like the news kept it out of the news because it wasn't news.
> 
> ...


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Well, first, you can't fire someone who isn't an employee. lol - so we wouldn't have seen that!


According to the public, the media, etc, you can. Even businesses use the term "fire" in their advertising... "fire your so and so and switch to us"

Sports agents are usually ICs and over the years plenty of them have been reported as being "fired" by their clients. Check out various news stories and you'll see that such and such ballplayer has fired his agent. The same with lawyers and other people classified as ICs. The same with golf caddies. You'll see news stories, articles, etc that stated that so and so golfer fired his/her caddie. At least a couple have been fired in the middle of gold tournament.

"Deactivate" is a propaganda term that I use as little as possible.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

oldfart said:


> The IRS will take information from an employer and decide how that employer should treat their workers


The classification issue, as part of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) falls under the authority of the Dept of Labor - not the IRS. The DoL won't step in until/unless the employers classification is challenged by someone and a complaint is filed. The IRS only steps in when the DoL determines that a misclassification has taken place.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Nats121 said:


> According to the public, the media, etc, you can. Even businesses use the term "fire" in their advertising... "fire your so and so and switch to us"
> 
> Sports agents are usually ICs and over the years plenty of them have been reported as being "fired" by their clients. Check out various news stories and you'll see that such and such ballplayer has fired his agent. The same with lawyers and other people classified as ICs. The same with golf caddies. You'll see news stories, articles, etc that stated that so and so golfer fired his/her caddie. At least a couple have been fired in the middle of gold tournament.
> 
> "Deactivate" is a propaganda term that I use as little as possible.


You're right - but there is a difference between common parlay of language and legal meaning. When you end an ICs relationship with you or your company, in legal terms you are '_terminating the contractual agreement_' between the parties. Hell of a lot easier to say you 'fired' them.


----------



## Ted Fink (Mar 19, 2018)

Nats121 said:


> Sports agents are usually ICs and over the years plenty of them have been reported as being "fired" by their clients. Check out various news stories and you'll see that such and such ballplayer has fired his agent.


This made me think of Jerry Maguire. Show me the money!!!


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The classification issue, as part of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) falls under the authority of the Dept of Labor - not the IRS. The DoL won't step in until/unless the employers classification is challenged by someone and a complaint is filed. The IRS only steps in when the DoL determines that a misclassification has taken place.



I understand the difference between the IRS and Dept of Labor and I understand the the DoL interest is to assure compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act and the IRS's interest is to assure compliance with the Tax law but my guess is that the one agency would accept the determination of the other

What you say about the IRS getting involved only after the DoL makes a decision, makes sense, but never-the-less, the IRS (for tax purposes)will m ake a determination if they are asked

This is from the IRS website





Independent Contractor (Self-Employed) or Employee? | Internal Revenue Service


Learn how to determine whether a person providing a service to you is an employee or an independent contractor.




www.irs.gov





*Form SS-8*
If it is still unclear whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor after reviewing the three categories of evidence, then Form SS-8, Determination of Worker Status for Purposes of Federal Employment Taxes and Income Tax WithholdingPDF, can be filed with the IRS. The form may be filed by either the business or the worker. The IRS will review the facts and circumstances and officially determine the worker’s status.


----------



## Sonoran Uber (Feb 15, 2020)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> That would not happen. If by some chance driver's were able to set their own pricing, the TNC's computers would simply adjust the total fare to the rider to be the same as it was.
> 
> Driver A accepts ride at TNC's quoted price of $10 uber puts the request through to the rider at $10.​​Driver B accepts ride at $7, $3 less than driver A Uber puts the request through to the rider at $10 (and pockets the other $3)​


Did not work at all like that (rates could be set from .5 to 5) it would 'offer' a rider a driver say 15 mins away at say 2X set by that driver, that driver passes, then they find a driver 10 mins away at a little higher rate set by driver, they pass & so on until a driver close enough with their desired rate accepts. It was the system they developed that was dis functional for rider I think the best solution is to allow the drivers & riders to set a rate they are willing to accept & pay for a ride, say up to 3X & then let the metric of algorithm go higher to 5 when applicable. That way a driver can be paired to a rider in relative proximity that matches up as closely as possible to rate desired. I am no rocket scientist but a did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.


----------



## Ritter (Jan 2, 2016)

Here's what I'm confused by...

Bob needs a ride to the airport.
Bob orders an Uber.
I log on to the Uber app as a driver, accept the request and drive Bob to the airport.
Bob pays Uber.
Uber pays me.

In my view, Bob is not MY customer, Bob is Uber's customer.

If I decline the work, Bob still gets to the airport when Uber locates a driver willing to do the work for the fee they are offering.

As an independent contractor (a driver), I AM free to accept or refuse work as I please and set my own rates.

In the moment I log in to the Uber app, I am accepting the rates they are offering aren't I?

For the sake of argument, let's say Uber is charging Bob $20 for the ride to the airport and paying me $7.

I believe I should be paid $30 to drive Bob to the airport.

I am free to do this. I just have to find my own means of attracting Bob as a customer so he orders a ride from me and not Uber right?

What am I not understanding?


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Ritter said:


> Here's what I'm confused by...
> 
> Bob needs a ride to the airport.
> Bob orders an Uber.
> ...


That may be your view, but its not Ubers

Bob wants a ride to the airport, Bob asks Uber to find him a ride. Uber looks for a driver and finds you. 
You accept, pick up the customer and deliver him to the airport, 
Uber collects the fare on your behalf, takes their fee for finding you a ride and takes their fee as your credit card processor, and sends the rest to your bank


There was a time when I offered a service over the internet, I used paypal to send my invoice and the customer could use their credit card to pay that invoice/ PayPal took their fee and deposited the rest into my account. In that case its clear that the customer is my customer and paypal is a credit card processor

Its the same with Uber.(except that they offer another service; their lead service, or customer finding service. Check your 1099K, Uber is reporting to the IRS, the total fare they collect from the customers as your gross income,


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

oldfart said:


> Its the same with Uber



Riders or customers can't even contact their service provider (driver) after the ride ends or to perform another transaction.
All customer service issues or concerns go to a department called customer support hired and paid for by Uber technologies.
Transaction (invoice) itself is created solely by Uber.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> Riders or customers can't even contact their service provider (driver) after the ride ends or to perform another transaction.
> All customer service issues or concerns go to a department called customer support hired and paid for by Uber technologies.
> Transaction (invoice) itself is created solely by Uber.



Im not saying what should be, 
Im saying what is.
At least what is from Ubers perspective

regarding your three points

1) My riders can call me, if I give them my card
2) the customer service dept must be something they do for us
3) as I said Uber collects the money for us, we pay for that service


----------



## Heisenburger (Sep 19, 2016)

oldfart said:


> My riders can call me, if I give them my card


 They're not gonna call you to complain about a service or billing question or problem on a completed trip or delivery.



oldfart said:


> the customer service dept must be something they do for us


 I don't understand what you mean.



oldfart said:


> as I said Uber collects the money for us, we pay for that service


And you pay them again to get instant pay. If you were collecting the initial payments (via cash, or a P2P payments platform like Square Cash or Zelle or PayPal), would you still pay for instant transfer?


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> And you pay them again to get instant pay. If you were collecting the initial payments (via cash, or a P2P payments platform like Square Cash or Zelle or PayPal), would you still pay for instant transfer?


Instant pay to my Uber , Go Bank account is free and then next day transfers to my Bank of America account is free. Or use the GoBank debit card to use your money

When I do private rides my customers can pay me using credit or debit cards.or Zelle. I use PayPal as my credit card processor. PayPal takes 3% for their service, and deposits the rest into my PayPal account I can do an instant transfer to my bank. But they charge a fee for that.. Next day transfers are free. Zelle is a bank to bank thing, so no credit cards or credit card processors (or their fees) Im not familiar with Square


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> They're not gonna call you to complain about a service or billing question or problem on a completed trip or delivery.


That's a good thing, right


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Heisenburger said:


> I don't understand what you mean.


When I say customer service is something they do for us, I mean that part of the fees Uber collects from us goes to providing a customer service department for our customers


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You're right - but there is a difference between common parlay of language and legal meaning. When you end an ICs relationship with you or your company, in legal terms you are '_terminating the contractual agreement_' between the parties. Hell of a lot easier to say you 'fired' them.


It's more than just about being easier to say. The emperor is buck naked, and despite the success corporations have had in lobbying (bribing) politicians into pretending that he's clothed, people with common sense don't buy into it.

Despite the fact that our wonderful SEC allowed Uber to classify the drivers as customers in their IPO, people with common sense don't buy it. People view drivers as working for Uber, not as Uber's "customers". They don't buy into the BS that the drivers pay Uber, they believe that Uber pays the drivers, when Uber gets ride of a driver they view it as a "firing", not a "deactivation", etc.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Ritter said:


> As an independent contractor (a driver), I AM free to accept or refuse work as I please and set my own rates.


So are hamburger flippers at McDonalds.



Ritter said:


> In the moment I log in to the Uber app, I am accepting the rates they are offering aren't I?


So are hamburger flippers every time they show up for work.



Ritter said:


> As an independent contractor (a driver), I AM free to accept or refuse work as I please and set my own rates.


So are hamburger flippers.



Ritter said:


> I believe I should be paid $30 to drive Bob to the airport.


If you look hard enough you can find hamburger flippers who believe they should be paid $50 per hour.



Ritter said:


> I am free to do this. I just have to find my own means of attracting Bob as a customer so he orders a ride from me and not Uber right?


So can a W2 sedan driver. He can use his own means of attracting customers to his new sedan service he just started.


----------



## KayGeeM82 (Oct 22, 2019)

oldfart said:


> Im not saying what should be,
> Im saying what is.
> At least what is from Ubers perspective
> 
> ...


Another Uber POV that drivers need to consider is that drivers are Uber's customers as well. Since drivers pay Uber to process payments after each trip and other features that come with the service. Also, Uber pays for all the state fees so drivers can to operate in their respective state & cities.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> It's more than just about being easier to say. The emperor is buck naked, and despite the success corporations have had in lobbying (bribing) politicians into pretending that he's clothed, people with common sense don't buy into it.
> 
> Despite the fact that our wonderful SEC allowed Uber to classify the drivers as customers in their IPO, people with common sense don't buy it. People view drivers as working for Uber, not as Uber's "customers". They don't buy into the BS that the drivers pay Uber, they believe that Uber pays the drivers, when Uber gets ride of a driver they view it as a "firing", not a "deactivation", etc.


it doesnt matter how you or the passengers understand the uber/driver relationship or the driver/passenger relationship or the uber/ passenger relationship. Or what anyone thinks those relationships should b

What those relationships are is specified in our agreements with uber

1. Relationship with Uber 1.1. Contracting Parties. The relationship between the parties is solely as independent business enterprises, each of whom operates a separate and distinct business enterprise that provides a service outside the usual course of business of the other. This is not an employment agreement and you are not an employee. You confirm the existence and nature of that contractual relationship each time you access our Platform. We are not hiring or engaging you to provide any service; *you are engaging us* to provide you access to our Platform. Nothing in this Agreement creates, will create, or is intended to create, any employment, partnership, joint venture, franchise or sales representative relationship between you and us. The parties do not share in any profits or losses. You have no authority to make or accept any offers or representations on our behalf. You are not our agent and you have no authority to act on behalf of Uber.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

oldfart said:


> it doesnt matter how you or the passengers understand the uber/driver relationship or the driver/passenger relationship or the uber/ passenger relationship. Or what anyone thinks those relationships should b
> 
> What those relationships are is specified in our agreements with uber
> 
> 1. Relationship with Uber 1.1. Contracting Parties. The relationship between the parties is solely as independent business enterprises, each of whom operates a separate and distinct business enterprise that provides a service outside the usual course of business of the other. This is not an employment agreement and you are not an employee. You confirm the existence and nature of that contractual relationship each time you access our Platform. We are not hiring or engaging you to provide any service; *you are engaging us* to provide you access to our Platform. Nothing in this Agreement creates, will create, or is intended to create, any employment, partnership, joint venture, franchise or sales representative relationship between you and us. The parties do not share in any profits or losses. You have no authority to make or accept any offers or representations on our behalf. You are not our agent and you have no authority to act on behalf of Uber.


Anyone can put any clause in any contract regardless of whether it's factual or not or legal or not. Clauses that are ruled illegal in a court of law are invalid.

Their contract is full of lies and contradictions. The Uber emperor is naked regardless of what the contract says. No matter how many times the contract says 2+2=5, it remains 4.

If you choose to drink Uber's Kool Aid that's up to you, assuming you actually believe Uber's lies.

Uber's entire business has been built on lies, starting with their denial of being a transportation company.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> Anyone can put any clause in any contract regardless of whether it's factual or not or legal or not. Clauses that are ruled illegal in a court of law are invalid.
> 
> Their contract is full of lies and contradictions. The Uber emperor is naked regardless of what the contract says. No matter how many times the contract says 2+2=5, it remains 4.
> 
> ...



You are making my point. Those clauses are in the contract whether you like it or not, and thats how we are paid and file taxes. Maybe the contract doesnt reflect reality and isnt the right way to do things, but it is how we operate today

Wgats the top line on your schedule C (its the total fare collected by uber , from passengers And whats your biggest expense item...(its probably the fees that uber charges you)

Again; you might want Uber to operate differently, and according to the law, and public perception. But they are not and until they do. passengers are buying a service from us, and we are buying services from Uber


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

oldfart said:


> You are making my point. Those clauses are in the contract whether you like it or not, and thats how we are paid and file taxes. Maybe the contract doesnt reflect reality and isnt the right way to do things, but it is how we operate today
> 
> Wgats the top line on your schedule C (its the total fare collected by uber , from passengers And whats your biggest expense item...(its probably the fees that uber charges you)
> 
> Again; you might want Uber to operate differently, and according to the law, and public perception. But they are not and until they do. passengers are buying a service from us, and we are buying services from Uber


I didn't make your point at all.

My point is that Uber's entire operation is built on lies and so are their contracts.

Lies are never truth, no matter how many times they're stated or whether or not the liar is allowed to get away with lying. 2+2 will never = 5 no matter how many times Uber says it does.

If you choose to drink the Kool Aid that's up to you. I have my doubts that you actually buy this shit. Your comments are more likely driven by your intense desire to perpetuate the status quo.

Whether it's financial analysts, talking heads, economists, media people, general public, etc, nobody (no anal literal word-parsing please) buys this shit. 

I've read shitloads of articles, seen shitloads of talking heads, seen shitloads of social media and I've yet to see anyone describe a driver pay cut or pay increase as Uber increasing or decreasing their "service fees" to the drivers. They say that Uber cut driver pay or raised driver pay (a very rare event).

Over the years I've seen many announcements from Uber concerning "changes" to driver pay (almost always a cut) and I've yet to see Uber ever use the term "service fee hike" or "rate hike", etc. Here we are their alleged "customers" Uber chooses to avoid those terms. That's because Uber's knows they'd sound like liars and would be met with massive amounts of derision.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> I didn't make your point at all.
> 
> My point is that Uber's entire operation is built on lies and so are their contracts.
> 
> ...


I cant understand why you and I continue to argue this point . What you say is common knowledge. And I agree with you. And I think you know what Im saying is true


I know that what you have said is true, and I agree that that calling us Ubers customer and the passenger our customer is not something most people accept (or would even consider) . The way Uber defines our relationships is counter intuitive and as you say, probably an illegal attempt to avoid treating us as employees. The contract is entirely one sided and probably illegal. and I think you know what Im saying is true. Specifically Uber treats us as independent contractors, not employees

What Im saying is the contract, is the contract and it is the way uber operates. (whether illegal or not, or whether the public knows whats in it or not)

Even If the contract is illegal we agreed to it and we operate in compliance with it, For example:

When we file out taxes we use a Schedule C and the total of what all our passengers pay (through) Uber is entered as our top-line income. And the difference between what the passenger pay and what Uber forwards to us is an expense
ie we file our taxes as independent contractors.

Once again. Im not saying its right, or the way it should be. Im saying that like it or not, it is the way it is. and I happen to like it


I think where we disagree is that I like working as an independent contractor and Im happy with my agreement with Uber. you aren't. . And Im not going to argue for my preferences or against yours


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

deleted, duplicate post


----------



## pvtandrewmalone (Oct 2, 2016)

I quit driving. If we had set your own multiplier, I would go back, I might even even invest in another XL vehicle. 

As it is fukudara and your bullshit faux independent contractor. I've read the contract and see things that are total lies in there. They don't even pretend to actually operate the way the legalese says they do.

I live in an affluent area, within 5 miles of an Ivy League University. People here would pay 5X late at night, for 3AM morning airport runs, and in snowstorms if they were desperate for a ride, and I would be happy to provide them one at that rate. But I'm not busting my ass and killing a car as a pseudo employee in exchange for peanuts.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

oldfart said:


> I cant understand why you and I continue to argue this point . What you say is common knowledge. And I agree with you. And I think you know what Im saying is true
> 
> 
> I know that what you have said is true, and I agree that that calling us Ubers customer and the passenger our customer is not something most people accept (or would even consider) . The way Uber defines our relationships is counter intuitive and as you say, probably an illegal attempt to avoid treating us as employees. The contract is entirely one sided and probably illegal. and I think you know what Im saying is true. Specifically Uber treats us as independent contractors, not employees
> ...


On many occasions you've parroted contract clauses such as the "Uber is a lead generator" BS. Maybe now you've changed your mind about accepting their lies as truth.

Whether Uber's contract is technically legal or not it's full of lies and contradictions. Given the fact that our IC laws are pathetically weak, Uber's lies may not be technically illegal. Nevertheless they're lies. The fact that the IRS allows the lies to be used in their tax forms also doesn't make those lies the truth.

The fact you may be profiting from Uber's corrupt system doesn't make it any less corrupt. The fact that Bernie Madoff made a small number of investors very rich doesn't change the fact that he was a thief.

I'm not delusional so I'm well aware that right now Uber's corrupt business model "is what it is". Hopefully the gig companies' day of reckoning will come before they escape in their robocars.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> On many occasions you've parroted contract clauses such as the "Uber is a lead generator" BS. Maybe now you've changed your mind about accepting their lies as truth.
> 
> Whether Uber's contract is technically legal or not it's full of lies and contradictions. Given the fact that our IC laws are pathetically weak, Uber's lies may not be technically illegal. Nevertheless they're lies. The fact that the IRS allows the lies to be used in their tax forms also doesn't make those lies the truth.
> 
> ...


Neither am I delusional, it just doesn’t matter to me that you see Uber as corrupt. I see it, I understand it, I like it and I use it to my advantage. If Uber is corrupt so am I because I am part of it and of course so are you 

if Uber is corrupt as you say; If you could wave your magic wand, how would you change it to make it less corrupt? Or not corrupt at all. Do you want to be an employee with all the advantages and and disadvantages of that classification. Or would you prefer to be an IC with all the advantages and disadvantages of that classification


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

This thread is still going? LOL

Post the progress on the case, I wanna see what happens.


----------



## Logistics12 (Jun 22, 2018)

Ritter said:


> Here's what I'm confused by...
> 
> Bob needs a ride to the airport.
> Bob orders an Uber.
> ...


1. You are not, as a driver, "free" to accept or refuse work as you please since there are consequences to not accepting a ride with Uber. "Free to accept or refuse work as you please" indicates that there is no consequence involved.

2. The action of Uber "offering" rates DOES NOT EQUAL the action of drivers "setting" rates! As a driver, I vehemently reject this premise.


----------



## Logistics12 (Jun 22, 2018)

oldfart said:


> it doesnt matter how you or the passengers understand the uber/driver relationship or the driver/passenger relationship or the uber/ passenger relationship. Or what anyone thinks those relationships should b
> 
> What those relationships are is specified in our agreements with uber
> 
> 1. Relationship with Uber 1.1. Contracting Parties. The relationship between the parties is solely as independent business enterprises, each of whom operates a separate and distinct business enterprise that provides a service outside the usual course of business of the other. This is not an employment agreement and you are not an employee. You confirm the existence and nature of that contractual relationship each time you access our Platform. We are not hiring or engaging you to provide any service; *you are engaging us* to provide you access to our Platform. Nothing in this Agreement creates, will create, or is intended to create, any employment, partnership, joint venture, franchise or sales representative relationship between you and us. The parties do not share in any profits or losses. You have no authority to make or accept any offers or representations on our behalf. You are not our agent and you have no authority to act on behalf of Uber.


Actually, just because Uber proclaimed it, doesn't mean that it is legally so/sound. Uber is not a principality or power like they would like everyone to think of them (sadly, most of the people reading this percieve them as such and behave accordingly).


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Logistics12 said:


> 1. You are not, as a driver, "free" to accept or refuse work as you please since there are consequences to not accepting a ride with Uber. "Free to accept or refuse work as you please" indicates that there is no consequence involved.
> 
> 2. The action of Uber "offering" rates DOES NOT EQUAL the action of drivers "setting" rates! As a driver, I vehemently reject this premise.



1)I have been rejecting rides a lot since upfront pricing started here. My acceptance rate is now at 60%, ...no consequences, In fact, whether you think it means something or not, my agreement specifically states we can reject rides and cancel rides at will, without consequence.

2) I understand that being presented with a price for a ride does not equate with the ability to set my own price....
So What's your point Setting my own price is not necessary for an IC classification

Today I was offered a 23 mile ride for $16 That doesnt do it for me. On the plus side it was nearly all Interstate so it would have been less than a 30 min X ride, but I rejected it anyway. Within a minute or so I was offered a 16 mile X ride for $29... Thats more like it...The negative was that it was all 30 mph roads. I took that ride

Im no lawyer or expert in the distinction between an employee and IC, But I have been both, at different times over the last 50 years, . and Uber feels more like IC to me


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Logistics12 said:


> Actually, just because Uber proclaimed it, doesn't mean that it is legally so/sound. Uber is not a principality or power like they would like everyone to think of them (sadly, most of the people reading this percieve them as such and behave accordingly).


I dont think anyone mistakes the company Uber for a government entity

It wont be decided until or unless someone takes it to the supreme court.. and even then, (as we have recently learned). we cant count on precedent , So until Uber changes our agreement, or some court forces them to, Ill live with the current one. 

If you want to call Uber a criminal enterprise.. fine. Just remember if you wanted to do business with Tony Soprano, you played by Tonys rules


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

oldfart said:


> If Uber is corrupt so am I because I am part of it and of course so are you


That's bullshit. You can't hold workers responsible for things that are done beyond their control by their employers, especially when workers such as myself are ethical in our dealings with the customers. I've never scammed a customer. Over the years I've gone above and beyond on many occasions because that's how I roll.

The vast majority of Uber's scamming is and always has been directed at the drivers.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Screwber driver north said:


> This thread is still going? LOL


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> That's bullshit. You can't hold workers responsible for things that are done beyond their control by their employers, especially when workers such as myself are ethical in our dealings with the customers. I've never scammed a customer. Over the years I've gone above and beyond on many occasions because that's how I roll.
> 
> The vast majority of Uber's scamming is and always has been directed at the drivers.


You are in complete control. You are free to participate in, and profit from the "corrupt" enterprise or not. 
That you do what you do, ethically, dosent change a thing about how Uber treats the customer or other drivers


----------



## 232439 (7 mo ago)

Driftinginn said:


> As an independent operator we should have total controll to set a rate. That would include being able to increase the fare.


Lyft by far is worst and states should force Lyft to be employer. Lyft even shows message "limit taps" so now it's dictating what we tap on our own phone that we buy? Also Lyft auto adds pings, hide pax photo and name and hides destination. Only at arrival do we see where pax is going and in my market it's dangerous to reject a pax trying to get in car. Pax have shot at drivers cancelling and driving away after seeing destination here. Imagine bullet coming in through back windshield and making you paraplegic spine sever.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

oldfart said:


> You are in complete control. You are free to participate in, and profit from the "corrupt" enterprise or not.
> That you do what you do, ethically, dosent change a thing about how Uber treats the customer or other drivers


Your attempt to include the drivers as part of "collective guilt" for Uber's sins doesn't wash, especially when it's the drivers themselves who have been the exploited party in all this.

The pax have NOT been exploited. On the contrary they've benefitted tremendously from the highly convenient service at dirt cheap rates they've received all these years at the drivers' expense.

Uber has benefitted tremendously as well. Look no further than the sight of Travis Kalanick walking off into the sunset with a cool $5 billion after years of cutting driver pay and treating them like shit for years.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

KayGeeM82 said:


> Another Uber POV that drivers need to consider is that drivers are Uber's customers as well.


Nah, I'm not buying it.

Sometimes Uber pays me out of its own pocket (over and above money received from pax) to do work for it. When an entity pays someone to do work for it, that isn't indicative of a seller:customer relationship; it's indicative of a client:contractor or employee:employer relationship.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Nats121 said:


> Anyone can put any clause in any contract regardless of whether it's factual or not or legal or not. Clauses that are ruled illegal in a court of law are invalid.


Correct. Uber could put in its contract: "The Driver agrees that the moon is made of bleu cheese". If I sign the contract it does not mean that the moon is made of bleu cheese.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> Your attempt to include the drivers as part of "collective guilt" for Uber's sins doesn't wash, especially when it's the drivers themselves who have been the exploited party in all this.
> 
> The pax have NOT been exploited. On the contrary they've benefitted tremendously from the highly convenient service at dirt cheap rates they've received all these years at the drivers' expense.
> 
> Uber has benefitted tremendously as well. Look no further than the sight of Travis Kalanick walking off into the sunset with a cool $5 billion after years of cutting driver pay and treating them like shit for years.


I remember buying a TV in DC after MLK was shot and killed. I bought it from a guy that had several dozen TVs in his home. I knew and he knew I knew that they had been looted during the riots. But we didn’t talk about that. I paid him and retreated to the safety of the lily white suburbs where I lived

Would you say I had no responsibility for the looting. Or would you say that I was guilty of a crime too by providing a market for stolen goods. 

I think the the guy doing the looting knew he could sell what he looted. And that knowledge motivated his action. I may not have been guilty of looting but I sure enabled it

If Uber is a money making criminal enterprise we drivers are helping them make that money


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> Correct. Uber could put in its contract: "The Driver agrees that the moon is made of bleu cheese". If I sign the contract it does not mean that the moon is made of bleu cheese.


By signing the bleu cheese contract you are letting Uber “get away” with their misunderstanding of the moons geology. But saying the moon is made of cheese is not criminal, According to my friend from DC however treating us as contractors when we are actually employees is illegal and we are at least enabling that criminality by participating


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

oldfart said:


> I remember buying a TV in DC after MLK was shot and killed. I bought it from a guy that had several dozen TVs in his home. I knew and he knew I knew that they had been looted during the riots. But we didn’t talk about that. I paid him and retreated to the safety of the lily white suburbs where I lived
> 
> Would you say I had no responsibility for the looting. Or would you say that I was guilty of a crime too by providing a market for stolen goods.
> 
> ...


You've got the parties mixed up in your little "looting" scenario.

Uber is the party that "looted" the TVs and in turn sold them cheap to the pax. The drivers are the party that was looted out of billions of dollars worth of TVs.

Just as I said in my previous post I'll say it again... Both Uber and the pax have benefitted spectacularly from Uber's "racketeering". Uber grew from nothing to $60 billion and made people such as Travis Kalanick and Garrett Camp incredibly rich. The pax benefitted enormously by receiving highly reliable and convenient transportation at 1980s prices.

The drivers are the big losers who've been getting screwed by all this. They've been providing reliable transportation to hundreds of millions of pax for 1970s pay rates while paying 2014-2022 overhead costs.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

elelegido said:


> Nah, I'm not buying it.
> 
> Sometimes Uber pays me out of its own pocket (over and above money received from pax) to do work for it. When an entity pays someone to do work for it, that isn't indicative of a seller:customer relationship; it's indicative of a client:contractor or employee:employer relationship.


Sometimes the pax pay ZERO for their rides due to credits or promos yet the drivers always get paid their full amount. That sure as heck doesn't sound like any customer relationship I've ever seen.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

I give up. We just are not talking to each other

Maybe I wont give up. One more time…. We agree
Uber is screwing the drivers and getting rich doing it. I’m not arguing that. 
and again Uber is screwing the drivers and getting rich doing it

They are charging the passenger as much as they can get away with and keeping an excessive amount for themselves, and what we get for what we do is absurdly low. I get it, we provide a vehicle and pay all the expenses to operate that vehicle. And we are providing our time. Our income is not enough to pay for them both (the car and our time ) As it stands we are in ever sense of the word under paid employees and Uber is getting away with it by calling us independent contractors

As I said, I’m not denying any of that

What I’m saying is that Uber is getting away with what they are doing and every time we turn on the app we are accepting what they are doing and to the point I have been trying to make…… enabling it

As Pogo said. “We have met the enemy and he is us”











And that is why I buy commercial insurance and do my best to make the passengers Uber sends my way, my customers. At least in the private ride side of what I do, I am getting paid a fair rate and I truly am an independent contractor.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

oldfart said:


> By signing the bleu cheese contract you are letting Uber “get away” with their misunderstanding of the moons geology.


In the first instance, i.e. just after signing a contract, yes. However, not necessarily in the long term, depending on the below.


> According to my friend from DC however treating us as contractors when we are actually employees is illegal


This highlights the fact that laws, in isolation and by themselves, have no consequence. They are just words written on pieces of paper. It is the _courts_, whose job it is to interpret and uphold the law, that have power and can be instrumental. To illustrate this, let's compare the same independent contractor vs employee argument in two different countries, in both of which the argument has gone to court. Both countries have similar laws stating that misclassifying employees as independent contractors is unlawful. 

In the UK, cases have been brought against Uber claiming misclassification. The judges found Uber's claims that they are simply "agents" who collect fares on behalf of drivers to be "nonsense" (one judge actually called Uber's case "nonsense" in his summing-up") and Uber was ruled to be an employer. Uber was ordered to pay drivers pensions, holiday pay and a minimum income. 

However, in the US, the legal system is different. As we know, such cases have been brought against Uber/Lyft, but the courts have not decided in favour of drivers as they have in the UK, and the rideshare companies are allowed to continue their ruse. What has happened here is that the drivers' lawyers chose to settle with Uber/Lyft in order to get fat payouts for themselves running in to the millions of dollars, in the process selling their driver clients down the river. The drivers get a token few thousand dollars and Uber/Lyft get to keep the independent contractor status. Or, as in the case of California, Uber/Lyft purchase votes in the Prop 22 decision and get to keep the IC status without having to give true IC rights to the drivers. 

So, it's not whether misclassifying employees as IC is illegal or not that is important. It's the verdict that can be achieved in court that is important. And, as stated above, in the US, it is due to several reasons including money-grab lawyers, the indifference of the courts and also the indifference of government to bring their own cases to court, that this is not likely to change here in the foreseeable future. 


> and we are at least enabling that criminality by participating


Yes; if no drivers accepted the contracts then Uber / Lyft would have no business so, in that sense, the misclassified workers do enable the practice. However, in labour law it is the employer who is guilty of misclassification, not the misclassified worker.

I also don't think that the workers should be judged too harshly for this. For example, if one has a family and needs to provide for them, one may be more inclined to accept a contract and thus start working, even if the contract is exploitative. 

In my view it is the government's remit to disallow exploitation of this and other types, something that it has repeatedly failed to do.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> In the first instance, i.e. just after signing a contract, yes. However, not necessarily in the long term, depending on the below.
> This highlights the fact that laws, in isolation and by themselves, have no consequence. They are just words written on pieces of paper. It is the _courts_, whose job it is to interpret and uphold the law, that have power and can be instrumental. To illustrate this, let's compare the same independent contractor vs employee argument in two different countries, in both of which the argument has gone to court. Both countries have similar laws stating that misclassifying employees as independent contractors is unlawful.
> 
> In the UK, cases have been brought against Uber claiming misclassification. The judges found Uber's claims that they are simply "agents" who collect fares on behalf of drivers to be "nonsense" (one judge actually called Uber's case "nonsense" in his summing-up") and Uber was ruled to be an employer. Uber was ordered to pay drivers pensions, holiday pay and a minimum income.
> ...


Im not making any judgements and Im certainly not saying whats legal and not legal
Whether we are misclassified or properly classified is not a question Im trying .to answer. . The question Im asking and answering; is...... What is todays reality regarding a driver's relationship with Uber and the passengers? ie Rightly or wrongly; how are we actually classified today...(in the US)

I dont think that there is any question. Maybe we should be classified as employees, but actually, we are classified as independent contractors. Thats how we are paid and thats how we file our taxes and we certainly do not receive the benefits of employment


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

oldfart said:


> Im not making any judgements and Im certainly not saying whats legal and not legal
> Whether we are misclassified or properly classified is not a question Im trying .to answer.


I didn't say you were.


> The question Im asking and answering; is...... What is todays reality regarding a driver's relationship with Uber and the passengers? ie Rightly or wrongly; how are we actually classified today...(in the US)


There's no need for you to ask or try to answer this, as it's already been answered! In California the answer was given by voters in Prop 22, who decided that drivers are independent contractors. In other states, also in the absence of successful legal challenges to Uber/Lyft's contracts, drivers are classified as independent contractors.

So there's no need for you to pose and then try to answer such a question; the answer is already common knowledge.


> I dont think that there is any question.


Indeed. Again, as above, I don't see why you're raising it.


> Maybe we should be classified as employees


As we also know, the majority of drivers would like to be _genuine, bona fide_ independent contractors, not employees.


> but actually, we are classified as independent contractors. Thats how we are paid and thats how we file our taxes and we certainly do not receive the benefits of employment


Again, you're stating common knowledge. There's no need to keep repeating it over and over.


----------



## Donatello (6 mo ago)

2022 - Uber woos drivers by giving them more decision-making power


2022- Uber woos drivers by giving them more decision-making power - The Latest News




gettotext.com







That didn't take long, watch the morons do as Uber says because they were thrown a bone.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

elelegido said:


> I didn't say you were.


you said this
_*I also don't think that the workers should be judged too harshly for this*_.

I thought you were saying that I was judging others too harshly. and I still do


I know was stating the obvious and My posts have been reactions to Nats101who doesnt seem to accept the obvious


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

oldfart said:


> you said this
> _*I also don't think that the workers should be judged too harshly for this*_.
> 
> I thought you were saying that I was judging others too harshly. and I still do


No, when I say that "I don't think _x_", the only conclusion that can be drawn from that is that I don't think _x._


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

oldfart said:


> you said this
> _*I also don't think that the workers should be judged too harshly for this*_.
> 
> I thought you were saying that I was judging others too harshly. and I still do
> ...


OK, OK, the drivers are enablers, we share guilt in this, and the enemy is us. Satisfied? Now that we got the blame game out of the way where do we go from here? If the drivers are guilty so are millions and even billions of workers over the years who were guilty of enabling their piece of shit employers who exploited them.

Are the drivers supposed to shut the **** up because we're "guilty"? Because guilty or not I'm not shutting up.


----------



## oldfart (Dec 22, 2017)

Nats121 said:


> OK, OK, the drivers are enablers, we share guilt in this, and the enemy is us. Satisfied? Now that we got the blame game out of the way where do we go from here? If the drivers are guilty so are millions and even billions of workers over the years who were guilty of enabling their piece of shit employers who exploited them.
> 
> Are the drivers supposed to shut the **** up because we're "guilty"? Because guilty or not I'm not shutting up.


I think I finally understand that you know we are paid as if we are independent contractors and we pay taxes as if we are independent contractors and in fact we are classified as independent contractors. When you say we are employees you mean we are currently misclassified as independent contractors and should either be classified as employees or Uber has to make certain changes so we are properly classified as contractors

I appreciate all your hard work complaining about Uber and Lyft. And no doubt that Uber has changed the way we interact with them for the better, because of that hard work and No doubt I have benefited from your hard work,

However I was happy with Uber before up front pricing and I’m happy after up front pricing has been introduced in my market and although I’m no lawyer, I believe we are now, properly classified as contractors

In my many years on this planet I have learned that there are something’s I can’t change so I don’t frustrate myself trying. I accept the way things are and do my best to adapt. If I can’t adapt I move on 

We drivers are not guilty of doing anything wrong. Not you for trying to change things or me for accepting the way things are. And to answer your question For me the right thing to do is to is to shut up, put my head down and continue working. And be thankful that I am still able to make a little money

And back to the original post. I have no interest in entering into a lawsuit to force Uber to let us set our own prices. I don’t think that’s necessary for us to be properly classified as independent contractors


----------

