# AB5 HAS PASSED



## Bob Reynolds

SACRAMENTO - The California Senate on Tuesday passed gig-work legislation that could transform the state's employment landscape, turning many independent contractors into employees. The vote was 29-11, along party lines.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sf...passes-AB5-gig-work-bill-turning-14430204.php
*California passes landmark bill that threatens to upend companies like Uber and Lyft*
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/california-passes-assembly-bill-5-for-gig-workers.htmlNBC NEWS 11 SEP 2019

California lawmakers passed a landmark bill on Tuesday that threatens to reshape how companies like Uber and Lyft do business.
The legislation, known as Assembly Bill 5, would require gig economy workers to be reclassified as employees instead of contractors.
The bill has received support from California Gov. Gavin Newsom and would go into effect Jan. 1, 2020.
California lawmakers passed a landmark bill on Tuesday that threatens to reshape how companies like Uber and Lyft do business.

But shares of Lyft popped as much as 3.9% on Wednesday morning, while Uber climbed more than 2.9% after California Gov. Gavin Newsom told the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday that he's still engaged in talks with Uber, Lyft and other gig economy companies about possible negotiations around the bill. Newsom recently voiced his support for the bill.

The legislation, known as Assembly Bill 5 (AB5), would require gig economy workers to be reclassified as employees instead of contractors. The bill passed in a 29 to 11 vote in the State Senate and now moves on to the State Assembly, where if it passes, it will land on Newsom's desk.

Additionally, the bill has received broad support from Democratic Presidential candidates including Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), as well as South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg.

The bill has the potential to change the employment status of more than 1 million low-wage workers in California, not just gig workers at companies like Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Postmates and Instacart. It will make it harder for gig economy companies to prove that their workers aren't staff, while ensuring key benefits and protections, like minimum wage, insurance and sick days.

AB5 has attracted staunch opposition from gig economy companies, as it could upend their traditional business model of hiring inexpensive contractors. In an effort to push back against the bill, Uber and Lyft proposed establishing $21-an-hour minimum wage for drivers in California. The ride-hailing companies, as well as Doordash, have also pledged $90 million on a ballot initiative for the 2020 election that would exempt them from AB5.

Lyft spokesperson Adrian Durbin said the bill has the potential to hurt drivers who prefer a flexible work schedule


----------



## sellkatsell44

Heading to assembly.


----------



## tohunt4me

Bob Reynolds said:


> AB5 Has just passed.


Imagining wafting Sitar music . . . humming
" this is the end . . ."


----------



## BigBadJohn

Yea! Errrrrr Booo! I don't know man, i just don't know.


----------



## Buckiemohawk

get it while its hot


----------



## uberdriverfornow

sellkatsell44 said:


> Heading to assembly.
> 
> View attachment 354796


it actually passed the assembly already

it should be heading to the governors desk now

i think she misspoke


----------



## sellkatsell44

uberdriverfornow said:


> it actually passed the assembly already
> 
> it should be heading to the governors desk now
> 
> i think she misspoke


Ahhhh

I've been trying to read the dang thing

https://www.billtrack50.com/BillDetail/996562


----------



## Pax Collector

Now we'll wait to see if Gavin Nuisance will sign the darn thing and make these blood sucking entities bleed a little.


----------



## Jlynn

Whats this mean for the ride share drivers in the rest of the country?


----------



## Buckiemohawk

I've seen the Lights Go out Broadway, I saw them try to scam us. But we said no


----------



## AllenChicago

In much of private industry, when benefit increases are forced upon a company, or forced into implementation for the first time, employee pay is reduced accordingly.

What's the smallest percentage of fare you'll accept, in return for Health/Dental Insurance, 401K, etc..? In other words, how large of a pay cut will you accept?


----------



## Bob Reynolds

AllenChicago said:


> In much of private industry, when benefit increases are forced upon a company, or forced into implementation for the first time, employee pay is reduced accordingly.
> 
> What's the smallest percentage of fare you'll accept, in return for Health/Dental Insurance, 401K, etc..? In other words, how large of a pay cut will you accept?


The reason AB5 passed was because the pay was cut below poverty wages and there was nothing left to take from the drivers. So there will be no pay cuts at Uber and Lyft.

Now Lyft and Uber will have to pay at least the minimum wage plus driver vehicle expenses which the IRS says are .58 cents a mile. That is not a pay cut. That is a pay increase for the majority of the drivers.



Jlynn said:


> Whats this mean for the ride share drivers in the rest of the country?


Nothing for right now. The law just applies to California until other states pass similar laws.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

AllenChicago said:


> In much of private industry, when benefit increases are forced upon a company, or forced into implementation for the first time, employee pay is reduced accordingly.
> 
> What's the smallest percentage of fare you'll accept, in return for Health/Dental Insurance, 401K, etc..? In other words, how large of a pay cut will you accept?


By my estimation...

Min wage in Florida as an employee uber driver using his/her own car would equal $22.00 an hour.

Florida has a min wage of $8.46 an hour.

California?

Min wage in Francisco for an uber driver is closer to _*$28 an hour.*_

10 hours?

*$280!*

This isn't benefits, this is simply min wage free and clear of all deductions!

4 10s and your looking at $1120

50 weeks a year, 56,000.

Let's assume they have to pay OT.

Well it won't be double $28 an hour, only about $36 an hour.

But time and a half?

Yeah they only have to pay time and a half for actual labor, not in mileage reimbursements.

Truth is... after having freshly crunched the numbers their hourly costs might not even be 1.20 times higher for overtime, if they take benefits into the equation it might be cheaper to NOT cap it at 29.5 hours a week.

58c a mile + $15.00 an hour for the first 40 hours
THEN
58c a mile plu 22.50 per hour for every hour after that?

That sounds like a good incentive to get drivers on the road past 40 hours.

I'm not 100% sure on that math so, maybe?


----------



## Sal29

At this point I almost want Uber, Lyft, and others to go out of business and be replaced by more humane companies kind of like The Costco of The Gig Economy.



AllenChicago said:


> In much of private industry, when benefit increases are forced upon a company, or forced into implementation for the first time, employee pay is reduced accordingly.
> 
> What's the smallest percentage of fare you'll accept, in return for Health/Dental Insurance, 401K, etc..? In other words, how large of a pay cut will you accept?


They CAN'T REDUCE PAY because employees are ENTITLED TO MINIMUM WAGE AFTER EXPENSES. Uber/Lyft drives will have to make the minimum wage AFTER DEDUCTING 58 cents per mile.
If you drive 200 miles in 8 hours and make $116, then your income will be considered $0 and Uber will have to pay you minimum wage for 8 hours on top of those $116 you made. Uber and Lyft will try and claim that you're only working when you are on a trip, but California will geve Uber/Lyft another beating for the ages if they try and pull that BS. Uber/Lyft will have to pay overtime and other stuff too.


----------



## Ubereater

tohunt4me said:


> Imagining wafting Sitar music . . . humming
> " this is the end . . ."


Uber, yes partner, I want to kill you..

Lyft...I want to....WAAAAA )


----------



## Gerrygri11

Not sure I am exactly happy about this, But it'll give us a chance to stop the bleeding. Now they will think twice before they cut rates .
Maybe now then start running the company like a business and not like a bunch of spoiled brats that just won the lottery and have no common sense and how to spend a dollar.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer

Well Uber/Lyft really brought this on themselves when they drop California pay to ,60 cent/mile. Thats equivalent to .30 cent/mile in most states.


----------



## Gerrygri11

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> By my estimation...
> Min wage in Florida as an employee uber driver using his/her own car would equal $22.00 an hour.
> Florida has a min wage of $8.46 an hour.
> California?
> Min wage in Francisco for an uber driver is closer to _*$28 an hour.*_
> 10 hours?
> *$280!*
> This isn't benefits, this is simply min wage free and clear of all deductions!
> 4 10s and your looking at $1120
> 50 weeks a year, 56,000.
> Let's assume they have to pay OT
> Well it won't be double $28 an hour, only about $36 an hour.
> But time and a half?
> Yeah they only have to pay time and a half for actual labor, not in mileage reimbursements
> Truth is... after having freshly crunched the numbers their hourly costs might not even be 1.20 times higher for overtime, if they take benefits into the equation it might be cheaper to NOT cap it at 29.5 hours a week.
> 58c a mile + $15.00 an hour for the first 40 hours
> THEN
> 58c a mile plu 22.50 per hour for every hour after that?
> That sounds like a good incentive to get drivers on the road past 40 hours.
> I'm not 100% sure on that math so, maybe?


Steve the problem is there's never gonna be benefits. The companies will cap all drive is below $30/hr Or whatever California minimum is for not having to pay benefits or overtime.
These companies were never meant to be full time jobs they were meant to be side gigs and they will do whatever they have to to keep them that way.
I've been driving over for 3 years I've never made less than $23 an hour in normally hover in the 27 to 36. Difference is I know my market I work Part And when IM not working that keeping an eye on the App so I can see where the busy locations are on a given day isI know will be in my market 45 minutes before Demand goes up.
All driversis can do this but uber and Lyft have to stop cutting rates they need to charge people a little bit more an be more transparent


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Gerrygri11 said:


> Steve the problem is there's never gonna be benefits. The companies will cap all drive is below $30 a week Or whatever California minimum is for not having to pay benefits or overtime.
> These companies were never meant to be full time jobs they were meant to be side gigs and they will do whatever they have to to keep them that way.
> I've been driving over for 3 years I've never made less than $23 an hour in normally hover in the 27 to 36. Difference is I know my market I work Part And when IM not working that keeping an eye on the App so I can see where the busy locations are on a given day isI know will be in my market 45 minutes before Demand goes up.
> All driversis can do this but uber and Lyft have to stop cutting rates they need to charge people a little bit more an be more transparent


All employees get benefits. It doesn't matter how many hours each week they work. 30 hours, 2 hours, 25 hours, 48 hours, all get benefits.

You worry about the rates cuts coming to North Providence and let California start the trend of stopping rate cuts.


----------



## Lowestformofwit

tohunt4me said:


> " this is the end . . ."


"Hold your breath and count to ten..."


----------



## dgates01

Jlynn said:


> Whats this mean for the ride share drivers in the rest of the country?


Nothing.


----------



## ValleyAntMan

uberdriverfornow said:


> it actually passed the assembly already
> 
> it should be heading to the governors desk now
> 
> i think she misspoke


No. The bill has been amended several times since the Assembly passed it, so the bill they passed is different from the bill passed by the Senate. So it goes back to the Assembly to pass the same bill just passed by the Senate. THEN it goes to the Governor, who has already said he'll sign it.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

ValleyAntMan said:


> No. The bill has been amended several times since the Assembly passed it, so the bill they passed is different from the bill passed by the Senate. So it goes back to the Assembly to pass the same bill just passed by the Senate. THEN it goes to the Governor, who has already said he'll sign it.


sounds good


----------



## Leoncio

uberdriverfornow said:


> All employees get benefits. It doesn't matter how many hours each week they work. 30 hours, 2 hours, 25 hours, 48 hours, all get benefits.
> 
> You worry about the rates cuts coming to North Providence and let California start the trend of stopping rate cuts.


Sorry but you HAVE to be a full time employee to get "benefits" 
You cant get medical insurance if you work 2 hours. Uber and Lyft will try to keep everybody part time to avoid paying into this expense. They dont give a crap about drivers well being. They are almost a decade "improving drivers pay" they say every time they lower fares.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

Gerrygri11 said:


> Steve the problem is there's never gonna be benefits. The companies will cap all drive is below $30 a week Or whatever California minimum is for not having to pay benefits or overtime.


29 hours at triple the pay = 90 hours compared to now.

29 hours on uber,
20 hours on lyft
49 hours = golden



Gerrygri11 said:


> These companies were never meant to be full time jobs they were meant to be side gigs and they will do whatever they have to to keep them that way.


I cleared over $45,000 part time doing uber the first year. Between thursday night and monday morning i could clear an easy $1000 back in the day.



Gerrygri11 said:


> I've been driving over for 3 years I've never made less than $23 an hour in normally hover in the 27 to 36.


Some places are under $10 an hour, some are $30 an hour. The difference in pay between different cities is crazy.

I used to average over $30 an hour (including surges) Now it's closer to $7-12 here in Orlando.



Gerrygri11 said:


> All drivers is can do this but uber and Lyft have to stop cutting rates they need to charge people a little bit more an be more transparent


No they can't, when most pings pay $3-$5 and the most pings you can get is 1.5 per hour it's 100% impossible, like i said the pay difference between cities in the us is _*300%*_


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Leoncio said:


> Sorry but you HAVE to be a full time employee to get "benefits"
> You cant get medical insurance if you work 2 hours. Uber and Lyft will try to keep everybody part time to avoid paying into this expense. They dont give a crap about drivers well being. They are almost a decade "improving drivers pay" they say every time they lower fares.


Wrong, and you are confusing benefits with health insurance.

All employees get benefits like workers comp, unemployment insurance etc etc.

No employee is required to get health insurance. All that happens depending on the size of the business is that the employer would pay a penalty if they didn't provide health insurance depending on the number of employees.

However, in certain cities like San Francisco, health insurance is required for all employees.

You can go to a fast food business website like Mcdonalds and you see if they get health insurance.


----------



## Azpilot2211

you think you're going to be able to drive for both companies now? LOL. You entitled millennials brought this on yourselves, maybe you all will learn a thing or two before you go *****ing and try to change capitalism again. 

The new Uber, You will work 12pm to 9 am, 2 15 minute breaks, 1 hour lunch from 3am to 4 am. Accept ALL requests no matter the distance or you're fired. Hope you like the new taxes that will be taken out of your paycheck each week, plus insurance. It truly amazes me how dumb some of you are. I want more money. I deserve it!! Its not fair!! wah wah. You just screwed yourselves.


----------



## Gerrygri11

uberdriverfornow said:


> All employees get benefits. It doesn't matter how many hours each week they work. 30 hours, 2 hours, 25 hours, 48 hours, all get benefits.
> 
> You worry about the rates cuts coming to North Providence and let California start the trend of stopping rate cuts.


Lol you need to Chill man.
Personally I could care less what they do. I make almost as much is tips as I do driving. 
But I'll tell you this don't count on Uber or Lyft to do the right thing by you just because you got a law passed.
They're gonna be looking to prove that the law isnt going to work. You know the old saying be careful what you wish for. But anyway I don't wanna go to far and hurt your feelings you seem Kind of sensitive.
Signing out from the earthquake free zone in North Providence


----------



## itsablackmarket

Karma is a b

They took it too far. This is the result.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Gerrygri11 said:


> Lol you need to Chill man.
> Personally I could care less what they do. I make almost as much is tips as I do driving.
> But I'll tell you this don't count on Uber or Lyft to do the right thing by you just because you got a law passed.
> They're gonna be looking to prove that the law isnt going to work. You know the old saying be careful what you wish for. But anyway I don't wanna go to far and hurt your feelings you seem Kind of sensitive.
> Signing out from the earthquake free zone in North Providence


That's why they added a last minute provision giving cities a special provision to take action on behalf of drivers that are hamstrung by the arbitration clause.

Of course Uber and Lyft cried to try to get it removed but given how nobody believes anything Uber or Lyft say anymore they didn't get their way.

And the real benefits won't occur til drivers have unionized which will take a few months.


----------



## Taxi2Uber

Bob Reynolds said:


> The reason AB5 passed was because the pay was cut below poverty wages and there was nothing left to take from the drivers.


The reason was for more tax revenue, under the guise of helping drivers.



Bob Reynolds said:


> Now Lyft and Uber will have to pay at least the minimum wage plus driver vehicle expenses which the IRS says are .58 cents a mile.


Not necessarily $.58.
_"The California Supreme Court held that the reimbursement rate can be negotiated by parties as long as it fully reimburses the employee, and *the amount does not have to be set at the IRS mileage rate*.
Employees who challenge a mileage reimbursement amount set by the employer bear the burden in establishing their actual costs"_

It would be nice to think Uber would just graciously dole out the .58, while you drive your 2009 Hyundai Elantra, but I have less faith in them doing right by drivers.

And another thing Uber might do, is require the car to be new, or near new.

Another might be that Uber puts more of the burden of car insurance on the drivers.


----------



## dmoney155

Bob Reynolds said:


> The reason AB5 passed was because the pay was cut below poverty wages and there was nothing left to take from the drivers. So there will be no pay cuts at Uber and Lyft.
> 
> Now Lyft and Uber will have to pay at least the minimum wage plus driver vehicle expenses which the IRS says are .58 cents a mile. That is not a pay cut. That is a pay increase for the majority of the drivers.
> 
> 
> Nothing for right now. The law just applies to California until other states pass similar laws.


Yep, except now 1. you will have to adhere to a schedule, and 2. you will probably get fired. In any case, good luck, enjoy the health and 401 benefits.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

dmoney155 said:


> Yep, except now 1. you will have to adhere to a schedule, and 2. you will probably get fired. In any case, good luck, enjoy the health and 401 benefits.


What part of AB5 requires schedules ? Let's see it.

AB5 doesn't mandate health insurance in any way, shape, or forn, nor does it mandate a 401k plan.


----------



## nouberipo

Jlynn said:


> Whats this mean for the ride share drivers in the rest of the country?


Nothing as of yet but per a pattern, much of what happens on the coasts makes its way to the rest of the country. The writing is on the wall for Uber and Lyft and I couldn't be happier.



AllenChicago said:


> In much of private industry, when benefit increases are forced upon a company, or forced into implementation for the first time, employee pay is reduced accordingly.
> 
> What's the smallest percentage of fare you'll accept, in return for Health/Dental Insurance, 401K, etc..? In other words, how large of a pay cut will you accept?


Most drivers already make below minimum wage thus your argument is not relevant. Those benefits will be on top of making AT LEAST minimum wage which they will now need to honor. Furthermore, all other employment laws now come into affect thus Uber and Lyft can no longer operate as lawless companies exploiting millions of workers.


----------



## DeadEndRoad

First and foremost, I have no desire to be classified as an employee of uber. But the fact remains that uber/Lyft brought this on themselves. I drive in Arizona which is a "right to work " state, so I don't expect any changes in the immediate future. After four years and over 8000k plus rides with an average rating of 4.95 and a $1.59 will get you a free cup of coffee at your local QT. I never had the illusion of making easy money but I did believe if one puts the time in with the goal of getting each pax to their destination in a safe timely manner with courtesy. Then one should receive fair compensation. But as all of us know, there is a better chance of seeing world peace before that day would arrive. Uber refers to drivers as "partners" and if one was to read the definition it is nothing more than a backhanded compliment. Its more of a reach around without the offer of a cig. Remember when Dara meet the new boss same as the old boss entered at Act II shouting from the highest peak "Do the right thing" (refer to reach around). I don't believe his job is easy but there is one crucial difference between Dara and you the driver. Drivers are transporting human lives, and are doing it right every day and night and if that doesn't qualify for fair compensation then uber and its investors can burn in hell.


----------



## DoubleDee

This is great. I'm going to love watching Uber and Lyft find new creative ways to screw the drivers. 

Of course eventually Uber and Lyft will line the pockets of corrupt California politicians. Together they'll bring the drivers to their knees again.


----------



## Steve appleby

Let’s give a nice round of applause to the idiots in California. You guys are now going to be employees. So you can say bye-bye to surge, You can say bye-bye to setting your own hours, and now Uber is going to be on you guys like white on rice. Your acceptance rate goes below 80%, YOU ARE FIRED. Uber is going to tighten the parameters on drivers now and will probably deactivate half the drivers because they don’t wanna pay benefits to them. Uber may be too big to pull out of California, but they will make your life a living hell. I think people are making a big mistake here. But hey you reap what you sow and I’m gonna laugh my ass off would half the drivers in California get deactivated because they can’t get their numbers up. Uber is going to find a way to get around this law and Uber will find ways to deactivate you.


----------



## Kodyhead

Leoncio said:


> Sorry but you HAVE to be a full time employee to get "benefits"
> You cant get medical insurance if you work 2 hours. Uber and Lyft will try to keep everybody part time to avoid paying into this expense. They dont give a crap about drivers well being. They are almost a decade "improving drivers pay" they say every time they lower fares.


Imo if it comes to this they will incentivise part time drivers with better rates than full time drivers. I would also imagine better badges for part timers to earn too


----------



## Lee239

Good their are 60 million gig workers who are classified as working who don't have a real job.



Steve appleby said:


> Let's give a nice round of applause to the idiots in California. You guys are now going to be employees. So you can say bye-bye to surge, You can say bye-bye to setting your own hours, and now Uber is going to be on you guys like white on rice. Your acceptance rate goes below 80%, YOU ARE FIRED. Uber is going to tighten the parameters on drivers now and will probably deactivate half the drivers because they don't wanna pay benefits to them. Uber may be too big to pull out of California, but they will make your life a living hell. I think people are making a big mistake here. But hey you reap what you sow and I'm gonna laugh my ass off would half the drivers in California get deactivated because they can't get their numbers up. Uber is going to find a way to get around this law and Uber will find ways to deactivate you.


You forget that Uber needs the driver too. Who else are Uber and Lyft going to steal from they can't steal from the customer without drivers,.


----------



## Steve appleby

Lee239 said:


> Good their are 60 million gig workers who are classified as working who don't have a real job.
> 
> 
> You forget that Uber needs the driver too. Who else are Uber and Lyft going to steal from they can't steal from the customer without drivers,.


Oh don't worry uber is going to have drivers, Uber will just get rid of all the drivers who don't meet the standards...


----------



## DeadEndRoad

Steve appleby said:


> Let's give a nice round of applause to the idiots in California. You guys are now going to be employees. So you can say bye-bye to surge, You can say bye-bye to setting your own hours, and now Uber is going to be on you guys like white on rice. Your acceptance rate goes below 80%, YOU ARE FIRED. Uber is going to tighten the parameters on drivers now and will probably deactivate half the drivers because they don't wanna pay benefits to them. Uber may be too big to pull out of California, but they will make your life a living hell. I think people are making a big mistake here. But hey you reap what you sow and I'm gonna laugh my ass off would half the drivers in California get deactivated because they can't get their numbers up. Uber is going to find a way to get around this law and Uber will find ways to deactivate you.


Maybe, maybe not. At this point its pure speculation. I for one would not accept employee status. But I don't believe uber can cut its workforce and survive in that large of a market.


----------



## Ssgcraig

Bob Reynolds said:


> The reason AB5 passed was because the pay was cut below poverty wages and there was nothing left to take from the drivers. So there will be no pay cuts at Uber and Lyft.
> 
> Now Lyft and Uber will have to pay at least the minimum wage plus driver vehicle expenses which the IRS says are .58 cents a mile. That is not a pay cut. That is a pay increase for the majority of the drivers.
> 
> 
> Nothing for right now. The law just applies to California until other states pass similar laws.


Minimum wage while on a ride, yeah that's a pay increase.
You will get your $.58 upfront, only difference is who is paying it to you. This is not a pay increase, this is at best, a minimum wage job in CA now. How do you see this as a pay increase? Good job liberals!

I think other states will wait to see the fail/success story.


----------



## Taxi2Uber

uberdriverfornow said:


> What part of AB5 requires schedules ? Let's see it.


What part of AB5 requires flexible schedules?


DeadEndRoad said:


> After four years and over 8000k plus rides with an average rating of 4.95... I never had the illusion of making easy money but I did believe if one puts the time in with the goal of getting each pax to their destination in a safe timely manner with courtesy. Then one should receive fair compensation. But as all of us know, there is a better chance of seeing world peace before that day would arrive.


How long ago did you quit driving?
What were the rates when you quit?


----------



## SuperDumped

Jlynn said:


> Whats this mean for the ride share drivers in the rest of the country?


nothing much doesn't take effect till jan 1 2020 so theyll try to loot as much as they can by then

it just means 3 of their top 5 markets that bring in 80% of their revenues will be regulated ny, la, san fran, brazil, london

rest of markets are literally pennies compared to those 5

ny got $7 minimums $1.75 per mile .35 per minute, cap on hiring and when too many drivers in an area others cant log in, i expect the same in cali they can expect a new drivers agreement in order to log in on jan 1 so they fall under independent contractor status still so no unemployment, no workers comp no soc security credits but lesst minimum & maybe livable wages

other than that rest of country will take years to pass similar,96% will continue to fail or quit

but the public gets more knowledge into how these criminal orgimizations operate some will tip more, others will continue to exploit the app because theyre just poor not stupid


----------



## Ssgcraig

Sal29 said:


> At this point I almost want Uber, Lyft, and others to go out of business and be replaced by more humane companies kind of like The Costco of The Gig Economy.
> 
> 
> They CAN'T REDUCE PAY because employees are ENTITLED TO MINIMUM WAGE AFTER EXPENSES. Uber/Lyft drives will have to make the minimum wage AFTER DEDUCTING 58 cents per mile.
> If you drive 200 miles in 8 hours and make $116, then your income will be considered $0 and Uber will have to pay you minimum wage for 8 hours on top of those $116 you made. Uber and Lyft will try and claim that you're only working when you are on a trip, but California will geve Uber/Lyft another beating for the ages if they try and pull that BS. Uber/Lyft will have to pay overtime and other stuff too.


This is delusional, companies other than Uber already throttle employee hours so they don't pay overtime. 200 miles in 8 hours in my market is $308, this doesn't include the $.58 I get to write off which comes to $116. 200 miles in CA dream world is min wage plus $.58 a mile. What does that come to? $212 dollars? But wait, don't forget about being taxed at a regular rate now, also health insurance comes out of that $208. But wait, overtime? Youre kidding right? You think Uber will allow you to log in more the 39.9 hours online?


----------



## 1.5xorbust

Uber is going to have to fire a lot more middle and upper level deadwood to make this nightmare work.


----------



## Steve appleby

Ssgcraig said:


> This is delusional, companies other than Uber already throttle employee hours so they don't pay overtime. 200 miles in 8 hours in my market is $308. 200 miles in CA dream world is min wage plus $.58 a mile. What does that come to? $212 dollars? But wait, don't forget about being taxed at a regular rate now, also health insurance comes out of that $208. But wait, overtime? Youre kidding right? You think Uber will allow you to log in more the 39.9 hours online?


It's California man... this is the same state who just yesterday signed a bill into law allowing schools to not suspend disruptive kids who verbally abuse their teachers. It's laughable I know.


----------



## Seamus

In the 30 days before the start of the effective date (1/1/20) it's going to be a cold December for a large quantity of drivers. They will deactivate drivers who have a history of low AR, and fall below their threshold of star rating, CR, etc.etc.. They will do this just prior to the effective date so the drivers won't get to collect unemployment benefits.

The new motto at Uber HQ is going to be "Not Uber Pro.....Gotta Go"!

To those that think they can't do that because they need the drivers, history has shown they have no problem signing up (or now hiring) an endless supply of new ants who will conform. If you are a Cali driver, you better make sure between now and December you hit Uber Pro Status!


----------



## mch

Jlynn said:


> Whats this mean for the ride share drivers in the rest of the country?


Unless Uber and Lyft drastically change their buisness model in CA to make the drivers there true ICs it means the rest of us across the country will probably get rate cuts to pay for it


----------



## Ssgcraig

Seamus said:


> In the 30 days before the start of the effective date (1/1/20) it's going to be a cold December for a large quantity of drivers. They will deactivate drivers who have a history of low AR, and fall below their threshold of star rating, CR, etc.etc.. They will do this just prior to the effective date so the drivers won't get to collect unemployment benefits.
> 
> The new motto at Uber HQ is going to be "Not Uber Pro.....Gotta Go"!
> 
> To those that think they can't do that because they need the drivers, history has shown they have no problem signing up (or now hiring) and endless supply of new ants who will conform. If you are a Cali driver, you better make sure between now and December you hit Uber Pro Status!


Yup, I would start making plan B if you are one who has low AR, star and cancellation rates. If you are one to call the pax to find out destination, shuffle people because you just don't want to drive. Maybe this will weed out all the shit heads you drive in CA? Who knows.


----------



## itsablackmarket

mch said:


> Unless Uber and Lyft drastically change their buisness model in CA to make the drivers there true ICs it means the rest of us across the country will probably get rate cuts to pay for it


And that will just put more pressure on states to pass similar bills quicker.


----------



## njn

fun fact, overtime in cali is anything over 8 hours in a day.

fun fact #2, min wage is the same for tipped and non-tipped employees.


----------



## mch

itsablackmarket said:


> And that will just put more pressure on states to pass similar bills quicker.


Which means a hell of alot of people who have been doing this full time for awhile are about to get a refresher course in what its like to be an employee. A minimum wage employee at that. No more "my car my rules"


----------



## dgates01

Steve appleby said:


> Oh don't worry uber is going to have drivers, Uber will just get rid of all the drivers who don't meet the standards...


Well, yeah.


----------



## Seamus

mch said:


> Unless Uber and Lyft drastically change their buisness model in CA to make the drivers there true ICs it means the rest of us across the country will probably get rate cuts to pay for it


They can't cut driver rates much more. More likely, just like in NYC when the new driver rates went into effect new pax rates went into effect. Pax Uber and Lyft rates in NYC are much higher than in the surrounding areas. Taxis love it because in Manhattan the difference between paying for a Taxi vs an U/L aren't as much as they used to be. In cities pax will pay the higher rate because they don't have much of an alternative other than mass transit. In more suburban or rural areas demand will drop as pax price increases. The drunk shift demand will probably be mainly un-affected because they were already used to paying surge prices.


----------



## Steve appleby

Seamus said:


> In the 30 days before the start of the effective date (1/1/20) it's going to be a cold December for a large quantity of drivers. They will deactivate drivers who have a history of low AR, and fall below their threshold of star rating, CR, etc.etc.. They will do this just prior to the effective date so the drivers won't get to collect unemployment benefits.
> 
> The new motto at Uber HQ is going to be "Not Uber Pro.....Gotta Go"!
> 
> To those that think they can't do that because they need the drivers, history has shown they have no problem signing up (or now hiring) an endless supply of new ants who will conform. If you are a Cali driver, you better make sure between now and December you hit Uber Pro Status!


Yup!!! That's pretty much what I said. And yet people call me ignorant


----------



## Don'tchasethesurge

Hope other states do similar thing... we can’t have new rate cuts.... people earning .32 cents per mile on some markets is just plain robbery.


----------



## mch

Seamus said:


> They can't cut driver rates much more. More likely, just like in NYC when the new driver rates went into effect new pax rates went into effect. Pax Uber and Lyft rates in NYC are much higher than in the surrounding areas. Taxis love it because in Manhattan the difference between paying for a Taxi vs an U/L aren't as much as they used to be. In cities pax will pay the higher rate because they don't have much of an alternative other than mass transit. In more suburban or rural areas demand will drop as pax price increases. The drunk shift demand will probably still be there.


I dont know man. In SE PA/Philly where I drive it's .69 a mile. Across the bridge in Jersey its .66. I guaruntee you the majority of the ants in this area wont just up and stop driving if they reduced both markets to say .50

Even if Im wrong, decreased demand means less $$$ so it may as well be lower rates


----------



## OldBay

Bob Reynolds said:


> The vote was 29-11, along party lines.


When/if rideshare dies, at least we know who was responsible.


----------



## Don'tchasethesurge

OldBay said:


> When/if rideshare dies, at least we know who was responsible.


It won't die... it just may not look the same way... Uber and lyft are primarily to blame for cutting rates so low! Drivers who kept driving at those rates are also to blame.


----------



## Seamus

mch said:


> I dont know man. In SE PA/Philly where I drive it's .69 a mile. Across the bridge in Jersey its .66. I guaruntee you the majority of the ants in this area wont just up and stop driving if they reduced both markets to say .50
> 
> Even if Im wrong, decreased demand means less $$$ so it may as well be lower rates


In the NYC Suburbs you get .70/mi and .17/minute. Cross the line into the city and you get $1.75/mi and .35/minute. They never reduced driver rates in the NYC suburbs, they just raised pax rates in NYC.

There are other factors at play though, it's not always cut and dry. We still get multiplier surges. On a Saturday night you will see TLC plated NYC Uber drivers LEAVING $1.75/mi to come to .70/mi hoping to get a 3.0+surge!!! This shows you that if Uber didn't get greedy with the surge take and left the old surge multiplier in the rest of the country, they would have half the driver problems they have.

The Ultimate Rideshare killer has been Uber vs Lyft race to the bottom through price wars which kills it for everyone. The Uber/Lyft boneheads that thought you could drive rates down to 60's/70's levels and make money are idiots. In 1969 a burger at Mcdonalds cost 18 cents. Who would think it's a good idea to open up a burger stand in 2019 and charge 18 cents a burger???


----------



## mch

OldBay said:


> When/if rideshare dies, at least we know who was responsible.


There is plenty of blame to go around


----------



## nash801

I hope courts require U/L reimburse us our costs and wages retroactively.
If they don't, everyone go file a "wage claim" at your local Industrial Relations Office (455 golden gate ave 10th floor, SF).
It's easy. You don't need lawyer.


----------



## Uber_Yota_916

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> By my estimation...
> 
> Min wage in Florida as an employee uber driver using his/her own car would equal $22.00 an hour.
> 
> Florida has a min wage of $8.46 an hour.
> 
> California?
> 
> Min wage in Francisco for an uber driver is closer to _*$28 an hour.*_
> 
> 10 hours?
> 
> *$280!*
> 
> This isn't benefits, this is simply min wage free and clear of all deductions!
> 
> 4 10s and your looking at $1120
> 
> 50 weeks a year, 56,000.
> 
> Let's assume they have to pay OT.
> 
> Well it won't be double $28 an hour, only about $36 an hour.
> 
> But time and a half?
> 
> Yeah they only have to pay time and a half for actual labor, not in mileage reimbursements.
> 
> Truth is... after having freshly crunched the numbers their hourly costs might not even be 1.20 times higher for overtime, if they take benefits into the equation it might be cheaper to NOT cap it at 29.5 hours a week.
> 
> 58c a mile + $15.00 an hour for the first 40 hours
> THEN
> 58c a mile plu 22.50 per hour for every hour after that?
> 
> That sounds like a good incentive to get drivers on the road past 40 hours.
> 
> I'm not 100% sure on that math so, maybe?


Overtime. Doubt it. 30 hours max per app. No benefits paid out. The golden goose is about start pooping lead.



uberdriverfornow said:


> That's why they added a last minute provision giving cities a special provision to take action on behalf of drivers that are hamstrung by the arbitration clause.
> 
> Of course Uber and Lyft cried to try to get it removed but given how nobody believes anything Uber or Lyft say anymore they didn't get their way.
> 
> And the real benefits won't occur til drivers have unionized which will take a few months.


Unless that union is SEIU. Which coincidentally is the union behind ab5. People think U/L are bad, just wait.


----------



## Don'tchasethesurge

Uber and lyft need to stop cutting rates and bring them up before other states do the same.... they are in shitty situation, but it’s their own fault!


----------



## Yam Digger

Jlynn said:


> Whats this mean for the ride share drivers in the rest of the country?


Dominos


----------



## SurgeMasterMN

OldBay said:


> When/if rideshare dies, at least we know who was responsible.


This guy ....










Rideshare Resolved..

Rohit


----------



## Ssgcraig

Don'tchasethesurge said:


> Hope other states do similar thing... we can't have new rate cuts.... people earning .32 cents per mile on some markets is just plain robbery.


I will make sure my elected officials know that if they support anything like this, I will not be voting for them.


----------



## Cantina00

To avoid AB5,, all uber and lyft need to do is:

1. Tell you where the pick-up is,

2. Tell you where the drop-off is

3. Estimated time and distance

3. How much you will get paid guaranteed

4. Pay you the guaranteed amount,, plus any extra time or distance the trip took

5. Let the driver keep all tips

6. Let the driver decide if the trip is worth it

7. Probably not possible,, but let the driver set their own rates

You are not an indenpendent contractor,, If those qualifiers are not met


----------



## The Gift of Fish

Azpilot2211 said:


> I want more money. I deserve it!! Its not fair!! wah wah.


If you don't like the new employee status then you could always get another job! There's not need to cry about it! That's the great thing about a capitalist economy - if one wants to earn more money then one can always improve the skill sets one has to offer employers and thereby increase one's economic value.


----------



## Tampa Bay Hauler

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> By my estimation...
> 
> Min wage in Florida as an employee uber driver using his/her own car would equal $22.00 an hour.
> 
> Florida has a min wage of $8.46 an hour.
> 
> California?
> 
> Min wage in Francisco for an uber driver is closer to _*$28 an hour.*_
> 
> 10 hours?
> 
> *$280!*
> 
> This isn't benefits, this is simply min wage free and clear of all deductions!
> 
> 4 10s and your looking at $1120
> 
> 50 weeks a year, 56,000.
> 
> Let's assume they have to pay OT.
> 
> Well it won't be double $28 an hour, only about $36 an hour.
> 
> But time and a half?
> 
> Yeah they only have to pay time and a half for actual labor, not in mileage reimbursements.
> 
> Truth is... after having freshly crunched the numbers their hourly costs might not even be 1.20 times higher for overtime, if they take benefits into the equation it might be cheaper to NOT cap it at 29.5 hours a week.
> 
> 58c a mile + $15.00 an hour for the first 40 hours
> THEN
> 58c a mile plu 22.50 per hour for every hour after that?
> 
> That sounds like a good incentive to get drivers on the road past 40 hours.
> 
> I'm not 100% sure on that math so, maybe?


 Do you really think they will pay overtime? Not only will they not pay overtime,during non peak hours drivers will be taken off the platform. Do you think they are going to pay 100 drivers to sit at the airport when 30 drivers will do the job? Your math is very good. Your conclusion is is way off.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Leoncio said:


> Sorry but you HAVE to be a full time employee to get "benefits"
> You cant get medical insurance if you work 2 hours. Uber and Lyft will try to keep everybody part time to avoid paying into this expense. They dont give a crap about drivers well being. They are almost a decade "improving drivers pay" they say every time they lower fares.


There is no such thing in legal terms as a 'full-time employee".
Legislation can outline a minimum number of hours worked over a period of time to determine eligibility for required federal or state benefits, including health care participation.


----------



## SuperDumped

Steve appleby said:


> Yup!!! That's pretty much what I said. And yet people call me ignorant


it is ignorant they CANT deactivate for acceptance rate judge forced that years ago

they don't need to fire or deactivate drivers 96% fail by design "pro" or non pro

the 4% that succeed already figured out how to win at this ponzi

did any of that happen in ny? unemployment LMAO they'll never pay that, theyll raise rates like in ny

no one really wants to be an employee but they wont be able to treat drivers like one anymore they'll fight as long as they can with appeals & bribes but in the end the new ants will least get minimum wage while the 4% will continue doing exactly what they currently do at a higher per mile & minute rate

Travis & company will continue to laugh in their 34-77+ million dollar mansions while avoiding jail


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

uberdriverfornow said:


> it actually passed the assembly already
> 
> it should be heading to the governors desk now
> 
> i think she misspoke


No... she didn't mis-speak. There are amendments by the senate that need to be considered by the assembly before it goes to the governor's desk:

09/10/19*In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. *May be considered on or after September 12 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.09/10/19Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly.


----------



## iheartuber

The rate cut will not come from Uber,
The rate cut will come from the situation as a whole.

You will not be able to drive as many hours if any at all

You will not be able to drive when you want

Your tax decudruons will be gone.

Your weekly gross will be higher but your weekly net after taxes will be much lower.

No one likes AB5 except liberal
Aholes who think they’re “helping the working man”


----------



## dnlbaboof

Hooray we will be forced to pick up 4.2 pool riders or get fired, hooray no more mileage deduction kiss your Obamacare subsidy goodbye......hooray they could have just passed a bill with a minimum rate per mile but no!!! Take a potty break you're fired!!!!! And say goodbye to stop trips and destination feature, if they are paying min wage which we were making anyway no destination filter for you!!!!!!!


----------



## Don'tchasethesurge

iheartuber said:


> The rate cut will not come from Uber,
> The rate cut will come from the situation as a whole.
> 
> You will not be able to drive as many hours if any at all
> 
> You will not be able to drive when you want
> 
> Your tax decudruons will be gone.
> 
> Your weekly gross will be higher but your weekly net after taxes will be much lower.
> 
> No one likes AB5 except liberal
> Aholes who think they're "helping the working man"


Hey the only one at fault are the ridesharing companies who keep lowering the rates..... it is not liberal issue.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

iheartuber said:


> The rate cut will not come from Uber,
> The rate cut will come from the situation as a whole.
> 
> You will not be able to drive as many hours if any at all
> 
> You will not be able to drive when you want
> 
> Your tax decudruons will be gone.
> 
> Your weekly gross will be higher but your weekly net after taxes will be much lower.
> 
> No one likes AB5 except liberal
> Aholes who think they're "helping the working man"


Amazing what foresight you have - must feel great to know things before they happen! 

I wonder why the IRS publishes Form 2106?
About *Form 2106*, Employee Business Expenses​Employees file this *form* to deduct ordinary and necessary expenses for their job. An ordinary expense is one that is common and accepted in your field of trade, business, or profession. A necessary expense is one that is helpful and appropriate for your business.Mar 5, 2019 ​


----------



## Don'tchasethesurge

Instead of being upset... blame uber and lyft for the race to the bottom... they keep lowering rates with no end in sight. This was bound to happen. They pushed too far.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

dnlbaboof said:


> Hooray we will be forced to pick up 4.2 pool riders or get fired, hooray no more mileage deduction kiss your Obamacare subsidy goodbye......hooray they could have just passed a bill with a minimum rate per mile but no!!! Take a potty break you're fired!!!!! And say goodbye to stop trips and destination feature, if they are paying min wage which we were making anyway no destination filter for you!!!!!!!


You do know that EMPLOYEES can deduct expenses, right? (see IRS Form2106)
Please stop spreading the lie that they can't.

The difference under this bill, is that as an employee, the employer *may* be required to pay for or reimburse some some expenses incurred by it's employee(s) on behalf of the company.


----------



## Tampa Bay Hauler

Kodyhead said:


> Imo if it comes to this they will incentivise part time drivers with better rates than full time drivers. I would also imagine better badges for part timers to earn too


 According to federal standards 32 hours is full time and less than that is part time. A lot of companies would prefer 20 part time employees to any full time employees if they could find a way to do it.Look for Rideshare companies to pull drivers from the app if they start pushing 32 hours.


----------



## iheartuber

Don'tchasethesurge said:


> Instead of being upset... blame uber and lyft for the race to the bottom... they keep lowering rates with no end in sight. This was bound to happen. They pushed too far.


Well... duh


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Uber_Yota_916 said:


> Overtime. Doubt it. 30 hours max per app. No benefits paid out. The golden goose is about start pooping lead.


The Golden Goose? Seriously? You call less than min wage with zero benefits the Golden Goose? Haha. Now THAT is funny.



Tampa Bay Hauler said:


> According to federal standards 32 hours is full time and less than that is part time. A lot of companies would prefer 20 part time employees to any full time employees if they could find a way to do it.Look for Rideshare companies to pull drivers from the app if they start pushing 32 hours.


No such thing.
example: For the purposes of health care benefits, an employee who works than 20 hrs/wk on average is eligible for benefits from the company.


----------



## iheartuber

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The Golden Goose? Seriously? You call less than min wage with zero benefits the Golden Goose? Haha. Now THAT is funny.


Let's put it this way:
Take a vet who knows what he's doing (not an idiot ant) and compare what he makes now to after AB5. Then we can talk.

As for the ant, they will see a slight increase but come April 15 will have to pay more taxes than they did before

So- all around a net loss.

You don't see it now, but you will


----------



## VanGuy

Somebody must know something about what the Governor was saying when he said they could work around it because their stock is up $1.50 so far, 4.5%.


----------



## dnlbaboof

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You do know that EMPLOYEES can deduct expenses, right? (see IRS Form2106)
> Please stop spreading the lie that they can't.
> 
> The difference under this bill, is that as an employee, the employer *may* be required to pay for or reimburse some some expenses incurred by it's employee(s) on behalf of the company.


Employees can not deduct miles since tax act of 2017. And uber will never reimburse for mileage, they'd rather just leave the state.... 
https://money.usnews.com/money/pers...o-know-about-claiming-a-mileage-tax-deduction
*CLAIMING A DEDUCTION for business mileage can be a good way to reduce how much you owe Uncle Sam, but the government is tightening up the rules for tax-deductible miles.
"It used to be an employee could deduct their mileage, but that is no longer (allowed)," says Bob Charron, a CPA and partner-in-charge of tax department for accounting firm Friedman LLP in New York City. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated itemized deductions for unreimbursed business expenses like mileage. The tax reform law also significantly narrowed the mileage tax deduction for moving expenses. That can now only be claimed by active-duty military members who are relocating because of new orders. Still, a mileage deduction still exists for certain situations.
Under the new tax code, you can claim a mileage deduction for:*

*Business mileage for the self-employed.*
*Mileage related to medical appointments.*
*Mileage incurred while volunteering for a nonprofit.*


----------



## Uber_Yota_916

Both U/L should turn off the apps on January 1st. Let the people revolt and wait until they are begged to come back. Local governments will shit bricks when their tax dollars disappear. How much $$$ do the airports bring in? It’s not chump change.

Plus it would benefit all the drivers. It’s like forced sobriety. Good for the betterment of society.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

*STOP SPREADING THE LIE THAT EXPENSES WON'T BE DEDUCTIBLE!!*

It doesn't matter if you are an employee or an independent contractor,
*UNREIMBURSED business expenses ARE DEDUCTIBLE*.

*IRS FORM 2106*
https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-form-2106
*Employees file this form to deduct ordinary and necessary expenses for their job.*

*An ordinary expense is one that is common and accepted in your field of trade, business, or profession.*
*A necessary expense is one that is helpful and appropriate for your business. An expense does not have to be required to be considered necessary.*
*Will the STD MILEAGE DEDUCTION BE AVAILABLE TO AN EMPLOYEE? PROBABLY NOT.*
But the very fact that it won't be available due to changes in the tax law from 2017, would mean that t*he EMPLOYER would be liable for the expense*.


----------



## Seamus

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Amazing what foresight you have - must feel great to know things before they happen! :smiles:
> 
> I wonder why the IRS publishes Form 2106?
> About *Form 2106*, Employee Business Expenses​Employees file this *form* to deduct ordinary and necessary expenses for their job. An ordinary expense is one that is common and accepted in your field of trade, business, or profession. A necessary expense is one that is helpful and appropriate for your business.Mar 5, 2019 ​


Not to be argumentative but you are conflating two different issues. Before the 2018 tax year you could write off your unreimbursed employee expenses. (mileage deductions, etc..) As those who filed tax returns and tried to itemize deductions in 2018 realized, Trump's Tax Reform *took away *the ability to itemize and deduct unreimbursed employee expenses.

What was left was the ability to use form 2106 that you are referencing. HOWEVER, what you are leaving out is that this only applies to the following: Armed Force Reservists, qualified performing artists, fee based government officials, and employees with impairment related work expenses. A very small group of people. No, gig workers could not use 2106 to write off their mileage. A simple fact. Take a look at the actual form heading if you doubt.


----------



## LADriver

AllenChicago said:


> In much of private industry, when benefit increases are forced upon a company, or forced into implementation for the first time, employee pay is reduced accordingly.
> 
> What's the smallest percentage of fare you'll accept, in return for Health/Dental Insurance, 401K, etc..? In other words, how large of a pay cut will you accept?


No pay cut is possible since the minimum wage in California is $12 an hour. It's $14.25 an hour in the City and County of Los Angeles. It's $15 an hour in San Jose. Plus California labor law is very strict and defined: If an employee reports to work (logs on) and there is no work, the employee is owed a minimum of 4 hours of pay. Mandatory overtime for over 8 hours a day or 40 hours per week. Including the famous "Gap time" while waiting for a ride. (Google California limousine employment lawsuits. There are hundreds.) Mandatory time and a half on Holidays, etc.

And the Gig Economy companies will now be liable for work expenses such as gas, maintenance, insurance, vehicle per mile reimbursement for personal cars used for business, etc.

Plus, the companies will have to provide vacation pay, worker's comp for injuries, unemployment insurance, 401K's for bigger companies (over 25 employees), paid time off for jury duty, maternity leave, etc.

It's endless expenses for the companies. Not a loss for the employees.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

dnlbaboof said:


> Employees can not deduct miles since tax act of 2017. And uber will never reimburse for mileage, they'd rather just leave the state....
> https://money.usnews.com/money/pers...o-know-about-claiming-a-mileage-tax-deduction
> *CLAIMING A DEDUCTION for business mileage can be a good way to reduce how much you owe Uncle Sam, but the government is tightening up the rules for tax-deductible miles.
> "It used to be an employee could deduct their mileage, but that is no longer (allowed)," says Bob Charron, a CPA and partner-in-charge of tax department for accounting firm Friedman LLP in New York City. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated itemized deductions for unreimbursed business expenses like mileage. The tax reform law also significantly narrowed the mileage tax deduction for moving expenses. That can now only be claimed by active-duty military members who are relocating because of new orders. Still, a mileage deduction still exists for certain situations.
> Under the new tax code, you can claim a mileage deduction for:*
> 
> *Business mileage for the self-employed.*
> *Mileage related to medical appointments.*
> *Mileage incurred while volunteering for a nonprofit.*


But the very fact that it won't be available due to changes in the tax law from 2017, would mean that t*he EMPLOYER would be liable for the expense*.



Seamus said:


> Not to be argumentative but you are conflating two different issues. Before the 2018 tax year you could write off you're unreimbursed employee expenses. (mileage deductions, etc..) As those who filed tax returns and tried to itemize deductions in 20128 realized, Trump's Tax Reform *took away *the ability to itemize and deduct unreimbursed employee expenses.
> 
> What was left was the ability to use form 2106 that you are referencing. HOWEVER, what you are leaving out is that this only applies to the following: Armed Force Reservists, qualified performing artists, fee based government officials, and employees with impairment related work expenses. A very small group of people. No, gig workers could not use 2106 to write off their mileage. A simple fact. Take a look at the actual form heading if you doubt.


I appreciate the input, but but the very fact that the std deduction won't be available to *EMPLOYEES* due to changes in the tax law from 2017, would mean that *the EMPLOYER would be liable for the expense*. T

I provided the link to the IRS web page above. Here's a screenshot:










*And you're RIGHT... the form does now say for use only by Armed Forces Reservists, etc... WOW - I missed that!*









*In any case - expenses by an employee on behalf of an employer, are the responsibility of the EMPLOYER.*
It appears that the Tax Reform Act of 2017 was the Gov't saying to employers: stop making the Gov't reimburse YOUR employees for Your expenses. (which, may might sense, except that those expenses reimbursed to employees are Tax Deductible expenses for the company. LOL!)


----------



## dnlbaboof

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p463.pdf*
Car expenses. The cost of using your car as an employee, whether measured using actual expenses or the standard mileage rate, will no longer be allowed to be claimed as an unreimbursed employee travel expense as a miscellaneous itemized deduction due to the suspension of miscellaneous itemized deductions that are subject to the 2% floor under section 67. The suspension applies to tax years beginning after December 2017, and before January 2026. Deductions for expenses that are deductible in determining adjusted gross income are not suspended. For example, Armed Forces reservists, qualified performing artists, and fee-basis state or local government officials are allowed to deduct unreimbursed employee travel expenses as an adjustment to total income on Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 24. *

Straight from the IRS. No more deducting miles for employees. Form 2106 is specific only for armed services/performing artists etc.....


----------



## Seamus

Michael - Cleveland said:


> would mean that *the EMPLOYER would be liable for the expense*.


I agree that any "normal" employer who required employees to use their private vehicles would reimburse for mileage or have an almost impossible time finding employees who would do it.


----------



## LADriver

Bob Reynolds said:


> The reason AB5 passed was because the pay was cut below poverty wages and there was nothing left to take from the drivers. So there will be no pay cuts at Uber and Lyft.
> 
> Now Lyft and Uber will have to pay at least the minimum wage plus driver vehicle expenses which the IRS says are .58 cents a mile. That is not a pay cut. That is a pay increase for the majority of the drivers.
> 
> 
> Nothing for right now. The law just applies to California until other states pass similar laws.


UBER slammed a %30 pay cut on Southern California drivers in March 2019. The average ride went from $10 to $7. A very clear 30 percent loss. So, the drivers in the Southern California market (Not the New York market or even the San Francisco market.) were stripped of any profit and were forced to drive AT COST!

So UBER/LYFT, here's your payback.

I know because I've driven over 18,000 UBER rides since 2013. But, I also have my own limousine service with elite clients. So, I never committed fully to UBER. Because this AB5 ball buster was on the horizon.

California usually leads national trends, so, I'd start looking for a real job out there in Trump Land.


----------



## Tampa Bay Hauler

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The Golden Goose? Seriously? You call less than min wage with zero benefits the Golden Goose? Haha. Now THAT is funny.
> 
> 
> No such thing.
> example: For the purposes of health care benefits, an employee who works than 20 hrs/wk on average is eligible for benefits from the company.


 Eligible is different than mandated. For example you can check Obama Care. Threshold is 32 hours. At least it was at first. Maybe they changed it. I was working at Jimmy Johns at the time and they were not going to let anyone but managers get over 32 hours.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Seamus said:


> I agree that any "normal" employer who required employees to use their private vehicles would reimburse for mileage or have an almost impossible time finding employees who would do it.


yep... and the TNC's have already lost cases in front of the CA Labor Board brought by non-employees claiming expenses. If AB-5 is signed into law, you can bet that driver's expenses are going to be one of the key issues that the TNCs will have to deal with



dnlbaboof said:


> https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p463.pdf
> *Car expenses. The cost of using your car as an employee, whether measured using actual expenses or the standard mileage rate, will no longer be allowed to be claimed as an unreimbursed employee travel expense as a miscellaneous itemized deduction due to the suspension of miscellaneous itemized deductions that are subject to the 2% floor under section 67. The suspension applies to tax years beginning after December 2017, and before January 2026. Deductions for expenses that are deductible in determining adjusted gross income are not suspended. For example, Armed Forces reservists, qualified performing artists, and fee-basis state or local government officials are allowed to deduct unreimbursed employee travel expenses as an adjustment to total income on Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 24. *
> 
> Straight from the IRS. No more deducting miles for employees. Form 2106 is specific only for armed services/performing artists etc.....


yep. But, expenses incurred by an employee on behalf of an employer, are the responsibility of the EMPLOYER. CA's labor board has already ruled in favor of driver's who were determined to be 'employees' for the purpose of expenses.


----------



## kevin92009

BigBadJohn said:


> Yea! Errrrrr Booo! I don't know man, i just don't know.


Let's see how it plays out let's see how exaggerated Uber scare tactics are I'm sure if they have an issue with scheduling they will adapt and they will make it to what drivers want they will have no choice


----------



## LADriver

Sal29 said:


> At this point I almost want Uber, Lyft, and others to go out of business and be replaced by more humane companies kind of like The Costco of The Gig Economy.
> 
> 
> They CAN'T REDUCE PAY because employees are ENTITLED TO MINIMUM WAGE AFTER EXPENSES. Uber/Lyft drives will have to make the minimum wage AFTER DEDUCTING 58 cents per mile.
> If you drive 200 miles in 8 hours and make $116, then your income will be considered $0 and Uber will have to pay you minimum wage for 8 hours on top of those $116 you made. Uber and Lyft will try and claim that you're only working when you are on a trip, but California will geve Uber/Lyft another beating for the ages if they try and pull that BS. Uber/Lyft will have to pay overtime and other stuff too.


Love it.

UBER and LYFT are falling into the web of highly litigated limousine company issues such as Wait Time/Gap Time.

Google; Diva Limousine Lawsuit / Music Express Lawsuit/ CLS Lawsuit / BLS Lawsuit for all the juicy details.

Back in the day, limousine companies would pay chauffeurs per job, not per hour, as required by California employment law. Since the chauffeurs WERE classified as employees. They also did not pay chauffeurs for the wait time in between jobs. Big mistake.

As a result of these numerous lawsuit settlements against the big limo services, drivers MUST be paid for wait/gap time!


----------



## dnlbaboof

The irony in this bill is that it doesnt provide any health insurance, it takes it away since your obamacare subsidies will be gone w/o deducting miles, provides no increase in pay since california drivers make the most in the nation already, jeapordizes thousands of jobs since uber could leave like they left austin. Makes your job much harder, since if youre an employee you can forget about not accepting 4.3 pool riders or using a dest filter....

They could have passed a law that gave min 1$ per mile (Go back to the 2015 rates) after uber's cut and made changes to rating system that protected drivers, enabled dashcam support etc. The people who passed this law know nothing about helping drivers they just want likes and clicks on social media. This is going to be a trainwreck.


----------



## Coastal_Cruiser

Jlynn said:


> Whats this mean for the ride share drivers in the rest of the country?


It is not unusual for other state legislatures to follow the lead of California after all the heavy lifting has been done by CA. For example in the arena of motor vehicles, several states basically copied the California ZEV law (Zero Emission Vehicles), which insures a stipulated percentage of vehicles sold are non-polluters.

IN OTHER NEWS

• Taxi drivers have been seen dancing on the roofs of their cabs

• The law of unintended consequences has been unleashed in a way that would shame the Sardaukar

• Labor unions are frothing at the mouth over the potential windfall in new dues


----------



## LADriver

kevin92009 said:


> Let's see how it plays out let's see how exaggerated Uber scare tactics are I'm sure if they have an issue with scheduling they will adapt and they will make it to what drivers want they will have no choice


Let's look at the UBER playbook for when they don't get there way, shall we?

CHINA:
Kalanick (remember this character who is now worth $7 Billion after the UBER IPO?), decided to sellout to Didi China because UBER could never become #1 in China. Playbook move: PULL OUT.

Austin Texas: UBER spent $8 million to fight Austin's election to have drivers mandatory finger printed background checked by the FBI to gain employment. Austin voted Yes. UBER lost. Playbook move: PULL OUT. Uber AND Lyft pulled out of the Austin market. Austin created it's own rideshare APP.

California: AB5 gets signed into law by Gov. Newsom. ALL Gig Economy independent contractors, including STRIPPERS!, must be classified as employees. UBER/LYFT reject having to absorb real employee economics and cost. Playbook move: PULL OUT.


----------



## iheartuber

Michael - Cleveland said:


> *STOP SPREADING THE LIE THAT EXPENSES WON'T BE DEDUCTIBLE!!*
> 
> It doesn't matter if you are an employee or an independent contractor,
> *UNREIMBURSED business expenses ARE DEDUCTIBLE*.
> 
> *IRS FORM 2106*
> https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-form-2106
> *Employees file this form to deduct ordinary and necessary expenses for their job.*
> 
> *An ordinary expense is one that is common and accepted in your field of trade, business, or profession.*
> *A necessary expense is one that is helpful and appropriate for your business. An expense does not have to be required to be considered necessary.*
> *Will the STD MILEAGE DEDUCTION BE AVAILABLE TO AN EMPLOYEE? PROBABLY NOT.*
> But the very fact that it won't be available due to changes in the tax law from 2017, would mean that t*he EMPLOYER would be liable for the expense*.


If AB5 forces UL to pay drivers expenses that means they will pay mileage

If UL pays mileage then you cannot deduct from taxes.

Right now UL does not pay mileage which is why we can deduct from taxes

AB5 will force UL to pay mileage


----------



## LADriver

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Well Uber/Lyft really brought this on themselves when they drop California pay to ,60 cent/mile. Thats equivalent to .30 cent/mile in most states.


Yes. Gas remains over $3.50 a gallon for the cheap. Over $4 for premium. An apartment is clearly over $1500 to $2000 for a little box to live in.

UBER decided to punish the L.A. drivers with their 60 cents per mile bull. Well, here's your payback.


----------



## MiamiKid

uberdriverfornow said:


> it actually passed the assembly already
> 
> it should be heading to the governors desk now
> 
> i think she misspoke


Governor Newsome is not going to sign the bill in its present form.

Talks underway now.
?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

iheartuber said:


> If AB5 forces UL to pay drivers expenses that means they will pay mileage
> 
> If UL pays mileage then you cannot deduct from taxes.
> 
> Right now UL does not pay mileage which is why we can deduct from taxes
> 
> AB5 will force UL to pay mileage


Right now we don't know what AB5 will do. I think it might be a stretch to say that it will force the TNCs to pay mileage. But it should hold them liable for expenses in one way or another.

We just don't know yet what the consequences, intended or otherwise, we'll be. All of this discussion and opinion is just that. Discussion and opinion. And very interesting.


----------



## 2smart2drive

AllenChicago said:


> In much of private industry, when benefit increases are forced upon a company, or forced into implementation for the first time, employee pay is reduced accordingly.
> 
> What's the smallest percentage of fare you'll accept, in return for Health/Dental Insurance, 401K, etc..? In other words, how large of a pay cut will you accept?


UberX-tier rates can't get any lower, being at the bottom already. Below the bottom is lava (and hell, I've heard). If Uber cuts rates even farther - they will lose a significant portion of their drivers base, guaranteed. This isn't 'my prediction' - in other countries, it has happened to them already - the market will split into smaller transportation entities.

USA isn't the only country where Uber tried to built their monopoly playground. In russia, they disrupted taxi industry as well, but over time lost the lion share to copy-cutters, smaller localized entities with better rates for drivers. In China, rates slashing race to the bottom ended with Uber exiting Chinese (lucrative) market, all together (for a sweet ransom to back-up, but still - Uber lost "market domination" battles there - and, hopefully, learned something. Or not.

There is one, unique to America, alternative, however: Uber could morph riders' mindset into the 'tips are required' category - keeping its dominant presence in US market, but switching the burden of providing sustainable living wedges on riders, who will living on tips'


Azpilot2211 said:


> you think you're going to be able to drive for both companies now? LOL. You entitled millennials brought this on yourselves, maybe you all will learn a thing or two before you go @@@@@ing and try to change capitalism again.
> 
> The new Uber, You will work 12pm to 9 am, 2 15 minute breaks, 1 hour lunch from 3am to 4 am. Accept ALL requests no matter the distance or you're fired. Hope you like the new taxes that will be taken out of your paycheck each week, plus insurance. It truly amazes me how dumb some of you are. I want more money. I deserve it!! Its not fair!! wah wah. You just screwed yourselves.


Yeah, yeah, yeah... Hypothetically. 
Let's not forget, WHY Uber spread like wild fire, initially, and when:
Only AFTER 'affordable' UberX line of service was introduced to the market that couldn't afford, except in emergencies, getting around in taxi cabs - Uber gained track. 
The original line of service, Uber Black,
was anything but 'affordable' - servicing, mostly, the traveling needs of well-paid CEOs, top-tiered management league, etc - payable by their respected entities' (tax write-offs) travel expenses allowances - not from the pocket change of nowadays Uber-X riders.

It was UberX, not UberBlack - aside from new level of higher convenience: an ease to request, speedy response, guaranteed arrivals, better-mannered drivers, cleaner cars and etc - Uber's main attraction was how relatively inexpensive the rates were, compared to existing alternatives, taxis. During start-up phase, when Uber did not have enough drivers to cover their bases for all ride requests, pay rates and incentives, offered to drivers, were MUCH higher than now. HIGHER pay and FLEXIBLE hours IS what made Uber attractive to DRIVERS. Word got around and new army of Uber-drivers wannabes lined-up to sign-in at Green Hubs.

It's called 'natural demand'. When the product is good, it has a way of selling itself epithet much sweat. However, once supply for demand reaches its tipping point, puppets' masters can slash rates - as low as they're pleased - until the supply-demand balance gets once-sided again.

Which is EXACTLY what will happen if post-AB5 UBER will dare to force-introduce pre-schedules hours & strict rules of all sorts - using drivers' own vehicles, plus risking lives - all for a minimum wage job opportunity that will destroy their own cars in the process.

Contrary to common belief, there aren't enough - not only stupid, but full-time unemployed (!) - drivers around, who will be willing to full-time their cars to the graveyard for some shitty bare bones job compensation.

Good luck to UBER at that point. Funny thing, UBER already KNOWS this dilemma. It's not so much about paying the state extra money. It's Uber's entire structure that would be at risk.


----------



## Agent Cam

Jlynn said:


> Whats this mean for the ride share drivers in the rest of the country?


It will not have an impact for quite some time. Other major cities might follow with similar bills if pushed in the direction but each would take several months to draft, then be presented, votes on etc.

Neither Uber nor Lyft prefer the model so changes without legislation are highly unlikely. The jury is still out as to whether a bill like this will be beneficial to drivers. My humble opinion - bills like this help the average guys ( who can get more by working less ) but hurt those of us that want to hustle and push the limits to exceed gains. Just my two cents.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

MiamiKid said:


> Governor Newsome is not going to sign the bill in its present form.
> 
> Talks underway now.
> ?


Governor Newsom has already expressed support for the bill. I know that does not mean he will sign it. But he supports the movement. If there are things he finds egregious in the bill when it reaches him, he will send it back for reworking. But he has given every indication that he will sign legislation requiring companies to classify workers properly in California.


----------



## May H.

uberdriverfornow said:


> it actually passed the assembly already
> 
> it should be heading to the governors desk now
> 
> i think she misspoke


She didn't mis-speak, after being passed in the state senate it's sent back to the assembly for revisions before it's sent to the governor.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Agent Cam said:


> It will not have an impact for quite some time. Other major cities might follow with similar bills if pushed in the direction but each would take several months to draft, then be presented, votes on etc.
> 
> Neither Uber nor Lyft prefer the model so changes without legislation are highly unlikely. The jury is still out as to whether a bill like this will be beneficial to drivers. My humble opinion - bills like this help the average guys ( who can get more by working less ) but hurt those of us that want to hustle and push the limits to exceed gains. Just my two cents.


Won't be possible in what you call most major cities. Most major cities are within states that have already put in place Statewide legislation governing the Rideshare companies.


----------



## iheartuber

2smart2drive said:


> UberX-tier rates can't get any lower, being at the bottom already. Below the bottom is lava (and hell, I've heard). If Uber cuts rates even farther - they will lose a significant portion of their drivers base, guaranteed. This isn't 'my prediction' - in other countries, it has happened to them already - the market will split into smaller transportation entities.
> 
> USA isn't the only country where Uber tried to built their monopoly playground. In russia, they disrupted taxi industry as well, but over time lost the lion share to copy-cutters, smaller localized entities with better rates for drivers. In China, rates slashing race to the bottom ended with Uber exiting Chinese (lucrative) market, all together (for a sweet ransom to back-up, but still - Uber lost "market domination" battles there - and, hopefully, learned something. Or not.
> 
> There is one, unique to America, alternative, however: Uber could morph riders' mindset into the 'tips are required' category - keeping its dominant presence in US market, but switching the burden of providing sustainable living wedges on riders, who will living on tips'
> 
> Yeah, yeah, yeah... Hypothetically.
> Let's not forget, WHY Uber spread like wild fire, initially, and when:
> Only AFTER 'affordable' UberX line of service was introduced to the market that couldn't afford, except in emergencies, getting around in taxi cabs - Uber gained track.
> The original line of service, Uber Black,
> was anything but 'affordable' - servicing, mostly, the traveling needs of well-paid CEOs, top-tiered management league, etc - payable by their respected entities' (tax write-offs) travel expenses allowances - not from the pocket change of nowadays Uber-X riders.
> 
> It was UberX, not UberBlack - aside from new level of higher convenience: an ease to request, speedy response, guaranteed arrivals, better-mannered drivers, cleaner cars and etc - Uber's main attraction was how relatively inexpensive the rates were, compared to existing alternatives, taxis. During start-up phase, when Uber did not have enough drivers to cover their bases for all ride requests, pay rates and incentives, offered to drivers, were MUCH higher than now. HIGHER pay and FLEXIBLE hours IS what made Uber attractive to DRIVERS. Word got around and new army of Uber-drivers wannabes lined-up to sign-in at Green Hubs.
> 
> It's called 'natural demand'. When the product is good, it has a way of selling itself epithet much sweat. However, once supply for demand reaches its tipping point, puppets' masters can slash rates - as low as they're pleased - until the supply-demand balance gets once-sided again.
> 
> Which is EXACTLY what will happen if post-AB5 UBER will dare to force-introduce pre-schedules hours & strict rules of all sorts - using drivers' own vehicles, plus risking lives - all for a minimum wage job opportunity that will destroy their own cars in the process.
> 
> Contrary to common belief, there aren't enough - not only stupid, but full-time unemployed (!) - drivers around, who will be willing to full-time their cars to the graveyard for some shitty bare bones job compensation.
> 
> Good luck to UBER at that point. Funny thing, UBER already KNOWS this dilemma. It's not so much about paying the state extra money. It's Uber's entire structure that would be at risk.


Correct me if I'm wrong but under AB5 there will be no driver rates- it will simply be min wage plus expenses (whether it's mileage or calculated some other way)

Talk of "rate cuts" due to AB5 is misleading because UL will simply use a whole new way to pay drivers

A better way to frame the question is:

Will bottom line drivers make less money from AB5? Yes


----------



## MiamiKid

iheartuber said:


> If AB5 forces UL to pay drivers expenses that means they will pay mileage
> 
> If UL pays mileage then you cannot deduct from taxes.
> 
> Right now UL does not pay mileage which is why we can deduct from taxes
> 
> AB5 will force UL to pay mileage


AB


Michael - Cleveland said:


> Governor Newsom has already expressed support for the bill. I know that does not mean he will sign it. But he supports the movement. If there are things he finds egregious in the bill when it reaches him, he will send it back for reworking. But he has given every indication that he will sign legislation requiring companies to classify workers properly in California.


That's a matter of opinion regarding classifying workers. Most of us feel they're classified perfectly already.
?


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer

LADriver said:


> Yes. Gas remains over $3.50 a gallon for the cheap. Over $4 for premium. An apartment is clearly over $1500 to $2000 for a little box to live in.
> 
> UBER decided to punish the L.A. drivers with their 60 cents per mile bull. Well, here's your payback.


Yea doing the math for LA drivers is depressing. I can imagine 3 rideshare roommates each doing 70+ hour weeks to just get by.

A friend of mine moved out there for a while. He got emotional and told me the truth one day that he was homeless for a time there and it got pretty rough.


----------



## dnlbaboof

The rates in dec of 2015 were perfect around 1.30 per mile in CA before ubers cut.......just go back to that, this provides nothing but hassle and control for drivers. Get ready to pay up for health insurance cause you cant deduct miles and be under control of a boss who'll tell you you must pick up a 4.2 pool or be fired............


----------



## Bob Reynolds

dnlbaboof said:


> The rates in dec of 2015 were perfect around 1.30 per mile in CA before ubers cut.......just go back to that, this provides nothing but hassle and control for drivers. Get ready to pay up for health insurance cause you cant deduct miles and be under control of a boss who'll tell you you must pick up a 4.2 pool or be fired............


Uber and Lyft can pay their drivers by the mile. AB5 does not prohibit them from doing this. However the amount paid per mile can not work out to less than the minimum wage plus driver expenses.


----------



## DoubleDee

MiamiKid said:


> Governor Newsome is not going to sign the bill in its present form.
> 
> Talks underway now.
> ?


Of course Newsome will sign the bill. Unless Uber and Lyft get together and line his pockets with cash.

Then of course Newsome will drop to his knees and @@@@ the Uber and Lyft corporate @@@@s.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

dnlbaboof said:


> The rates in dec of 2015 were perfect around 1.30 per mile in CA before ubers cut.......just go back to that, this provides nothing but hassle and control for drivers. Get ready to pay up for health insurance cause you cant deduct miles and be under control of a boss who'll tell you you must pick up a 4.2 pool or be fired............


as has been shown to you a million times now, you can always deduct mileage when using your own car for work


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

iheartuber said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but under AB5 there will be no driver rates- it will simply be min wage plus expenses (whether it's mileage or calculated some other way)
> 
> Talk of "rate cuts" due to AB5 is misleading because UL will simply use a whole new way to pay drivers
> 
> A better way to frame the question is:
> 
> Will bottom line drivers make less money from AB5? Yes


60c a mile?

That's not enough to reimburse expenses unless you have 100% of your miles being paid.

The rates are so far below what they would _need_ to be for employees that you folks arn't getting it.

10 hours...$140

200 miles $118 (tax free)

That's $258 for 10 hours...

And of course you'll have to pay some taxes on that..


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> as has been shown to you a million times now, you can always deduct mileage when using your own car for work


Can you deduct it if you've been reimbursed already by your employer?

Example- a traveling salesman is a W2 full employee of a software company. He racks up 30,000 miles a year driving all over the state to meet with clients.

The company fully pays him mileage

Does that mean he can not deduct mileage on his taxes?

Under AB5 the Uber Driver is in the same boat as this guy


----------



## dnlbaboof

uberdriverfornow said:


> as has been shown to you a million times now, you can always deduct mileage when using your own car for work


please stop. You can not anymore since 2017 unless you work in the military etc. Straight from the IRS themselves.

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p463.pdf

*Publication 463 Cat. No. 11081L Travel, Gift, and Car Expenses

Car expenses. The cost of using your car as an employee, whether measured using actual expenses or the standard mileage rate, will no longer be allowed to be claimed as an unreimbursed employee travel expense as a miscellaneous itemized deduction due to the suspension of miscellaneous itemized deductions that are subject to the 2% floor under section 67. The suspension applies to tax years beginning after December 2017, and before January 2026. Deductions for expenses that are deductible in determining adjusted gross income are not suspended. For example, Armed Forces reservists, qualified performing artists, and fee-basis state or local government officials are allowed to deduct unreimbursed employee travel expenses as an adjustment to total income on Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 24.*


----------



## uberdriverfornow

dnlbaboof said:


> please stop. You can not anymore since 2017 unless you work in the military etc. Straight from the IRS themselves.
> 
> https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p463.pdf
> 
> *Publication 463 Cat. No. 11081L Travel, Gift, and Car Expenses
> 
> Car expenses. The cost of using your car as an employee, whether measured using actual expenses or the standard mileage rate, will no longer be allowed to be claimed as an unreimbursed employee travel expense as a miscellaneous itemized deduction due to the suspension of miscellaneous itemized deductions that are subject to the 2% floor under section 67. The suspension applies to tax years beginning after December 2017, and before January 2026. Deductions for expenses that are deductible in determining adjusted gross income are not suspended. For example, Armed Forces reservists, qualified performing artists, and fee-basis state or local government officials are allowed to deduct unreimbursed employee travel expenses as an adjustment to total income on Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 24.*


we'll be getting reimbursed so it won't matter



iheartuber said:


> Can you deduct it if you've been reimbursed already by your employer?
> 
> Example- a traveling salesman is a W2 full employee of a software company. He racks up 30,000 miles a year driving all over the state to meet with clients.
> 
> The company fully pays him mileage
> 
> Does that mean he can not deduct mileage on his taxes?
> 
> Under AB5 the Uber Driver is in the same boat as this guy


it looks like they made it so that you must be reimbursed which means you won't need to deduct it


----------



## iheartuber

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> 60c a mile?
> 
> That's not enough to reimburse expenses unless you have 100% of your miles being paid.
> 
> The rates are so far below what they would _need_ to be for employees that you folks arn't getting it.
> 
> 10 hours...$140
> 
> 200 miles $118 (tax free)
> 
> That's $258 for 10 hours...
> 
> And of course you'll have to pay some taxes on that..


Take it one step further...

If this driver makes $258 in 10 hours under AB5 and has to pay taxes on that but can not deduct mileage or expenses because they've already been reimbursed to him then we're looking at say $64.50 being taken out for taxes .

Vs say half of that under the current system

Then you have to ask yourself will Uber even let you work for 10 hours after AB5? Prob not

That's why I said the best way to look at this is to take the net net bottom line- will drivers make more money or less under AB 5?

The politician crooks want you to think it's more but it will be less


----------



## MiamiKid

uberdriverfornow said:


> as has been shown to you a million times now, you can always deduct mileage when using your own car for work


Wow! Can you not read, or comprehend? The 2017 Tax Law changed the way mileage is deducted for a W2 employee.

Stop arguing your false point, on this forum, and call a CPA or tax professional.

No need to respond, BTW.
?


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> we'll be getting reimbursed so it won't matter


Not at 58 cents a mile. More like 15-20 cents



MiamiKid said:


> Wow! Can you not read, or comprehend? The 2017 Tax Law changed the way mileage is deducted for a W2 employee.
> 
> Stop arguing your false point, on this forum, and call a CPA or tax professional.
> 
> No need to respond, BTW.
> ?


That's why we need to stay ICs!!!


----------



## MiamiKid

iheartuber said:


> Not at 58 cents a mile. More like 15-20 cents
> 
> 
> That's why we need to stay ICs!!!


Agreed!


----------



## dnlbaboof

If uber ever does reimburse for mileage (it wont be 58 cents, much less) and pay a 13 min wage say good bye to any semblance of independence, they are not gonna pay you for refusing low rated pool drivers or having a destination filter on. Youll be deactivated.

Just keep us as independent contractors and go back to the 2015 rates of 1.30 per mile. Problem solved. And if you still whine about not being paid enough get another job.


----------



## iheartuber

MiamiKid said:


> Agreed!


If those who are in arbitration on the Liss-Riordan case got 11c a mile and those who opted out got 37c the average of the two is 24c a mile

That means a 35 hr week will earn you
35 x 12 = $420
900 miles @ 24c / mile = $216
Total= $636 minus taxes

Me now $850 minus taxes

So how is AB5 good at all? How? Any supporter of this crap bill please defend these numbers I'm giving you

They are real numbers, not your pie in the sky liberal bs


----------



## LADriver

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Yea doing the math for LA drivers is depressing. I can imagine 3 rideshare roommates each doing 70+ hour weeks to just get by.
> 
> A friend of mine moved out there for a while. He got emotional and told me the truth one day that he was homeless for a time there and it got pretty rough.


L.A. has over 60,000 homeless right now. They live in RV's, if lucky to have some shelter. There are many living under freeway underpasses to avoid the summer heat. Plus many just living along major streets where they can bum for a dollar.

If you do not have a decent paying job in L.A., please do not move here! We have thousands of homeless.


----------



## dnlbaboof

can we be honest here, so many drivers exaggerate how they only make 4$ per hour have tainted politicians minds. In Ca at least this is a total lie. There are many days you are easily making 20 plus per hour after gas and expenses, and to reduce your expenses on your car, buy a used one less than 10k and maintain it.

If you get long trips back to back you can make decent money, if you drive on nights with high demand with events and all the people barhopping you make decent money.

Yes if on a tuesday night you're in the middle of nowhere at 11pm youre not getting pings you might make 4$ an hour, but you're not even working , you're listening to the radio. Change your strategy then and stop whining. this bill stripped us of our independence and our ability for some drivers to get subsidized obamacare since as an employee your income will go way up w/o the .58 mile deduction.

the solution is one rate per mile for all of Ca. the Dec 2015 trate of 1.30 per mile. Now it will be.... "*You're on the clock! you didnt accept a 4.3 pool!!! you are deactivated!!!!"*


----------



## MiamiKid

dnlbaboof said:


> can we be honest here, so many drivers exaggerate how they only make 4$ per hour have tainted politicians minds. In Ca at least this is a total lie. There are many days you are easily making 20 plus per hour after gas and expenses, and to reduce your expenses on your car, buy a used one less than 10k and maintain it.
> 
> If you get long trips back to back you can make decent money, if you drive on nights with high demand with events and all the people barhopping you make decent money.
> 
> Yes if on a tuesday night you're in the middle of nowhere at 11pm youre not getting pings you might make 4$ an hour, but you're not even working , you're listening to the radio. Change your strategy then and stop whining. this bill stripped us of our independence and our ability for some drivers to get subsidized obamacare since as an employee your income will go way up w/o the .58 mile deduction.
> 
> the solution is one rate per mile for all of Ca. the Dec 2015 trate of 1.30 per mile. Now it will be.... "*You're on the clock! you didnt accept a 4.3 pool!!! you are deactivated!!!!"*


AB5 is a guaranteed job killer. The recent NYC law, regarding rideshare, is a disaster.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> If those who are in arbitration on the Liss-Riordan case got 11c a mile and those who opted out got 37c the average of the two is 24c a mile
> 
> That means a 35 hr week will earn you
> 35 x 12 = $420
> 900 miles @ 24c / mile = $216
> Total= $636 minus taxes
> 
> Me now $850 minus taxes
> 
> So how is AB5 good at all? How? Any supporter of this crap bill please defend these numbers I'm giving you
> 
> They are real numbers, not your pie in the sky liberal bs


because we'll be getting 58 cents a mile


----------



## kevin92009

LADriver said:


> Let's look at the UBER playbook for when they don't get there way, shall we?
> 
> CHINA:
> Kalanick (remember this character who is now worth $7 Billion after the UBER IPO?), decided to sellout to Didi China because UBER could never become #1 in China. Playbook move: PULL OUT.
> 
> Austin Texas: UBER spent $8 million to fight Austin's election to have drivers mandatory finger printed background checked by the FBI to gain employment. Austin voted Yes. UBER lost. Playbook move: PULL OUT. Uber AND Lyft pulled out of the Austin market. Austin created it's own rideshare APP.
> 
> California: AB5 gets signed into law by Gov. Newsom. ALL Gig Economy independent contractors, including STRIPPERS!, must be classified as employees. UBER/LYFT reject having to absorb real employee economics and cost. Playbook move: PULL OUT.


Hey maybe a pull out might be a good idea and then let another company replace them that will treat drivers better , But I hope they stay and just treat drivers better


----------



## uberdriverfornow

dnlbaboof said:


> can we be honest here, so many drivers exaggerate how they only make 4$ per hour have tainted politicians minds. In Ca at least this is a total lie. There are many days you are easily making 20 plus per hour after gas and expenses, and to reduce your expenses on your car, buy a used one less than 10k and maintain it.
> 
> If you get long trips back to back you can make decent money, if you drive on nights with high demand with events and all the people barhopping you make decent money.
> 
> Yes if on a tuesday night you're in the middle of nowhere at 11pm youre not getting pings you might make 4$ an hour, but you're not even working , you're listening to the radio. Change your strategy then and stop whining. this bill stripped us of our independence and our ability for some drivers to get subsidized obamacare since as an employee your income will go way up w/o the .58 mile deduction.
> 
> the solution is one rate per mile for all of Ca. the Dec 2015 trate of 1.30 per mile. Now it will be.... "*You're on the clock! you didnt accept a 4.3 pool!!! you are deactivated!!!!"*


the only place you can make anywhere close to 20 an hour is in sf bay area so the rest of the states drivers aren't makin shit

and that's only til they cut rates there

AB5 ensures all drivers are making a decent wage after expenses


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> because we'll be getting 58 cents a mile


Ha!

In my days of being an employee who was able to submit mileage to be reimbursed it was never IRS rates- always less

What makes you think Uber will be different?


----------



## uberdriverfornow

kevin92009 said:


> Hey maybe a pull out might be a good idea and then let another company replace them that will treat drivers better , But I hope they stay and just treat drivers better


exactly, let em leave and let a real company in that isn't blowing billions on SDC's and bloated executive salaries that do nothing



iheartuber said:


> Ha!
> 
> In my days of being an employee who was able to submit mileage to be reimbursed it was never IRS rates- always less
> 
> What makes you think Uber will be different?


because the law has a special provision that states cities can now go after companies themselves if they don't


----------



## LADriver

kevin92009 said:


> Hey maybe a pull out might be a good idea and then let another company replace them that will treat drivers better , But I hope they stay and just treat drivers better


I have already started my own rideshare company called FUDRIVERS.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

MiamiKid said:


> Wow! Can you not read, or comprehend? The 2017 Tax Law changed the way mileage is deducted for a W2 employee.
> 
> Stop arguing your false point, on this forum, and call a CPA or tax professional.
> 
> No need to respond, BTW.
> ?


when Uber pays for all my expenses as an employee I won't need to worry about deducting mileage as an independent contractor anymore ?


----------



## Don'tchasethesurge

Ppl saying uber should go back to 1.30... it’s pointless. Uber and lyft shot themselves on the foot... now they have to figure out. Now I am interested to see what whether this will change their attitude in other markets. They made rate cuts too far down. This was gonna happen soon or later. Whether this will benefit us or not we will see. Only one to blame is uber lack of respect toward their drivers


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

Leoncio said:


> Sorry but you HAVE to be a full time employee to get "benefits"
> You cant get medical insurance if you work 2 hours. Uber and Lyft will try to keep everybody part time to avoid paying into this expense. They dont give a crap about drivers well being. They are almost a decade "improving drivers pay" they say every time they lower fares.


There are benefits that don't depend on hours: minimum wage after expenses and workmens comp for example.



Taxi2Uber said:


> The reason was for more tax revenue, under the guise of helping drivers.
> 
> Not necessarily $.58.
> _"The California Supreme Court held that the reimbursement rate can be negotiated by parties as long as it fully reimburses the employee, and *the amount does not have to be set at the IRS mileage rate*.
> Employees who challenge a mileage reimbursement amount set by the employer bear the burden in establishing their actual costs"_
> 
> It would be nice to think Uber would just graciously dole out the .58, while you drive your 2009 Hyundai Elantra, but I have less faith in them doing right by drivers.
> 
> And another thing Uber might do, is require the car to be new, or near new.
> 
> Another might be that Uber puts more of the burden of car insurance on the drivers.


They don't have to pay 58 cents unless paying less means you're not making minimum wage after expenses. I've received checks from pizza hut and dominos over that lawsuit.

Note, that's federal. States may require full mileage reimbursement. I don't know what CA requires.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Fuzzyelvis said:


> There are benefits that don't depend on hours: minimum wage after expenses and workmens comp for example.


there are no employee benefits that depend on hours, none

let the blind lead the blind

they are talking about nothing


----------



## dnlbaboof

How do you even calculate a min wage for a driver? potty breaks no longer allowed?? well get a 15 minute break every 4 hours and if you work less no break? you must accept every ping??? The 4.3 pool request? must accept? No dest filter?? This is a disaster.


----------



## LADriver

Don'tchasethesurge said:


> Ppl saying uber should go back to 1.30... it's pointless. Uber and lyft shot themselves on the foot... now they have to figure out. Now I am interested to see what whether this will change their attitude in other markets. They made rate cuts too far down. This was gonna happen soon or later. Whether this will benefit us or not we will see. Only one to blame is uber lack of respect toward their drivers


UBER and LYFT are a bunch of ruthless goons, They don't care if you have a family to feed.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

MiamiKid said:


> That's a matter of opinion regarding classifying workers. Most of us feel they're classified perfectly already.
> ?


I doesn't matter what '_most of us feel_'. This isn't about feelings - it's about law. 
And as I've pointed out before, under the FLSA (federal law) a worker cannot waive the protections provided by the Act.



iheartuber said:


> Take it one step further...
> 
> If this driver makes $258 in 10 hours under AB5 and has to pay taxes on that but can not deduct mileage or expenses because they've already been reimbursed to him then we're looking at say $64.50 being taken out for taxes .
> 
> Vs say half of that under the current system
> 
> Then you have to ask yourself will Uber even let you work for 10 hours after AB5? Prob not
> 
> That's why I said the best way to look at this is to take the net net bottom line- will drivers make more money or less under AB 5?
> 
> The politician crooks want you to think it's more but it will be less


We have no idea yet if it will more, less or neutral.
Anyone who claims to know, is just guessing.


----------



## jetcityx

AB5 might benefit drivers from other markets by keeping fares higher, but if you drive in Cali you are screwed. No more not accepting trips, no more driving in rural/suburbs or slower markets, no more logging on and off when you want to. Earnings will be capped at an hourly rate at all times and not much you can do about it, your tips (if they still exist) most likely will go towards this hourly rate not being paid to you unless they exceed it. You now pay taxes at all levels of income including fica, regardless of expense. Tens of thousands of drivers could be eliminated. It will be much more difficult to be hired. This is a supply and demand business and if fares go higher there will be an adjustment. They will negotiate a deal but with the lack in flexibility and cap in pay coming it will be a lower paying crap job.


----------



## iheartuber

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I doesn't matter what '_most of us feel_'. This isn't about feelings - it's about law.
> And as I've pointed out before, under the FLSA (federal law) a worker cannot waive the protections provided by the Act.
> 
> 
> We have no idea yet if it will more, less or neutral.
> Anyone who claims to know, is just guessing.


I'm guessing it will be less. In fact I'm 99% certain of it and I used the numbers above to justify my guess.

You will be proven wrong and I won't even be able to say I told you so because you will disappear from UP when the time comes


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

uberdriverfornow said:


> there are no employee benefits that depend on hours, none
> 
> let the blind lead the blind
> 
> they are talking about nothing


Clearly you know nothing of employment law.

It doesn't matter if I walk into a job on my first day where I'm only going to be working 2 hours per week and work 30 seconds that first day and am injured, I'm covered. And those 2 hours will be at least minimum wage. Period.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

https://markets.businessinsider.com...-raises-prices-hurt-workers-2019-9-1028515655*California just passed a bill turning 'gig economy' workers into employees. Here's what Uber and Lyft have said.*

Business Insider byTheron Mohamed Sep. 11, 2019

*California lawmakers have passed a bill requiring Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and other "gig economy" businesses to treat workers as employees instead of contractors.*
*Uber and Lyft have said the bill simply qualifies existing law and, if signed into law, would hurt workers by removing flexibility and would lead to customers paying more.*
*Lyft has said the bill would lower some of its costs and give it more control over drivers.*

UBER:
"If AB5 passes, it'll simply be a qualification of existing law," Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said on the company's second-quarter earnings call in August. "It doesn't immediately transform drivers into employees. It just changes kind of the legal test in the court."​
LYFT:
"AB5 is the result of the California Supreme Court ruling called Dynamex," Lyft's finance boss, Brian Roberts, said at a Citi conference last week. "It basically codifies parts of that ruling. There's no magical change."​
_click for the full article_


----------



## Bob Reynolds

dnlbaboof said:


> How do you even calculate a min wage for a driver? potty breaks no longer allowed?? well get a 15 minute break every 4 hours and if you work less no break? you must accept every ping??? The 4.3 pool request? must accept? No dest filter?? This is a disaster.


You calculate minimum wage just like you do for other employees that work at other jobs. It's rather simple. If you are punched in then you get paid. When you punch out you don't get paid. Two 15 minute breaks, per 8 hour shift are paid under the federal wage and hour laws. Lunch and dinner breaks are not.

So for Uber it would work like this.

1. You will log onto the app. That is the same effect as punching in. You will get paid.

2. You want to go to the bathroom. You do not punch out and you still get paid.

3. You want to go to lunch or dinner. You will log out and you will not get paid while you are logged out.

4. You come back from lunch or dinner and you log back on. You are getting paid.

5. When you are done for the day then you will log off. You stop getting paid at that point.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

iheartuber said:


> I'm guessing it will be less. In fact I'm 99% certain of it and I used the numbers above to justify my guess.
> 
> You will be proven wrong and I won't even be able to say I told you so because you will disappear from UP when the time comes


First - I never disappear from UP. I've been here 10 months longer than you! :smiles:
Second - I can't be 'wrong' about something I haven't expressed any opinion on.
All I've said is that those expressing opinions are expressing their opinions - not facts.
Wanna prove me wrong on that? Post some FACTS.


----------



## kevin92009

LADriver said:


> I have already started my own rideshare company called FUDRIVERS.


i want to start a rideshare company called gryft


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

dnlbaboof said:


> How do you even calculate a min wage for a driver? potty breaks no longer allowed?? well get a 15 minute break every 4 hours and if you work less no break? you must accept every ping??? The 4.3 pool request? must accept? No dest filter?? This is a disaster.


Breaks of up to 20 minutes have to be paid. There is no federal requirement to give breaks, however there's no way for them to know if you're taking a crap or washing your car windows (which they'd have to allow as a safety issue).


----------



## dnlbaboof

Bob Reynolds said:


> You calculate minimum wage just like you do for other employees that work at other jobs. It's rather simple. If you are punched in then you get paid. When you punch out you don't get paid. Two 15 minute breaks, per 8 hour shift are paid under the federal wage and hour laws. Lunch and dinner breaks are not.
> 
> So for Uber it would work like this.
> 
> 1. You will log onto the app. That is the same effect as punching in. You will get paid.
> 
> 2. You want to go to the bathroom. You do not punch out and you still get paid.
> 
> 3. You want to go to lunch or dinner. You will log out and you will not get paid while you are logged out.
> 
> 4. You come back from lunch or dinner and you log back on. You are getting paid.
> 
> 5. When you are done for the day then you will log off. You stop getting paid at that point.


What if you want to work for only 2 hours or less? what if you dont want to accept low rated pool and x riders? What if you want to drive in a certain area to avoid traffic? What if you want to use a destination filter? What if you you have no need for min wage because in Ca you can easily make more if you have a decent strategy? What if you want to just work events and surge?


----------



## MiamiKid

uberdriverfornow said:


> when Uber pays for all my expenses as an employee I won't need to worry about deducting mileage as an independent contractor anymore ?


Sure they will. NOT
????


----------



## iheartuber

Michael - Cleveland said:


> First - I never disappear from UP.
> Second I can't be 'wrong' about something I haven't expressed any opinion on.
> All I've said is that those expressing opinions are expressing their opinions - not facts.
> Wanna prove me wrong on that? Post some FACTS.


Let me be clear. AB5 bottom line will make drivers less take home pay after taxes.

Therefore, it is my opinion that AB5 is BAD and if I had my way it would not be law

You are saying AB5 is GOOD and it will lead to drivers making MORE MONEY.

This is where I am saying you are wrong.

Drivers will make less money due to AB5 so it can't be good

You wanna see FACTS to prove that? Ok.

1. Being forced to take ALL pax means you run the risk of getting a psycho pax who will damage your car you really think Uber will pay for that?
2. Caps on drivers and hours mean you won't even be able to drive nearly as many hours as you have the freedom to do now- across all levels ft, pt, etc
3. There is no question that the taxes drivers will pay under AB5 will give them lower take home pay

But, here's the most important fact of all to consider: just wait and see what happens. Don't believe me? Fine. See for yourself.

All you seem to care about is that Uber is now forced to "do the right thing"

I say- who gives a crap about "the right thing" if drivers just make less money?


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

iheartuber said:


> Take it one step further...
> 
> If this driver makes $258 in 10 hours under AB5 and has to pay taxes on that but can not deduct mileage or expenses because they've already been reimbursed to him then we're looking at say $64.50 being taken out for taxes .
> 
> Vs say half of that under the current system
> 
> Then you have to ask yourself will Uber even let you work for 10 hours after AB5? Prob not
> 
> That's why I said the best way to look at this is to take the net net bottom line- will drivers make more money or less under AB 5?
> 
> The politician crooks want you to think it's more but it will be less


you don't pay taxes on reimbursed miles, it's not income.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

kevin92009 said:


> i want to start a rideshare company called gryft


I jokingly started a company and called 'HITCH' a few years back:
it was a photo of a hitch-hiking thumb you held up on your phone to get a ride.










Then...
https://www.americaninno.com/austin...aring-app-embraces-the-spirit-of-hitchhiking/
*Hitch's Ride-Sharing App Embraces the Spirit of Hitchhiking*​
_Dec 4, 2018 - The idea for Hitch started when CEO and co-founder Kush Singh found ... "We've been watching this rideshare space develop, obviously with ..._​
I should have copyrighted the name or something.
(actually, I think their incorporation predated my joke)




Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> you don't pay taxes on reimbursed miles, it's not income.


Exactly. You don't pay taxes on ANY reimbursed expenses. It's not taxable.
Under tax law, when you pay an expense upfront and your company reimburses you for that expense, you've basically loaned your employer money (that you have or already will report as income) and they are reimbursing you for the loan amount.


----------



## FormerTaxiDriver♧

SurgeMasterMN said:


> This guy ....
> 
> View attachment 354869
> 
> 
> Rideshare Resolved..
> 
> Rohit


Nope, this is ROHIT.


----------



## Bob Reynolds

dnlbaboof said:


> What if you want to work for only 2 hours or less? what if you dont want to accept low rated pool and x riders? What if you want to drive in a certain area to avoid traffic? What if you want to use a destination filter? What if you you have no need for min wage because in Ca you can easily make more if you have a decent strategy? What if you want to just work events and s


If you only want to work for 2 hours then you will only get paid for 2 hours.

Low rated pool and x riders are not going to matter because they are not going to be on the platform when the rates are raised. They will be back on the bus.

There is nothing preventing you from driving in a certain area to avoid traffic.

There is nothing in AB5 preventing you from using a destination filter.

The minimum wage is the MINIMUM you must make. You are not prevented from making more money. You just can't make less than the minimum. AB5 does not specify a maximum you can make. Therefore your potential earnings are unlimited.

You are not prevented from working just events. Just sign up for those events when they are made available and go work them.

I don't believe surge will be around much longer. The rates will be raised to make surge not needed.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

The net result of uber/lyft being forced to pay expenses is that you'll get min wage plus expenses reimbursed and having that reimbursement being untaxable.

For Orlando,

for 8 hours it would be $67.68 in pay and $92.80 in un-taxed expenses reimbursed,

for a total of $161.48

And this is in a low min wage state (pretty much half of LA)

It could very easily work out that your non-taxed reimbursed exceed your taxed income.

If this ever came to florida I'd quit driving a cab and go get rideshare insurance and sign up for uber/lyft a few days before it took affect.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> The net result of uber/lyft being forced to pay expenses is that you'll get min wage plus expenses reimbursed and having that reimbursement being untaxable.
> 
> For Orlando,
> 
> for 8 hours it would be $67.68 in pay and $92.80 in un-taxed expenses reimbursed,
> 
> for a total of $161.48
> 
> And this is in a low min wage state (pretty much half of LA)
> 
> It could very easily work out that your non-taxed reimbursed exceed your taxed income.
> 
> If this ever came to florida I'd quit driving a cab and go get rideshare insurance and sign up for uber/lyft a few days before it took affect.


To kick it off they will cull the heard. They will only hire anyone with a rating of 4.95 or above.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

iheartuber said:


> Let me be clear. AB5 bottom line will make drivers less take home pay after taxes.
> 
> Therefore, it is my opinion that AB5 is BAD and if I had my way it would not be law
> 
> You are saying AB5 is GOOD and it will lead to drivers making MORE MONEY.
> 
> This is where I am saying you are wrong.
> 
> Drivers will make less money due to AB5 so it can't be good
> 
> You wanna see FACTS to prove that? Ok.
> 
> 1. Being forced to take ALL pax means you run the risk of getting a psycho pax who will damage your car you really think Uber will pay for that?
> 2. Caps on drivers and hours mean you won't even be able to drive nearly as many hours as you have the freedom to do now- across all levels ft, pt, etc
> 3. There is no question that the taxes drivers will pay under AB5 will give them lower take home pay
> 
> But, here's the most important fact of all to consider: just wait and see what happens. Don't believe me? Fine. See for yourself.
> 
> All you seem to care about is that Uber is now forced to "do the right thing"
> 
> I say- who gives a crap about "the right thing" if drivers just make less money?


Your FACTS are just 'guesses'. (which is fine - but state them as such!)
- Being forced to take ALL pax: doesn't exist. You're making it up. Could happen - but hasn't.
- Caps on drivers and hours: Already exists - and has nothing to do with AB5 or worker classification - it has to do with safety.
but assuming you mean to prevent over-time: doesn't exist. You're making it up. Could happen - but hasn't.
- Higher taxes means lower take-home: doesn't exist. You're making it up. Could happen - but hasn't. - and there is no EVIDENCE yet that changes (have not taken place, ie: they're hypothetical) would mean lower take-hom... but more importantly LOWER ERANINGS (and they are not the same thing).

Your response, imo, is a complete failure to provide facts.
I don't take issue with what you post as an opinion that *may* come about (and some it may very well happen).
But what you've posted is not reality - and not fact.



Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> The net result of uber/lyft being forced to pay expenses is that you'll get min wage plus expenses reimbursed and having that reimbursement being untaxable.
> 
> For Orlando,
> 
> for 8 hours it would be $67.68 in pay and $92.80 in un-taxed expenses reimbursed,
> 
> for a total of $161.48
> 
> And this is in a low min wage state (pretty much half of LA)
> 
> It could very easily work out that your non-taxed reimbursed exceed your taxed income.
> 
> If this ever came to florida I'd quit driving a cab and go get rideshare insurance and sign up for uber/lyft a few days before it took affect.


lol... on paper, you're right - especially if they were to allow for unrestricted miles driven! Can't imagine that happening, though.



SurgeMasterMN said:


> To kick it off they will cull the heard. They will only hire anyone with a rating of 4.95 or above.


LOL - GOOD!! safer drivers, better cars, happier customers.


----------



## Bob Reynolds

SurgeMasterMN said:


> To kick it off they will cull the heard. They will only hire anyone with a rating of 4.95 or above.


Not that this would happen, but would that be a bad thing?

Frankly if they fill all of the driver positions and there aren't any job openings, that would be a good thing.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN

Bob Reynolds said:


> Not that this would happen, but would that be a bad thing?
> 
> Frankly if they fill all of the driver positions and there aren't any job openings, that would be a good thing.


Probably not... but no it would raise the quality. Either way I'm good.


----------



## kevin92009

Bob Reynolds said:


> If you only want to work for 2 hours then you will only get paid for 2 hours.
> 
> Low rated pool and x riders are not going to matter because they are not going to be on the platform when the rates are raised. They will be back on the bus.
> 
> There is nothing preventing you from driving in a certain area to avoid traffic.
> 
> There is nothing in AB5 preventing you from using a destination filter.
> 
> The minimum wage is the MINIMUM you must make. You are not prevented from making more money. You just can't make less than the minimum. AB5 does not specify a maximum you can make. Therefore your potential earnings are unlimited.
> 
> You are not prevented from working just events. Just sign up for those events when they are made available and go work them.
> 
> I don't believe surge will be around much longer. The rates will be raised to make surge not needed.


Back on the bus baby


----------



## iheartuber

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Your FACTS are just 'guesses.
> - Being forced to take ALL pax: doesn't exist. You're making it up. Could happen - but hasn't.
> - Caps on drivers and hours: Already exists - and has nothing to do with AB5 or worker classification - it has to do with safety.
> but assuming you mean to prevent over-time: doesn't exist. You're making it up. Could happen - but hasn't.
> - Higher taxes means lower take-home: doesn't exist. You're making it up. Could happen - but hasn't. - and there is no EVIDENCE yet that changes (have not taken place, ie: they're hypothetical) would mean lower take-hom... but more importantly LOWER ERANINGS (and they are not the same thing).
> 
> Your response, imo, is a complete failure to provide facts.
> I don't take issue with what you post as an opinion that *may* come about (and some it may very well happen).
> But what you've posted is not reality - and not fact.
> 
> 
> lol... on paper, you're right - especially if they were to allow for unrestricted miles driven! Can't imagine that happening, though.
> 
> 
> LOL - GOOD!! safer drivers, better cars, happier customers.


Like I said- if you think what I'm "guessing" is NOT going to happen, just wait and see.

If you're still here on up I'll applaud your bravery

What no one is talking about is how will this affect FAIR?

It will crush FAIR

no more FAIR cars no more ants

No more ants, who will drive for pennies?


----------



## Coastal_Cruiser

Michael - Cleveland said:


> UBER:
> "If AB5 passes, it'll simply be a qualification of existing law," Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said on the company's second-quarter earnings call in August. "It doesn't immediately transform drivers into employees. It just changes kind of the legal test in the court."​
> LYFT:
> "AB5 is the result of the California Supreme Court ruling called Dynamex," Lyft's finance boss, Brian Roberts, said at a Citi conference last week. "It basically codifies parts of that ruling. There's no magical change."​
> _click for the full article_


Based upon these statements it may be reasonable to infer that U/L will go to court over this (in addition to their other strategies to negate this bill, assuming it is signed into law). It may further be inferred that U/L will carry on as before in CA (see below for exception), unless and until they are taken to court by some entity... perhaps a city. Therefore on Jan 1 there may be no changes.

Except, it will be interesting to see what U/L "voluntarily" do on their own to shore up driver pay in the meantime. The companies likely want to go into court with the strongest arguments possible that workers are now being treated fairly, and that additional regulation would be counter-productive to both the drivers and the public that depend on the service.

And of course at some point both U and L need to stop bleeding ink regardless, or the whole U/L party will be over. Once they burn through the bonus cash from going public investors may not be up for another round of financing.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

<rant>
One of the things I find most interesting about this whole contractor v employee debate (legally) is that after the TNCs determined that "rideshare isn't just for ballers anymore"... and moved to bring it to the mass-market, they also abandoned the idea of supporting full-time drivers (Black car drivers were/are in the business of driving - with their own commercial insurance).

Instead, they focused on developing a platform where anyone could drive whatever hours they wanted. They didn't need to be full-time drivers to earn a couple hundred extra a week. If someone CHOSE to drive full-time, more power to 'em - it would be their choice.
Man, did that come back to bite them in the ass.

It is the drivers who CHOOSE to drive full-time and make TNC driving their career who have brought this whole debate about. They work full-time - they (rightfully so, imo) want the protections and benefits full-time employees deserve: unemployment insurance, health insurance options, paid-time off, expenses of some sort.

The rest of us, part-timers and drive-when-we-feel-like-it drivers, really want as little interference from anyone (the TNC or the Gov't) as possible. We still drive for pocket-change, extra cash - cash to make ends meet. We don't drive as a living. And we sure as heck don't want to be told when, where or how to drive because that would defeat the purpose of why we are driving to begin with.

It seems to me, that the TNCs just never figured that so many drivers would end up relying on their driving earnings as their main source of income. IF they'd had that foresight, they could have done things that would have avoided all of the problems of the classification question.

Probably first and foremost - instead of turning their corporate noses up at governments and the law, they should have lobbied and pressured CONGRESS to amend the FLSA to account for 'gig' workers with a new worker classification - independent employee or employed contractor or something. It's something still needed. It would not be difficult for the TNCs to pay into a fund for the purpose of providing drivers with some safety-net protections, like unemployment insurance, contributions to SS and Medicaid, etc. They could have easily excluded TNCs drivers from min wage laws - the same way many industries with tipped employees do already.

But they could have taken more draconian steps too. If they app limited ALL drivers to X hours per day and Y hours per week, no driver would have ever seen the business as a long-term full-time business. They'd have signed up, driven when they could, as they could and as they needed - but still be out there working on finding or getting other gainful employment.

Thanks mostly to the short-sightedness (imo) of Kalanick, Uber forced the industry (and specifically Lyft) into the position it's in today.

I have zero sympathy for the TNC's who have dug their own grave by being blind to the realities of labor's needs and government's role in protecting workers.

</endrant>



iheartuber said:


> Like I said- if you think what I'm "guessing" is NOT going to happen, just wait and see.


THAT is alI I've been saying to you: WAIT AND SEE.


----------



## iheartuber

Coastal_Cruiser said:


> Based upon these statements it may be reasonable to infer that U/L will go to court over this (in addition to their other strategies to negate this bill, assuming it is signed into law). It may further be inferred that U/L will carry on as before in CA (see below for exception), unless and until they are taken to court by some entity... perhaps a city. Therefore on Jan 1 there may be no changes.
> 
> Except, it will be interesting to see what U/L "voluntarily" do on their own to shore up driver pay in the meantime. The companies likely want to go into court with the strongest arguments possible that workers are now being treated fairly, and that additional regulation would be counter-productive to both the drivers and the public that depend on the service.
> 
> And of course at some point both U and L need to stop bleeding ink regardless, or the whole U/L party will be over. Once they burn through the bonus cash from going public investors may not be up for another round of financing.


You sir are a wise sage unlike OTHER people here LOL


----------



## Hideyokidshideyowifebcuz

Uber’s lead attorney just said they are not going to reclassify the drivers as employees ??‍♂


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> Let me be clear. AB5 bottom line will make drivers less take home pay after taxes.
> 
> Therefore, it is my opinion that AB5 is BAD and if I had my way it would not be law
> 
> You are saying AB5 is GOOD and it will lead to drivers making MORE MONEY.
> 
> This is where I am saying you are wrong.
> 
> Drivers will make less money due to AB5 so it can't be good
> 
> You wanna see FACTS to prove that? Ok.
> 
> 1. Being forced to take ALL pax means you run the risk of getting a psycho pax who will damage your car you really think Uber will pay for that?
> 2. Caps on drivers and hours mean you won't even be able to drive nearly as many hours as you have the freedom to do now- across all levels ft, pt, etc
> 3. There is no question that the taxes drivers will pay under AB5 will give them lower take home pay
> 
> But, here's the most important fact of all to consider: just wait and see what happens. Don't believe me? Fine. See for yourself.
> 
> All you seem to care about is that Uber is now forced to "do the right thing"
> 
> I say- who gives a crap about "the right thing" if drivers just make less money?


you don't seem to understand that the real benefits will kick in when the union contract kicks in ?



Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> you don't pay taxes on reimbursed miles, it's not income.


preach on, brother ?



Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> you don't pay taxes on reimbursed miles, it's not income.


preach on, brother ?


----------



## iheartuber

Michael - Cleveland said:


> <rant>
> One of the things I find most interesting about this whole contractor v employee debate (legally) is that after the TNCs determined that "rideshare isn't just for ballers anymore"... and moved to bring it to the mass-market, they also abandoned the idea of supporting full-time drivers (Black car drivers were/are in the business of driving - with their own commercial insurance).
> 
> Instead, they focused on developing a platform where anyone could drive whatever hours they wanted. They didn't need to be full-time drivers to earn a couple hundred extra a week. If someone CHOSE to drive full-time, more power to 'em - it would be their choice.
> Man, did that come back to bite them in the ass.
> 
> It is the drivers who CHOOSE to drive full-time and make TNC driving their career who have brought this whole debate about. They work full-time - they (rightfully so, imo) want the protections and benefits full-time employees deserve: unemployment insurance, health insurance options, paid-time off, expenses of some sort.
> 
> The rest of us, part-timers and drive-when-we-feel-like-it drivers, really want as little interference from anyone (the TNC or the Gov't) as possible. We still drive for pocket-change, extra cash - cash to make ends meet. We don't drive as a living. And we sure as heck don't want to be told when, where or how to drive because that would defeat the purpose of why we are driving to begin with.
> 
> It seems to me, that the TNCs just never figured that so many drivers would end up relying on their driving earnings as their main source of income. IF they'd had that foresight, they could have done things that would have avoided all of the problems of the classification question.
> 
> Probably first and foremost - instead of turning their corporate noses up at governments and the law, they should have lobbied and pressured CONGRESS to amend the FLSA to account for 'gig' workers with a new worker classification - independent employee or employed contractor or something. It's something still needed. It would not be difficult for the TNCs to pay into a fund for the purpose of providing drivers with some safety-net protections, like unemployment insurance, contributions to SS and Medicaid, etc. They could have easily excluded TNCs drivers from min wage laws - the same way many industries with tipped employees do already.
> 
> But they could have taken more draconian steps too. If they app limited ALL drivers to X hours per day and Y hours per week, no driver would have ever seen the business as a long-term full-time business. They'd have signed up, driven when they could, as they could and as they needed - but still be out there working on finding or getting other gainful employment.
> 
> Thanks mostly to the short-sightedness (imo) of Kalanick, Uber forced the industry (and specifically Lyft) into the position it's in today.
> 
> I have zero sympathy for the TNC's who have dug their own grave by being blind to the realities of labor's needs and government's role in protecting workers.
> 
> </endrant>
> 
> 
> THAT is alI I've been saying to you: WAIT AND SEE.


I think that while UL are absolutely taking advantage too much of their power and it would be nice to reign them in, ultimately all the "rights" you think ft drivers should have are a trade off for the tax breaks they get as an IC. In the end it's a wash.

But with AB5 forcing UL to give drivers more rights those very sane drivers will lose some things they have now and take for granted.

Bottom line, will drivers make more or less as a result of AB5? I say less even though some think more

Wait and you will see



Hideyokidshideyowifebcuz said:


> Uber's lead attorney just said they are not going to reclassify the drivers as employees ??‍♂


That attorney is Michael Avanatti


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Hideyokidshideyowifebcuz said:


> Uber's lead attorney just said they are not going to reclassify the drivers as employees ??‍♂


sure they did, Mr New Member, sure they did


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> you don't seem to understand that the real benefits will kick in when the union contract kicks in ?
> 
> 
> preach on, brother ?
> 
> 
> preach on, brother ?


Union contract? So now I gotta pay union dues? Tell me How I will be making more money again? Because I just keep seeing less and less of a projection


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> Union contract? So now I gotta pay union dues? Tell me How I will be making more money again? Because I just keep seeing less and less of a projection


I don't work for free, other drivers don't work for free, and union workers don't work for free, especially when they get you a great contract with great pay and great benefits.

??


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> I don't work for free, other drivers don't work for free, and union workers don't work for free, especially when they get you a great contract with great pay and great benefits.
> 
> 
> ??


Um.. maybe I wasn't clear: you mean to tell me I'm gonna pay money to a union and the union will be able to negotiate such a higher salary for me that even after factoring in the union dues I will still make more than I'm making now?

I don't believe that is possible


----------



## dnlbaboof

The reason people support AB15, they just hate Uber and will support anything that hurts the company without even thinking there are better ways to fix the problem. The hate comes first, and that mob mentality without thinking of the ways this actually hurts drivers by losing IC status will haunt drivers for years.

you can fix many if the gripes you have with uber and still be an IC. Remember when uber settled out of court years ago, they conceded acceptance rate no longer gets you canned and they added guarantees for being online 40 bucks an hour during rush hour. They should just negotiate a higher rate per mile, dashcam support, riders must leave comment if they rate low, etc. there is no need for us to lose the right to not accept a 4.2 pool rider, to force us to work certain hours etc


----------



## iheartuber

dnlbaboof said:


> The reason people support AB15, they just hate Uber and will support anything that hurts the company without even thinking there are better ways to fix the problem. The hate comes first, and that mob mentality without thinking of the ways this actually hurts drivers by losing IC status will haunt drivers for years.
> 
> you can fix many if the gripes you have with uber and still be an IC. Remember when uber settled out of court years ago, they conceded acceptance rate no longer gets you canned and they added guarantees for being online 40 bucks an hour during rush hour. They should just negotiate a higher rate per mile, dashcam support, riders must leave comment if they rate low, etc. there is no need for us to lose the right to not accept a 4.2 pool rider, to force us to work certain hours etc


Bingo

Finally someone who's talking sense!!


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> Um.. maybe I wasn't clear: you mean to tell me I'm gonna pay money to a union and the union will be able to negotiate such a higher salary for me that even after factoring in the union dues I will still make more than I'm making now?
> 
> I don't believe that is possible


Uber and Lyft haven't cut rates to below poverty level where you are now.

AB5 and a union contract ensures you get a contractual rate that can't be reduced on a whim like Uber and Lyft can and will do now.

Easy and simple to understand.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

dnlbaboof said:


> you must accept every ping??? The 4.3 pool request? must accept? No dest filter?? This is a disaster.


What pool request, we have established prices will go up and people paying bus fairs will be getting bus rides. Solved that one at least.


----------



## Tom Oldman

Bob Reynolds said:


> SACRAMENTO - The California Senate on Tuesday passed gig-work legislation that could transform the state's employment landscape, turning many independent contractors into employees. The vote was 29-11, along party lines.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sf...passes-AB5-gig-work-bill-turning-14430204.php
> *California passes landmark bill that threatens to upend companies like Uber and Lyft*
> https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/california-passes-assembly-bill-5-for-gig-workers.htmlNBC NEWS 11 SEP 2019
> 
> California lawmakers passed a landmark bill on Tuesday that threatens to reshape how companies like Uber and Lyft do business.
> The legislation, known as Assembly Bill 5, would require gig economy workers to be reclassified as employees instead of contractors.
> The bill has received support from California Gov. Gavin Newsom and would go into effect Jan. 1, 2020.
> California lawmakers passed a landmark bill on Tuesday that threatens to reshape how companies like Uber and Lyft do business.
> 
> But shares of Lyft popped as much as 3.9% on Wednesday morning, while Uber climbed more than 2.9% after California Gov. Gavin Newsom told the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday that he's still engaged in talks with Uber, Lyft and other gig economy companies about possible negotiations around the bill. Newsom recently voiced his support for the bill.
> 
> The legislation, known as Assembly Bill 5 (AB5), would require gig economy workers to be reclassified as employees instead of contractors. The bill passed in a 29 to 11 vote in the State Senate and now moves on to the State Assembly, where if it passes, it will land on Newsom's desk.
> 
> Additionally, the bill has received broad support from Democratic Presidential candidates including Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), as well as South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg.
> 
> The bill has the potential to change the employment status of more than 1 million low-wage workers in California, not just gig workers at companies like Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Postmates and Instacart. It will make it harder for gig economy companies to prove that their workers aren't staff, while ensuring key benefits and protections, like minimum wage, insurance and sick days.
> 
> AB5 has attracted staunch opposition from gig economy companies, as it could upend their traditional business model of hiring inexpensive contractors. In an effort to push back against the bill, Uber and Lyft proposed establishing $21-an-hour minimum wage for drivers in California. The ride-hailing companies, as well as Doordash, have also pledged $90 million on a ballot initiative for the 2020 election that would exempt them from AB5.
> 
> Lyft spokesperson Adrian Durbin said the bill has the potential to hurt drivers who prefer a flexible work schedule


It's a wake-up call for Uber and Lyft to rethink their predatory practices abusing drivers. But I believe the drivers should have the freedom to choose between employment and independent contractor.


----------



## jeanocelot

Leoncio said:


> They dont give a crap about drivers well being.


DING, DING! We have a winner!


----------



## La La Lady

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> By my estimation...
> 
> Min wage in Florida as an employee uber driver using his/her own car would equal $22.00 an hour.
> 
> Florida has a min wage of $8.46 an hour.
> 
> California?
> 
> Min wage in Francisco for an uber driver is closer to _*$28 an hour.*_
> 
> 10 hours?
> 
> *$280!*
> 
> This isn't benefits, this is simply min wage free and clear of all deductions!
> 
> 4 10s and your looking at $1120
> 
> 50 weeks a year, 56,000.
> 
> Let's assume they have to pay OT.
> 
> Well it won't be double $28 an hour, only about $36 an hour.
> 
> But time and a half?
> 
> Yeah they only have to pay time and a half for actual labor, not in mileage reimbursements.
> 
> Truth is... after having freshly crunched the numbers their hourly costs might not even be 1.20 times higher for overtime, if they take benefits into the equation it might be cheaper to NOT cap it at 29.5 hours a week.
> 
> 58c a mile + $15.00 an hour for the first 40 hours
> THEN
> 58c a mile plu 22.50 per hour for every hour after that?
> 
> That sounds like a good incentive to get drivers on the road past 40 hours.
> 
> I'm not 100% sure on that math so, maybe?


And how do they avoid all those pesky benefits and OT? Regulated schedules not to exceed 29 hours/week of course!


----------



## dnlbaboof

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> What pool request, we have established prices will go up and people paying bus fairs will be getting bus rides. Solved that one at least.


not true at all, alot of drug dealers/gang members/criminals have tons of money and use X.....a lot of spoiled rich people too who treat drivers like slaves as well.......


----------



## uberdriverfornow

dnlbaboof said:


> there are better ways to fix the problem.


lol Fixing the problem that Uber and Lyft created ? ???

Yeah, let's let Uber and Lyft fix the problems that they created. ??

That's letting the fox guard the hen house. ??



La La Lady said:


> not to exceed 29 hours/week of course!


you mean 39 hours

and there will be no schedules


----------



## jeanocelot

DeadEndRoad said:


> Uber refers to drivers as "partners" and if one was to read the definition it is nothing more than a backhanded compliment. Its more of a reach around without the offer of a cig.


A "reach around" like this?


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> Uber and Lyft haven't cut rates to below poverty level where you are now.
> 
> AB5 and a union contract ensures you get a contractual rate that can't be reduced on a whim like Uber and Lyft can and will do now.
> 
> Easy and simple to understand.


Below poverty level? I make $25-$30 per hour gross on average because I know what I'm doing. I was making over $30 average before the March rate cut but I'm still doing ok

I hear stories about dumb people making far less than that but if they are that dumb they deserve it

I think a union wants to snatch them up because they are so dumb



Tom Oldman said:


> It's a wake-up call for Uber and Lyft to rethink their predatory practices abusing drivers. But I believe the drivers should have the freedom to choose between employment and independent contractor.


Wow another smart person. UP is not that bad


----------



## jeanocelot

Steve appleby said:


> Your acceptance rate goes below 80%, YOU ARE FIRED. Uber is going to tighten the parameters on drivers now and will probably deactivate half the drivers because they don't wanna pay benefits to them. Uber may be too big to pull out of California, but they will make your life a living hell. I think people are making a big mistake here. But hey you reap what you sow and I'm gonna laugh my ass off would half the drivers in California get deactivated because they can't get their numbers up. Uber is going to find a way to get around this law and Uber will find ways to deactivate you.


More like the acceptance rate will 100%, with "3 strikes, you're out" if you decline a ride. Everyone will be officially deactivated when Guy Lombardo's tune gets played. Employees will be hired (i.e., in the time leading up to this) to start right then and there.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> Below poverty level? I make $25-$30 per hour gross on average because I know what I'm doing. I was making over $30 average before the March rate cut but I'm still doing ok
> 
> I hear stories about dumb people making far less than that but if they are that dumb they deserve it
> 
> I think a union wants to snatch them up because they are so dumb
> 
> 
> Wow another smart person. UP is not that bad


You are only making that because the rate cuts haven't hit your market YET.



jeanocelot said:


> More like the acceptance rate will 100%, with "3 strikes, you're out" if you decline a ride. Everyone will be officially deactivated when Guy Lombardo's tune gets played. Employees will be hired (i.e., in the time leading up to this) to start right then and there.


and drivers will stop driving which means Uber won't have any drivers

I'm pretty sure Uber needs drivers to drive passengers


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

jetcityx said:


> AB5 might benefit drivers from other markets by keeping fares higher, but if you drive in Cali you are screwed. No more not accepting trips, no more driving in rural/suburbs or slower markets, no more logging on and off when you want to. Earnings will be capped at an hourly rate at all times and not much you can do about it, your tips (if they still exist) most likely will go towards this hourly rate not being paid to you unless they exceed it. You now pay taxes at all levels of income including fica, regardless of expense. Tens of thousands of drivers could be eliminated. It will be much more difficult to be hired. This is a supply and demand business and if fares go higher there will be an adjustment. They will negotiate a deal but with the lack in flexibility and cap in pay coming it will be a lower paying crap job.


You have just said so many random things that are not valid my friend. It's just a list of random sayings without any real backing. 
For example 
1_ You say 10's of thousands of drivers will be fired. Well so many would quit first, so actually there would not be enough drivers left. Can't fire me, I quite if they talk schedules. So if we quite first can't fire.

2_ You say they would add tip to cover minimum wage. Actually minimum wage in California is before tips and expenses. Sorry. I know it's not the case in other states, so not saying your nonsense, just respectfully saying your not factual and correct in your claims.

3_ You say increased taxes, for the most part we are a burden to the state. I rather pay some taxes and have SSI credits, income to show for loans, mortgages, as most of us write off enough to show no income basically. The 7 percent they would have to put in our SSI would offset any tax. This includes workers comp and unemployment insurance which is the backbone and safety net of western society labor.

My points are factual here. Not opinions.


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> You are only making that because the rate cuts haven't hit your market YET.
> 
> 
> and drivers will stop driving which means Uber won't have any drivers
> 
> I'm pretty sure Uber needs drivers to drive passengers


 I am in Los Angeles which is the second biggest market in America when factoring for cost of living my $.60 a mile is equivalent to a $.30 a mile in a smaller market out of state


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> I am in Los Angeles which is the second biggest market in America when factoring for cost of living my $.60 a mile is equivalent to a $.30 a mile in a smaller market out of state


which means when the 35 cents a mile rate cuts come you will be making 17 cents a mile in smaller markets

thankfully, AB5 and a union contract will prevent that from happening ?



I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> You have just said so many random things that are not valid my friend. It's just a list of random sayings without any real backing.
> For example
> 1_ You say 10's of thousands of drivers will be fired. Well so many would quit first, so actually there would not be enough drivers left. Can't fire me, I quite if they talk schedules. So if we quite first can't fire.
> 
> 2_ You say they would add tip to cover minimum wage. Actually minimum wage in California is before tips and expenses. Sorry. I know it's not the case in other states, so not saying your nonsense, just respectfully saying your not factual and correct in your claims.
> 
> 3_ You say increased taxes, for the most part we are a burden to the state. I rather pay some taxes and have SSI credits, income to show for loans, mortgages, as most of us write off enough to show no income basically. The 7 percent they would have to put in our SSI would offset any tax. This includes workers comp and unemployment insurance which is the backbone and safety net of western society labor.
> 
> My points are factual here. Not opinions.


the best part is that in lieu of having to pay for all expenses and take a deduction, now we get reimbursed and the reimbursements are not taxable...it's a win-win


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Tom Oldman said:


> It's a wake-up call for Uber and Lyft to rethink their predatory practices abusing drivers. But I believe the drivers should have the freedom to choose between employment and independent contractor.


Bingo. Pinning us against each other is not the answer. The 80% part timers should get real contracts, and have the right to remain IC's. The 20% misused mostly immigrant full timers should have full employment benefits with Union right. I don't understand why this is hard to arrange. The thing would be the IC contract would need to be better than what it is now.


----------



## jeanocelot

iheartuber said:


> I am in Los Angeles which is the second biggest market in America when factoring for cost of living my $.60 a mile is equivalent to a $.30 a mile in a smaller market out of state


But if your hustling is a marginal activity, then there is no cost of living since you are already living there.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN




----------



## Tom Oldman

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Bingo. Pinning us against each other is not the answer. The 80% part timers should get real contracts, and have the right to remain IC's. The 20% misused mostly immigrant full timers should have full employment benefits with Union right. I don't understand why this is hard to arrange. The thing would be the IC contract would need to be better than what it is now.


Thank you, that's exactly my point. Let us decide our status. Don't force us in an unwanted employment. Don't create another Wal-Mart. It's my car, my time and my freedom to choose my schedule.

Some people here don't read a paragraph or post to the end and just jump to conclusion and judgment calls. I've nothing to say to those trolls but to add them to my Igor list.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

jetcityx said:


> AB5 might benefit drivers from other markets by keeping fares higher, but if you drive in Cali you are screwed. No more not accepting trips, no more driving in rural/suburbs or slower markets, no more logging on and off when you want to. Earnings will be capped at an hourly rate at all times and not much you can do about it, your tips (if they still exist) most likely will go towards this hourly rate not being paid to you unless they exceed it. You now pay taxes at all levels of income including fica, regardless of expense. Tens of thousands of drivers could be eliminated. It will be much more difficult to be hired. This is a supply and demand business and if fares go higher there will be an adjustment. They will negotiate a deal but with the lack in flexibility and cap in pay coming it will be a lower paying crap job.


You don't KNOW any of that. It might happen - it might not. Uber and Lyft are working with the Governor and his team to "negotaite" how this can be implemented. No need to jump off any bridges just yet - and no need to state speculation as if it had happened.



Tom Oldman said:


> Thank you, that's exactly my point. Let us decide our status. Don't force us in an unwanted employment. Don't create another Wal-Mart. It's my car, my time and my freedom to choose my schedule.
> 
> Some people here don't read a paragraph or post to the end and just jump to conclusion and judgment calls. I've nothing to say to those trolls but to add them to my Igor list.


Igor list? lol! Freudian slip?
But seriously - I agree with you - I hope they come up with a way to allow drivers to CHOOSE their status.
Where may run into difficulty is a conflict with Federal law, which specially does not allow an employer to choose who gets protections under the FLSA. And that's been the law for over 50 years.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You don't KNOW any of that. I might happen - it might not. Uber and Lyft are working with the Governor and his team to "negotaite" how this can be implemented. No need to jump off any bridges just yet - and no need to state speculation as if it had happened.


The amount of speculation was too much on that post for me to even respond. It's like just making random comments out of the ski and hopping it sticks.


----------



## Texassully

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You do know that EMPLOYEES can deduct expenses, right? (see IRS Form2106)
> Please stop spreading the lie that they can't.
> 
> The difference under this bill, is that as an employee, the employer *may* be required to pay for or reimburse some some expenses incurred by it's employee(s) on behalf of the company.


From the IRS Website 
Car expenses.
The cost of using your car as an employee, whether measured using actual expenses or the standard mileage rate, will no longer be allowed to be claimed as an unreimbursed employee travel expense as a miscellaneous itemized deduction due to the suspension of miscellaneous itemized deductions that are subject to the 2% floor under section 67. The suspension applies to tax years beginning after December 2017, and before January 2026.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Texassully said:


> From the IRS Website
> Car expenses.
> The cost of using your car as an employee, whether measured using actual expenses or the standard mileage rate, will no longer be allowed to be claimed as an unreimbursed employee travel expense as a miscellaneous itemized deduction due to the suspension of miscellaneous itemized deductions that are subject to the 2% floor under section 67. The suspension applies to tax years beginning after December 2017, and before January 2026.


now you get reimbursed directly from the employer, and that reimbursement is NOT TAXABLE ??


----------



## Coastal_Cruiser

iheartuber said:


> You sir are a wise sage unlike OTHER people here LOL


I certainly fit the age requirement. Was just thinking, the other half of this challenge is the collective bargaining aspect. The history of post-industrial America is replete with examples of why collective bargaining is necessary to fight corporate tyranny. This is not a new story. My biggest fear at the same though is the very thought of unionization. There is a very fine line between what intelligent collective bargaining can produce, vs the "We forgot just who the hell we were supposed to be representing" trap that unions can fall in to. There are apparently several entities vying to represent drivers. Some are young organizations. On the other end is the Teamsters union. I hope that if it comes to picking one of these organizations to represent us we will have a thorough, rational post on the topic that can inform us drivers as to the ideal entity to ally with.



iheartuber said:


> Below poverty level? I make $25-$30 per hour gross on average because I know what I'm doing. I was making over $30 average before the March rate cut but I'm still doing ok


When folks like yourself speak of the hourly rate they make, is this calculated from total time online, or only during stage 2 and 3?


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You don't KNOW any of that. It might happen - it might not. Uber and Lyft are working with the Governor and his team to "negotaite" how this can be implemented. No need to jump off any bridges just yet - and no need to state speculation as if it had happened.
> 
> 
> Igor list? lol! Freudian slip?
> But seriously - I agree with you - I hope they come up with a way to allow drivers to CHOOSE their status.
> Where may run into difficulty is a conflict with Federal law, which specially does not allow an employer to choose who gets protections under the FLSA. And that's been the law for over 50 years.


CA has their own labor laws that far outweigh any Federal labor laws

thats like saying we'll take the Federal minimum wage over California's minimum wage...we don't care about the federal wage laws in that regard


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Tom Oldman said:


> Thank you, that's exactly my point. Let us decide our status. Don't force us in an unwanted employment. Don't create another Wal-Mart. It's my car, my time and my freedom to choose my schedule.
> 
> Some people here don't read a paragraph or post to the end and just jump to conclusion and judgment calls. I've nothing to say to those trolls but to add them to my Igor list.


You know, last night my passenger was an interpreter. We had a long conversation about how AB5 affected her as well. I am all for labor rights, but she was not a gig worker, underpaid, full time exploited worker. She said their group is getting caught into this. I assured her they would be excluded. I hope so, I miss the point if interpreters making 60$ plus now are being affected by what was suppose to be gig workers rights. They don't need help from the state or politicians she explained. So I believe the governor will help clear some of this confusion and allow freedom of choice. Both sides need the right to choose for this to go right. I think it will.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> You know, last night my passenger was an interpreter. We had a long conversation about how AB5 affected her as well. I am all for labor rights, but she was not a gig worker, underpaid, full time exploited worker. She said their group is getting caught into this. I assured her they would be excluded. I hope so, I miss the point if interpreters making 60$ plus now are being affected by what was suppose to be gig workers rights. They don't need help from the state or politicians she explained. So I believe the governor will help clear some of this confusion and allow freedom of choice. Both sides need the right to choose for this to go right. I think it will.


how is she an underpaid exploited worker if she's making $60 an hour ?

how does this bill make her make less ?


----------



## iheartuber

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You don't KNOW any of that. It might happen - it might not. Uber and Lyft are working with the Governor and his team to "negotaite" how this can be implemented. No need to jump off any bridges just yet - and no need to state speculation as if it had happened.
> 
> 
> Igor list? lol! Freudian slip?
> But seriously - I agree with you - I hope they come up with a way to allow drivers to CHOOSE their status.
> Where may run into difficulty is a conflict with Federal law, which specially does not allow an employer to choose who gets protections under the FLSA. And that's been the law for over 50 years.


Well this is what I DO know:

Supporters of AB5 are either:
1. Anyone who is just filled with emotional hatred towards Uber and all they want to do is "stick it to Uber" regardless of how it affects the drivers
2. Greedy politicians who just want a bigger tax grab

So excuse me if I'm doubtful that AB5 will helps drivers when the very people behind it are only behind it for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with helping the driver.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Texassully said:


> From the IRS Website
> Car expenses.
> The cost of using your car as an employee, whether measured using actual expenses or the standard mileage rate, will no longer be allowed to be claimed as an unreimbursed employee travel expense as a miscellaneous itemized deduction due to the suspension of miscellaneous itemized deductions that are subject to the 2% floor under section 67. The suspension applies to tax years beginning after December 2017, and before January 2026.


That's not going to apply. The negotiated rate would not be taxable. Uber is offering 30 cents a mile as of today's offer. Whatever the final number would be, it's expense reimbursement, non taxable. The 30 cents has been rejected btw. The bill would put a rate, that rate would be non taxable. There is no arguing.


----------



## iheartuber

Coastal_Cruiser said:


> I certainly fit the age requirement. Was just thinking, the other half of this challenge is the collective bargaining aspect. The history of post-industrial America is replete with examples of why collective bargaining is necessary to fight corporate tyranny. This is not a new story. My biggest fear at the same though is the very thought of unionization. There is a very fine line between what intelligent collective bargaining can produce, vs the "We forgot just who the hell we were supposed to be representing" trap that unions can fall in to. There are apparently several entities vying to represent drivers. Some are young organizations. On the other end is the Teamsters union. I hope that if it comes to picking one of these organizations to represent us we will have a thorough, rational post on the topic that can inform us drivers as to the ideal entity to ally with.
> 
> When folks like yourself speak of the hourly rate they make, is this calculated from total time online, or only during stage 2 and 3?


Time online. But I take very few breaks. I pee fast


----------



## MiamiKid

Pax Collector said:


> Now we'll wait to see if Gavin Nuisance will sign the darn thing and make these blood sucking entities bleed a little.


You will not be employees next year, the year after and, most likely, never. Uber is working on making enforcement impossible. A move I support.

Moreover, they're spending $90 million on a ballot initiative, to appear on the 2020 ballot, which will exempt rideshare companies from the bill. Another move I strongly support.

Am a driver, in Georgia, where it will never happen. However, am taking Uber's side 100% on this legislation.

Bill or no bill, it's not happening folks.
?


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

uberdriverfornow said:


> how is she an underpaid exploited worker if she's making $60 an hour ?
> 
> how does this bill make her make less ?


No, I said she is NOT underpaid nor exploited. Thus should not be getting caught up in this bill. The bill is forcing interpreters to become employees, they don't want that. Was just saying how the bill reaches other sectors as well and needs to be smoothed out.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> Well this is what I DO know:
> 
> Supporters of AB5 are either:
> 1. Anyone who is just filled with emotional hatred towards Uber and all they want to do is "stick it to Uber" regardless of how it affects the drivers
> 2. Greedy politicians who just want a bigger tax grab
> 
> So excuse me if I'm doubtful that AB5 will helps drivers when the very people behind it are only behind it for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with helping the driver.


1. It affect drivers in a positive way while also sticking it to Uber. a win-win ?

2. instead of deducting mileage and paying for ALL expenses we now get fully reimbursed for driving expenses with that reimbursement being NON-taxable.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

uberdriverfornow said:


> CA has their own labor laws that far outweigh any Federal labor laws
> thats like saying we'll take the Federal minimum wage over California's minimum wage...we don't care about the federal wage laws in that regard


State laws can extend federal law - but they may not contradict federal law. For example, 
CA has a higher min wage than federal law. The CA state min wage is required (and not in conflict with the federal law, because that min has been met.)
Some states have a lower min wage than the federal min. It is the federal min wage that is required to be paid, because the state min does meet the requirements of the federal law.

But that's besides the point... what was trying to say is that should CA law in any way be found to be in conflict with the FLSA and the DoL regulations supporting the FLSA, the federal law will have over-riding jurisdiction. States may not 'opt out' of federal law. (I would guess that while some Uber/Lyft lawyers are 'negotiating in good faith' with state authorities, others are planing on appeals and legal battles - and that they have been doing so for since the day the companies were incorporated)


----------



## Ovaro

Let’s us see and wait if other states will soon follow a similar path. This is about money, and the government wants his piece of the pie.


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> 1. It affect drivers in a positive way while also sticking it to Uber. a win-win ?
> 
> 2. instead of deducting mileage and paying for ALL expenses we now get fully reimbursed for driving expenses with that reimbursement being NON-taxable.


If I make less money how is that affecting me in a positive way?

If a driver now works any time they want and for as long or as little as they want and after AB5 they can't, How is that affecting drivers in a positive way?

If it comes to the point where a driver is limited to the number of hours they can work and in some cases they can't even work at all how is that affecting drivers in a positive way?


----------



## uberdriverfornow

MiamiKid said:


> You will not be employees next year, the year after and, most likely, never. Uber is working on making enforcement impossible. A move I support.
> 
> Moreover, they're spending $90 million on a ballot initiative, to appear on the 2020 ballot, which will exempt rideshare companies from the bill. Another move I strongly support.
> 
> Am a driver, in Georgia, where it will never happen. However, am taking Uber's side 100% on this legislation.
> 
> Bill or no bill, it's not happening folks.
> ?


Uber appreciates your support from Georgia(or Bangladesh)in not allowing it to pass. But it still passed.

Uber appreciates your support from Georgia(or the Phillipines) in them not allowing California law to be enforced.



iheartuber said:


> If I make less money how is that affecting me in a positive way?
> 
> If a driver now works any time they want and for as long or as little as they want and after AB5 they can't, How is that affecting drivers in a positive way?
> 
> If it comes to the point where a driver is limited to the number of hours they can work and in some cases they can't even work at all how is that affecting drivers in a positive way?


There is literally nothing in this bill that makes you make less money than you do now. That will only change if Uber decides not to allow you to make the same money.

There is nothing in AB5 that says you can't work when you want.


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> 1. It affect drivers in a positive way while also sticking it to Uber. a win-win ?
> 
> 2. instead of deducting mileage and paying for ALL expenses we now get fully reimbursed for driving expenses with that reimbursement being NON-taxable.


Re: expenses, there are many various (gas, car wash, oil change, brakes, tires, etc)

What I've found is that no matter what I spend the IRS mileage rates always more than pays for them

So... if they give IRS rates, ok. If not, then it will suck

And I'm very doubtful



uberdriverfornow said:


> Uber appreciates your support from Georgia(or Bangladesh)in not allowing it to pass. But it still passed.
> 
> Uber appreciates your support from Georgia(or the Phillipines) in them not allowing California law to be enforced.
> 
> 
> There is literally nothing in this bill that makes you make less money than you do now. That will only change if Uber decides not to allow you to make the same money.
> 
> There is nothing in AB5 that says you can't work when you want.


Right now I can work as much as 12 hrs online time per day.

What if Uber halved that? (Which is very possible under AB5)

Bam! I make less


----------



## jeanocelot

iheartuber said:


> If those who are in arbitration on the Liss-Riordan case got 11c a mile and those who opted out got 37c the average of the two is 24c a mile
> 
> That means a 35 hr week will earn you
> 35 x 12 = $420
> 900 miles @ 24c / mile = $216
> Total= $636 minus taxes
> 
> Me now $850 minus taxes
> 
> So how is AB5 good at all? How? Any supporter of this crap bill please defend these numbers I'm giving you
> 
> They are real numbers, not your pie in the sky liberal bs


Please provide a link that says that drivers only got out net 11c a mile. They probably got that in addition to the 56c or whatever they had gotten.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> You know, last night my passenger was an interpreter. We had a long conversation about how AB5 affected her as well. I am all for labor rights, but she was not a gig worker, underpaid, full time exploited worker. She said their group is getting caught into this. I assured her they would be excluded. I hope so, I miss the point if interpreters making 60$ plus now are being affected by what was suppose to be gig workers rights. They don't need help from the state or politicians she explained. So I believe the governor will help clear some of this confusion and allow freedom of choice. Both sides need the right to choose for this to go right. I think it will.


You are mis-stating so much it's hard to know where to start. 
Take a minute to read the bill and unless you are Gavin Newsome, it's probably a good idea for you to stop 'assuring" people they will be excluded. 

(BTW, anyone making $60/hr and getting enough billable to be making a living (40 hrs X 50 wks x $60/hr = ($120,000/yr) hours should be incorporated anyway - and either be a sole proprietor or an employee of their own company.)


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

I


iheartuber said:


> Well this is what I DO know:
> 
> Supporters of AB5 are either:
> 1. Anyone who is just filled with emotional hatred towards Uber and all they want to do is "stick it to Uber" regardless of how it affects the drivers
> 2. Greedy politicians who just want a bigger tax grab
> 
> So excuse me if I'm doubtful that AB5 will helps drivers when the very people behind it are only behind it for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with helping the driver.


I disagree. Any laborer working full time should have basic labor law protection. It really is something to help a valnerable group of full time gig workers. They have the right. I think California labor laws are for the workers benefit. We have some of the most worker friendly labor laws. So don't tell me the governor doesn't have the peoples interest. Or the politicians are not doing it to stop app based labor exploitation. You have to take account multiple parties have an interest and it needs a fair balance. The state needs taxes, the company's need profit, full timers want benefits, part timers want to be treated fairly and left alone as IC's, the unions want money, the poor governor had to see how to make everyone come to a realistic fair compromise.


----------



## jeanocelot

iheartuber said:


> Ha!
> 
> In my days of being an employee who was able to submit mileage to be reimbursed it was never IRS rates- always less
> 
> What makes you think Uber will be different?


Whenever I submitted mileage, it was always at the IRS rate. You should have sued.


----------



## kevin92009

Hideyokidshideyowifebcuz said:


> Uber's lead attorney just said they are not going to reclassify the drivers as employees ??‍♂


screw that attorney


----------



## jeanocelot

iheartuber said:


> Can you deduct it if you've been reimbursed already by your employer?
> 
> Example- a traveling salesman is a W2 full employee of a software company. He racks up 30,000 miles a year driving all over the state to meet with clients.
> 
> The company fully pays him mileage
> 
> Does that mean he can not deduct mileage on his taxes?
> 
> Under AB5 the Uber Driver is in the same boat as this guy


It isn't reported as income to begin with, so there is nothing to deduct.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

iheartuber said:


> Re: expenses, there are many various (gas, car wash, oil change, brakes, tires, etc)
> 
> What I've found is that no matter what I spend the IRS mileage rates always more than pays for them
> 
> So... if they give IRS rates, ok. If not, then it will suck
> 
> And I'm very doubtful
> 
> 
> Right now I can work as much as 12 hrs online time per day.
> 
> What if Uber halved that? (Which is very possible under AB5)
> 
> Bam! I make less


a) that's a big IF (but certainly possible) 
b) it's not currently 12 hrs/day - it's 12 hrs ON, then a required break of 6 or 8 hours), then you can go back ON
c) Third, If you'r car isn't moving, Uber doesn't count the time as 'on' time (but I think Lyft does)

And if that does happen - *I guess it's 12 hours ON with Uber then 12 hours ON with Lyft.* 
sleep is overrated anyway, right?


----------



## jeanocelot

dnlbaboof said:


> Employees can not deduct miles since tax act of 2017. And uber will never reimburse for mileage, they'd rather just leave the state....
> https://money.usnews.com/money/pers...o-know-about-claiming-a-mileage-tax-deduction
> *CLAIMING A DEDUCTION for business mileage can be a good way to reduce how much you owe Uncle Sam, but the government is tightening up the rules for tax-deductible miles.
> "It used to be an employee could deduct their mileage, but that is no longer (allowed)," says Bob Charron, a CPA and partner-in-charge of tax department for accounting firm Friedman LLP in New York City. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 eliminated itemized deductions for unreimbursed business expenses like mileage. The tax reform law also significantly narrowed the mileage tax deduction for moving expenses. That can now only be claimed by active-duty military members who are relocating because of new orders. Still, a mileage deduction still exists for certain situations.
> Under the new tax code, you can claim a mileage deduction for:*
> 
> *Business mileage for the self-employed.*
> *Mileage related to medical appointments.*
> *Mileage incurred while volunteering for a nonprofit.*


The key is "unreimbursed". There is no way that Uber/Lyft are going to get by with paying folks minimum wage, and say that bringing their car around is part of that wage.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You are mis-stating so much it's hard to know where to start.
> Take a minute to read the bill and unless you are Gavin Newsome, it's probably a good idea for you to stop 'assuring" people they will be excluded. :wink:
> 
> (BTW, anyone making $60/hr and getting enough billable to be making a living (40 hrs X 50 wks x $60/hr = ($120,000/yr) hours should be incorporated anyway - and either be a sole proprietor or an employee of their own company.)


I am mis stating! I just shared an experience about talking to someone that is also effected by the bill. I shared what she told me. Only thing is I told her, yes that doesn't sound right, I am sure the bill was not intended for your profession, call the governor and explain you shouldn't be included. I am sure you interpreters will get an exception. 
I guess your taking that as me mid stating things. It was more voicing my opinion in a conversation with someone. Ok, I should have said I hope instead of I am sure.


----------



## njn

there's no way the app will work more than 8 hours a day, cali is the only state to have time and a half after 8.

while uber plans to take it to court, they need to be careful after it passes, because pay is retroactive.


----------



## Rexi

Seamus said:


> In the NYC Suburbs you get .70/mi and .17/minute. Cross the line into the city and you get $1.75/mi and .35/minute. They never reduced driver rates in the NYC suburbs, they just raised pax rates in NYC.
> 
> There are other factors at play though, it's not always cut and dry. We still get multiplier surges. On a Saturday night you will see TLC plated NYC Uber drivers LEAVING $1.75/mi to come to .70/mi hoping to get a 3.0+surge!!! This shows you that if Uber didn't get greedy with the surge take and left the old surge multiplier in the rest of the country, they would have half the driver problems they have.
> 
> The Ultimate Rideshare killer has been Uber vs Lyft race to the bottom through price wars which kills it for everyone. The Uber/Lyft boneheads that thought you could drive rates down to 60's/70's levels and make money are idiots. In 1969 a burger at Mcdonalds cost 18 cents. Who would think it's a good idea to open up a burger stand in 2019 and charge 18 cents a burger???


i live in upstate, all facts here. and people are blaming drivers, law makers ect. people gotta eat, i'm not telling nyone that needs extra money not to drive, i dunno their situation. Uber had years to do a better job, they just up and cut rates, no warning before hand and they just kept cutting and cutting. The price war is so stupid because the only way to go is down without regulation. If this bill wasnt passed you can bet rates would be cut in some sneaky way and then AND only then will some of these guys realize what we have been talking about


----------



## Munsuta

There's always a hidden ✋. They show you something in the left hand and have the right hand behind their backs. Politicians have NEVER EVER in the history of America given a flying f about the people. You have to remember the ex CEO of Uber is buddies with trump and served on some government board. This is just a magic show.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> Re: expenses, there are many various (gas, car wash, oil change, brakes, tires, etc)
> 
> What I've found is that no matter what I spend the IRS mileage rates always more than pays for them
> 
> So... if they give IRS rates, ok. If not, then it will suck
> 
> And I'm very doubtful


That's what the union contract will be for, to ensure you get reimbursed properly for expenses.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

iheartuber said:


> Well this is what I DO know:
> 
> Supporters of AB5 are either:
> 1. Anyone who is just filled with emotional hatred towards Uber and all they want to do is "stick it to Uber" regardless of how it affects the drivers
> 2. Greedy politicians who just want a bigger tax grab
> 
> So excuse me if I'm doubtful that AB5 will helps drivers when the very people behind it are only behind it for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with helping the driver.


Once again - that's how you feel and that's fine, but I disagree with you because:
1. I know people who support AB5 who love Uber and Lyft... but love worker's rights more.
2. I know politicians (including a couplein the CA legislature) that are not 'greedy' and what a bigger 'grab' (of what? They don't get anything personally from passing AB5 - they could get a lot more by being bought by Uber & Lyft!)

It doesn't matter how strongly you feel about something - your feelings don't make something fact.


----------



## Wolfgang Faust

Munsuta said:


> There's always a hidden ✋. They show you something in the left hand and have the right hand behind their backs. Politicians have NEVER EVER in the history of America given a flying f about the people. You have to remember the ex CEO of Uber is buddies with trump and served on some government board. This is just a magic show.


You have to remember Eric Holder works for Uber.



Michael - Cleveland said:


> Once again - that's how you feel and that's fine, but I disagree with you because:
> 1. I know people who support AB5 who love Uber and Lyft... but love worker's rights more.
> 2. I know politicians (including a couplein the CA legislature) that are not 'greedy' and what a bigger 'grab' (of what? They don't get anything personally from passing AB5 - they could get a lot more by being bought by Uber & Lyft!)
> 
> It doesn't matter how strongly you feel about something - your feelings don't make something fact.


You hurt my feelings.
(both of them)


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

Michael - Cleveland said:


> You don't KNOW any of that. It might happen - it might not. Uber and Lyft are working with the Governor and his team to "negotaite" how this can be implemented. No need to jump off any bridges just yet - and no need to state speculation as if it had happened.
> 
> 
> Igor list? lol! Freudian slip?
> But seriously - I agree with you - I hope they come up with a way to allow drivers to CHOOSE their status.
> Where may run into difficulty is a conflict with Federal law, which specially does not allow an employer to choose who gets protections under the FLSA. And that's been the law for over 50 years.


If you allow people to choose their status McDonald's will just decide that they're only going to hire contractors and then you'd have to choose to be a contractor. EVEN IF THEY TREAT YOU LIKE AN EMPLOYEE. Uber could simply decide that they're only going to hire employees, or only going to hire contractors. They would do whatever works best for them.

What you have to do is just decide what people are, not what they want to be, not what the company says they are, but what they actually are according to whatever the law is. Otherwise people are going to choose to work for peanuts because that's the only thing that's being offered to them. It's like saying let me choose whether I want to work for less than minimum wage. You can't allow people to make those kinds of choices because companies will simply take advantage of it.

There could be both, but only if companies are forced to treat them accordingly. But letting someone choose to be a contractor and allowing a company to treat them like an employee will not work. And if you let people try to choose the way you're talking about about it it would not work.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Munsuta said:


> There's always a hidden ✋. They show you something in the left hand and have the right hand behind their backs. Politicians have NEVER EVER in the history of America given a flying f about the people. You have to remember the ex CEO of Uber is buddies with trump and served on some government board. This is just a magic show.


very cluttered post.
Kalanick RESIGNED from Trump's economic advisory board.
Really, politicians have never in the history of this country given a flying f about people? Even the ones that wrote the words "We the People..." or the ones that created things like voting rights, anti-discrimination laws, the 10 amendments in the bill-of-rights? How about the ones that served in our military institutions - or raised children who did? How about the ones who volunteer absurd hours in unpaid political positions in their local cities and towns? That's the magic. If you don't want politicians, opt for something other than a democracy.


----------



## Tom Oldman

Pax Collector said:


> Now we'll wait to see if Gavin Nuisance will sign the darn thing and make these blood sucking entities bleed a little.


I know you're in trucking sector and I understand the AB5 maybe regulating trucking businesses and truck drivers. Any info on that? Thank you


----------



## Transportador

OMG! Where are we, the freaking stone age? Who the hell needs unions in this day and age? All the fair pay you think you'll get because of AB5 will be split per the below:

1. Withholding taxes, Federal and State (for those states that have income taxes) and local.

2. Medicare and Social Security and any other taxes applicable.

3. Union dues. Oh yeah, you think unions are free? Those union boses are freaking mafia guys just the same.

And the most important effect is this:

Uber and Lyft will go out of business. You and I will not be on this forum to complain about them anymore. We'll be doing other things instead of making any money driving U/L.

If that makes you all happy, go for it.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Fuzzyelvis said:


> What you have to do is just decide what people are not what they want to be what not what the company says they are but what they actually are according to whatever the law is.


Yes, Exactly!! And if we don't like the law, or feel it needs updating (as I am convinced) then we have to change the law!!


----------



## JaredJ

Sing it with me now, "We represent, The Lollipop Guild, The Lollipop Guild, and in the name of The Lollipop Guild...we welcome everyone to Defunctland."


----------



## Wolfgang Faust

Fuzzyelvis said:


> If you allow people to choose their status McDonald's will just decide that they're only going to hire contractors and then you'd have to choose to be a contractor. Fubo could simply decide that they're only going to hire employees or only going to hire contractors. They would do whatever works best for them.
> 
> What you have to do is just decide what people are not what they want to be what not what the company says they are but what they actually are according to whatever the law is. Otherwise people are going to choose to work for peanuts because that's the only thing that's being offered to them. It's like saying let me choose whether I want to work for less than minimum wage. You can't allow people to make those kinds of choices because companies will simply take advantage of it.


You have two choices..
1) crap
2) poo


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Transportador said:


> OMG! Where are we, the freaking stone age? Who the hell needs unions in this day and age? All the fair pay you think you'll get because of AB5 will be split per the below:
> 
> 1. Withholding taxes, Federal and State (for those states that have income taxes) and local.
> 
> 2. Medicare and Social Security and any other taxes applicable.
> 
> 3. Union dues. Oh yeah, you think unions are free? Those union boses are freaking mafia guys just the same.
> 
> And the most important effect is this:
> 
> Uber and Lyft will go out of business. You and I will not be on this forum to complain about them anymore. We'll be doing other things instead of making any money driving U/L.
> 
> If that makes you all happy, go for it.


OH, NO - THE SKY IS FALLING! 
You're going to try to scare me with... 
A PAYCHECK? 
Medicare and Social Security benefits? 
You forgot the scariest of all: UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE!

Please - ask me if I care if Uber & Lyft (owned by it's executives and investors) go out of business! 
I won't make you wait for answer: "could not care less." 
The industry exists... the need and demand is there. There will always be others to come in and meet the demand if they think they can make a profit.


----------



## Hpil77

Gerrygri11 said:


> Steve the problem is there's never gonna be benefits. The companies will cap all drive is below $30/hr Or whatever California minimum is for not having to pay benefits or overtime.
> These companies were never meant to be full time jobs they were meant to be side gigs and they will do whatever they have to to keep them that way.
> I've been driving over for 3 years I've never made less than $23 an hour in normally hover in the 27 to 36. Difference is I know my market I work Part And when IM not working that keeping an eye on the App so I can see where the busy locations are on a given day isI know will be in my market 45 minutes before Demand goes up.
> All driversis can do this but uber and Lyft have to stop cutting rates they need to charge people a little bit more an be more transparent


Some this guys claim 43000 part time working for uber can I see you taxes idiots


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> No, I said she is NOT underpaid nor exploited. Thus should not be getting caught up in this bill. The bill is forcing interpreters to become employees, they don't want that. Was just saying how the bill reaches other sectors as well and needs to be smoothed out.


Who exactly is saying that it's forcing interpreters to become employees? If she's actually being treated like a contractor not an employee then it shouldn't be an issue.



jeanocelot said:


> The key is "unreimbursed". There is no way that Uber/Lyft are going to get by with paying folks minimum wage, and say that bringing their car around is part of that wage.


Pizza hut and dominos were already sued over that. You can't use reimbursement to determine minimum wage.


----------



## Rexi

uberdriverfornow said:


> You are only making that because the rate cuts haven't hit your market YET.
> 
> 
> and drivers will stop driving which means Uber won't have any drivers
> 
> I'm pretty sure Uber needs drivers to drive passengers


its so simple and yet people cant understand this, LOL. there must really be uber shills in this forum


----------



## Pax Collector

Tom Oldman said:


> I know you're in trucking sector and I understand the AB5 maybe regulating trucking businesses and truck drivers. Any info on that? Thank you


That wouldn't apply to me in particular because I'm a W-2 employee. I get my hourly wages and full benefits. Most local trucking jobs are the same way. I can't give you any info about long haul or owner operator trucking because I don't have that experience. Maybe @Lissetti could be kind enough to shed some light on the matter.


----------



## SuperDumped

Michael - Cleveland said:


> very cluttered post.
> Kalanick RESIGNED from Trump's economic advisory board.
> Really, politicians have never in the history of this country given a flying f about people? Even the ones that wrote the words "We the People..." or the ones that created things like voting rights, anti-discrimination laws, the 10 amendments in the bill-of-rights? How about the ones that served in our military institutions - or raised children who did? How about the ones who volunteer absurd hours in unpaid political positions in their local cities and towns? That's the magic. If you don't want politicians, opt for something other than a democracy.


lmao the people who wrote "we the people" owned people they didnt give a flying ef about people neither do the politicans who passed this bill

voting rights & anti discrimnation laws were only passed AFTER blood was spilled to get them, non violence didnt achieve anything. almost immidiatley after they were passed the people who passed them were assassinated along with the leaders of the groups pushing for them

politicians dont send their kids to serve in the military unless they want them to go into politics, the ones that did in the past were forced via draft, most in military had a choice of mcdonalds or weapons training with an opportunity to kill brown people to steal natural resources, protect resources like pipelines or protect drug crops

amendments & bill of rights again all written by people who owned, raped, murdered, tortured people

as far as volunteers theyre about as smart as idiots who volunteer to drive for points, stars, badges, pro status, illegal 1970s wages theyre clueless & naive to how the world really works

they could of just said we have regulated cab rates for a reason and have for almost a century, you have to pay drivers 100% of these regulated rate other than that play all the games you want

this is not as complicated as they make it out to be its a friggen cab company that you press 1 button instead of pressing 7 buttons & having to talk a minute or few

only thing drivers care about are the rates which were being cut annually with no notice to the point most drivers are driving for free at a loss because theyre stupid or desperate (no one else would willingly drive at .60 - $1.20ish per mile the math just dont work in reality)until they fail by design 96% of the time


----------



## Lissetti

Pax Collector said:


> That wouldn't apply to me in particular because I'm a W-2 employee. I get my hourly wages and full benefits. Most local trucking jobs are the same way. I can't give you any info about long haul or owner operator trucking because I don't have that experience. Maybe @Lissetti could be kind enough to shed some light on the matter.


Don't do Owner-Op. It's a loosing business. Now most cross country shipping is done via Intermodal.



















The main runs you will get as an Owner-Op is local and short regional pick ups and drop offs to and from the rail and ports.


----------



## iheartuber

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Once again - that's how you feel and that's fine, but I disagree with you because:
> 1. I know people who support AB5 who love Uber and Lyft... but love worker's rights more.
> 2. I know politicians (including a couplein the CA legislature) that are not 'greedy' and what a bigger 'grab' (of what? They don't get anything personally from passing AB5 - they could get a lot more by being bought by Uber & Lyft!)
> 
> It doesn't matter how strongly you feel about something - your feelings don't make something fact.


I never said it was fact, I said it was an educated guess- and if AB5 is passed in an extreme "let's screw Uber" version, it will play out as I'm guessing it will


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Yes, Exactly!! And if we don't like the law, or feel it needs updating (as I am convinced) then we have to change the law!!


I think the law is pretty clear (in my state I've read the definition of contractor vs. employee and it's clear to me we're employees). Unfortunately the ONE thing (flexibility) is what is brought up to prove that we're not. Of course this is accepted because of the money that Uber spends to get legislators on their side. The fact that the amount of flexibility we ought to have as contractors is nowhere near what we actually have is ignored.

I have to admit I have not read the California rules for determining worker status, or the new law, but my guess is that all it does is clarify what the rules actually say already.


----------



## Transportador

Michael - Cleveland said:


> OH, NO - THE SKY IS FALLING!
> You're going to try to scare me with...
> A PAYCHECK?
> Medicare and Social Security benefits?
> You forgot the scariest of all: UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE!
> 
> Please - ask me if I care if Uber & Lyft (owned by it's executives and investors) go out of business!
> I won't make you wait for answer: "could not care less."
> The industry exists... the need and demand is there. There will always be others to come in and meet the demand if they think they can make a profit.


If you don't give a crap whether U/L exists then why post anything on here? Spreading hate for the sake of hate is not constructive.

I'm not trying to scare anybody. It is foolhardy to think that this AB5 is going to help put more pay in drivers' pocket is my ONLY point.

The reason why I drive U/L part time in addition to my regular job instead of working part time at McDonald's is the pay structure and the flexible hours. I don't work for Uber so don't even start with that crap.

AB5 will end my ability to earn extra income on U/L. I will just do Amazon Flex until they screw that one up too.


----------



## SuperDumped

jeanocelot said:


> More like the acceptance rate will 100%, with "3 strikes, you're out" if you decline a ride. Everyone will be officially deactivated when Guy Lombardo's tune gets played. Employees will be hired (i.e., in the time leading up to this) to start right then and there.


then they will get unemployment or every driver will be fired eventually the app is fsr from perfect just like the consumer gps it uses & who care 96% of drivers fail by design anyway

the 4% who succeed for some reason are scared, this only effects the new ants & current ants that will make 2-3 times more due to regulated minimum per mile, per minute, per trips & the 4%ers will also make more per ride

schedules will not work, uber lyft in no way will pay unemployment, workers comp, soc sec credits etc. they will do the minimum to get around the employee status and it will cost them lots of 71 million dollar mansions, theyll have to stop firing over cancel rates, show contracts pre ride or be fined into oblivion thats what the states want the extra fine money

no one cares about the drivers but drivers


----------



## dnlbaboof

Uber holds all the cards they can just leave the state and then all the same drivers in CA who lied and said they only made 4 bucks an hour (when they really made much more) will beg uber to come back, as will the cheapo pax who dont wanna pay 3 bucks a mile.

Just give CA drivers a buck per mile after ubers cut problem solved, tweak the ratings system, roll that rate out nationwide. If you still cant make more than 4 bucks an hour then get another job, or watch a few you tube videos on tips how to make money ridesharing.


----------



## SuperDumped

kevin92009 said:


> Back on the bus baby


yup why people think chauffer is their budget is beyond me, cabs were never meant to be taken daily, out of the 20+ years since i was 16, i didnt have a car maybe 6 months, if I couldnt find a friend, family member, neighbor, coworker that would do it for $10 for gas $, it was bus or walk 30-45 minutes to grocery store & back & spend the $10 I saved on extra groceries, a useless mindless generation has been created they cant even figure out how to travel a few miles without an app

the two times i needed a tow for this gig the shop is a little over 4 miles, took an hour walking not really a big deal geez its 1-2 netflix shows or a full length cd


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Transportador said:


> If you don't give a crap whether U/L exists then why post anything on here? Spreading hate for the sake of hate is not constructive.


Probably because there is no requirement that to be on here you have to care whether or not U/L exist. (Fortunately, I have higher priorities in my life to care about). Spreading hate of whom? Spreading anything anywhere... no clue what are you talking about. (and I don't care about that, either)



> I'm not trying to scare anybody.


 Then have the courage to state your opinions as just that: your opinion - don't try to give your opinion more weight by stating it as something you know to be fact - when you know it's not.



> It is foolhardy to think that this AB5 is going to help put more pay in drivers' pocket is my ONLY point.


Are you one of those drivers that think that you're making a profit, earning $1,000/wk driving your car 2,000 miles/wk - but who accounts only for earnings and fuel expense - not real expenses?

It appears that you do not understand that if a TNC paid you only $0.15/mi. you'd be making more than the ~$0.60/mi earnings you get now because they would also be paying:

ALL of your expenses,
their 50% share (7.5%) of your SSI/Medicare (for which you are currently 100% liable at 15% of your income),
unemployment insurance (which you currently pay 100% of)
a portion of your health insurance



> AB5 will end my ability to earn extra income on U/L. I will just do Amazon Flex until they screw that one up too.


You have NO IDEA AT ALL what AB5 will do to you. NONE.
*Uber, as of 5PM today, has said AB5 will NOT cause them to classify drivers in CA as employees.*

Amazon has all but eliminated the FLEX drivers in favor of individuals and small companies driving vans. Flex drivers do no more than 'clean-up' now - screwed up afternoon routes all over the area delivering the stuff the van drivers couldn't (or didn't want to) deliver.
And AMAZON has been limiting flex hours to fewer than 40/wk for 2 years already.


----------



## SuperDumped

dnlbaboof said:


> Uber holds all the cards they can just leave the state and then all the same drivers in CA who lied and said they only made 4 bucks an hour (when they really made much more) will beg uber to come back, as will the cheapo pax who dont wanna pay 3 bucks a mile.
> 
> Just give CA drivers a buck per mile after ubers cut problem solved, tweak the ratings system, roll that rate out nationwide. If you still cant make more than 4 bucks an hour then get another job, or watch a few you tube videos on tips how to make money ridesharing.


the 96% who fail by design will beg lmao, uber going to leave their 2 outta 5 biggest markets lmao, buck a mile lmao what this 1990? yeah doubt any of that happens

ny la san fran brazil london is 80% of ubers business, uber lyft just lost all their cards it will be pay $1000 a day per driver fine halff going to driver or pay regulated minimums come jan 1st per whats written in the bill

markets vary the best rides are from your couch or bed & most drivers just cant move thats why they circles or stage the handful of spots every city has that are profitable or stage at airports 16 hours a day

ny got $1.75 a mile .35 a min & $7 minimum fares cali will most likely do the same,


----------



## MajorBummer

Lyft announced today they will start scheduling shifts for drivers and also determine where you have to drive.Too bad if you dont want to drive at 6AM in downtown L.A. Do your job, "employee" !!
And i would not be surprised if they keep your hours at 29 or below so they dont have to give you health insurance.
Flexibilty is out the door. Oh and they say no driving for the competition either.
I hope our Massachusetts drivers see what a mess California has become and stay away from the "Employee" pitfall.
i support the minimum wage rule but not at the expense of my independance.


----------



## Wrb06wrx

Kodyhead said:


> Imo if it comes to this they will incentivise part time drivers with better rates than full time drivers. I would also imagine better badges for part timers to earn too


I think itll be advantageous to be a part timer because they might give you the option of 1099 or employee but you full timers good luck they will do what was said earlier in this thread acceptance rate falls below 80% buh bye cancelation rate goes above 15 or 20% buh bye car is older that 10yrs buh bye this is empowering them to tell you your services are no longer required you'll see they will tighten the criteria to be a driver you get a certain amount of less than 5 star ratings buh bye they screwed themselves in Cali.... NY is just as liberal so I'm curious to see what happens here but hey it was fun while it lasted at least I can remember the time I picked up these 3 20 something girls that one wanted to add a stop to go home and shave her cuca real quick cause they were supposed to meet up with some guys and she might take one home cause she was horny.... lol amazing the sh*t you hear as an uber driver


----------



## SuperDumped

iheartuber said:


> Um.. maybe I wasn't clear: you mean to tell me I'm gonna pay money to a union and the union will be able to negotiate such a higher salary for me that even after factoring in the union dues I will still make more than I'm making now?
> 
> I don't believe that is possible


hmmm .30-60 per mile vs $1.75
..10-.20 per min vs .35
$3-4 min fare vs $7
cap on hiring

all things ny got without union dues
uber lyft will do the bare minimum to not have to classify drivers as employees as those costs will vastly outweigh tweakin the app to do so

& even if they do union will be $50 a month where youll get the above along with dead mile & maintenance reimbursment, unemployment workers comp protection, soc sec credits for retirement.....


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

MajorBummer said:


> Lyft announced today they will start scheduling shifts for drivers and also determine where you have to drive.Too bad if you dont want to drive at 6AM in downtown L.A. Do your job, "employee" !!
> And i would not be surprised if they keep your hours at 29 or below so they dont have to give you health insurance.
> Flexibilty is out the door. Oh and they say no driving for the competition either.
> I hope our Massachusetts drivers see what a mess California has become and stay away from the "Employee" pitfall.
> i support the minimum wage rule but not at the expense of my independance.


And just where and how did Lyft announce this?
(please don't post 'news' without sources)


----------



## SuperDumped

MajorBummer said:


> Lyft announced today they will start scheduling shifts for drivers and also determine where you have to drive.Too bad if you dont want to drive at 6AM in downtown L.A. Do your job, "employee" !!
> And i would not be surprised if they keep your hours at 29 or below so they dont have to give you health insurance.
> Flexibilty is out the door. Oh and they say no driving for the competition either.
> I hope our Massachusetts drivers see what a mess California has become and stay away from the "Employee" pitfall.
> i support the minimum wage rule but not at the expense of my independance.


no source huh? guess if they fire you for not wanting that 6am schedule youll get 6 months severance in the form of unemployment to find another gig chances are 96% youd have to anyway by design

guess that beats just waking up one day with no notice and cant log in being fired on an accusation with no proof or worse an app error


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Lissetti said:


> Don't do Owner-Op. It's a loosing business. Now most cross country shipping is done via Intermodal.
> 
> View attachment 355081
> 
> 
> View attachment 355082
> 
> 
> The main runs you will get as an Owner-Op is local and short regional pick ups and drop offs to and from the rail and ports.


that sure looks an awful lot like autonomous shipping to me.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN




----------



## Michael - Cleveland

iheartuber said:


> I never said it was fact, I said it was an educated guess- and if AB5 is passed in an extreme "let's screw Uber" version, it will play out as I'm guessing it will


that's cool - but you should know that AB5 isn't about Uber - it's about a gig economy that is robbing the single largest economy in the US of revenues, forcing business expenses on to workers, and leaving a labor force unprotected in the event of employment of health emergencies, which pushes those costs on to the tax payers in the state.


----------



## SuperDumped

Michael - Cleveland said:


> that sure looks an awful lot like autonomous shipping to me.


on rails & STILL has a human behind the "wheel" but driverless cars in 2021 haha


----------



## La La Lady

uberdriverfornow said:


> lol Fixing the problem that Uber and Lyft created ? ???
> 
> Yeah, let's let Uber and Lyft fix the problems that they created. ??
> 
> That's letting the fox guard the hen house. ??
> 
> 
> you mean 39 hours
> 
> and there will be no schedules


29 is part time. Pure speculation, but it would not surprise me if they limited drivers to part time status so they are not on the hook to provide expensive benefits like medical insurance.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

SurgeMasterMN said:


>


https://uberpeople.net/threads/california-contractor-law-doesnt-apply-says-uber.351070/


----------



## MajorBummer

you want proof? also watch this : dated today


----------



## Lissetti

Michael - Cleveland said:


> that sure looks an awful lot like autonomous shipping to me.


That's exactly what it is. I drove over the road and the US Continental, but every time I left California heading east, I would look out over the desert and see a cargo train, looked 3 miles long, carrying shipping containers, also heading east. My own company had containers on that train. For the next 7 years I drove local Intermodal Semis. I picked up and dropped off at the train depot. That's all I did all day, but I went home at the end of each day. Yes, those BNSF locomotives are autonomous, They only shift to the Engineer controls when they are entering the depot, loading, leaving, and "switching."


----------



## SuperDumped

MajorBummer said:


> you want proof? also watch this : dated today


thats not proof thats lyft trying to scare drivers with fraud like the same pop up i get evertime i ignore or cancel a ride LMAO


----------



## jocker12

Lissetti said:


> That's exactly what it is. I drove over the road and the US Continental, but every time I left California heading east, I would look out over the desert and see a cargo train, looked 3 miles long, carrying shipping containers, also heading east. My own company had containers on that train. For the next 7 years I drove local Intermodal Semis. I picked up and dropped off at the train depot. That's all I did all day, but I went home at the end of each day. Yes, those BNSF locomotives are autonomous, They only shift to the Engineer controls when they are entering the depot, loading, leaving, and "switching."


Here is your future self driving train successfully tested by the enthusiasts.


----------



## Coastal_Cruiser

Lissetti said:


> That's exactly what it is. I drove over the road and the US Continental, but every time I left California heading east, I would look out over the desert and see a cargo train, looked 3 miles long, carrying shipping containers, also heading east.


Right. And POP QUIZ: Who has been buying up a bunch of railroads on the Monopoly board? Initials WB.


----------



## jeanocelot

SuperDumped said:


> then they will get unemployment or every driver will be fired eventually the app is fsr from perfect just like the consumer gps it uses & who care 96% of drivers fail by design anyway


The folks that would be driving right before The End would still be independent contractors, so they would not be getting unemployment since they never were W2 employees to begin with.


----------



## Gone_in_60_seconds

Bob Reynolds said:


> SACRAMENTO - The California Senate on Tuesday passed gig-work legislation that could transform the state's employment landscape, turning many independent contractors into employees. The vote was 29-11, along party lines.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sf...passes-AB5-gig-work-bill-turning-14430204.php
> *California passes landmark bill that threatens to upend companies like Uber and Lyft*
> https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/california-passes-assembly-bill-5-for-gig-workers.htmlNBC NEWS 11 SEP 2019
> 
> California lawmakers passed a landmark bill on Tuesday that threatens to reshape how companies like Uber and Lyft do business.
> The legislation, known as Assembly Bill 5, would require gig economy workers to be reclassified as employees instead of contractors.
> The bill has received support from California Gov. Gavin Newsom and would go into effect Jan. 1, 2020.
> California lawmakers passed a landmark bill on Tuesday that threatens to reshape how companies like Uber and Lyft do business.
> 
> But shares of Lyft popped as much as 3.9% on Wednesday morning, while Uber climbed more than 2.9% after California Gov. Gavin Newsom told the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday that he's still engaged in talks with Uber, Lyft and other gig economy companies about possible negotiations around the bill. Newsom recently voiced his support for the bill.
> 
> The legislation, known as Assembly Bill 5 (AB5), would require gig economy workers to be reclassified as employees instead of contractors. The bill passed in a 29 to 11 vote in the State Senate and now moves on to the State Assembly, where if it passes, it will land on Newsom's desk.
> 
> Additionally, the bill has received broad support from Democratic Presidential candidates including Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), as well as South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg.
> 
> The bill has the potential to change the employment status of more than 1 million low-wage workers in California, not just gig workers at companies like Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Postmates and Instacart. It will make it harder for gig economy companies to prove that their workers aren't staff, while ensuring key benefits and protections, like minimum wage, insurance and sick days.
> 
> AB5 has attracted staunch opposition from gig economy companies, as it could upend their traditional business model of hiring inexpensive contractors. In an effort to push back against the bill, Uber and Lyft proposed establishing $21-an-hour minimum wage for drivers in California. The ride-hailing companies, as well as Doordash, have also pledged $90 million on a ballot initiative for the 2020 election that would exempt them from AB5.
> 
> Lyft spokesperson Adrian Durbin said the bill has the potential to hurt drivers who prefer a flexible work schedule


This is good for the full time drivers but terrible for the part time drivers. The flexibility and potential lucrative earnings hours during surge will be severely limited, as there will be a restriction on how many drivers can drive at a certain time.


----------



## iheartuber

Michael - Cleveland said:


> that's cool - but you should know that AB5 isn't about Uber - it's about a gig economy that is robbing the single largest economy in the US of revenues, forcing business expenses on to workers, and leaving a labor force unprotected in the event of employment of health emergencies, which pushes those costs on to the tax payers in the state.


That's cool that you feel that way but like I said before it's a trade off. The worker gets a tax break in exchange for a few bells and whistles he is willing to give up.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

SuperDumped said:


> lmao the people who wrote "we the people" owned people they didnt give a flying ef about people neither do the politicans who passed this bill
> 
> voting rights & anti discrimnation laws were only passed AFTER blood was spilled to get them, non violence didnt achieve anything. almost immidiatley after they were passed the people who passed them were assassinated along with the leaders of the groups pushing for them
> 
> politicians dont send their kids to serve in the military unless they want them to go into politics, the ones that did in the past were forced via draft, most in military had a choice of mcdonalds or weapons training with an opportunity to kill brown people to steal natural resources, protect resources like pipelines or protect drug crops
> 
> amendments & bill of rights again all written by people who owned, raped, murdered, tortured people
> 
> as far as volunteers theyre about as smart as idiots who volunteer to drive for points, stars, badges, pro status, illegal 1970s wages theyre clueless & naive to how the world really works
> 
> they could of just said we have regulated cab rates for a reason and have for almost a century, you have to pay drivers 100% of these regulated rate other than that play all the games you want
> 
> this is not as complicated as they make it out to be its a friggen cab company that you press 1 button instead of pressing 7 buttons & having to talk a minute or few
> 
> only thing drivers care about are the rates which were being cut annually with no notice to the point most drivers are driving for free at a loss because theyre stupid or desperate (no one else would willingly drive at .60 - $1.20ish per mile the math just dont work in reality)until they fail by design 96% of the time


lol.. you're a very angry person.

(and if you're thinking it was the Kennedy's that passed the social security act, the new deal, the civil rights act or the voting rights act, um, no, that would be FDR and LBJ... neither were killed. Some founding fathers owned slaves - some didn't. It was, at the time, legal. To call them rapists and torturers in order to make a point here is absurd.)


----------



## Wolfgang Faust

Get a load of this crap...

https://www.vox.com/2019/9/11/20861599/ab-5-uber-lyft-drivers-contractors-reclassify-employees


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

iheartuber said:


> That's cool that you feel that way but like I said before it's a trade off. The worker gets a tax break in exchange for a few bells and whistles he is willing to give up.


That's pretty much how our society works. Otherwise, everyone would be a libertarian (and living in tents in the woods with no roads or schools)



Gone_in_60_seconds said:


> This is good for the full time drivers but terrible for the part time drivers. The flexibility and potential lucrative earnings hours during surge will be severely limited, as there will be a restriction on how many drivers can drive at a certain time.


We do not know what it will... but if there is a restriction (as in NYC) that's GOOD for drivers. 
Fewer drivers means more and higher surges.



MajorBummer said:


> you want proof? also watch this : dated today


That's what I figured. That is *not* an announcement that Lyft is limiting hours or do anything at all. It specifically says (and I'll quote it here in big bold letters so you can't ignore it like you did when you reported this as having happened:

*"NO CHANGES HAVE GONE INTO EFFECT"*

It's a MARKETING email from Lyft to drivers, attempting to scare them into objecting to the soon to be law..
Nothing more - nothing less.

in other words: *FAKE NEWS!*


----------



## uberdriverfornow

La La Lady said:


> 29 is part time. Pure speculation, but it would not surprise me if they limited drivers to part time status so they are not on the hook to provide expensive benefits like medical insurance.


you don't get medical benefits in CA as a condition of employment unless a union contract is nice enough to represent you with a contract

you do get other benefits by simply being employeed

working 29 hours and working 30 hours in CA means the same thing



Wolfgang Faust said:


> Get a load of this crap...
> 
> https://www.vox.com/2019/9/11/20861599/ab-5-uber-lyft-drivers-contractors-reclassify-employees


it's ok, looks like they will spend millions losing in court when they get sued by the city attornies in major cities that have banded together to sue to get them to comply

Uber and Lyft literally have no chance in winning


----------



## SurgeMasterMN

uberdriverfornow said:


> https://www.uber.com/newsroom/ab5-update/


Typical Uber spin. Talking about fixing problems they created aka the fox guarding the hen house.

Talking about how the Dynamex decision already changed things while also stating that AB5 didn't. lol


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

uberdriverfornow said:


> you don't get medical benefits in CA as a condition of employment unless a union contract is nice enough to represent you with a contract
> 
> you do get other benefits by simply being employeed
> 
> working 29 hours and working 30 hours in CA means the same thing


Has something changed?

What are the ACA requirements for employers?​*Employers* must offer health insurance that is affordable and provides minimum value to 95% of their full-time employees and their children up to age 26, or be subject to penalties. This is known as the *employer* mandate. It applies to *employers* with 50* or more full-time employees, and/or full-time equivalents (FTEs).​


----------



## Clothahump

I imagine that Uber and Lyft will simply shut down in California. It looks like Uber is planning to move to Texas. Don't know Lyft will do.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Michael - Cleveland said:


> or be subject to penalties.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

dnlbaboof said:


> Uber holds all the cards they can just leave the state ...


I wonder why they didn't do that in NYC when the city made them play on a level field.
Too important a market to walk away from?
SF & LA (just those 2 markets) are about the same size as the NYC market. CA as a whole is the largest economy in the US (fifth largest in the world).

I can't imagine Uber walking away and leaving that all to Lyft (or vice-versa).



uberdriverfornow said:


> or be subject to penalties.


uh, yeah... just like other laws... follow the law or be assessed penalties.
So health benefits are in-fact mandated.

_PENALTY:_​_A business may have to pay a per-employee, per-month fee called the Employer Shared Responsibility Payment if the business:_​

_Does not offer coverage (to at least 95 percent of FTE employees) that complies with specified reforms under the Affordable Care Act._​
_Does not offer coverage that meets minimum value. (The plan's share of the total average cost of covered services is at least 60 percent)._​
_Does not offer coverage that is affordable. (The employee's premium is more than 9.66 percent of that employee's annual household income)._​
_If a business does not offer coverage, the Employer Shared Responsibility Payment penalty is triggered when an employee who is not offered coverage purchases health insurance on an exchange and receives a federal subsidy to help pay for that coverage. The penalty is assessed monthly and is equal to the number of FTE employees (minus the first 30) multiplied by one-twelfth of $2,000._​
For a company with 10,030 employees, the ESRP penalty for not providing a compliant health insurance plan to employees would be:
$1,666,666.60 *a month*. ($20mil/yr).

for those $$, I think I'd just open a hospital in the company and self insure!


----------



## SuperDumped

Michael - Cleveland said:


> lol.. you're a very angry person.
> 
> (and if you're thinking it was the Kennedy's that passed the social security act, the new deal, the civil rights act or the voting rights act, um, no, that would be FDR and LBJ... neither were killed. Some founding fathers owned slaves - some didn't. It was, at the time, legal. To call them rapists and torturers in order to make a point here is absurd.)


angry for posting facts huh?
not angry at all people shouldn't try to decipher tone from text its why emoticons were invented & i only use those when trying to stick something in a millinial

pretty much every president up to including Lincoln owned or profited from slaves dont really care if it was legal it was rape murder & torture periodt, even the progressives of the time like franklin profited immensly from the murder rape & torture of people they were the very definition of liars & hypocrites, those after werent much better they just hid it, reagan & 1st bush flooded streets with crack, clinton imprisoned more blacks with mandatory minimums, & obama ignored us like the good puppet they all are

kennedys was civil rights & voting too they paid the price, feds were responsible for mlk, many innocents in the black panthers with cointelpro & malcolm also suffered from their ops

fdr was racist
lbj was hella racist

President Lyndon B. Johnson would routinely use the "N" word and called civil rights legislation "n***er" bills.

Johnson also reportedly defended appointing Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court--the court's first black justice in U.S. history--by stating, "Son, when I appoint a n***er to the court, I want everyone to know he's a n***er."

In 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower told Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren white Southerners "are not bad people. All they are concerned about is to see that their sweet little girls are not required to sit in school alongside some big overgrown *******" while discussing the desegregation of schools.

President Richard Nixon referred to black people as "***** bastards" who live like "dogs."

imagine what they said & felt in private lol

the 1st movie shown in the white house was a kkk film lol

not trying to make a point, dont need to facts do what they do & youre free to ignore them


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

SuperDumped said:


> angry for posting facts huh?
> not angry at all people shouldn't try to decipher tone from text its why emoticons were invented & i only use those when trying to stick something in a millinial
> 
> pretty much every president up to including Lincoln owned or profited from slaves dont really care if it was legal it was rape murder & torture periodt, even the progressives of the time like franklin profited immensly from the murder rape & torture of people they were the very definition of liars & hypocrites, those after werent much better they just hid it, reagan & 1st bush flooded streets with crack, clinton imprisoned more blacks with mandatory minimums, & obama ignored us like the good puppet they all are
> 
> kennedys was civil rights & voting they paid the price, feds were responsible for mlk, many innocents in the black panthers with cointelpro & malcolm also suffered from their ops
> 
> fdr was racist
> lbj was hella racist
> 
> President Lyndon B. Johnson would routinely use the "N" word and called civil rights legislation "n***er" bills.
> 
> the 1st movie shown in the white house was a kkk film lol
> 
> not trying to make a point, dont need to facts do what they do & youre free to ignore them
> 
> View attachment 355142


I think you misunderstand the meaning of the word "fact".
It's not a fact just because you believe it (facts don't care what you believe) or post it.


----------



## SuperDumped

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I think you misunderstand the meaning of the word "fact".
> It's not a fact just because you believe it (facts don't care what you believe) or post it.


dispute my facts lol

if you own a slave and have sex with them is that not rape? do you not torture them? if you kill a person whether on orders or just because doesn't that make you a murderer?

every president was a murderer, every slave owner tortured & raped people even if legal, i dont define words

did i make those quotes up or are they public record? conversations actually taped lol

is cointelpro on the record because of yhe freedom of information act or did i just make it up?

was birth of a nation a kkk film not the first movie shown in the white house?
record

all facts sorry not sorry


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Michael - Cleveland said:


> And just where and how did Lyft announce this?
> (please don't post 'news' without sources)


it was a mass email, telling us to take their side and gave some fear mongering. It wasn't an announcement. Just fear mongering to get us to go against full timers wanting labor laws.



Fuzzyelvis said:


> Who exactly is saying that it's forcing interpreters to become employees? If she's actually being treated like a contractor not an employee then it shouldn't be an issue.
> [automerge]1568241166[/[/automerge]


She was just talking about how translators where worried. I'm not an expert or trying to say exactly what's going to happen. She said she works the same Monday every week, and that makes her fall under AB5. She said lot of translators have become nervous. I'm not arguing or taking sides. I'm neutral and don't mind different people opposing different views. I was just talking and sharing my experience. 
I think strippers, independent music, and trucking are in the mix and have different views. I wish an option to simply have legit IC contracts with an opt out clause would work for them, or even me as a driver.


----------



## Antvirus

Saccharine Trust tried to warn you but you wouldn't listen...


----------



## Uber1111uber

I'm just glad its gonna cost these greedy scumbags about $200 million. And for everyone freaking out about scheduling, there is NO way they can operate and be reliable with full time employees. I'll bet itll be like grubhub where you sign up for 2 hour blocks at a time and such, but have to keep a decent acceptance rate to keep getting shifts. It's a step in the right direction bc something had to be done to these shady , law-skirting companies.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I wonder why they didn't do that in NYC when the city made them play on a level field.
> Too important a market to walk away from?
> SF & LA (just those 2 markets) are about the same size as the NYC market. CA as a whole is the largest economy in the US (fifth largest in the world).
> 
> I can't imagine Uber walking away and leaving that all to Lyft (or vice-versa).
> 
> 
> uh, yeah... just like other laws... follow the law or be assessed penalties.
> So health benefits are in-fact mandated.
> 
> _PENALTY:_​_A business may have to pay a per-employee, per-month fee called the Employer Shared Responsibility Payment if the business:_​
> 
> _Does not offer coverage (to at least 95 percent of FTE employees) that complies with specified reforms under the Affordable Care Act._​
> _Does not offer coverage that meets minimum value. (The plan's share of the total average cost of covered services is at least 60 percent)._​
> _Does not offer coverage that is affordable. (The employee's premium is more than 9.66 percent of that employee's annual household income)._​
> _If a business does not offer coverage, the Employer Shared Responsibility Payment penalty is triggered when an employee who is not offered coverage purchases health insurance on an exchange and receives a federal subsidy to help pay for that coverage. The penalty is assessed monthly and is equal to the number of FTE employees (minus the first 30) multiplied by one-twelfth of $2,000._​
> For a company with 10,030 employees, the ESRP penalty for not providing a compliant health insurance plan to employees would be:
> $1,666,666.60 *a month*. ($20mil/yr).
> 
> for those $$, I think I'd just open a hospital in the company and self insure!


looks like it only applies to companies with over 50 employees

i never mind being wrong and it benefitting me with free health insurance ?


----------



## The Entomologist

That's it, burn the place down in California, other states are pushing to use the Dynamex test to check again if they are employees or not.


----------



## dauction

I drive 40,000 Miles a year now ..that equals a $23,000 tax deduction ..on $40,000 revenues ... 


GOODBYE $23,000 with AB5



My View remains ..if you want a Driving Job where you have an employer that will tell you when to work .. where to work , who to pick up etc.. then go get one.. if you dont want that and simply want flexibility in setting your own hours , decide where you want to work and can deny rides then Uber and Lyft ...

If you are UNABLE too make any NET money ...then do something else and quit trying to force the rest of us to be employees ..


WE DONT WANT TO BE EMPLOYEES


----------



## uberdriverfornow

dauction said:


> I drive 40,000 Miles a year now ..that equals a $23,000 tax deduction ..on $40,000 revenues ...
> 
> GOODBYE $23,000 with AB5
> 
> My View remains ..if you want a Driving Job where you have an employer that will tell you when to work .. where to work , who to pick up etc.. then go get one.. if you dont want that and simply want flexibility in setting your own hours , decide where you want to work and can deny rides then Uber and Lyft ...
> 
> If you are UNABLE too make any NET money ...then do something else and quit trying to force the rest of us to be employees ..
> 
> WE DONT WANT TO BE EMPLOYEES


you don't have to worry about this bill since you're in Minnesota

stop trying to tell people in California what to do


----------



## dauction

uberdriverfornow said:


> you don't have to worry about this bill since you're in Minnesota
> 
> stop trying to tell people in California what to do


 Yes I do need to worry about it ..because I don't want this debacle to become a Federal standard .

You all are going to get screwed and you dont even see it coming ..


----------



## everythingsuber

dauction said:


> Yes I do need to worry about it ..because I don't want this debacle to become a Federal standard .
> 
> You all are going to get screwed and you dont even see it coming ..


What did rates start out at in your market and what are they now?

Has uber offered your market the minimum deal California was offered?

What do you think Uber would like your rates to be?

What do you see coming?


----------



## SurgeMasterMN

dauction said:


> Yes I do need to worry about it ..because I don't want this debacle to become a Federal standard .
> 
> You all are going to get screwed and you dont even see it coming ..


----------



## uberdriverfornow

dauction said:


> Yes I do need to worry about it ..because I don't want this debacle to become a Federal standard .
> 
> You all are going to get screwed and you dont even see it coming ..


If it's not going to work then why are you worrying about it being a federal standard ?


----------



## dauction

uberdriverfornow said:


> If it's not going to work then why are you worrying about it being a federal standard ?


Because YOU WILL be forced to work the schedule they tell you , You WILL be forced to Pick up WHO they Tell you , You WILL be Forced the AREA they tell you and NO you wont make anymore Money because now you lose all your deductions, Now you pay taxes that you never paid before ..

You WILL not just Take the Day off or Week off whenever you want ..

YOU ARE NOW AN EMPLOYEE ..



everythingsuber said:


> What do you see coming?


Morning ... See my Post to "uberdriverfornow"


----------



## uberdriverfornow

dauction said:


> Because YOU WILL be forced to work the schedule they tell you , You WILL be forced to Pick up WHO they Tell you , You WILL be Forced the AREA they tell you and NO you wont make anymore Money because now you lose all your deductions, Now you pay taxes that you never paid before ..
> 
> You WILL not just Take the Day off or Week off whenever you want ..
> 
> YOU ARE NOW AN EMPLOYEE ..
> 
> 
> Morning ... See my Post to "uberdriverfornow"


If it's not going to work then why are you worrying about it being a federal standard ?



Azpilot2211 said:


> you think you're going to be able to drive for both companies now? LOL. You entitled millennials brought this on yourselves, maybe you all will learn a thing or two before you go @@@@@ing and try to change capitalism again.
> 
> The new Uber, You will work 12pm to 9 am, 2 15 minute breaks, 1 hour lunch from 3am to 4 am. Accept ALL requests no matter the distance or you're fired. Hope you like the new taxes that will be taken out of your paycheck each week, plus insurance. It truly amazes me how dumb some of you are. I want more money. I deserve it!! Its not fair!! wah wah. You just screwed yourselves.


If they wanted people on shifts, you would already be on shifts.


----------



## Taxi2Uber

uberdriverfornow said:


> If it's not going to work then why are you worrying about it being a federal standard ?


Because the gig is working as-is, and he doesn't want it to go national and ruin it for drivers outside of CA.

If all you were interested in was being an employee, earning at least min wage, and getting benefits, then why did you struggle, cry, complain, driving Uber for the last 4(?) years, instead of just getting hired as a cab driver?


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Taxi2Uber said:


> Because the gig is working as-is, and he doesn't want it to go national and ruin it for drivers outside of CA.
> 
> If all you were interested in was being an employee, earning at least min wage, and getting benefits, then why did you struggle, cry, complain, driving Uber for the last 4(?) years, instead of just getting hired as a cab driver?


Clearly you're not smart enough to get it so I'll make it easier just for you.

If it's not going to work then why are you worrying about it being a federal standard since, according to you, it should be so bad that it's not possible for it to spread to any other states ?


----------



## Taxi2Uber

uberdriverfornow said:


> Clearly you're not smart enough to get it so I'll make it easier just for you.
> 
> If it's not going to work then why are you worrying about it being a federal standard since, according to you, it should be so bad that it's not possible for it to spread to any other states ?


(Don't worry, I won't report you for being confrontational like you did me with that comment)

Again, you're reading into my comment with your biased viewpoint.
I never said it wasn't possible.
Other states have liberal politicians just as stupid as the CA ones.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Taxi2Uber said:


> (Don't worry, I won't report you for being confrontational like you did me with that comment)
> 
> Again, you're reading into my comment with your biased viewpoint.
> I never said it wasn't possible.
> Other states have liberal politicians just as stupid as the CA ones.


Well, I wasn't originally talking to, but obviously since you jumped in, I'm going to pose the question to you.

If this really was such a bad law, you wouldn't be so worried about it spreading.


----------



## The Texan

Turn the app on and make 21$ an hour? For sitting with your phone on? YOu all think that's going to fly?

Glad I have a profession.


----------



## Taxi2Uber

uberdriverfornow said:


> Well, I wasn't originally talking to, but obviously since you jumped in, I'm going to pose the question to you.
> 
> If this really was such a bad law, you wouldn't be so worried about it spreading.


I'm just being the voice of reason, and correcting all of your comments.

I am worried about it spreading because it IS such a bad law. Get it?


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Taxi2Uber said:


> I'm just being the voice of reason, and correcting all of your comments.
> 
> I am worried about it spreading because it IS such a bad law. Get it?


no, you're worried about it spreading, being a good law, and you being wrong about it


----------



## iheartuber

It’s really a shame that it had to come to this.

To be clear: if you want to get technical, being an Uber driver does lack in certain benefits that are absolutely required by law (sick days, unemployment, etc)

But there are some benefits (flexibility, tax breaks). It’s a trade off. It’s always been that way.

But... here’s where the problems started... Uber got greedy. They started biting off too much because- surprise surprise- in order to make the service work better for the pax you need to treat drivers like employees to a certain extent.

All they had to do was make the gig worth our while and we woulda had their backs.

Greed is not really good


----------



## uberdriverfornow

The Texan said:


> Turn the app on and make 21$ an hour? For sitting with your phone on? YOu all think that's going to fly?
> 
> Glad I have a profession.


Yeah, that's what drivers want, to follow the plan of the fox that wants to guard the hen house.

Nope, not going to fly.


----------



## Kodyhead

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I wonder why they didn't do that in NYC when the city made them play on a level field.
> Too important a market to walk away from?
> SF & LA (just those 2 markets) are about the same size as the NYC market. CA as a whole is the largest economy in the US (fifth largest in the world).
> 
> I can't imagine Uber walking away and leaving that all to Lyft (or vice-versa).
> 
> 
> uh, yeah... just like other laws... follow the law or be assessed penalties.
> So health benefits are in-fact mandated.
> 
> _PENALTY:_​_A business may have to pay a per-employee, per-month fee called the Employer Shared Responsibility Payment if the business:_​
> 
> _Does not offer coverage (to at least 95 percent of FTE employees) that complies with specified reforms under the Affordable Care Act._​
> _Does not offer coverage that meets minimum value. (The plan's share of the total average cost of covered services is at least 60 percent)._​
> _Does not offer coverage that is affordable. (The employee's premium is more than 9.66 percent of that employee's annual household income)._​
> _If a business does not offer coverage, the Employer Shared Responsibility Payment penalty is triggered when an employee who is not offered coverage purchases health insurance on an exchange and receives a federal subsidy to help pay for that coverage. The penalty is assessed monthly and is equal to the number of FTE employees (minus the first 30) multiplied by one-twelfth of $2,000._​
> For a company with 10,030 employees, the ESRP penalty for not providing a compliant health insurance plan to employees would be:
> $1,666,666.60 *a month*. ($20mil/yr).
> 
> for those $$, I think I'd just open a hospital in the company and self insure!


Imo they cannot leave California for the same reason they could not leave nyc.

From what I read between nyc, sf and la that is 3 of the top 5 markets and make up about 25% of their revenue.

NYC is also heavily regulated and an important battle ground as is California


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer

Gerrygri11 said:


> Steve the problem is there's never gonna be benefits. The companies will cap all drive is below $30/hr Or whatever California minimum is for not having to pay benefits or overtime.
> These companies were never meant to be full time jobs they were meant to be side gigs and they will do whatever they have to to keep them that way.
> I've been driving over for 3 years I've never made less than $23 an hour in normally hover in the 27 to 36. Difference is I know my market I work Part And when IM not working that keeping an eye on the App so I can see where the busy locations are on a given day isI know will be in my market 45 minutes before Demand goes up.
> All driversis can do this but uber and Lyft have to stop cutting rates they need to charge people a little bit more an be more transparent


Uber did advertise as full time in the beginning. They actively encouraged people to quit their day jobs.


----------



## Munsuta

Michael - Cleveland said:


> very cluttered post.
> Kalanick RESIGNED from Trump's economic advisory board.
> Really, politicians have never in the history of this country given a flying f about people? Even the ones that wrote the words "We the People..." or the ones that created things like voting rights, anti-discrimination laws, the 10 amendments in the bill-of-rights? How about the ones that served in our military institutions - or raised children who did? How about the ones who volunteer absurd hours in unpaid political positions in their local cities and towns? That's the magic. If you don't want politicians, opt for something other than a democracy.


I've met many people like you who are under the illusion that the government isn't a self serving entity (corporation) and is "for the people", that your vote matters (ROFL), that they abide by the Constitution, that our system of laws is just and not about money (lex Mercatoria law), that's programming you have to break. It's like licking the bottom of their boots and not realising that the same boot your licking is also stomping on your face. That's the magic game they play. You see one thing going on but it's something completely different. They are masters at sleight of hand. It's sad to see so many Love and defend their servitude and call it FREEDOM.


----------



## anteetr

uberdriverfornow said:


> no, you're worried about it spreading, being a good law, and you being wrong about it


If we thought it was a good law those of us against it wouldn't be against it. We would welcome it's passage and actively encourage it's spread.

The pattern in this country is that California does somthing breathtakingly incompetent, like pass AB5 for example. Then, all the not so creative but at least similarly incompetent liberal states like NY and NJ do the same over the next ten years or so despite the overwhelming real life evidence that demonstrates how incompetent it is. Finally, within 25 years those states get together and roll it out federally when their delegations control Congress to level the playing field so there's no escape for anybody and they no longer have to pay for their own stupidity or admit failure. Then the rest of us get to pay for California's historic stupidity.

Simultaneously, many Californians leave the mess they voted for and continue to vote for exactly the same morons in the states they flee to and accelerate the spread of incompetence, like locusts. I say the rest of us should expel California from the union and build a wall.


----------



## Taxi2Uber

uberdriverfornow said:


> no, you're worried about it spreading, being a good law, and you being wrong about it


I know you're used to your nanny state telling what to do and how to think, but you telling me what I think is laughable.

You never did answer my question? 
If all you were interested in was being an employee, earning at least min wage, and getting benefits, then why did you struggle, cry, complain, driving Uber for the last 4(?) years, instead of just getting hired as a cab driver?


----------



## Toadstein

Does someone know what percentage of drivers are part time? Not worldwide but in the U.S.Google it and there's nothing.Ask yourselves why? They really don't want anyone to know the answer.


----------



## SuperDumped

dauction said:


> I drive 40,000 Miles a year now ..that equals a $23,000 tax deduction ..on $40,000 revenues ...
> 
> GOODBYE $23,000 with AB5
> 
> My View remains ..if you want a Driving Job where you have an employer that will tell you when to work .. where to work , who to pick up etc.. then go get one.. if you dont want that and simply want flexibility in setting your own hours , decide where you want to work and can deny rides then Uber and Lyft ...
> 
> If you are UNABLE too make any NET money ...then do something else and quit trying to force the rest of us to be employees ..
> 
> WE DONT WANT TO BE EMPLOYEES


96% do quit or failby design
you don't want to be an employee most dont either but they can't have it both ways they treat us like them so reimburse my dead miles, pay for my gas & maintenance, pay into unemployment & workers comp,give me soc sec credits over time...

or just raise rates to a legal wage & show me the details of my contract without punishment for cancelling, until then im xl only & degrading the experience for the x tier


----------



## Toadstein

I think a full time+(vendor) sub contractor for part time would work.Make the full timers make more money and part timers less.If its your only source of income you need stability.


----------



## iheartuber

SuperDumped said:


> 96% do quit or failby design
> you don't want to be an employee most dont either but they can't have it both ways they treat us like them so reimburse my dead miles, pay for my gas & maintenance, pay into unemployment & workers comp,give me soc sec credits over time...
> 
> or just raise rates to a legal wage & show me the details of my contract without punishment for cancelling, until then im xl only & degrading the experience for the x tier


Exactly

All Uber had to do was make the pax rates/driver pay high enough so that we have more than enough money to pay for our own expenses like gas etc and still make a decent net wage

But they started losing money and they thought they could squeeze it out of the drivers by cutting driver pay.

Then they realized that if every driver had high CR and low AR it would make the pax wait longer to get a ride- so they started penalizing us one way or another for not having acceptable AR and CR rates.

All they had to do was not be greedy.

It's not that hard!!


----------



## Transportador

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Probably because there is no requirement that to be on here you have to care whether or not U/L exist. (Fortunately, I have higher priorities in my life to care about). Spreading hate of whom? Spreading anything anywhere... no clue what are you talking about. (and I don't care about that, either)
> 
> Then have the courage to state your opinions as just that: your opinion - don't try to give your opinion more weight by stating it as something you know to be fact - when you know it's not.
> 
> Are you one of those drivers that think that you're making a profit, earning $1,000/wk driving your car 2,000 miles/wk - but who accounts only for earnings and fuel expense - not real expenses?
> 
> It appears that you do not understand that if a TNC paid you only $0.15/mi. you'd be making more than the ~$0.60/mi earnings you get now because they would also be paying:
> 
> ALL of your expenses,
> their 50% share (7.5%) of your SSI/Medicare (for which you are currently 100% liable at 15% of your income),
> unemployment insurance (which you currently pay 100% of)
> a portion of your health insurance
> 
> You have NO IDEA AT ALL what AB5 will do to you. NONE.
> *Uber, as of 5PM today, has said AB5 will NOT cause them to classify drivers in CA as employees.*
> 
> Amazon has all but eliminated the FLEX drivers in favor of individuals and small companies driving vans. Flex drivers do no more than 'clean-up' now - screwed up afternoon routes all over the area delivering the stuff the van drivers couldn't (or didn't want to) deliver.
> And AMAZON has been limiting flex hours to fewer than 40/wk for 2 years already.


I never said I am the messiah of all truth.

We all know that we're stating opinions on here.

However, it is true that we will have to pay withholding taxes on W2 paychecks. You didn't argue with that. You just ain't scare about it.

And here's my problem. You ain't scare and you just flat don't care about the viability of U/L nor the ability of people like myself who want to make extra income on the side. We don't want a W2 paycheck. We don't want to pay withholding taxes. We already have a tax paying paycheck from our regular job. As IC, we are able to claim so much losses that U/L income is essentially tax free.

So, that's why your response comes across as hate speech to me. Anyone who wishes that U/L die because of AB5 has none of my interest at heart, and therefore is hating on me!

Also, wanting the government of all entities to regulate rideshare to protect the full time losers who want to make a living on U/L is EXACTLY like manipulating the clean air act to protect the losers who want to dig for coal for a living in West Virginia. Not a smart thing to do no matter what angle you look at it.

I expected a lot better from you as a moderator!!!


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Taxi2Uber said:


> I know you're used to your nanny state telling what to do and how to think, but you telling me what I think is laughable.
> 
> You never did answer my question?
> If all you were interested in was being an employee, earning at least min wage, and getting benefits, then why did you struggle, cry, complain, driving Uber for the last 4(?) years, instead of just getting hired as a cab driver?


because as the rates have been cut I have still been able to make money in my market

now I'm at the point where any further rate cuts would put me below the minimum amount I would be able to drive for and have a profit

and unless a bill like AB5 passes, all drivers across the country are at risk of ridiculous rate cuts like Lyft has implemented in some markets where drivers lose money driving


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

dauction said:


> I drive 40,000 Miles a year now ..that equals a $23,000 tax deduction ..on $40,000 revenues ...
> 
> GOODBYE $23,000 with AB5
> 
> My View remains ..if you want a Driving Job where you have an employer that will tell you when to work .. where to work , who to pick up etc.. then go get one.. if you dont want that and simply want flexibility in setting your own hours , decide where you want to work and can deny rides then Uber and Lyft ...
> 
> If you are UNABLE too make any NET money ...then do something else and quit trying to force the rest of us to be employees ..
> 
> WE DONT WANT TO BE EMPLOYEES


I don't think you understand deductions vs credits. How is it goodbye $23,000?


----------



## SuperDumped

Transportador said:


> I never said I am the messiah of all truth.
> 
> We all know that we're stating opinions on here.
> 
> However, it is true that we will have to pay withholding taxes on W2 paychecks. You didn't argue with that. You just ain't scare about it.
> 
> And here's my problem. You ain't scare and you just flat don't care about the viability of U/L nor the ability of people like myself who want to make extra income on the side. We don't want a W2 paycheck. We don't want to pay withholding taxes. We already have a tax paying paycheck from our regular job. As IC, we are able to claim so much losses that U/L income is essentially tax free.
> 
> So, that's why your response comes across as hate speech to me. Anyone who wishes that U/L die because of AB5 has none of my interest at heart, and therefore is hating on me!
> 
> Also, wanting the government of all entities to regulate rideshare to protect the full time losers who want to make a living on U/L is EXACTLY like manipulating the clean air act to protect the losers who want to dig for coal for a living in West Virginia. Not a smart thing to do no matter what angle you look at it.
> 
> I expected a lot better from you as a moderator!!!


never was never will be ride"share" using the term itself is fraud its a cab, cabs have regulated rates for a reason & have for almost a century people who drive for less than $1.20ish per mile are super scabs, desperate, or dont grasp basic math so fail 96% of the time, even stupid peyrisking their lives against their best interest have rights. rights people actually died for so they wouldn't be exploited with childrens wages. uber lyft know desperate people will work for $3 an hour because its better than zero & prey on them

its funny the 4% who figure the ponzi out or live in a honey pot where they get good rides from home dont want to cut off their nose to spite their face, I make great money at this ponzi scam but I know what it is & everyone involved deserves life sentences & prison far as Im concerned uber lyft owes me about 20K over the last 5 years so until i get that i hope they both fail as I was fine before them will be fine after,but the way they rob steal exploit seniors, immigrants, and dumb or desperate people is disgusting & evil


----------



## Bob Reynolds

I believe the point being lost here is that Uber and Lyft were never exempt from the W2 rules. They just claimed they were and ignored those rules. The reason for this was simply money. They thought they could get away with not paying the minimum wage and they could get away with not having to pay the employers share of FICA, Medicare and unemployment insurance. These wage and hour laws have been in place for almost 100 years and almost all businesses must comply with those laws.

Then came Dynamex and the California Supreme Court voted unanimously that the Dynamex drivers were subject to the W2 rules and not 1099 IC rules. The Dynamex drivers were much like the Lyft and Uber drivers except they carried packages instead of passengers. They are also considered transportation workers.

In 2004, long before Lyft and Uber were even thought of, the Industrial Welfare Commission in the state of California, instituted WAGE ORDER 9-2001 which regulates wages, hours and working conditions in the transportation industry. You probably have never heard of WAGE ORDER 9-2001. If you are in California, Uber and Lyft were supposed to make you aware of this order but they did not.

This order provides the basis of overtime, wages, rules and regulations for those involved in the transportation industry. There are a number of sections in this wage order.

Some partial sections of interest are:

1. *Applicability of Order* This order shall apply to all persons employed in the transportation industry whether paid on a time, piece rate, commission, or other basis,

*4. Minimum Wages *



> (A) Every employer shall pay to each employee wages not less than six dollars and twenty-five cents ($6.25) per hour for all hours worked, effective January 1, 2001, and not less than six dollars and seventy-five cents ($6.75) per hour for all hours worked, effective January 1, 2002, except:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LEARNERS: Employees during their first 160 hours of employment in occupations in which they have no previous similar or related experience, may be paid not less than 85 percent of the minimum wage rounded to the nearest nickel.
> 
> 
> 
> (B) Every employer shall pay to each employee, on the established payday for the period involved, not less than the applicable minimum wage for all hours worked in the payroll period, whether the remuneration is measured by time, piece, commission, or otherwise.
> 
> (C) When an employee works a split shift, one (1) hour's pay at the minimum wage shall be paid in addition to the minimum wage for that workday, except when the employee resides at the place of employment.
> 
> (D) The provisions of this section shall not apply to apprentices regularly indentured under the State Division of Apprenticeship Standards.
Click to expand...

*20. Penalties *(See California Labor Code, Section 1199)



> (A) In addition to any other civil penalties provided by law, any employer or any other person acting on behalf of the employer who violates, or causes to be violated, the provisions of this order, shall be subject to the civil penalty of:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (1) Initial Violation -- $50.00 for each underpaid employee for each pay period during which the employee was underpaid in addition to the amount which is sufficient to recover unpaid wages.
> 
> (2) Subsequent Violations -- $100.00 for each underpaid employee for each pay period during which the employee was underpaid in addition to an amount which is sufficient to recover unpaid wages.
> 
> (3) The affected employee shall receive payment of all wages recovered.
Click to expand...

*22. Posting of Order *
Every employer shall keep a copy of this order posted in an area frequented by employees where it may be easily read during the workday. Where the location of work or other conditions make this impractical, every employer shall keep a copy of this order and make it available to every employee upon request.

Here is a link to the order:
https://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/WageOrders2005/IWCArticle9.html
----------------------------------------
So Uber and Lyft continued to ignore the unanimous California Supreme Court Dynamex decision memo and continued to not pay their drivers according to the industrial wage order. This meant that the taxpayers of California are picking up the tab for those Uber and Lyft drivers that don't have enough money to pay for their necessary expenses like food, shelter and medical care.

Now the state legislature has passed AB5 which was directly targeted at those companies like Lyft and Uber that are ignoring almost 100 year old US wage and hour laws as well as a 15 year old Industrial Welfare Commission wage order which they should have been complying with the entire time they have been in business.


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> because as the rates have been cut I have still been able to make money in my market
> 
> now I'm at the point where any further rate cuts would put me below the minimum amount I would be able to drive for and have a profit
> 
> and unless a bill like AB5 passes, all drivers across the country are at risk of ridiculous rate cuts like Lyft has implemented in some markets where drivers lose money driving


We don't need a bill like AB5 to increase our pay.

All we need is for Uber to make the cheap azz pax pay a little more, then raise our pay a little more then cap the number of people who can be hired to be drivers and bam! Your pay has gone up significantly.

But.. they can't or won't do that so here we are


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

iheartuber said:


> It's really a shame that it had to come to this.
> 
> To be clear: if you want to get technical, being an Uber driver does lack in certain benefits that are absolutely required by law (sick days, unemployment, etc)
> 
> But there are some benefits (flexibility, tax breaks). It's a trade off. It's always been that way.
> 
> But... here's where the problems started... Uber got greedy. They started biting off too much because- surprise surprise- in order to make the service work better for the pax you need to treat drivers like employees to a certain extent.
> 
> All they had to do was make the gig worth our while and we woulda had their backs.
> 
> Greed is not really good


If left unchecked

*cough* like it was until yesterday *cough*

you have someone paying their contractor paying less than the tax deduction, ala most markets in the US.

Uber/lyft have done this to themselves and what they owe in backpay could easily bankrupt them (and the officers individually)


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Uber1111uber said:


> I'm just glad its gonna cost these greedy scumbags about $200 million. And for everyone freaking out about scheduling, there is NO way they can operate and be reliable with full time employees. I'll bet itll be like grubhub where you sign up for 2 hour blocks at a time and such, but have to keep a decent acceptance rate to keep getting shifts. It's a step in the right direction bc something had to be done to these shady , law-skirting companies.


They are just fear mongering. We quite if they bringvschedules


AllenChicago said:


> In much of private industry, when benefit increases are forced upon a company, or forced into implementation for the first time, employee pay is reduced accordingly.
> 
> What's the smallest percentage of fare you'll accept, in return for Health/Dental Insurance, 401K, etc..? In other words, how large of a pay cut will you accept?


i don't get your point. I will get my 15 per hour for all my time including wait time, SF market minimum wage, then I get tips and a negotiated mileage reimbursement close to IRS rate. I'll tell you how it goes on my two week paid vacay, or during paid sick leave, or If I get injured on the job, I'll let you know how I'm doing while collecting workers comp. just don't hate me if you get annoyed I have a safety net while working as a driver.


----------



## dauction

Fuzzyelvis said:


> I don't think you understand deductions vs credits. How is it goodbye $23,000?


Mileage is a DEDUCTION for a Credit..

*Standard Car Mileage Rates*
*2019 Tax Year Standard Deductible Mileage Rates from Jan. 1, 2019-Dec. 31, 2019*
*ATTENTION: *The following mileage rates are for 2019 Tax Returns due April 15, 2020. _Do not_ use them for your 2018 Tax Return; see under 2018 for those.

The optional standard tax deductible IRS mileage rates for the use of your car, van, pickup truck, or panel truck during 2019 are:


*58 cents per mile driven for business purposes*
*20 cents per mile driven for medical or moving purposes*
*14 cents per mile driven in service of charitable organizations*
*Additional Vehicle Use Deductions:* In addition to the standard mileage rates, you may deduct the costs of tolls and parking while using your vehicle for one of the approved purposes. These are separate deductions. However, if you have claimed vehicle depreciation, you may not deduct tolls and parking fees.

*Standard Mileage Rate Restrictions: *The standard mileage rates may not be used for vehicles used as equipment, or for more than four vehicles used simultaneously. You cannot use the standard mileage rates if you claim vehicle depreciation.

*Very Very simplified explanation..*

Revenue = $40,000 
FEDERAL Standard Individual Deduction- $12,000

= $28,000 Taxable Income ..

Then you take your Mileage deduction..

Mileage DEDUCTION =$23,000

= $28,000 - $23,000 = 5k

So your TAXABLE INCOME is Just 5k


----------



## iheartuber

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> They are just fear mongering. We quite if they bringvschedules
> 
> i don't get your point. I will get my 15 per hour for all my time including wait time, SF market minimum wage, then I get tips and a negotiated mileage reimbursement close to IRS rate. I'll tell you how it goes on my two week paid vacay, or during paid sick leave, or If I get injured on the job, I'll let you know how I'm doing while collecting workers comp. just don't hate me if you get annoyed I have a safety net while working as a driver.


The whole point of Uber was to offer cheap rides due to this extremely low regulated brand new job.
Only problem is- they got too greedy.

Or, more specifically... they thought they could bully the world


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> it was a mass email, telling us to take their side and gave some fear mongering. It wasn't an announcement. Just fear mongering to get us to go against full timers wanting labor laws.
> 
> 
> 
> She was just talking about how translators where worried. I'm not an expert or trying to say exactly what's going to happen. She said she works the same Monday every week, and that makes her fall under AB5. She said lot of translators have become nervous. I'm not arguing or taking sides. I'm neutral and don't mind different people opposing different views. I was just talking and sharing my experience.
> I think strippers, independent music, and trucking are in the mix and have different views. I wish an option to simply have legit IC contracts with an opt out clause would work for them, or even me as a driver.


They're worried about nothing. First, if an interpreter works 'every monday' for the same company - and that's all they do, then they are a part-time employee (unless they are assigned that work by the association to which they belong) Second, not only is it simple to work as a sole proprietor (or S-Corp), it's also smart and gives you protections.



dauction said:


> Mileage is a DEDUCTION for a Credit..
> 
> *Standard Car Mileage Rates*
> *2019 Tax Year Standard Deductible Mileage Rates from Jan. 1, 2019-Dec. 31, 2019*
> *ATTENTION: *The following mileage rates are for 2019 Tax Returns due April 15, 2020. _Do not_ use them for your 2018 Tax Return; see under 2018 for those.
> 
> The optional standard tax deductible IRS mileage rates for the use of your car, van, pickup truck, or panel truck during 2019 are:
> 
> 
> *58 cents per mile driven for business purposes*
> *20 cents per mile driven for medical or moving purposes*
> *14 cents per mile driven in service of charitable organizations*
> *Additional Vehicle Use Deductions:* In addition to the standard mileage rates, you may deduct the costs of tolls and parking while using your vehicle for one of the approved purposes. These are separate deductions. However, if you have claimed vehicle depreciation, you may not deduct tolls and parking fees.
> 
> *Standard Mileage Rate Restrictions: *The standard mileage rates may not be used for vehicles used as equipment, or for more than four vehicles used simultaneously. You cannot use the standard mileage rates if you claim vehicle depreciation.
> 
> *Very Very simplified explanation..*
> 
> Revenue = $40,000
> FEDERAL Standard Individual Deduction- $12,000
> 
> = $28,000 Taxable Income ..
> 
> Then you take your Mileage deduction..
> 
> Mileage DEDUCTION =$23,000
> 
> = $28,000 - $23,000 = 5k
> 
> So your TAXABLE INCOME is Just 5k


Which - as Fuzzy Elvis said, is a DEDUCTION, not a credit. You DEDUCT the STD MILEAGE DEDUCTION allowed from your taxable income, reducing your taxable income (not tax bill) by that amount. A Tax CREDIT is different. You can be eligible for a TAX CREDIT for things like, child care. The difference is that you use a DEDUCTION to lower the amount of your income on which a tax is levied.
You use a tax CREDIT against the tax you owe.

So, for example, using your number above, after using your allowed deduction, you have a taxable income of $5,000. You can now apply your child care tax credit of $5,500 and you end up with a tax return of $500.

To put it simply:
DEDUCTIONS reduce your gross taxable income.
CREDITS reduce your tax liability.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

dauction said:


> Yes I do need to worry about it ..because I don't want this debacle to become a Federal standard .
> 
> You all are going to get screwed and you dont even see it coming ..


If it becomes a federal standard exercise your right to vote. Make your voice heard. Don't come at me for exercising my right out here in C.A. Go, go fast and exercise your own rights. Don't hold me to your views, beliefs, needs. I do what I feel is right so should you.



Michael - Cleveland said:


> They're worried about nothing. First, if an interpreter works 'every monday' for the same company - and that's all they do, then they are a part-time employee (unless they are assigned that work by the association to which they belong) Second, not only is it simple to work as a sole proprietor (or S-Corp), it's also smart and gives you protections.
> 
> 
> Which - as Fuzzy Elvis said, is a DEDUCTION, not a credit. You DEDUCT the STD MILEAGE DEDUCTION allowed from your taxable income, reducing your tax liability by that amount. A Tax CREDIT is different. You can be eligible for a TAX CREDIT for things like, child care. The difference is that you use a DEDUCTION to lower the amount of your income on which a tax is levied.
> You use a tax CREDIT against the tax you owe.
> 
> So, for example, using your number above, after using your allowed deduction, you have a taxable income of $5,000. You can now apply your child care tax credit of $5,500 and you end up with a tax return of $500.
> 
> To put it simply:
> DEDUCTIONS reduce your gross taxable income.
> CREDITS reduce your tax liability.


Yea, I get that now that I read up on them. Thanks. I was surprised and didn't fully understand why she was freaking out. Really for no reason it seems. At worst they have to set up a llc or something.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

Munsuta said:


> I've met many people like you who are under the illusion that the government isn't a self serving entity (corporation) and is "for the people", that your vote matters (ROFL), that they abide by the Constitution, that our system of laws is just and not about money (lex Mercatoria law), that's programming you have to break. It's like licking the bottom of their boots and not realising that the same boot your licking is also stomping on your face. That's the magic game they play. You see one thing going on but it's something completely different. They are masters at sleight of hand. It's sad to see so many Love and defend their servitude and call it FREEDOM.
> View attachment 355285


You don't know me. I've met a lot of people like you who seem to think you know other people and have a corner on the whole good v evil and truth v delusion thing. But you go ahead a preach.


----------



## Wonkytonk

Taxi2Uber said:


> And another thing Uber might do, is require the car to be new, or near new.
> 
> Another might be that Uber puts more of the burden of car insurance on the drivers.


Am I thinking about this incorrectly, but if you're currently an employee and they required you to get a new car under the terms of the proposed law wouldn't they have to make good on that expense?

Car insurance would also have to be covered as an expense by them wouldn't it? The point of the proposed law was to give drivers a certain level of income after expenses, not before. So if they transfer the cost of insurance to drivers they would actually have to pay out more because they're getting a volume discounted rate for the insurance they're offering now.


----------



## flymiester

Jlynn said:


> Whats this mean for the ride share drivers in the rest of the country?


Absolutely nothing unless you live in a crazy state like California run by leftist progressives. Thank God I live in Montana, Trump country. I don't feel sorry for you stupid Californians when Uber and Lyft scale back operations in the state. You will lose all flexibility you once enjoyed by dictating your working hours. Oh don't forget the tax deductions you enjoyed for milage, guess you might lose those too. You've done it to yourselves. I hope you all lose your incomes, livelihoods and ability to survive. YOU ALL DESERVE TO SUFFER!!! I never looked to Uber Lyft as a permanent source of income. I've been able to average $24-$35 an hour doing this gig in my small town. Admittedly my rate card is one of the highest in the country. How do you beat Uber Lyft? QUIT. Get a real job, I have one. Go back to school. When enough people quit they will be forced to raise wages. But you want to be provided for at an artificial rate of what the market will bear for your labor vs. supply. There are TOO many drivers in the California area, period. This is why they were able to cut rates. It's basic economics. At some point Lyft and Uber will have to get out when the regulatory costs outweigh any ability to turn a profit. Why the hell you'd want to live in California anyway is beyond me. You've dug your own grave, now lay in it. :laugh:?‍☠


----------



## Jlynn

Well that’s rather harsh.


----------



## iheartuber

flymiester said:


> Absolutely nothing unless you live in a crazy state like California run by leftist progressives. Thank God I live in Montana, Trump country. I don't feel sorry for you stupid Californians when Uber and Lyft scale back operations in the state. You will lose all flexibility you once enjoyed by dictating your working hours. Oh don't forget the tax deductions you enjoyed for milage, guess you might lose those too. You've done it to yourselves. I hope you all lose your incomes, livelihoods and ability to survive. YOU ALL DESERVE TO SUFFER!!! I never looked to Uber Lyft as a permanent source of income. I've been able to average $24-$35 an hour doing this gig in my small town. Admittedly my rate card is one of the highest in the country. How do you beat Uber Lyft? QUIT. Get a real job, I have one. Go back to school. When enough people quit they will be forced to raise wages. But you want to be provided for at an artificial rate of what the market will bear for your labor vs. supply. There are TOO many drivers in the California area, period. This is why they were able to cut rates. It's basic economics. At some point Lyft and Uber will have to get out when the regulatory costs outweigh any ability to turn a profit. Why the hell you'd want to live in California anyway is beyond me. You've dug your own grave, now lay in it. :laugh:?‍☠


You've got Jon Tester- I wouldn't talk!!


----------



## Thetomatoisajoke

This just means California will take the hit . We didn’t need this law if Uber was transparent and actually paid drivers a good wage .
In order for laws like these to keep passing in other states I’m sure Uber will start paying other drivers in other states more . Enough for them not to think of creating this kind of law.


----------



## Taxi2Uber

Wonkytonk said:


> Am I thinking about this incorrectly, but if you're currently an employee and they required you to get a new car under the terms of the proposed law wouldn't they have to make good on that expense?
> 
> Car insurance would also have to be covered as an expense by them wouldn't it? The point of the proposed law was to give drivers a certain level of income after expenses, not before. So if they transfer the cost of insurance to drivers they would actually have to pay out more because they're getting a volume discounted rate for the insurance they're offering now.


I was kind of "thinking out loud" some worst case scenarios that Uber might pull if it decided to play "hardball".

One was changing the car requirement before making everyone employees, but you raise a good point.
If after you are an employee, you're in need of another car, because yours broke, do you just buy another one and send Uber the bill?
Not very likely, but I really haven't looked into it.
Or is having an eligible car a condition of employment, and without it you essentially quit? Don't know.

After reading and re-reading the CA reimbursement methods, I think you're right about the insurance.
I was first thinking that the .58 was IT, but it can be more if the employee can prove they are deserving of more.
That .58 is when you're working, likely meaning from accepting trip to end trip, and all dead miles don't count.
Uber just might make it zero, and put all the burden on the employee to prove actual expenses, and then in typical Uber fashion, fight it all the way. Who knows, but I doubt they'll just roll over and make it easy.


----------



## O-Side Uber

Michael - Cleveland said:


> lol.. you're a very angry person.
> 
> (and if you're thinking it was the Kennedy's that passed the social security act, the new deal, the civil rights act or the voting rights act, um, no, that would be FDR and LBJ... neither were killed. Some founding fathers owned slaves - some didn't. It was, at the time, legal. To call them rapists and torturers in order to make a point here is absurd.)


https://www.thevintagenews.com/2016/06/30/renovation-benjamin-franklins-home-turns-dozens-bones/amp/


----------



## Roadmasta

dauction said:


> Mileage is a DEDUCTION for a Credit..
> 
> *Standard Car Mileage Rates*
> *2019 Tax Year Standard Deductible Mileage Rates from Jan. 1, 2019-Dec. 31, 2019*
> *ATTENTION: *The following mileage rates are for 2019 Tax Returns due April 15, 2020. _Do not_ use them for your 2018 Tax Return; see under 2018 for those.
> 
> The optional standard tax deductible IRS mileage rates for the use of your car, van, pickup truck, or panel truck during 2019 are:
> 
> 
> *58 cents per mile driven for business purposes*
> *20 cents per mile driven for medical or moving purposes*
> *14 cents per mile driven in service of charitable organizations*
> *Additional Vehicle Use Deductions:* In addition to the standard mileage rates, you may deduct the costs of tolls and parking while using your vehicle for one of the approved purposes. These are separate deductions. However, if you have claimed vehicle depreciation, you may not deduct tolls and parking fees.
> 
> *Standard Mileage Rate Restrictions: *The standard mileage rates may not be used for vehicles used as equipment, or for more than four vehicles used simultaneously. You cannot use the standard mileage rates if you claim vehicle depreciation.
> 
> *Very Very simplified explanation..*
> 
> Revenue = $40,000
> FEDERAL Standard Individual Deduction- $12,000
> 
> = $28,000 Taxable Income ..
> 
> Then you take your Mileage deduction..
> 
> Mileage DEDUCTION =$23,000
> 
> = $28,000 - $23,000 = 5k
> 
> So your TAXABLE INCOME is Just 5k


Working for Uber is a charitable donation.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

O-Side Uber said:


> https://www.thevintagenews.com/2016/06/30/renovation-benjamin-franklins-home-turns-dozens-bones/amp/


There are like 206 bones in the human body. So there were the remains of maybe 6 people in Franklin's basement. Hell, I've got more skeletons in my closet than that.


----------



## jocker12

Thetomatoisajoke said:


> I'm sure Uber will start paying other drivers in other states more .


No. Actually they are still delusional about buying an AB5 reversal at the ballot in 2020 - "Both Uber and Lyft said Thursday they'd spend $30 million each to sponsor a ballot initiative in November 2020 that would exempt them from AB 5, according to the San Francisco Chronicle." - https://uberpeople.net/threads/uber-and-lyft-to-spend-60-million-fighting-ab-5.349121/

Paying drivers more is the only logical thing to do, but from a corporate perspective, that would come from raising the rates, that would generate a significant loss of riders and rides, and directly would affect their "growth", unfortunately the only metric their investors understand.

At this point, no rideshare company has a viable solution because their greed and absurdly stubborn future vision never considered the drivers and their cars as THE ONLY asset that mattered in their business formula.

This end of 2019 looks like the beginning of 2017, when Uber got hit by Susan Fowler blog post, Greyball and Hell programs media reports, the South Korean karaoke/prostitutes escapade, India rape scandal documents mishandling by Eric Alexander, the Holder report and the Fawzi Kamel dashcam video, culminating with CEO's Travis Kalanick's replacement (after he tragically lost his mother in a boat accident).


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

Bob Reynolds said:


> I believe the point being lost here is that Uber and Lyft were never exempt from the W2 rules. They just claimed they were and ignored those rules. The reason for this was simply money. They thought they could get away with not paying the minimum wage and they could get away with not having to pay the employers share of FICA, Medicare and unemployment insurance. These wage and hour laws have been in place for almost 100 years and almost all businesses must comply with those laws.
> 
> Then came Dynamex and the California Supreme Court voted unanimously that the Dynamex drivers were subject to the W2 rules and not 1099 IC rules. The Dynamex drivers were much like the Lyft and Uber drivers except they carried packages instead of passengers. They are also considered transportation workers.
> 
> In 2004, long before Lyft and Uber were even thought of, the Industrial Welfare Commission in the state of California, instituted WAGE ORDER 9-2001 which regulates wages, hours and working conditions in the transportation industry. You probably have never heard of WAGE ORDER 9-2001. If you are in California, Uber and Lyft were supposed to make you aware of this order but they did not.
> 
> This order provides the basis of overtime, wages, rules and regulations for those involved in the transportation industry. There are a number of sections in this wage order.
> 
> Some partial sections of interest are:
> 
> 1. *Applicability of Order* This order shall apply to all persons employed in the transportation industry whether paid on a time, piece rate, commission, or other basis,
> 
> *4. Minimum Wages
> 
> 20. Penalties *(See California Labor Code, Section 1199)
> 
> *22. Posting of Order *
> Every employer shall keep a copy of this order posted in an area frequented by employees where it may be easily read during the workday. Where the location of work or other conditions make this impractical, every employer shall keep a copy of this order and make it available to every employee upon request.
> 
> Here is a link to the order:
> https://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/WageOrders2005/IWCArticle9.html
> ----------------------------------------
> So Uber and Lyft continued to ignore the unanimous California Supreme Court Dynamex decision memo and continued to not pay their drivers according to the industrial wage order. This meant that the taxpayers of California are picking up the tab for those Uber and Lyft drivers that don't have enough money to pay for their necessary expenses like food, shelter and medical care.
> 
> Now the state legislature has passed AB5 which was directly targeted at those companies like Lyft and Uber that are ignoring almost 100 year old US wage and hour laws as well as a 15 year old Industrial Welfare Commission wage order which they should have been complying with the entire time they have been in business.


This is basically the point I keep making: it's pretty clear drivers are already employees by any test that's in place to categorize workers. This bill just points it out.

All those folks saying what they WANT is beside the point. You are what the law says you are, regardless of what uber calls you or what you want to be. The law has just been ignored. And it's not just uber. Many companies have done this for many years. They just haven't done it to the same extent, with so many workers, and so blatantly.



dauction said:


> Mileage is a DEDUCTION for a Credit..
> 
> *Standard Car Mileage Rates*
> *2019 Tax Year Standard Deductible Mileage Rates from Jan. 1, 2019-Dec. 31, 2019*
> *ATTENTION: *The following mileage rates are for 2019 Tax Returns due April 15, 2020. _Do not_ use them for your 2018 Tax Return; see under 2018 for those.
> 
> The optional standard tax deductible IRS mileage rates for the use of your car, van, pickup truck, or panel truck during 2019 are:
> 
> 
> *58 cents per mile driven for business purposes*
> *20 cents per mile driven for medical or moving purposes*
> *14 cents per mile driven in service of charitable organizations*
> *Additional Vehicle Use Deductions:* In addition to the standard mileage rates, you may deduct the costs of tolls and parking while using your vehicle for one of the approved purposes. These are separate deductions. However, if you have claimed vehicle depreciation, you may not deduct tolls and parking fees.
> 
> *Standard Mileage Rate Restrictions: *The standard mileage rates may not be used for vehicles used as equipment, or for more than four vehicles used simultaneously. You cannot use the standard mileage rates if you claim vehicle depreciation.
> 
> *Very Very simplified explanation..*
> 
> Revenue = $40,000
> FEDERAL Standard Individual Deduction- $12,000
> 
> = $28,000 Taxable Income ..
> 
> Then you take your Mileage deduction..
> 
> Mileage DEDUCTION =$23,000
> 
> = $28,000 - $23,000 = 5k
> 
> So your TAXABLE INCOME is Just 5k


You said bye bye $23000. Not the case. You're just not paying taxes on the $23,000. Show me where you're losing $23,000.

Don't try to be smart and act as if I don't know what I'm talking about. I've been doing my own taxes on self employment income since 1990.



I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> If it becomes a federal standard exercise your right to vote. Make your voice heard. Don't come at me for exercising my right out here in C.A. Go, go fast and exercise your own rights. Don't hold me to your views, beliefs, needs. I do what I feel is right so should you.
> 
> 
> Yea, I get that now that I read up on them. Thanks. I was surprised and didn't fully understand why she was freaking out. Really for no reason it seems. At worst they have to set up a llc or something.


Wasn't freaking out. Seems you were over losing $23,000 if you ask me.


----------



## DeadEndRoad

Steve appleby said:


> Let's give a nice round of applause to the idiots in California. You guys are now going to be employees. So you can say bye-bye to surge, You can say bye-bye to setting your own hours, and now Uber is going to be on you guys like white on rice. Your acceptance rate goes below 80%, YOU ARE FIRED. Uber is going to tighten the parameters on drivers now and will probably deactivate half the drivers because they don't wanna pay benefits to them. Uber may be too big to pull out of California, but they will make your life a living hell. I think people are making a big mistake here. But hey you reap what you sow and I'm gonna laugh my ass off would half the drivers in California get deactivated because they can't get their numbers up. Uber is going to find a way to get around this law and Uber will find ways to deactivate you.


Steve I would like you to take a moment and breathe through the nose and exhale through the mouth. Unless your part of uber's legal team , then your merely speculating. If 50% of the issues you have stated come to fruition I will humbly apologize and and ordain you as the next karnack.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Bob Reynolds said:


> I believe the point being lost here is that Uber and Lyft were never exempt from the W2 rules. They just claimed they were and ignored those rules. The reason for this was simply money. They thought they could get away with not paying the minimum wage and they could get away with not having to pay the employers share of FICA, Medicare and unemployment insurance. These wage and hour laws have been in place for almost 100 years and almost all businesses must comply with those laws.
> 
> Then came Dynamex and the California Supreme Court voted unanimously that the Dynamex drivers were subject to the W2 rules and not 1099 IC rules. The Dynamex drivers were much like the Lyft and Uber drivers except they carried packages instead of passengers. They are also considered transportation workers.
> 
> In 2004, long before Lyft and Uber were even thought of, the Industrial Welfare Commission in the state of California, instituted WAGE ORDER 9-2001 which regulates wages, hours and working conditions in the transportation industry. You probably have never heard of WAGE ORDER 9-2001. If you are in California, Uber and Lyft were supposed to make you aware of this order but they did not.
> 
> This order provides the basis of overtime, wages, rules and regulations for those involved in the transportation industry. There are a number of sections in this wage order.
> 
> Some partial sections of interest are:
> 
> 1. *Applicability of Order* This order shall apply to all persons employed in the transportation industry whether paid on a time, piece rate, commission, or other basis,
> 
> *4. Minimum Wages
> 
> 20. Penalties *(See California Labor Code, Section 1199)
> 
> *22. Posting of Order *
> Every employer shall keep a copy of this order posted in an area frequented by employees where it may be easily read during the workday. Where the location of work or other conditions make this impractical, every employer shall keep a copy of this order and make it available to every employee upon request.
> 
> Here is a link to the order:
> https://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/WageOrders2005/IWCArticle9.html
> ----------------------------------------
> So Uber and Lyft continued to ignore the unanimous California Supreme Court Dynamex decision memo and continued to not pay their drivers according to the industrial wage order. This meant that the taxpayers of California are picking up the tab for those Uber and Lyft drivers that don't have enough money to pay for their necessary expenses like food, shelter and medical care.
> 
> Now the state legislature has passed AB5 which was directly targeted at those companies like Lyft and Uber that are ignoring almost 100 year old US wage and hour laws as well as a 15 year old Industrial Welfare Commission wage order which they should have been complying with the entire time they have been in business.


Look, you want to talk sense and facts and history and labor codes. The people that are badmouthing, don't actually care about fair honest discussion. They just want to bad mouth the state of California, the people supporting facts, and any and all drivers are considered losers to them. I wish we could discuss labor laws, treatment of the low wage workers, what will be the implications in a more intellectual way.



DeadEndRoad said:


> Steve I would like you to take a moment and breathe through the nose and exhale through the mouth. Unless your part of uber's legal team , then your merely speculating. If 50% of the issues you have stated come to fruition I will humbly apologize and and ordain you as the next karnack.


I am in California, please don't call me a looser. I don't care were your from, your not a looser to me. I was not the supreme judge that proceeded over 2018 Dynamax case that created ABC test for employment status. If you want to protest, protest the judge. What's up? I'm tired of non stop endless looser looser argument. I am calling you out SIR. Come at me with something, argument against ABC ruling, final results after negotiations, or implications of said law. I am calling out anyone that can only say losers as a argument as illiterate if honestly that's your argument.
I am part time, did not create or vote for 2018 ABC test. I am quitting at the first smell of a schedule. It's not a big deal for me. Many of us will walk if they schedule, so they will have severe shortage and would have to schedule whoever is left full time if the driver wanted. So please clarify if I am still a looser and that's all you got???‍♂



Steve appleby said:


> Let's give a nice round of applause to the idiots in California. You guys are now going to be employees. So you can say bye-bye to surge, You can say bye-bye to setting your own hours, and now Uber is going to be on you guys like white on rice. Your acceptance rate goes below 80%, YOU ARE FIRED. Uber is going to tighten the parameters on drivers now and will probably deactivate half the drivers because they don't wanna pay benefits to them. Uber may be too big to pull out of California, but they will make your life a living hell. I think people are making a big mistake here. But hey you reap what you sow and I'm gonna laugh my ass off would half the drivers in California get deactivated because they can't get their numbers up. Uber is going to find a way to get around this law and Uber will find ways to deactivate you.


Read above, that was for you SIR.


----------



## dauction

Fuzzyelvis said:


> This is basically the point I keep making: it's pretty clear drivers are already employees by any test that's in place to categorize workers. This bill just points it out.
> 
> All those folks saying what they WANT is beside the point. You are what the law says you are, regardless of what uber calls you or what you want to be. The law has just been ignored. And it's not just uber. Many companies have done this for many years. They just haven't done it to the same extent, with so many workers, and so blatantly.
> 
> 
> You said bye bye $23000. Not the case. You're just not paying taxes on the $23,000. Show me where you're losing $23,000.
> 
> Don't try to be smart and act as if I don't know what I'm talking about. I've been doing my own taxes on self employment income since 1990.
> 
> 
> Wasn't freaking out. Seems you were over losing $23,000 if you ask me.


I've been doing my own taxes since 1978 .. You dont know what you are talking about ...Mileage is a DEDUCTION ..


----------



## O-Side Uber

Michael - Cleveland said:


> There are like 206 bones in the human body. So there were the remains of maybe 6 people in Franklin's basement. Hell, I've got more skeletons in my closet than that.





Michael - Cleveland said:


> [QUOTE="Michael - Cleveland, post: 5388550, member: 6945"
> 
> Explain to me what circumstances would require Ben Franklin to bury 8 bodies beneath his basement. I'm my opinion he was hiding his crimes.


**IMO


----------



## DeadEndRoad

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Look, you want to talk sense and facts and history and labor codes. The people that are badmouthing, don't actually care about fair honest discussion. They just want to bad mouth the state of California, the people supporting facts, and any and all drivers are considered losers to them. I wish we could discuss labor laws, treatment of the low wage workers, what will be the implications in a more intellectual way.
> 
> 
> I am in California, please don't call me a looser. I don't care were your from, your not a looser to me. I was not the supreme judge that proceeded over 2018 Dynamax case that created ABC test for employment status. If you want to protest, protest the judge. What's up? I'm tired of non stop endless looser looser argument. I am calling you out SIR. Come at me with something, argument against ABC ruling, final results after negotiations, or implications of said law. I am calling out anyone that can only say losers as a argument as illiterate if honestly that's your argument.
> I am part time, did not create or vote for 2018 ABC test. I am quitting at the first smell of a schedule. It's not a big deal for me. Many of us will walk if they schedule, so they will have severe shortage and would have to schedule whoever is left full time if the driver wanted. So please clarify if I am still a looser and that's all you got???‍♂
> 
> 
> Read above, that was for you SIR.


Please forgive me Steve but I don't see where I called you a loser. I just saying let's wait and see how this drama plays out. For what its worth I was born and raised in Northern California and currently residing in the state of Arizona. I do understand your frustration, I repeat let's see how this drama plays out. I as well will not accept employee status if that scenario should rear its ugly head here in Arizona. But after four plus years and over 8000+ rides and the countless BS of uber giving driver's an old fashioned reach around 
, I'm ready to push all my chips in and call uber's bluff because I can't lose what I never had.



flymiester said:


> Absolutely nothing unless you live in a crazy state like California run by leftist progressives. Thank God I live in Montana, Trump country. I don't feel sorry for you stupid Californians when Uber and Lyft scale back operations in the state. You will lose all flexibility you once enjoyed by dictating your working hours. Oh don't forget the tax deductions you enjoyed for milage, guess you might lose those too. You've done it to yourselves. I hope you all lose your incomes, livelihoods and ability to survive. YOU ALL DESERVE TO SUFFER!!! I never looked to Uber Lyft as a permanent source of income. I've been able to average $24-$35 an hour doing this gig in my small town. Admittedly my rate card is one of the highest in the country. How do you beat Uber Lyft? QUIT. Get a real job, I have one. Go back to school. When enough people quit they will be forced to raise wages. But you want to be provided for at an artificial rate of what the market will bear for your labor vs. supply. There are TOO many drivers in the California area, period. This is why they were able to cut rates. It's basic economics. At some point Lyft and Uber will have to get out when the regulatory costs outweigh any ability to turn a profit. Why the hell you'd want to live in California anyway is beyond me. You've dug your own grave, now lay in it. :laugh:?‍☠


Just wanted to ask you if it helps you to take your mind off yourself when you paint every driver in California as something less than ignorant. When one refers to themselves as conservative or liberal then they are part of the problem. You are an American first and foremost. Nobody is asking you to buy into their grievances. I do understand that it's easier to lob $hit bombs when it can be extremely difficult to bring a solution to the table. Yeah drivers in California may be wrong about some points but they ain't wrong about everything.


----------



## UberSnitch

Bob Reynolds said:


> SACRAMENTO - The California Senate on Tuesday passed gig-work legislation that could transform the state's employment landscape, turning many independent contractors into employees. The vote was 29-11, along party lines.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sf...passes-AB5-gig-work-bill-turning-14430204.php
> *California passes landmark bill that threatens to upend companies like Uber and Lyft*
> https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/california-passes-assembly-bill-5-for-gig-workers.htmlNBC NEWS 11 SEP 2019
> 
> California lawmakers passed a landmark bill on Tuesday that threatens to reshape how companies like Uber and Lyft do business.
> The legislation, known as Assembly Bill 5, would require gig economy workers to be reclassified as employees instead of contractors.
> The bill has received support from California Gov. Gavin Newsom and would go into effect Jan. 1, 2020.
> California lawmakers passed a landmark bill on Tuesday that threatens to reshape how companies like Uber and Lyft do business.
> 
> But shares of Lyft popped as much as 3.9% on Wednesday morning, while Uber climbed more than 2.9% after California Gov. Gavin Newsom told the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday that he's still engaged in talks with Uber, Lyft and other gig economy companies about possible negotiations around the bill. Newsom recently voiced his support for the bill.
> 
> The legislation, known as Assembly Bill 5 (AB5), would require gig economy workers to be reclassified as employees instead of contractors. The bill passed in a 29 to 11 vote in the State Senate and now moves on to the State Assembly, where if it passes, it will land on Newsom's desk.
> 
> Additionally, the bill has received broad support from Democratic Presidential candidates including Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), as well as South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg.
> 
> The bill has the potential to change the employment status of more than 1 million low-wage workers in California, not just gig workers at companies like Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Postmates and Instacart. It will make it harder for gig economy companies to prove that their workers aren't staff, while ensuring key benefits and protections, like minimum wage, insurance and sick days.
> 
> AB5 has attracted staunch opposition from gig economy companies, as it could upend their traditional business model of hiring inexpensive contractors. In an effort to push back against the bill, Uber and Lyft proposed establishing $21-an-hour minimum wage for drivers in California. The ride-hailing companies, as well as Doordash, have also pledged $90 million on a ballot initiative for the 2020 election that would exempt them from AB5.
> 
> Lyft spokesperson Adrian Durbin said the bill has the potential to hurt drivers who prefer a flexible work schedule


U/L will not give in just to save their California business.

Sorry to say but Calf is fasting turning into a massive ghetto. The money folks are moving and being replaced by trash.

Between the liberals, homeless & illegals&#8230;.California is doomed.

Uber will try to win the fight&#8230;but if they lose they will likely close up shop and drop California.

Then California can add Uber drivers to the welfare program.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

iheartuber said:


> The whole point of Uber was to offer cheap rides due to this extremely low regulated brand new job.
> Only problem is- they got too greedy.
> 
> Or, more specifically... they thought they could bully the world


Yea, I mean every country, society, city has basic laws. We don't live out in the open with tribes anymore. How can a company say, I am just going to do my own thing and I don't care for any laws. California has a strong regulated market. For a company to just flip the finger at them it was like testing them until they just say that's enough. I think this got too far by mistreatment of workers and then snowballed out of control. Now it's a circus. What kind of business plan was this.


----------



## Bob Reynolds

UberSnitch said:


> Then California can add Uber drivers to the welfare program.


Uber drivers already are on the welfare program because they make poverty wages. That's why the state passed AB5


----------



## jocker12

Back in November 2017, The New York Times reported

"Dara Khosrowshahi has spent the past two months learning the ins and outs of Uber, the embattled ride-hailing company where he took over as chief executive in August. Now begins the hard work of repairing Uber's negative image.

On Tuesday, *Mr. Khosrowshahi introduced a new set of cultural values* for the company, replacing a list previously conceived by Travis Kalanick, the former chief executive who in June was pushed out of the start-up he had helped to create.

Introduced to employees at an all-hands staff meeting in San Francisco, the list is meant to strike a softer tone for the eight-year-old company, which has long been seen as hard-edged and combative. It includes warmer, fuzzier goals like perseverance and celebrating differences. *Another entry reads: "We do the right thing. Period*."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/technology/uber-dara-khosrowshahi.html
Assuming Uber's CEO agrees how *following the law is the right thing to do*, I am curious to see if his set of values stands, and Uber under Dara's leadership would follow the law and "Do the right thing. Period.", or if he was (and still is) full of BS.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks

Steve appleby said:


> Yup!!! That's pretty much what I said. And yet people call me ignorant


There is an effective date? So it's not retroactive like Dinamax. Can you refer me to a source please. I am ignorant and think it's retroactive and settlement checks will be on offer once we go into arbitration. This is a big deal, please help me read your source as I don't want to stay ignorant.



iheartuber said:


> The rate cut will not come from Uber,
> The rate cut will come from the situation as a whole.
> 
> You will not be able to drive as many hours if any at all
> 
> You will not be able to drive when you want
> 
> Your tax decudruons will be gone.
> 
> Your weekly gross will be higher but your weekly net after taxes will b.
> 
> No one likes AB5 except liberal
> Aholes who think they're "helping the working man"





kevin92009 said:


> Let's see how it plays out let's see how exaggerated Uber scare tactics are I'm sure if they have an issue with scheduling they will adapt and they will make it to what drivers want they will have no choice


haha, people keep scaring me about Uber will do this, Uber will do that.
I say Uber wound not do shit to me.
Nor Uber, nor a free market guy from Georgia dictates for me.
I QUIt if they talk schedule.
We part timers will QUIT before they can pull their head out of their ass. 
What part it too complicated, 4 % retention rate. Driver leaving in droves if any attempt of a schedule. Shortage of drivers. 
I do not have a "till death due us part" clause with Uber. It's not a "marriage" nor "Cosa Nostra"
I can walk tonight. Who looses? Who has stock? Who can't run it's business plan? 
You guys against labor laws are missing the point of who looses. 
Hint: it's not me, nor the state, nor the union, guess who it is?


----------



## iheartuber

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> There is an effective date? So it's not retroactive like Dinamax. Can you refer me to a source please. I am ignorant and think it's retroactive and settlement checks will be on offer once we go into arbitration. This is a big deal, please help me read your source as I don't want to stay ignorant.
> 
> 
> haha, people keep scaring me about Uber will do this, Uber will do that.
> I say Uber wound not do shit to me.
> Nor Uber, nor a free market guy from Georgia dictates for me.
> I QUIt if they talk schedule.
> We part timers will QUIT before they can pull their head out of their ass.
> What part it too complicated, 4 % retention rate. Driver leaving in droves if any attempt of a schedule. Shortage of drivers.
> I do not have a "till death due us part" clause with Uber. It's not a "marriage" nor "Cosa Nostra"
> I can walk tonight. Who looses? Who has stock? Who can't run it's business plan?
> You guys against labor laws are missing the point of who looses.
> Hint: it's not me, nor the state, nor the union, guess who it is?


If your situation is such where you can take it or leave it if Uber exists or doesn't then good for you

Some people depend on full or part time work of Uber existing in its current IC/freedom to work state.

Depending on how many desperate ants there are is how much leverage Uber does or doesn't have



I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Yea, I mean every country, society, city has basic laws. We don't live out in the open with tribes anymore. How can a company say, I am just going to do my own thing and I don't care for any laws. California has a strong regulated market. For a company to just flip the finger at them it was like testing them until they just say that's enough. I think this got too far by mistreatment of workers and then snowballed out of control. Now it's a circus. What kind of business plan was this.


Because if they're doing drivers a solid by giving them the opportunity to make as much or as little extra cash they want working when they want with a ton of tax advantages, and if they're doing the pax a solid by just existing and also by having the rides be cheap then Uber is doing society a massive favor.

I for one am happy to let any and all regulation slide in recognition of this service they are providing to society.

Now, if they get too greedy that's where my support starts to thin


----------



## theonearmedman

Gerrygri11 said:


> Steve the problem is there's never gonna be benefits. The companies will cap all drive is below $30/hr Or whatever California minimum is for not having to pay benefits or overtime.
> These companies were never meant to be full time jobs they were meant to be side gigs and they will do whatever they have to to keep them that way.
> I've been driving over for 3 years I've never made less than $23 an hour in normally hover in the 27 to 36. Difference is I know my market I work Part And when IM not working that keeping an eye on the App so I can see where the busy locations are on a given day isI know will be in my market 45 minutes before Demand goes up.
> All driversis can do this but uber and Lyft have to stop cutting rates they need to charge people a little bit more an be more transparent


I was so mad when they cut the mile rates even though Im not from there. /they could have cut referral bonuses but instead they cut the drivers pay.... and they also could have had a hiring freeze to prevent oversaturation but no they wanted to screw over the drivers.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN




----------



## Yam Digger

Cantina00 said:


> 7. Probably not possible,, but let the driver set their own rates


In non rideshare gig apps like task rabbit and airBnB, that's the normal practice.

Uber will have a hard time convincing a judge that we're not employees if the price we charge for our services is completely out of our hands.


----------



## The Entomologist

This thread should never die to remind them that IN a body... a head must never fight the hands cause it loses.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-ab5-will-affect-much-more-than-uber/*California's gig worker law will mostly affect non-gig workers*
CBS NEWS BY IRINA IVANOVA SEPTEMBER 13, 2019 / 3:01 PM / MONEYWATCH

_*"You see a growing trend of Uber and Lyft pushing as many expenses as possible on the driver, a*_*nything from gas to accident insurance, anything having to do with the expenses of the work, is driver-paid. It's a massive *_*abuse of labor"* _​

A California bill set to become law would turn many "gig economy" workers into full employees, although experts say its biggest impact could be on jobs outside companies like Uber and Lyft.
Trucking firms, news publishers, cleaning companies and software companies could all find it harder to legally define workers as independent contractors.
But the law would exempt contractor-heavy sectors including beauty salons, law firms, doctors' offices and real estate offices.
California lawmakers are one step closer to passing a sweeping law that would re-classify a slew of "gig economy" workers like rideshare drivers and food-delivery workers as employees. But if passed, the law's biggest impact could be on industries with a lot less buzz than Silicon Valley startups.

"There aren't that many Uber and Lyft workers - it's just that those companies are the ones making a big push about it," said Cathy Ruckelshaus, general counsel at the National Employment Law Project.

Trucking companies, newspaper publishers and cleaning operations could be among those widely impacted by Assembly Bill 5, sometimes referred to as the "Uber law"- although Uber maintains the bill doesn't apply to its drivers. While about 400,000 Californians work for gig platforms like Uber and Doordash, an army of 1.5 million freelance workers in the state could also be covered by the new law.

As the bill awaits signing by California Governor Gavin Newsom, Uber, Lyft and Doordash have pledged $90 million toward a statewide ballot initiative that would permanently exempt their industries from the law. At the same time, a whole swath of companies in industries such as construction and health services that have come to rely on independent contractors are also likely to feel the bill's bite, experts say.

Many traditional businesses across the U.S. have shifted to independent contractors as a way to reduce labor costs. But labor experts say they often misclassify workers as a way to avoid offering costly benefits like health care, paid vacation and sick time, and retirement plans.

"A lot of these don't pass the laugh test," Ruckelshaus said. "A janitor who gets hired by a contractor to go clean an Applebee's or a movie theater, they're not 'running their own business.' They're not really setting their own hours or setting their own pay rate."

*What is a freelancer?*
This question of control over a worker is central to defining a freelancer. But defining what constitutes a freelancer is no easy task in an economy that's blurring the definition of what it means to be employed, with workers increasingly taking on non-traditional jobs through apps and seasonal work.

As defined in Assembly Bill 5 - and as most people might understand it - an independent contractor is a person who runs an independent business; who is hired by a company to do something outside of that company's usual course of business; and who has full say over how, where and when they complete that job.

The bill, also called AB5, exempts dozens of occupations, including doctors, lawyers, architects, accountants, private investigators, commercial fishermen, manicurists and estheticians. But that still leaves many industries that have come to rely on contract labor.

One of these is trucking, which has already paid out millions in settlements to drivers claiming they were improperly classified as freelancers. With the passage of AB5, trucking firms in California that rely on more than 70,000 freelance drivers are concerned they won't be able to afford the extra costs and will lose business, according to Reuters.

*Same work, lower costs*
Unlike employees, contractors can't apply for unemployment insurance when they lose a gig. They also aren't required to be paid minimum wage or overtime and aren't allowed to form a union, as employees are. And because companies don't pay payroll taxes or benefits for contractors, employers that rely on contractors can shave as much as 20% of their costs, as noted by a 2016 UCLA paper.

"There are certainly strong incentives for a lot of employers to try to do that to save money," said Brad Hershbein, senior economist at the Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. "It allows the employer in some cases to lower their labor costs - they can get the same amount of work without paying the benefits."

It's hard to estimate how many freelancers might, under other circumstances, be called employees. Hershbein's own research finds that between 1.5% and 3% of the U.S. workforce, or 2.4 million to 5 million people, have done work for an online platform in any given week.

But over the course of a year, that figure is much larger. In 2017, the Census reported that some 25 million businesses without employees earned more than $1,000.

*Freelance writers and drivers*
Also known as sole proprietors, independent contractors are spread throughout the American economy. The sector adding them the fastest is transportation and warehousing, with more than 2.7 million independent businesses moving people or shipping goods in 2017, according to Census data.

There were also 2.8 million contractors in personal services (barbers, beauticians, nail technicians and hairdressers); 2.1 million in administrative and support services (a category that includes call centers, hiring agencies and debt-collection agencies); 1.7 million specialty trade contractors; and 1.3 million athletes and performing artists.

"The fact is, a lot of companies use freelancers, independent contractors, to provide ancillary services," said Kathy Kristof, editor of SideHusl, an independent review website of ways to make money freelancing (and a former contributing writer for CBS MoneyWatch). "Newspaper companies use independent contractors to deliver the paper. All sorts of media companies hire freelancers to write stories that their staff is not doing, and particularly as media companies scale back on staff, they rely more and more on freelancers."

Newspaper publishers have roundly condemned the new law and the "considerable cost" it could add to what they say are already razor-thin margins. But being classified as an employee could hurt some freelancers, particularly in the realm of intellectual property, Kristof said.

"If you're an employee, even a part-time employee, everything you produce on the employers' dime belongs to the employer. But if you're producing something for the employer that is related to something that you produce for yourself, that puts your rights to your intellectual property at risk," she said.

read the full article *HERE*


----------



## newDriver81

Azpilot2211 said:


> The new Uber, You will work 12pm to 9 am, 2 15 minute breaks, 1 hour lunch from 3am to 4 am. Accept ALL requests no matter the distance or you're fired. Hope you like the new taxes that will be taken out of your paycheck each week, plus insurance. It truly amazes me how dumb some of you are. I want more money. I deserve it!! Its not fair!! wah wah. You just screwed yourselves.


Amen. And taxes is what this is all about. Millions of Americans learned the deduction game by getting into the gig economy. The IRS was getting less taxes because of the gig economy something had to b done.


----------



## Greenfox

They are going to SCREW everyone and do assigned times and NO WAY are you going to drive where you want, trust me, you'll see....


----------



## everythingsuber

Greenfox said:


> They are going to SCREW everyone and do assigned times and NO WAY are you going to drive where you want, trust me, you'll see....


They are going to do what it takes to stay in business. Same number of people need the same number of cars and the same dollars are out there. 
Now Uber and Lyft need driver and to get drivers and keep them they need to provide what drivers need to make the job worthwhile.
Uber and Lyft are currently spending 60 Million generating fear and uncertainty. It shows


----------



## Bob Reynolds

Greenfox said:


> They are going to SCREW everyone and do assigned times and NO WAY are you going to drive where you want, trust me, you'll see....


Thanks for signing up for the Uberpeople.net forum today.

You are asking us to trust you. Who are you?


----------



## Greenfox

Bob Reynolds said:


> Thanks for signing up for the Uberpeople.net forum today.
> 
> You are asking us to trust you. Who are you?


My names Doug. I work for a certain company in the bay area.


----------



## Bob Reynolds

Greenfox said:


> My names Doug. I work for a certain company in the bay area.


Would that certain company be Uber or Lyft?


----------



## Lowestformofwit

Bob Reynolds said:


> Would that certain company be Uber or Lyft?


He said "certain", not "cretin".
Or did he?


----------



## Bob Reynolds

AB5 was enrolled and presented to the Governor at 11:00 AM PST on 09/17/2019 and is awaiting his signature.


----------



## flymiester

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> They are just fear mongering. We quite if they bringvschedules
> 
> i don't get your point. I will get my 15 per hour for all my time including wait time, SF market minimum wage, then I get tips and a negotiated mileage reimbursement close to IRS rate. I'll tell you how it goes on my two week paid vacay, or during paid sick leave, or If I get injured on the job, I'll let you know how I'm doing while collecting workers comp. just don't hate me if you get annoyed I have a safety net while working as a driver.


Do you really believe everything you just stated here? You're living in LaLa land. Apparently you seem to believe U/L is in the charity business happy to provide you all the above mentioned while they continue to make no profit.

Like you said, there will be schedules. If I were to guess it will be an app notification that only allows you to log onto to app and go online when your 8 hour period is available, say 6a-2pm, 2pm-10pm and 10pm-6am. Better not be late or you'll be fired!! Of course you have no say over which scheduled shift you get. Sorry. You'll get your breaks and lunch. Sounds awesome. Also you won't be able to chose the area you want to work, forced to drive some 20 miles to a high demand area, but at least you get your $15 an hour. You won't be able to reject rides from dangerous areas with high crime where you may be robbed beaten or killed. Sounds great!! Too many rejections mean being suspended or fired. No more being able to work just the high demand areas.

Maybe you just enjoyed driving passengers? That option is no longer available. You will do food delivery, packages, biohazards, groceries whatever the employer dictates. A lot of that type of work will result in low to no tips. Dictating the work is an employer right. 
Unlikely you will get any bonuses or quests since all work is now dictated.

Do you do both Uber and Lyft? That won't be allowed, no more double dipping. You'll have to pick one or split your shifts. 16 hour days? Man is that going to suck. Most drivers have both platforms operating at the same time, I do. Keeps you busy and you can pick or choose the better option.

Like to drink or do drugs? Welcome to mandatory drug testing. Then there is the physical exam for your employer provided health care. Curious to see what that looks like. Will you be allowed to drive if you have a medical marijuana card?

The whole point of Lyft/Uber was a low barrier of entry to part-time employment. If you can stand on two feet, grab a steering wheel with both hands and fog a mirror, congratulations! You're hired. There was no interview, urinalysis test or English proficiency. As long as your basic record was clean and no major driving infractions. Easy. The freedom and flexibility you once enjoyed as an IC will evaporate. If... and that's a giant if.. Lyft and Uber can still do this in California and become profitable, then it will work out. But now U/L costs will increase to have a separate app just for the California market and hire more people to mange the regulatory and oversight. Just look to NYC if you want to have and idea how minimum wage has affected ridership. I expect reclassification as employees to double or triple those costs. Uber and Lyft will cut numerous drivers from it's platforms before they can figure out the right balance. Of course rates will go up ridership will decline just like New York. This is all basic economics. If you cannot remain profitable in a highly regulated economy then eventually you have to pack it up, Wallstreet will not wait. However, this will create space for new players that are more nimble, less greedy and cost burdened, like Juno and Via to take over. This is known as "creative destruction" in economic circles. With all this said it will most likely be held up in court and not implemented anytime soon. This law has such wide reaching implications across multiple IC industries that it probably won't be decided until it reaches the Supreme Court of the United States.

I do not want to be classified as an employee as I enjoy the flexibility and freedom. On my worst day I average $23 per hour with many days being $28. I like the tax deductions I get which help me out tremendously. I also have another job as a real estate agent. If you don't have a plan B or exit strategy, that is your own fault. 
https://www.businessinsider.com/uber-lyft-rides-decline-after-new-york-minimum-wage-2019-7


----------



## Jon77

DeadEndRoad said:


> First and foremost, I have no desire to be classified as an employee of uber. But the fact remains that uber/Lyft brought this on themselves. I drive in Arizona which is a "right to work " state, so I don't expect any changes in the immediate future. After four years and over 8000k plus rides with an average rating of 4.95 and a $1.59 will get you a free cup of coffee at your local QT. I never had the illusion of making easy money but I did believe if one puts the time in with the goal of getting each pax to their destination in a safe timely manner with courtesy. Then one should receive fair compensation. But as all of us know, there is a better chance of seeing world peace before that day would arrive. Uber refers to drivers as "partners" and if one was to read the definition it is nothing more than a backhanded compliment. Its more of a reach around without the offer of a cig. Remember when Dara meet the new boss same as the old boss entered at Act II shouting from the highest peak "Do the right thing" (refer to reach around). I don't believe his job is easy but there is one crucial difference between Dara and you the driver. Drivers are transporting human lives, and are doing it right every day and night and if that doesn't qualify for fair compensation then uber and its investors can burn in hell.





Steve appleby said:


> Let's give a nice round of applause to the idiots in California. You guys are now going to be employees. So you can say bye-bye to surge, You can say bye-bye to setting your own hours, and now Uber is going to be on you guys like white on rice. Your acceptance rate goes below 80%, YOU ARE FIRED. Uber is going to tighten the parameters on drivers now and will probably deactivate half the drivers because they don't wanna pay benefits to them. Uber may be too big to pull out of California, but they will make your life a living hell. I think people are making a big mistake here. But hey you reap what you sow and I'm gonna laugh my ass off would half the drivers in California get deactivated because they can't get their numbers up. Uber is going to find a way to get around this law and Uber will find ways to deactivate you.


Uber is reaping what they have sown over the years, and I will be laughing my ass of if they deactivate so many drivers that their sorry passengers cant get rides anymore.
But the sad fact is they can't fire too many drivers because all the part timers will have bailed due to possible lack of flexibility, so driver quality may go down.
Uber may become like the Government, you can't get fired regardless what you do.
They need an army of drivers, and they will be losing a substantial amount of drivers if flexibility is curtailed.
I have a feeling that it will take a lot for them to let go of a driver, the flexebility is what produced this long line of people willing to put up with Uber's BS.


----------



## njn

uber already made an official statement that they do not intend to follow the law. nothing changes for the drivers of california.


----------



## Bob Reynolds

Governor Newsom has signed AB5. It is now official and it is now the law.

https://www.latimes.com/california/...-employees0independent-contractors-california
SACRAMENTO -
California businesses will be limited in their use of independent contractors under a closely watched proposal signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom on Wednesday, a decision that is unlikely to quell a growing debate over the rules and nature of work in the 21st century economy.

Newsom signed Assembly Bill 5 in a private ceremony in his state Capitol office. Legislators gave final approval to the sweeping employment rules before adjourning for the year last week.

The new law "will help reduce worker misclassification - workers being wrongly classified as 'independent contractors' rather than employees, which erodes basic worker protections like the minimum wage, paid sick days and health insurance benefits," Newsom wrote in a signing message released by his office.

"As one of the strongest economies in the world, California is now setting the global standard for worker protections for other states and countries to follow," Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego), the author of AB 5, said in a written statement.

The bill was one of the most hotly debated by the Legislature this year, legislation that began as a way to clarify state law following a 2018 ruling by the California Supreme Court that found a number of workers across the state should be considered employees of a business who are entitled to various benefits. During the legislative process, a variety of powerful business interests sought specific exclusions from AB 5, an effort to ensure those industries could continue to rely on non-employees in a variety of functions.

Those in the most prominent industry left out of those final changes to the bill, California's app-based technology sector, insisted they would continue to seek exemptions from any new mandate to classify workers as employees. Three companies - Uber, Lyft and DoorDash - opened a campaign committee last month with a $90-million contribution toward taking the issue to California voters in a 2020 ballot measure.

Newsom pledged on Wednesday to continue the discussion with business groups worried about the new law, which takes effect next year. In particular, he cited the need to ensure workers in the new tech sector businesses can join labor unions.

"I will convene leaders from the Legislature, the labor movement and the business community to support innovation and a more inclusive economy," he wrote in his signing message.


----------



## nj9000

Isn't one of the main points of doing Uber you being able to set your own schedule? So in CA full-timers are going to ruin everything for everyone else?


----------



## LAuberX

nj9000 said:


> Isn't one of the main points of doing Uber you being able to set your own schedule? So in CA full-timers are going to ruin everything for everyone else?


Who says you can't have a custom schedule as an employee? Uber is fighting this because it will COST them money, money they would have to pay drivers. The gig was OK when you kept 80%, that was years ago.

Flexibility is up to Uber, they don't want to be flexible, they can, but they won't.


----------



## XPG

Uber fanboys use this scheduling thing as if it's bad for everybody. No, it's not a bad thing. Both riders and drivers benefit from the scheduled trips in the current structure. Riders are able to make rider reservation, both apps schedule and offer (Lyft) them as scheduled trips to drivers. Let's say, Uber gave me 10 pm to 6 am or 3 am to 7 am shift and hooked med up with couple of those scheduled rides in advance. Who needs a 2nd app once you have a flexible and guaranteed pay structure platform to make decent money for driving people from A to B. Anting era is over.


----------



## Galveston

Ssgcraig said:


> This is delusional, companies other than Uber already throttle employee hours so they don't pay overtime. 200 miles in 8 hours in my market is $308, this doesn't include the $.58 I get to write off which comes to $116. 200 miles in CA dream world is min wage plus $.58 a mile. What does that come to? $212 dollars? But wait, don't forget about being taxed at a regular rate now, also health insurance comes out of that $208. But wait, overtime? Youre kidding right? You think Uber will allow you to log in more the 39.9 hours online?


Might be safer for passengers as drivers are working both Lyft and Uber for 24 hours straight without sleep


----------



## nj9000

LAuberX said:


> Who says you can't have a custom schedule as an employee? Uber is fighting this because it will COST them money, money they would have to pay drivers. The gig was OK when you kept 80%, that was years ago.
> 
> Flexibility is up to Uber, they don't want to be flexible, they can, but they won't.


I'm a noob here, but IIRC isn't Uber hemorrhaging money? Even with them taking so much more from drivers? I remember reading about their quarterly profits since their IPO.

It seems like they were giving drivers so much before just to drive up some hype but really their business model isn't profitable. I'd almost rather them take more from drivers so they can delay going out of business, so they'll stick around while I need them. There aren't many other gigs like Uber where you can support yourself on your own schedule when you're in-between real jobs.

To me, Uber is supposed to be practically minimum-wage, that you only do temporarily due to the toll it takes on your car. The main benefit is that unlike most min wage jobs you can set your schedule. Most salty people I see on the forum are upset because they made big $$$ initially a few years ago and expect that to last forever. Does Uber really have the money and profitability to keep paying like they did back then?


----------



## njn

u/l need a business license to operate in cali, guess who is not getting a license until they can prove they have employee drivers on payroll?


----------



## Grill




----------



## Ssgcraig

njn said:


> u/l need a business license to operate in cali, guess who is not getting a license until they can prove they have employee drivers on payroll?


Bye bye to Uber in CA.


----------



## Sal29

LADriver said:


> No pay cut is possible since the minimum wage in California is $12 an hour. It's $14.25 an hour in the City and County of Los Angeles. It's $15 an hour in San Jose. Plus California labor law is very strict and defined: If an employee reports to work (logs on) and there is no work, the employee is owed a minimum of 4 hours of pay. Mandatory overtime for over 8 hours a day or 40 hours per week. Including the famous "Gap time" while waiting for a ride. (Google California limousine employment lawsuits. There are hundreds.) Mandatory time and a half on Holidays, etc.
> 
> And the Gig Economy companies will now be liable for work expenses such as gas, maintenance, insurance, vehicle per mile reimbursement for personal cars used for business, etc.
> 
> Plus, the companies will have to provide vacation pay, worker's comp for injuries, unemployment insurance, 401K's for bigger companies (over 25 employees), paid time off for jury duty, maternity leave, etc.
> 
> It's endless expenses for the companies. Not a loss for the employees.


These people opposing AB5 would literally work for a negative income if Government Regulation and rights won by Unions weren't there to protect them.


----------



## Ssgcraig

Sal29 said:


> These people opposing AB5 would literally work for a negative income if Government Regulation and rights won by Unions weren't there to protect them.


Literally? That's silly, or you just do not understand the meaning of the word literal.

You think government regulation leads to a better product? I don't.

Unions have out lived their usefulness to society.


----------



## LADriver

Ssgcraig said:


> Literally? That's silly, or you just do not understand the meaning of the word literal.
> 
> You think government regulation leads to a better product? I don't.
> 
> Unions have out lived their usefulness to society.


Just take a look at the United Auto Workers. Massive corruption protested by it's own members. While they are on strike!


----------



## VanGuy

Ssgcraig said:


> Unions have out lived their usefulness to society.


For a long time I thought that was true. Now corporations are so stupidly huge they may be the only tools left to truly fight back. When companies have billions in their back pockets and a track record of paying off whoever needs paying to get their way, what's left?

They say go get something better. I have a good day job, but life happened and I'm looking for side money so this really isn't about me yet, but if Uber and Lyft get away with a race to the bottom, then everyone else will too. My food delivery money with Skip is down significantly and I believe all the other gig apps are finding ways to emulate Uber in lowering rates.

You can be this translates. Already I know a lot of waitresses here have been made into contractors with min wage because they don't have to pay all the extras like UI, CPP, etc. I know Canadian terms but just call them gov benefits. I've been a contractor for almost a decade. I'm doing alright but I had it much better as an employee in my day job long ago before the recession and the layoffs.

If corporations see a trend, like just make everyone a contractor, and they think they can get away with it because Uber did, and then someone else did, and then someone else, it's just dominoes at that point. And we all get screwed. So yeah, I've come around and my disdain for unions is gone as they may be the only way out of a vicious downward spiral as a whole.


----------



## Ssgcraig

LADriver said:


> Just take a look at the United Auto Workers. Massive corruption protested by it's own members. While they are on strike!


Uber tells you when they restructure the pay. What's the problem? If you continue to work for them, you are your own problem. Do I think Uber is a great company? No effing way. I want to go back to 2015 pay structure, but I know that's not going to happen. Min wage is how much in CA? $12 an hour? That's what you want?

If Uber is forced to eat the federal write off of $.58 a mile in CA, Uber is gone. How many skilled Uber drivers in CA will be looking for a job? Get your resumes polished.


----------



## LADriver

Ssgcraig said:


> Uber tells you when they restructure the pay. What's the problem? If you continue to work for them, you are your own problem. Do I think Uber is a great company? No effing way. I want to go back to 2015 pay structure, but I know that's not going to happen. Min wage is how much in CA? $12 an hour? That's what you want?
> 
> If Uber is forced to eat the federal write off of $.58 a mile in CA, Uber is gone. How many skilled Uber drivers in CA will be looking for a job? Get your resumes polished.


Correct.

UBER will stop operating in California due to AB5. (They pull out of markets when they lose: China, Austin Texas, Ontario Airport, etc.) Because they can.

It's a massive world wide operation that does huge business in mega cities like Mexico City and all the massive cities in Brazil. The bigger, the better.

It can afford to cut off (and punish) California if it wishes. Which is why they decided to screw over the Southern California drivers with a 30% pay cut. Because they have nothing to lose. Unlike in New York City, the financial capital of the world that provided a base for their IPO.

So, yeah, if you don't like the cheap rates. Go work at McDonald's or even In N' Out, which pays better.

But, be ready to pass a drug test. I did. And now I'm working for Amazon at $16 an hour. Only because I passed a drug test.


----------



## Galveston

Sal29 said:


> These people opposing AB5 would literally work for a negative income if Government Regulation and rights won by Unions weren't there to protect them.


All or most of what you mentioned is actually federal labor law as I have been reading


----------



## Sal29

Ssgcraig said:


> Literally? That's silly, or you just do not understand the meaning of the word literal.
> 
> You think government regulation leads to a better product? I don't.
> 
> Unions have out lived their usefulness to society.


They LITERALLY would work for a negative income because they don't understand depreciation, wear and tear, maintainance and many other expenses they will eventually pay. Many Uber and Lyft drivers are earning a negative income driving a brand new car in California right now before AB5. Slavery, child labor, and 100 hour work weeks without overtime would still be around if it weren't for Government Regulation and Unions.



LADriver said:


> Correct.
> 
> UBER will stop operating in California due to AB5. (They pull out of markets when they lose: China, Austin Texas, Ontario Airport, etc.) Because they can.
> 
> It's a massive world wide operation that does huge business in mega cities like Mexico City and all the massive cities in Brazil. The bigger, the better.
> 
> It can afford to cut off (and punish) California if it wishes. Which is why they decided to screw over the Southern California drivers with a 30% pay cut. Because they have nothing to lose. Unlike in New York City, the financial capital of the world that provided a base for their IPO.
> 
> So, yeah, if you don't like the cheap rates. Go work at McDonald's or even In N' Out, which pays better.
> 
> But, be ready to pass a drug test. I did. And now I'm working for Amazon at $16 an hour. Only because I passed a drug test.


California is not just a state. It has the 5th biggest economy in the world, has 40 million residents and tons of tourists, work and student Visa visitors, and other people visiting yearly. California is also the leader of about 20 to 25 other states that fall in line with whatever California does.
California and these other states will crush Uber and Lyft like bugs with their executives ending up in prison if Uber and Lyft try and play hardball against California.


----------



## Ssgcraig

Sal29 said:


> They LITERALLY would work for a negative income because they don't understand depreciation, wear and tear, maintainance and many other expenses they will eventually pay. Many Uber and Lyft drivers are earning a negative income driving a brand new car in California right now before AB5. Slavery, child labor, and 100 hour work weeks without overtime would still be around if it weren't for Government Regulation and Unions.


Are you going this weekend to area 51? Sorry, but you can't fix stupid. Driving a brand new car for Uber and somehow that is Ubers fault?

Who goes to work to pay the employer? Seriously, if you do not make good money, why work for the company? I bet you forgot about the $.58 per mile subsidy the feds give you for wear and tear. Have a little self awareness.

You sound like an extreme liberal, but that's just my opinion. Please come back after the government has fixed your life and let us know how its going.

Why would anyone make Uber a full time job for a long period? We all know the answer to why so many work for Uber.

Uber will make CA just like NY, good luck, I would practice on your interviewing skills and find a computer to learn what a resume is.


----------



## Sal29

Ssgcraig said:


> Are you going this weekend to area 51? Sorry, but you can't fix stupid. Driving a brand new car for Uber and somehow that is Ubers fault?
> 
> Who goes to work to pay the employer? Seriously, if you do not make good money, why work for the company? I bet you forgot about the $.58 per mile subsidy the feds give you for wear and tear. Have a little self awareness.
> 
> You sound like an extreme liberal, but that's just my opinion. Please come back after the government has fixed your life and let us know how its going.
> 
> Why would anyone make Uber a full time job for a long period? We all know the answer to why so many work for Uber.
> 
> Uber will make CA just like NY, good luck, I would practice on your interviewing skills and find a computer to learn what a resume is.


You don't even know the difference between a subsidy and a tax deduction. It's no wonder you want to increase the size of the piece of the pie that Uber and Lyft get and decrease the size of the piece of the pie that the drivers get.


----------



## Ssgcraig

Sal29 said:


> You don't even know the difference between a subsidy and a tax deduction. It's no wonder you want to increase the size of the piece of the pie that Uber and Lyft get and decrease the size of the piece of the pie that the drivers get.


Come on, you can tell the difference from stupid and sarcasm can't you? When did I state I wanted to make less money?

They will shoot you at area 51 Einstein.


----------



## XPG

Ssgcraig said:


> Uber tells you when they restructure the pay. What's the problem? Min wage is how much in CA? $12 an hour? That's what you want?


 You have to slow down jimbo. Your elementary school-level arguments are not helping. You don't even realize what most of us want. It's not about $12 an hour. We want Uber out. Get it? We want Uber out.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN

Sal29 said:


> These people opposing AB5 would literally work for a negative income if Government Regulation and rights won by Unions weren't there to protect them.


Agreed.... Sometimes people need to put Politics aside. I am right leaning and believe there should be some type of Union or Intermediary to negotiate Fares per mileage / per min rate for all drivers. When people go against their own interests they really have to take a good look at why they are resisting something that could be good for their bottom line in the end.


----------



## Ssgcraig

XPG said:


> You have to slow down jimbo. Your elementary school-level arguments are not helping. You don't even realize what most of us want. It's not about $12 an hour. We want Uber out. Get it? We want Uber out.


OK Bob, your brother Neal said the my level of education is suitable for this forum. Uber will be out of CA soon, I have stated that before. We all see what happened in NY, either Uber will leave or your flexibility is a thing of the past Bob. I actually want to see Uber leave CA .

By the way, I am not here to help, not sure where you got that notion.


----------



## XPG

Ssgcraig said:


> Uber will be out of CA soon, I have stated that before.


 Who told you this? Dara?


----------



## Ssgcraig

XPG said:


> Who told you this? Dara?


My personal opinion.


----------



## Jon77

Seamus said:


> In the 30 days before the start of the effective date (1/1/20) it's going to be a cold December for a large quantity of drivers. They will deactivate drivers who have a history of low AR, and fall below their threshold of star rating, CR, etc.etc.. They will do this just prior to the effective date so the drivers won't get to collect unemployment benefits.
> 
> The new motto at Uber HQ is going to be "Not Uber Pro.....Gotta Go"!
> 
> To those that think they can't do that because they need the drivers, history has shown they have no problem signing up (or now hiring) an endless supply of new ants who will conform. If you are a Cali driver, you better make sure between now and December you hit Uber Pro Status!


 I think you may be right, they will be more selective with drivers to try to get the best and weed out the rest.
This is just going to be a business version of natural selection.
But still I'm don't want their Uber pro,I'm not going to strive for it, and if I don't make the roster that's fine, there's other part-time jobs available.


----------



## XPG

Ssgcraig said:


> My personal opinion.


I'm interested in reading your opinion. And if you have facts support them with a source please.


----------



## Ssgcraig

XPG said:


> I'm interested in reading your opinion. And if you have facts support them with a source please.


You just read my opinion. Why would I have sources for an opinion? I did not state it was my hypothesis.

I think the barometer is NY, CA we will have to wait and see. I think Uber, if faced with paying the $.58 write off and other per diems, will leave. This is my opinion, not fact. Didn't think I needed to have a disclaimer like that, but here we are.


----------



## XPG

Ssgcraig said:


> I think the barometer is NY, CA we will have to wait and see.


 Of course the barometer is CA. Uber concept was born in California, as a black car service/limo dispatching app and then moved into other states. Failure in CA will be followed by NY (New York City) and other states. Uber should file bankruptcy now, exit from the U.S. market and move to India, which would be a very fitting location to re-launch their core business.


----------



## Jon77

XPG said:


> Of course the barometer is CA. Uber concept was born in California, as a black car service/limo dispatching app and then moved into other states. Failure in CA will be followed by NY (New York City) and other states. Uber should file bankruptcy now, exit from the U.S. market and move to India, which would be a very fitting location to re-launch their core business.


----------



## Uarefree

BigBadJohn said:


> Yea! Errrrrr Booo! I don't know man, i just don't know.


Same here. What if you're working multiple rideshare/ delivery services? How in hell is that going to go over? I counted 7 apps. I know there's more?
IRS and Ca State forms
1 -1040, 1040c 1040a, 1 540, 7 -1099ks, 7 1099-misc. and so on.
I think Nevada is Rideshare/Delivery Friendly!


----------



## Jon77

Ssgcraig said:


> You just read my opinion. Why would I have sources for an opinion? I did not state it was my hypothesis.
> 
> I think the barometer is NY, CA we will have to wait and see. I think Uber, if faced with paying the $.58 write off and other per diems, will leave. This is my opinion, not fact. Didn't think I needed to have a disclaimer like that, but here we are.


 I was ready to contact a lawyer, because I stubbed my foot on your opinion, and I need to be able to walk in order to be employed,.
Butt then I saw your disclaimer.
Dammit !


----------



## mnext02

So what changes?


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn

mnext02 said:


> So what changes?


Nothing officially until january first,

and nothing until uber/lyft are dragged to court.

And you may very well lose you job contractor gig if this bankrupts uber.


----------

