# CA voters; vote YES on prop.22



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

A yes vote means we are free to choose. Decline unprofitable offers. Flexibility on hours. Choose areas to work. And on and on. Be free as your own boss.

A no vote means we have to be part time, minimum wage employees. Your hours scheduled for you by your manager. Your delivery neighborhoods mandated by your supervisor. Terminated for cause for declining crap offers. And on and on.

If prop. 22 fails, you will be treated exactly as an employee. Think about that. 3 days PTO per year. Approval required to take a day off. Medical insurance offered at $600 per month, more if you include family members. Terminated for cause if you do not accept every offer. Terminated for cause excludes you from Unemployment insurance.

Your employment determined by an algorithm with rubber stamping employees determining your fate.

OMG, why would any sane person want to be an employee of these malicious gig app companies?

Vote YES on prop. 22 in .CA. The lesser of evils.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

Ha! 3 weeks after it passes, they will take something away from you because in their words "lower fares mean more money". I guarantee they won't leave things in ca any longer than they have to.

And by the way, there is nothing in the law that says they have to or will do the things you claim if the prop fails.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Disgusted Driver said:


> And by the way, there is nothing in the law that says they have to or will do the things you claim if the prop fails.


I'm guessing you aren't sure about what being an employee with U/L will mean. Almost everything OP wrote can happen as an employee. Much more, too.
Clearly Prop 22 is the lessor of 2 evils.


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

SHalester said:


> I'm guessing you aren't sure about what being an employee with U/L will mean. Almost everything OP wrote can happen as an employee. Much more, too.
> Clearly Prop 22 is the lessor of 2 evils.


CAN happen . . . fair.

Saying IT WILL happen . . . lies. They're using the famous scare tactic. Also discredits anything credible they may have previously said or in the future will say, as people will now question the validity of everything I say. Not that that's a big deal but still. These kind of people only hurt your campaign. They should consider running for president though. Those candidates are good at spewing pure BS to people

]



Judge and Jury said:


> A yes vote means we are free to choose. Decline unprofitable offers. Flexibility on hours. Choose areas to work. And on and on. Be free as your own boss.
> 
> A no vote means we have to be part time, minimum wage employees. Your hours scheduled for you by your manager. Your delivery neighborhoods mandated by your supervisor. Terminated for cause for declining crap offers. And on and on.
> 
> ...


----------



## NOXDriver (Aug 12, 2018)

If you have to be an employee that means your vehicle and personal attire now have to follow corp. standards, on your dime

Do you think Pradesh your new 'manager' give two fricks about you? Good luck haveing all your discussions via email.

I have absolutely no idea why people WANT to be and Uber/Lyft employee. What do they think they will get?


----------



## Fusion_LUser (Jan 3, 2020)

Daisey77 said:


> Saying IT WILL happen . . . lies. They're using the famous scare tactic. Also discredits anything credible they may have previously said or in the future will say, as people will now question the validity of everything I say. Not that that's a big deal but still. These kind of people only hurt your campaign. They should consider running for president though. Those candidates are good at spewing pure BS to people


Can you name one no-skills needed minimum wage job that allows you to pick your own hours, pick where you work and pick who you work for? Truly I can't think of any because the last time I worked for minimum wage was when I was like 15 years old.

Can Wal*Mart employee's go to work when they want and at any location they want? Can they work for Target at the same time? Can McDonald's employee's refuse to deal with a customer?


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

NOXDriver said:


> If you have to be an employee that means your vehicle and personal attire now have to follow corp. standards, on your dime
> 
> Do you think Pradesh your new 'manager' give two fricks about you? Good luck haveing all your discussions via email.
> 
> I have absolutely no idea why people WANT to be and Uber/Lyft employee. What do they think they will get?


 because correspondence Now isn't almost all via email?

Maybe people want to be an employee so I have some recourse against false allegations and being deactivated. Maybe they want to be an employee because they don't want to be unpaid for 2 months while they wait for a background check. Maybe they want to be an employee so they can get unemployment if wrongly deactivated. Maybe they want to be an employee because they won't have to worry about being refused pay for completing a trip


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Daisey77 said:


> CAN happen . . . fair.
> 
> Saying IT WILL happen . . . lies. They're using the famous scare tactic. Also discredits anything credible they may have previously said or in the future will say, as people will now question the validity of everything I say. Not that that's a big deal but still. These kind of people only hurt your campaign. They should consider running for president though. Those candidates are good at spewing pure BS to people
> 
> ]


As usual, I don't have a clue what you are trying to say.


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks (Aug 5, 2019)

Judge and Jury said:


> OMG, why would any sane person want to be an employee of these malicious gig app companies?


1- I do not want Workers Comp.
If I get disabled during work, I do not want Uber to be responsible. I know my state pays about 1,000$ a month disability. Why should Uber have to chip in when I get it anyways from my State and the tax payer.

2- I do not want 0 deductible.
If I get car damage or accident I should pay 2,500$ rideshare deductible.
Why should rideshare companies have to cover my expenses. I don't have much savings so I deserve to loose my income ability since I would not have enough for the 2,500$ deductible on Lyft.

3- I do not want Uber to contribute to my health insurance.
I get full coverage Obamacare subsidized again by my state and the taxpayers. I rather have taxpayers subsidies me than to reduce Ubers profit margin.

4- I don't want UI during economic downturns.
I know there will be economic cycles and when a recession hits, I count on taxpayers subsidizing stimulus plans.
Why would Uber have to contribute, when I can get it from the taxes on working class or printed stimulus money that creates inflation.

5- I do not want minimum wage nor do I want collective bargaining rights. 
I don't need meter rates set for the industry. I want Uber in total domination of the pay and I want drivers to not have neither wage protection or meter rate standard protection.


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Daisey77 said:


> because correspondence Now isn't almost all via email?
> 
> Maybe people want to be an employee so I have some recourse against false allegations and being deactivated. Maybe they want to be an employee because they don't want to be unpaid for 2 months while they wait for a background check. Maybe they want to be an employee so they can get unemployment if wrongly deactivated. Maybe they want to be an employee because they won't have to worry about being refused pay for completing a trip


Maybe I should apply to a pizza place or Chinese emporium.
I want to be an IC.
If you are unhappy with the gig apps, please move along, acquire a W2 job and leave the rest of us to our profitable endeavors.
Please stop dragging down profitable contractors because of your personal problems and complaints.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

SHalester said:


> I'm guessing you aren't sure about what being an employee with U/L will mean. Almost everything OP wrote can happen as an employee. Much more, too.
> Clearly Prop 22 is the lessor of 2 evils.


No one is sure what being an employee would mean and yes it "can" happen but realistically uber is doing their typical hardball scare negotiating.

I've said in other posts that no, I don't want to be an employee, I already am somewhere else and couldn't handle 2 competing ones. What I do want to be is a real independent contractor like what they are TEMPORARILY giving you in CA. Funny how they didn't roll any of that out elsewhere, isn't it? I wonder why. Uber only does for drivers what it has to only for as long as they have to. If you think differently you will always be disappointed.

My fondest hope out of all of this is that the prop fails, uber leaves and a better company steps in that actually creates an ic relationship.


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

Here's what Uber said in their app, you don't want to be a wage slave for them, it will suck, you will work when and where they want and accept all pings without any chance of being payed more then the wage, no fare split, no surge, just your minimum wage


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

NicFit said:


> Here's what Uber said in their app, you don't want to be a wage slave for them, it will suck, you will work when and where they want and accept all pings without any chance of being payed more then the wage, no fare split, no surge, just your minimum wage
> 
> View attachment 512021


"What uber said": have you ever known uber to lie?


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

Disgusted Driver said:


> No one is sure what being an employee would mean and yes it "can" happen but realistically uber is doing their typical hardball scare negotiating.
> 
> I've said in other posts that no, I don't want to be an employee, I already am somewhere else and couldn't handle 2 competing ones. What I do want to be is a real independent contractor like what they are TEMPORARILY giving you in CA. Funny how they didn't roll any of that out elsewhere, isn't it? I wonder why. Uber only does for drivers what it has to only for as long as they have to. If you think differently you will always be disappointed.
> 
> My fondest hope out of all of this is that the prop fails, uber leaves and a better company steps in that actually creates an ic relationship.


This is exactly it. None of us wanted to be employees. None of us want to be employees. All we wanted was the way we operate to match our classification. If we are classified as independent contractors, we need to be treated as such. If we're going to be treated as employees, then we need to be classified as employees. The ball was in their Court.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Disgusted Driver said:


> Uber only does for drivers what it has to only for as long as they have to. If you think differently you will always be disappointed.


Can you find even one company that does nice things for essentially their AP vendors (that is what we are: vendors)?

There are no RS companies 'waiting in the wings' to 'take' over if U/L leave (they aren't and won't). Maybe tryp, but they would essentially face the same exact issues.

There are some minimum things that will happen if we (um, active drivers in calif) are employees. Those who have experience being an employee know exactly what they can be. Isn't speculation, or guessing. If AB5 is it, there will certainly much fewer drivers in Calif; only guess is what percent will be hired. Drivers will be effected and the PAYING customer will be effected.

I hope the few drivers who wanted AB5 will be happy with the result(s).



Daisey77 said:


> They're using the famous scare tactic.


i kinda doubt it. There are certain things that WILL happen if Prop 22 fails (well, will happen to calif drivers, that is). The stuff and details that Uber is telegraphing are not scare tactics; they are what can happen. The only scare tactic I saw was their estimate only 20-30% of active drivers would be hired. I think the numbers are really double those. 
There will certainly be schedules and Uber will decide them. All the Prop 22 slides are telegraphing what at least Uber is going to do. No guesswork required. Really, almost all negatives. The one positive, as employees we would get paid from the moment we go on the clock to the moment we go off clock. That positive is lost among all the negatives, tho.

And there are a lot of negatives; just search the past year for them.....All so a few full time drivers could feel better about themselves. <sigh>


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

SHalester said:


> Can you find even one company that does nice things for essentially their AP vendors (that is what we are: vendors)?
> 
> There are no RS companies 'waiting in the wings' to 'take' over if U/L leave (they aren't and won't). Maybe tryp, but they would essentially face the same exact issues.
> 
> ...


Sorry my "They're" was referring to OP. They have no idea what Uber will or won't do. They may suspect but they can't sit there and say this is what will happen


----------



## NOXDriver (Aug 12, 2018)

Daisey77 said:


> because correspondence Now isn't almost all via email?
> 
> Maybe people want to be an employee so I have some recourse against false allegations and being deactivated. Maybe they want to be an employee because they don't want to be unpaid for 2 months while they wait for a background check. Maybe they want to be an employee so they can get unemployment if wrongly deactivated. Maybe they want to be an employee because they won't have to worry about being refused pay for completing a trip


But you're still at will, so you can still get fired. Most likely you'll get less than full time hours so you don't get any UC or anything.

You're crying because people lie? Do you think Pradeesh is going to take your word over a paying customer?

Man so many people just don't know how to business. Its not about paying YOU. It about making PROFIT. Ever wonder why employees are an EXPENSE on the balance sheet???



Daisey77 said:


> This is exactly it. None of us wanted to be employees. None of us want to be employees. All we wanted was the way we operate to match our classification. If we are classified as independent contractors, we need to be treated as such. If we're going to be treated as employees, then we need to be classified as employees. The ball was in their Court.


What part of your current agreement is the problem. YOU AGREED TO IT. If you don't like now knowing the destination, then don't accept the contract. Its really not that hard. You're a delivery person. So either DELIVER or find other work. Uber/Lyft have no obligation to meet YOUR NEEDS, you are not the paying customer.

Again, for the 10,000th time. You don't want to be an employee. Being an employee means that while you *might* now know the destination, refusal means termination. What part of that is a good deal???


----------



## luckytown (Feb 11, 2016)

NOXDriver said:


> But you're still at will, so you can still get fired. Most likely you'll get less than full time hours so you don't get any UC or anything.
> 
> You're crying because people lie? Do you think Pradeesh is going to take your word over a paying customer?
> 
> ...


All you guys here that dont want to be employees are living in fear....why.....all of you say that you wont work under those conditions.....good...Uber/Lyft will not be able to staff fleets if they lose....period....you want me to work nights...pay me....you want me to work weekends....pay me....you want me to work holidays....pay me...you want me to work in bad weather....pay me....if your paying me by the hour and I deliver food...send me all the office and high rise deliveries....please...they cant get enough drivers....you know it....they know it....this is your time.....


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

NOXDriver said:


> What part of your current agreement is the problem. YOU AGREED TO IT.


Yep under financial duress . . . &#128513;


NOXDriver said:


> If you don't like now knowing the destination, then don't accept the contract.


 now you're making assumptions. I see the Direction and duration of the trip


NOXDriver said:


> Uber/Lyft have no obligation to meet YOUR NEEDS, you are not the paying customer


You're right. However they have an obligation to treat us as true independent contractors if they don't want to treat us as employees &#129335;‍♀


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Under financial duress. Please explain.



Daisey77 said:


> Yep under financial duress . . . &#128513;
> now you're making assumptions. I see the Direction and duration of the trip
> 
> You're right. However they have an obligation to treat us as true independent contractors if they don't want to treat us as employees &#129335;‍♀


Under financial duress? Please explain.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> 1- I do not want Workers Comp.
> If I get disabled during work, I do not want Uber to be responsible. I know my state pays about 1,000$ a month disability. Why should Uber have to chip in when I get it anyways from my State and the tax payer.
> 
> 2- I do not want 0 deductible.
> ...


Uber trolls such as yourself give UP a bad name &#129320;


----------



## Wildgoose (Feb 11, 2019)

There are two groups on this Prop 22. 

First Group those wants to vote NO ... are full time drivers those wanted to be treated like Employees with benefit and with higher hourly wages. They won't care any restriction because they basically don't care anything but money. As they are full time drivers, they don't like part time drivers come into their territories and picking up the money from street. They want part time driver disappear from the market for good. They don't want saturated drivers in the market.
Second Group those wants to vote YES... are mostly part time drivers, who want to drive in their flexible time. They don't care benefits and stuff. They want their freedom, no boss environment. But they want better fares and fair payout. They have no problem over saturated drivers in the market. They respect same opportunity on getting riders and they want to decide whether they would take the trip or cancel the trip.
...
So, I would vote YES on Prop 22.


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

Wildgoose said:


> There are two groups on this Prop 22.
> 
> First Group those wants to vote NO ... are full time drivers those wanted to be treated like Employees with benefit and with higher hourly wages. They won't care any restriction because they basically don't care anything but money. As they are full time drivers, they don't like part time drivers come into their territories and picking up the money from street. They want part time driver disappear from the market for good. They don't want saturated drivers in the market.
> Second Group those wants to vote YES... are mostly part time drivers, who want to drive in their flexible time. They don't care benefits and stuff. They want their freedom, no boss environment. But they want better fares and fair payout. They have no problem over saturated drivers in the market. They respect same opportunity on getting riders and they want to decide whether they would take the trip or cancel the trip.
> ...


Then part time drivers need to quit complaining when they're deactivated for a month during a background check or complaining when they get unfairly deactivated or get a false allegation or don't get paid a cancellation fee. They Basically can't complain about anything they see as unfair by Uber or Lyft


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks (Aug 5, 2019)

everythingsuber said:


> Uber trolls such as yourself give UP a bad name &#129320;


Could you kindly explain why?
You understand my post was satire, right!


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Daisey77 said:


> Then part time drivers need to quit complaining when they're deactivated for a month during a background check or complaining when they get unfairly deactivated or get a false allegation or don't get paid a cancellation fee. They Basically can't complain about anything they see as unfair by Uber or Lyft


What makes you think it will be better as an employee? You will be fired for cause.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Daisey77 said:


> However they have an obligation to treat us as true independent contractors if they don't want to treat us as employees


would you be more happy with the Calif setup of seeing full info ping, set your own surge etc etc? Just curious.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

SHalester said:


> would you be more happy with the Calif setup of seeing full info ping, set your own surge etc etc? Just curious.


Can't speak for daisy but I for one would love that. The problem is that they only did the calif setup because they had to. As soon as this issue is resolved one way or another uber will take back whatever they can or want.


----------



## Fusion_LUser (Jan 3, 2020)

Disgusted Driver said:


> Can't speak for daisy but I for one would love that. The problem is that they only did the calif setup because they had to. As soon as this issue is resolved one way or another uber will take back whatever they can or want.


I like the pro-AB5 argument that Uber will just take all the things they gave us away after Prop 22 passes. It makes so much sense to do just that in a state that absolutely hates business, especially the ride share business.

I'm so sure Democrats in Sacramento are just going to say "Look at what Uber did, they took all the features away! Oh well there is nothing we can do about that. Bummer!"


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks (Aug 5, 2019)

Fusion_LUser said:


> I'm so sure Democrats in Sacramento are just going to say "Look at what Uber did, they took all the features away! Oh well there is nothing we can do about that. Bummer!"


That's actually a great point!

Even though any modification would need 7/8 vote, it is very possible.

After Seattle passed a rule for U/L with a 9-0 vote, I got confidence that we could get 7/8 vote here in C.A to modify bad behavior.

Setting our own rates, driver cap, Mileage rate minimum could be fought for and gained through 7/8 vote.

Seattle increased rates by a 9-0 vote. We could do that, all we need is 7/8 vote. Not easy but possible.

But all Uber needs is 2 politicians in their pocket, then nobody would have a say and U/L can bend us all over, no lube, buckaki style.

We shall see!


----------



## Fusion_LUser (Jan 3, 2020)

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> That's actually a great point!
> 
> Even though any modification would need 7/8 vote, it is very possible.
> 
> ...


If Prop 22 passes it will not be the end of employee/IC dispute. The last thing Sacramento cares about is what the people want so it's a safe bet when Prop 22 passes Sacramento will continue to act on behalf of their owners with the unions and continue to go after Uber and Lyft.

Its not like Uber and Lyft can start this late in the game and bribe Newsom in to signing another bill similar to AB2257 that will exempt Uber and Lyft. That option expired long ago... Uber and Lyft should have pre-ordered 10 years of wine from Newsom's winery for half of San Francisco to get their exemptions to AB5.


----------



## somedriverguy (Sep 6, 2016)

Daisey77 said:


> because correspondence Now isn't almost all via email?
> 
> Maybe people want to be an employee so I have some recourse against false allegations and being deactivated. Maybe they want to be an employee because they don't want to be unpaid for 2 months while they wait for a background check. Maybe they want to be an employee so they can get unemployment if wrongly deactivated. Maybe they want to be an employee because they won't have to worry about being refused pay for completing a trip


You have good points, but I want no on prop 22 sonthat they will gonfix ab5 and I can be a real boy.

I mean IC.


----------



## 25rides7daysaweek (Nov 20, 2017)

Judge and Jury said:


> Under financial duress. Please explain.


You must be kinda slow or something
Most of us want to work
All ready to go out and do it
Next thing you know theres something blocking you from it
Your only option is to say yes or go home and make no money till you read through a ream of legal bullshit most lawyers probably dont even get
Then you still cant make any money unless you agree to it anyway..
That would be the financial duress


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

25rides7daysaweek said:


> You must be kinda slow or something
> Most of us want to work
> All ready to go out and do it
> Next thing you know theres something blocking you from it
> ...


Sounds like you are bound to one app.

Expand your horizons. Engage multiple apps.

Adapt, experiment, overcome, learn to be profitable.

If one app throttling you, move on to another.

Duress would be if a certain gig app forced you to work for them under a threat for not doing so. Seems to me deleting the app from your phone would eliminate your claim of financial duress.

Sign up for other apps, exercise your freedom as a contractor. Be free and profitable.


----------



## 25rides7daysaweek (Nov 20, 2017)

Judge and Jury said:


> Sounds like you are bound to one app.
> 
> Expand your horizons. Engage multiple apps.
> 
> ...


I wasnt the one that was complaining
For some reason you didnt seem
to understand what the other guy was saying...


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

25rides7daysaweek said:


> I wasnt the one that was complaining
> For some reason you didnt seem
> to understand what the other guy was saying...


Seems your post called me slow. Perhaps you meant to respond to a different poster.

My advice stands, do not be beholden to a single app. You could be deactivated with short notice and have no recourse have back up apps available and ready to go if driving is your sole source of income. Just my opinion.


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

Judge and Jury said:


> Sounds like you are bound to one app.
> 
> Expand your horizons. Engage multiple apps.
> 
> ...


Signing a contract under duress makes a contract unenforceable. When one has been working this job and it's their main source of income or a significant source of their income and a new agreement is proposed to them and they are not allowed to continue making their income unless they sign this agreement put them in financial duress. They feel forced to sign the contract or else not be able to provide for their family AKA keep a roof over their head and food on the table. We have absolutely no warning or heads up. Literally we're working and making money one day when all of a sudden bam you no longer have an income unless you sign this contract. They are basically forcing us to sign this contract. One may call that a threat or even blackmail. Either way it makes the contract unenforceable


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Daisey77 said:


> Signing a contract under duress makes a contract unenforceable. When one has been working this job and it's their main source of income or a significant source of their income and a new agreement is proposed to them and they are not allowed to continue making their income unless they sign this agreement put them in financial duress. They feel forced to sign the contract or else not be able to provide for their family AKA keep a roof over their head and food on the table. We have absolutely no warning or heads up. Literally we're working and making money one day when all of a sudden bam you no longer have an income unless you sign this contract. They are basically forcing us to sign this contract. One may call that a threat or even blackmail. Either way it makes the contract unenforceable


A superior reply.

Spoke with a plumbing contractor over the weekend. He is on the verge of losing his house and declaring bankruptcy.

Three potential customers over the weekend contracted with other plumbers to replace their plumbing.

The fourth potential client, offered 40% of the quoted price and the plumber accepted.

Did the plumber accept the 40% offer under financial duress? Was the plumber forced to accept the offer? Was the client in any way liable for offering a low ball offer?

My advice is to utilize multiple apps so as not to be cornered in a situation by any app.

Hell, I run ten PostMates deliveries a month to stay active on the fourth of my app backups.


----------



## Daisey77 (Jan 13, 2016)

Judge and Jury said:


> A superior reply.
> 
> Spoke with a plumbing contractor over the weekend. He is on the verge of losing his house and declaring bankruptcy.
> 
> ...


Just because you run multiple apps doesn't mean your income wouldn't be severely impacted. Especially if it was the one providing the majority of your income.

But to answer your question about the plumber and his customer, no it would not be Financial duress because there was no continuous legal contract that existed. &#128513;

Im not going to sit here and debate this or argue this with you. you asked what it meant and I told you. Here it is written out for you


----------



## Judge and Jury (Oct 19, 2019)

Daisey77 said:


> Just because you run multiple apps doesn't mean your income wouldn't be severely impacted. Especially if it was the one providing the majority of your income.
> 
> But to answer your question about the plumber and his customer, no it would not be Financial duress because there was no continuous legal contract that existed. &#128513;
> 
> ...


Another superior answer.


----------



## Da Ub (Oct 29, 2016)

Judge and Jury said:


> A yes vote means we are free to choose. Decline unprofitable offers. Flexibility on hours. Choose areas to work. And on and on. Be free as your own boss.
> 
> A no vote means we have to be part time, minimum wage employees. Your hours scheduled for you by your manager. Your delivery neighborhoods mandated by your supervisor. Terminated for cause for declining crap offers. And on and on.
> 
> ...


Not true at all


Daisey77 said:


> Then part time drivers need to quit complaining when they're deactivated for a month during a background check or complaining when they get unfairly deactivated or get a false allegation or don't get paid a cancellation fee. They Basically can't complain about anything they see as unfair by Uber or Lyft


There is 3 types on this forms
There is the ones that think prop 22 is fine and dandy
There are the ones that want to be employees
There are the ones that want to be treated like a true independent contractor instead of an employee with a contractor title.
Prop 22 gives up the main problem, which is collective bargaining with the pricing which is the last thing missing from the Uber app.
I don't want to give up my rights and I would like to think none of us on the forms here would either. 
for those of us that have been through as much as we have, we owe it to ourselves to hold out for something better. Uber has shown us already how far their trust lasts. I want things in writing regarding price locks before I agree to a prop Uber wrote.
.30 cents a mile is nonsense when in their own SEC paperwork it states the cost to operate a vehicle is .75 cents per mile. This would also need to include full transparency (ie being able to see real customers receipts) and not made up data subset they are providing us (it says in there SEC paperwork, the riders pay the drivers and then the drivers pay Uber)


----------



## I will crack Lyft hacks (Aug 5, 2019)

Judge and Jury said:


> A superior reply.
> 
> Spoke with a plumbing contractor over the weekend. He is on the verge of losing his house and declaring bankruptcy.
> 
> ...


Exactly right about the plumbers.

So if a passenger wants a ride and my rate is higher than what the other nearby and available providers are offering, then I would not get the contract.
( This Plumber example is exactly how contractors operate. This is why Uber only in C.A is allowing the operators to set their own rates and compete in the free market as independent).

The drivers in California whom like Plumbers compete with each other based on rates and get full contract details have a argument that they are contractors.

If they could also get repeat clients that could specifically request them for scheduled service then they are in a true sense indipendent.

The drivers without those two rights talking about how they are running their own business are delusional.

Plumbers can get repeat clients and build a client base, rideshare drivers can't. ( The client is Ubers)
Plumbers can compete with other Plumbers on price and rating, Uber drivers can't.
Plumber don't need to use someone else's license to operate, Uber drivers need the Apps TNC license.



Da Ub said:


> Not true at all
> 
> There is 3 types on this forms
> There is the ones that think prop 22 is fine and dandy
> There are the ones that want to be employees


You couldn't have said it better.

I want true independent contractors of all fields to not be harassed and over controlled while being able to be independent.

For all contractors AB5 needs a small modification to part B. This isn't about just ride-share workers. All independent workers need to stand together and make AB5 legitimate through a modified part B That works for all.

This attitude about just saving ourself my taking whatever degraded rights Uber is offering is unfortunate.

Strategically to fight for true independent contractor status, it is easier to unite and correct AB5 for the REAL RIGHTS all contractors should have.

Ask Uber to write in Prop 22 prices will not go down and the markets will not be flooded, see what they say.


----------



## dnlbaboof (Nov 13, 2015)

ab5 happened in Switzerland a huge disaster, 77% of drivers jobless, the rest miserable and most plan to quit, yes on prop 22






Independent couriers’ reaction to employee reclassification: learnings from Geneva


By Alison Stein, Economist at Uber




medium.com


----------



## Da Ub (Oct 29, 2016)

dnlbaboof said:


> ab5 happened in Switzerland a huge disaster, 77% of drivers jobless, the rest miserable and most plan to quit, yes on prop 22
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This shows how much Uber flooded the market there. Uber should not have been flooding the markets to begin with.
Also Switzerland is not nearly the market share that CA.
I still say hold out for something better.
No on 22


----------



## dnlbaboof (Nov 13, 2015)

Da Ub said:


> This shows how much Uber flooded the market there. Uber should not have been flooding the markets to begin with.
> Also Switzerland is not nearly the market share that CA.
> I still say hold out for something better.
> No on 22


Flooding the markets?????? pre covid in CA uber was popping ping after ping!!!!!! u2 concert, playoff games, bar runs commuters, airports runs!!!!!!! this is government intrusion forcing people to be jobless


----------



## Da Ub (Oct 29, 2016)

dnlbaboof said:


> Flooding the markets?????? pre covid in CA uber was popping ping after ping!!!!!! u2 concerts, playoff games, bar runs commuters, airports runs!!!!!!! this is government intrusion forcing people to be jobless


Yes flooding the markets.

How long did you wait in between rides? Uber was not popping ping after ping in CA precovid unless you where doing the drive 20 minutes to pick up a ride. 
Wait you must be in Sacramento where the rates are .585 cents per mile and .19 cents per minute. Those are all you. 
After events, you are right. If the risk is worth the reward , you can make some money.
This isn't a government intrusion. This is a company that has consistently not followed the law. Did lowering the rates give you more rides? Probably but you made less money with more wear and tear on your car. 
uber needs to treat us as true independent contractors and prop 22 doesn't do that


----------

