# Just received this email from Uber this morning......



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Making Earnings Easier to Understand
Hi xxxxx,

*Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.

*These updates will not change your earnings.* This is not a rate cut. You'll earn the same amount, for the same trip, on Monday, as you do today.

*Here are the changes we're making:*


*Easier to understand rates -* You'll see the exact rates you earn for every minute and every mile you drive.Previously, you needed to deduct Uber's service fee from your rates to determine your earnings. Now, no math is required. You'll always know exactly what you'll earn. Rates are based on your Uber activation date. You can see all the rates atpartners.uber.com

starting Monday.
*Clearer in-app earnings pages -* In response to your requests for more clarity in our earnings calculations, we have updated our trip receipts. You'll see a clear breakdown of how your trip earnings were calculated. These details include minimum or base fare, plus time and distance, and any promotions. Fare details, including what the rider paid and Uber's service fee, can be viewed by tapping "Fare Details" on the trip receipt.
*Faster fare receipts -* Seeing what you earn in real-time is important. Our goal is to have earnings details available in the app within 15 seconds after a trip ends.
*Cash out more earnings, anytime -* We're making Boost available for immediate cash out through *Instant Pay*

. This summer, look for us to do the same with earnings from Quest.










As part of our effort to make *earnings straightforward and easy to understand,* we're also updating our *driver partner agreement* 

. These changes reflect that there are times when what a rider pays may be higher or lower than what you earn for a trip. Separating rider payments from driver fares allows us to keep your rates consistent, while offering new ride options like subscriptions. You'll continue to earn based on the minimum and/or base fare, time and distance rates, plus applicable promotions as you do today. The next time you go online you'll receive an in-app notification and agreement request for the updated driver partner agreement.

*To experience these updates you will need to update your driver app. Please update to the latest version of the Android

or iOS

app before May 21st. After that, updating your app will be required to go online and drive.*

We hope these changes will improve your driving experience and provide more clarity about your earnings.

Thank you for choosing to drive with Uber.


----------



## ACHUMA (Jun 26, 2016)

I've had this in my Android app for quite a few months now. Not sure why they felt they needed to make a huge announcement over something so minor.


----------



## Jo3030 (Jan 2, 2016)

They are basically saying they are able to rip off the passengers and only pay you for time & distance now, officially.
By agreeing to the agreement, you can't sue them.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Jo3030 said:


> They are basically saying they are able to rip off the passengers and only pay you for time & distance now, officially.
> By agreeing to the agreement, you can't sue them.


Exactly. Under the terms of the current driver agreements, a driver could make the case that Uber owes the driver for not just a % of base/time/mileage, but also for the difference between that actual fare and the 'ESTIMATED/UP-FRONT FARE'. Uber needed to close that ambiguity in the driver agreement. Under the terms of the current agreement, all a rider and driver have to do is request that Uber reduce the fare to the 'actual' fare (agreed upon between rider and driver) and Uber would legally have to comply - the driver's earnings would stay the same, but Uber would be out the jacked up difference.

It will be interesting to see the wording of the new driver agreement and if it removes the whole bit about how riders are the direct customers of the driver and how Uber is 'only' a third party payer and how fares are only 'recommended fares to be used as defaults in the even that riders & drivers don't request a different fare basis'. If that is all eliminated, Uber contractually takes control of all rider fares and moves one step closer to losing the argument about how they are not an employer of the driver.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

UberTaxPro said:


> Making Earnings Easier to Understand
> Hi xxxxx,
> 
> *Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.
> ...





UberTaxPro said:


> Making Earnings Easier to Understand
> Hi xxxxx,
> 
> *Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.
> ...


A.K.A.= sugar coating theft and deciet.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

*Driver Partner Agreement

RASIER, LLC
ADDENDUM*
Last update: May 22, 2017

You entered into a Technology Services Agreement with Rasier, LLC or one of its affiliates ("*Company*", "*we*" or "*us*") for the use of the Uber Services in connection with your Transportation Services (as amended, the "*Agreement*"). This is an addendum to that Agreement that updates fare and payment terms and replaces Section 4 (Financial Terms) of the Agreement in its entirety. By clicking "Yes, I agree", you agree to be bound by the additional terms below.

Capitalized terms used herein but not defined shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement, and, for the purposes of this addendum, "*Ride*" shall have the same meaning as "Transportation Services" and *"Rider" *shall have the same meaning as "User". Except where modified above, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain unchanged. This addendum replaces and supersedes any "Service Fee Addendum" or "Service Fee Schedule" that you have previously agreed to.

*Section 4 of the Agreement is replaced in its entirety with the following:*

*4. Financial Terms*

*4.1 Fares*. You are entitled to a Fare for each Ride that you provide, where "*Fare*" is a base fare amount
plus actual distance and/or time amounts (or as required by applicable law), provided that distance
and/or time amounts may be predetermined in certain situations, such as for flat rate and minimum
fare trips, or estimated where GPS information for that trip is unavailable. Fares vary by region
(detailed at partners.uber.com), may vary depending on local supply and demand, and may also be
adjusted in our discretion based on local market factors. We will provide you with notice of any
change to any base fare or applicable distance and/or time amounts, as well as flat rate and
minimum trip fares, and by continuing to use the Uber Services, you are deemed to accept these
changes. The Fare does not include gratuity. Additionally, even though we often separately advertise
and market the Uber Services and other products and services generally (including discounts or
promotions to Riders that reduce what they ultimately pay for a Ride), this does not entitle you to
any additional payment.

Unless we indicate to you otherwise, for each Ride, the Rider will pay an amount that includes the
Fare, applicable Tolls, applicable fees retained by us, and applicable taxes and surcharges, as well as
the Service Fee described in Paragraph 4.4 below (collectively, the "*Rider Payment*"). You appoint us
as your disclosed limited payment collection agent solely to accept the Rider Payment from Riders
via the Uber Services' payment processing functionality, and the Rider Payment to us (acting as your
agent) is treated the same as if that Rider paid you directly for that Ride. The Rider Payment is the
only payment that will be made to you by a Rider for a particular Ride. By accepting a Ride, you
indicate your agreement to charge the Rider Payment at the amount recommended by us as your
agent. The Fare portion of the Rider Payment shall operate as a default, but following completion of
a Ride you are entitled to request to charge a lower Fare, and we will consider these requests in
good faith. Your Fares and applicable Tolls will be remitted to you on at least a weekly basis. If you have
agreed to any other amounts being deducted from your Fares with any party (such as vehicle
financing or lease payments, or mobile device charges), those amounts will be deducted before
remittance to you, and we may determine the order of these other deductions if allowed by law.
If reasonable, we may adjust a particular Rider Payment (including the Fare portion) for reasons
such as inefficient routes, failure to properly end a Ride or technical error on our Services. In more
serious situations, such as fraud, charges for Rides that did not take place or Rider complaints, we
may cancel or refund a Rider Payment entirely (including the Fare portion). If a Rider cancels their
Ride prior to your arrival at the pick-up location, we may charge that Rider a cancellation fee on your
behalf, and in this case the cancellation fee will be treated the same as a Rider Payment for
completed Rides.

*4.2 Receipts*. The Uber Services provide you with a system for delivering receipts to your Riders. At the
end of a Ride, the receipt will be electronically delivered to your Rider on your behalf. It includes a
breakdown of amounts charged and certain information about you and that Ride (including your
details and the route taken). If you think a correction should be made to the amounts charged, you
must let us know in writing within 15 business days after the Ride took place or we will have no
further responsibility and you waive your right to later dispute the amounts charged.

*4.3 Taxes*. You are required to follow applicable law regarding your tax registration, calculation and
remittance obligations for your Rides and provide us with all relevant tax information. You are
responsible for taxes on your own income. Based on applicable tax or regulatory considerations, we
may choose in our reasonable discretion to collect and remit taxes applicable to your Rides, and may
provide any of the relevant tax information you have given us directly to the applicable tax
authorities on your behalf or otherwise. For the purpose of this section, references to "tax" includes
federal and state income, gross receipts, sales and self-employment taxes, and similar charges.

*4.4 Our Service Fee*. In consideration of your use of the Uber Services, you will pay us a service fee
("*Service Fee*") that is on a per-Ride basis. For each Ride, the Service Fee equals the Rider Payment
minus: (a) the Fare; (b) Tolls; (c) any other fees retained by us (_e.g._, booking fee); and (d) applicable
taxes and surcharges. In the event of a Ride where the Fare is greater than the Rider Payment
(excluding fees retained by us, and taxes and surcharges), no Service Fee will be charged for that
Ride. In such case, any excess amounts that you receive will be shown as an adjustment to your
Service Fee(s) (or if necessary, as an adjustment to another payment owed to you).


----------



## Jo3030 (Jan 2, 2016)

More scams by Uber!


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Jo3030 said:


> More scams by Uber!


Nothing but a Scam !


----------



## MSUGrad9902 (Jun 8, 2016)

It was a serious stretch of logic to make the argument that before you were entitled to receive a flat % of what they charged the pax. The new addendum spells it out clearly though - you are paid time and distance at your city rates plus surge or promos, if any.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

MSUGrad9902 said:


> It was a serious stretch of logic to make the argument that before you were entitled to receive a flat % of what they charged the pax. The new addendum spells it out clearly though - you are paid time and distance at your city rates plus surge or promos, if any.


IMO, that never has been the real issue. To me (and I hope the courts!) the real issue is that Uber continues to state in the agreement that all fares that they publish and charge are 'default' fares used in the event that a fare is not negotiated between the rider and driver... and now this addendum says the same thing but adds: you agree to the default ("recommended") fare. In other words, Uber, as always, wants it both ways. They are stating that drivers are independent contractors with control over the fares they charge - but also saying that drivers have to agree to use the fares 'recommended' by Uber - and now also saying that, 'oh, btw, not really - we may charge the rider more with 'UPFRONT PRICING' but we'll still only pay you on the actual time/mileage/base rate'. Uber is stepping all over itself with this with contradictions both in payments structure and employee classification.


----------



## Mazda3 (Jun 21, 2014)

I'm driving the long way wherever I go with the pax.


----------



## LA Cabbie (Nov 4, 2014)

lol driver continuing to earn minimum fares while uber makes extra cash by ripping off the passengers.


----------



## anteetr (Jan 24, 2017)




----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

anteetr said:


> View attachment 121489
> View attachment 121490


Just in from Uber Corporate meeting . . .


----------



## mattadams (Apr 19, 2016)

I got the same email and was a little confused, I probably read it a few times. To me though it doesn't seem like anything is changing, at least as far as what we are paid. The only confusion for me seems to be the differences between the flat rate and what we're paid. When most of us signed up, passengers were given "estimates" of their ride, but didn't really know what it'd cost until the ride was over as it wouldn't be calculated until we finished the trip... Then, whatever the final fare was, we got 75%, uber got 25% (or 80/20 if you were in early enough). 
Now, most are given upfront pricing, which is based on estimates of time and routes taken, but the actual time and distance might be greater or lesser, but we still get paid based on the routes we take... assuming we're not going obviously out of our way, that hasn't really changed that I'm aware of. For example, if a person is going from the airport to a hotel downtown, they might get quoted $30 based on the expected mileage, tolls, and distance the system assumes it will take. They still get charged $30 even if you end up sitting in bumper to bumper traffic and the ride takes 10 minutes longer than expected, or you decide to take the toll road instead for a quicker route, even though that wasn't in the original estimate. I think their estimations for the most part are probably pretty close, but I'm sure there are plenty of instances where that ends up not being the case. It might be that the final ride would've actually cost them $35 or $25... but we still get paid based on the $25 or $35 that the ride would've actually cost, even though the rider still only pays the $30.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

mattadams said:


> I got the same email and was a little confused, I probably read it a few times. To me though it doesn't seem like anything is changing, at least as far as what we are paid. The only confusion for me seems to be the differences between the flat rate and what we're paid. When most of us signed up, passengers were given "estimates" of their ride, but didn't really know what it'd cost until the ride was over as it wouldn't be calculated until we finished the trip... Then, whatever the final fare was, we got 75%, uber got 25% (or 80/20 if you were in early enough).
> Now, most are given upfront pricing, which is based on estimates of time and routes taken, but the actual time and distance might be greater or lesser, but we still get paid based on the routes we take... assuming we're not going obviously out of our way, that hasn't really changed that I'm aware of. For example, if a person is going from the airport to a hotel downtown, they might get quoted $30 based on the expected mileage, tolls, and distance the system assumes it will take. They still get charged $30 even if you end up sitting in bumper to bumper traffic and the ride takes 10 minutes longer than expected, or you decide to take the toll road instead for a quicker route, even though that wasn't in the original estimate. I think their estimations for the most part are probably pretty close, but I'm sure there are plenty of instances where that ends up not being the case. It might be that the final ride would've actually cost them $35 or $25... but we still get paid based on the $25 or $35 that the ride would've actually cost, even though the rider still only pays the $30.


That would be great if it worked that way in the real world. Unfortunately, the way it works most of the time is that the UPFRONT PRICE Uber charges the rider is significantly more than the actual time/miles on which we are paid - and Uber pockets the difference, thus boosting their revenues and earnings - in effect, raising the fare the that riders pay without compensating drivers any more - and boosting the Uber bottom line of profitability.


----------



## mattadams (Apr 19, 2016)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> That would be great if it worked that way in the real world. Unfortunately, the way it works most of the time is that the UPFRONT PRICE Uber charges the rider is significantly more than the actual time/miles on which we are paid - and Uber pockets the difference, thus boosting their revenues and earnings - in effect, raising the fare the that riders pay without compensating drivers any more - and boosting the Uber bottom line of profitability.


Personally I have no issue with this. I get that it is their right to make as much money as they can and I have the right to either accept the rates I'm offered, or not. 
In my real job, my time is often contracted out through my employer. The rate that the customer pays is often thousands of dollars more per week than I earn. I am perfectly ok with it, because I've agreed to tthe salary I receive, and I acknowledge that much of that money also goes to salaries of people who support me but aren't being paid directly, or to administrative costs, etc. I acknowledge that I in no way could earn the kind of money I'm earning without the company doing all the work for me that they are doing. 
It isn't that different from uber really. I could never make the kind of money on my own, with the technology investments, the marketing, the bookkeeping, etc. If they are able to charge the customer a little more and I still earn a decent rate, I don't have issue with it...


----------



## Chargersrt10 (Dec 23, 2015)

I can bet there is a change that Uber Is Not telling us about...................


----------



## Charlie Schwartz (Aug 17, 2016)

"If reasonable, we may adjust a particular Rider Payment (including the Fare portion) for reasons
such as inefficient routes, failure to properly end a Ride or technical error on our Services."

Huh? I mean, I know they've always been doing this, but huh? Is Uber our boss or something?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

mattadams said:


> Personally I have no issue with this. I get that it is their right to make as much money as they can and I have the right to either accept the rates I'm offered, or not.
> In my real job, my time is often contracted out through my employer. The rate that the customer pays is often thousands of dollars more per week than I earn. I am perfectly ok with it, because I've agreed to tthe salary I receive, and I acknowledge that much of that money also goes to salaries of people who support me but aren't being paid directly, or to administrative costs, etc. I acknowledge that I in no way could earn the kind of money I'm earning without the company doing all the work for me that they are doing.
> It isn't that different from uber really. I could never make the kind of money on my own, with the technology investments, the marketing, the bookkeeping, etc. If they are able to charge the customer a little more and I still earn a decent rate, I don't have issue with it...


"decent rate" being the operative phrase. All I've seen from Uber since I started driving with them is 3 earnings decreases while they increased their earnings with direct charges to the rider.


----------



## Jermin8r89 (Mar 10, 2016)

You know whats easy bring back ticker. Dont try to make assumption with pre-determined priceing. Lesson in life if you want something done right do it yourself so if you have to do some math do it as with upfront priceing you still jave to do it


----------



## mattadams (Apr 19, 2016)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> "decent rate" being the operative phrase. All I've seen from Uber since I started driving with them is 3 earnings decreases while they increased their earnings with direct charges to passenger


True, but even looking at the rate cuts, look how oversaturated uber is in pretty much every market! That means that there are so many people willing to work for that rate, that they often won't find work to do because there aren't enough passengers to meet the supply! Everyone has a price they are willing to work for and every passenger has a price they'll take the ride for. If they were offering $2/mile, they'd have tons of drivers, but not enough passengers because passengers would find other means of transportation (bus, train, get a ride, take a bike, don't go at all, etc.). If they were offering lets say 20 cents a mile, they'd have tons of passengers, but not enough drivers!
Unfortunately, based on this reasoning, at least in markets like denver, they are currently over-paying drivers, because there are too many people willing to work for the current rate and not enough work to do... so only with a boost in passengers or a drop in drivers would the system achieve equilibrium.
I don't expect any employer to be "fair" to their employees, I expect them to maximize their profit as much as possible, while paying workers what is reasonable to keep them around, yet paying enough to reduce turnover and ensure workers put in a decent amount of effort.
But all of that gets away from the topic at hand anyway, so I apologize for derailing the conversation.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

mattadams said:


> True, but even looking at the rate cuts, look how oversaturated uber is in pretty much every market! That means that there are so many people willing to work for that rate, that they often won't find work to do because there aren't enough passengers to meet the supply! Everyone has a price they are willing to work for and every passenger has a price they'll take the ride for. If they were offering $2/mile, they'd have tons of drivers, but not enough passengers because passengers would find other means of transportation (bus, train, get a ride, take a bike, don't go at all, etc.). If they were offering lets say 20 cents a mile, they'd have tons of passengers, but not enough drivers!
> Unfortunately, based on this reasoning, at least in markets like denver, they are currently over-paying drivers, because there are too many people willing to work for the current rate and not enough work to do... so only with a boost in passengers or a drop in drivers would the system achieve equilibrium.
> I don't expect any employer to be "fair" to their employees, I expect them to maximize their profit as much as possible, while paying workers what is reasonable to keep them around, yet paying enough to reduce turnover and ensure workers put in a decent amount of effort.
> But all of that gets away from the topic at hand anyway, so I apologize for derailing the conversation.


There is a reason congress passed the FLSA (and companies have been finding ways to avoid compliance ever since). That reason is to curtail the exploitation of labor in this country. Now we're getting into political territory - and I'm not going to climb on a soap-box other than to point to the increase in the concentration of wealth in the US over the last two decades among the wealthiest - while wages and the standard of living for the majority have been stagnant or decreased (in relative dollars).

What Uber is doing is exploitative.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

This is simply 

1. Uber's way of trying to head off the law suit by the Wilshire Law Firm

2. Raising rates without raising what drivers are paid, thus setting them on their way to profitability. 

My last Uber ride occurred May 12, 2017. I'm not agreeing to this new update. As a true independent contractor I should be able to negotiate the contract instead of having said contract shoved down my throat.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Exactly. Under the terms of the current driver agreements, a driver could make the case that Uber owes the driver for not just a % of base/time/mileage, but also for the difference between that actual fare and the 'ESTIMATED/UP-FRONT FARE'. Uber needed to close that ambiguity in the driver agreement. Under the terms of the current agreement, all a rider and driver have to do is request that Uber reduce the fare to the 'actual' fare (agreed upon between rider and driver) and Uber would legally have to comply - the driver's earnings would stay the same, but Uber would be out the jacked up difference.
> 
> It will be interesting to see the wording of the new driver agreement and if it removes the whole bit about how riders are the direct customers of the driver and how Uber is 'only' a third party payer and how fares are only 'recommended fares to be used as defaults in the even that riders & drivers don't request a different fare basis'. If that is all eliminated, Uber contractually takes control of all rider fares and moves one step closer to losing the argument about how they are not an employer of the driver.


Yes, as discussed on the forum weeks ago, with the introduction of up front pricing and the de-linking of fares from driver pay, Uber was in breach of contract - the business model no longer fit the concept "Uber is the driver's agent and just takes a percentage of the fare". So they had to change the contract.

It's even harder to see now how Uber can justify calling us independent businesses as opposed to employees.



mattadams said:


> In my real job, my time is often contracted out through *my employer*.


Bingo; there's the magic word. Your employer. Who also gives you statutory benefits.

Uber wants to pay us exactly like you say, as if they were our employers, but also duck out of the obligations of being an employer. _That_ is the problem we have with this move of Uber's away from being just an agent. Not whether they should or should not be an agent.



Michael - Cleveland said:


> Unless we indicate to you otherwise, for each Ride, the Rider will pay an amount that includes the
> Fare, applicable Tolls, applicable fees retained by us, and applicable taxes and surcharges, as well as
> the Service Fee described in Paragraph 4.4 below (collectively, the "*Rider Payment*"). You appoint us
> as your disclosed limited payment collection agent solely to accept the Rider Payment from Riders
> ...


Oh, what??? No.... they still have this bullshit weasel clause in the contract? How the F can they still claim they are our agent if they are now buying the service from us and reselling it at an unrelated price of their choice to their customers.

"Rider Payment to us (acting as your agent) is treated the same as if that Rider paid you directly for that Ride"

Yeah... of course... it's the same payment, it's just that the payment amount is different . 
Everything about the payment, except....the....payment... is the same. Of course.

The worst thing about this is not that it's a case of a shyster company trying to exploit workers, it's that this country's legal system is letting them get away with it.


----------



## Veju (Apr 17, 2017)

It's a big club folks, and you and I are not in the club. This is separating the laborer from his labor. Further alienation of the worker is classic Marx folks.


----------



## TBone (Jan 19, 2015)

I've already contacted our Governor and a media outlet regarding this change. It looks like it may be a violation of the states TNC law. 

Edit: Just lodged a complaint with the PUCO.


----------



## For the love of pax (May 17, 2017)

Jo3030 said:


> They are basically saying they are able to rip off the passengers and only pay you for time & distance now, officially.
> By agreeing to the agreement, you can't sue them.


Holy Jesus you read my mind



Beur said:


> 2. Raising rates without raising what drivers are paid, thus setting them on their way to profitability.


The devil is among us



Veju said:


> It's a big club folks, and you and I are not in the club. This is separating the laborer from his labor. Further alienation of the worker is classic Marx folks.


Don't stop, don't be silenced. Your message is important.


----------



## Dan Smith (Aug 16, 2016)

Oh Man... Something smells fishy.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-on-predicting-how-much-you-re-willing-to-pay


----------



## TBone (Jan 19, 2015)

TBone said:


> I've already contacted our Governor and a media outlet regarding this change. It looks like it may be a violation of the states TNC law


Specifically, this piece.

Sec. 4925.03. A transportation network company shall do all of the following:
(A) Disclose its fare calculation method on its digital network;
(B) Provide transportation network company riders or potential riders with the applicable rates charged by the transportation network company;
(C) Allow a transportation network company rider or potential rider to request and receive an estimated fare before the rider or potential rider receives transportation network company services; 
F) Within a reasonable period of time after the completion of transportation network services, transmit an electronic receipt to the transportation network company rider that includes the origin and destination of the trip, the distance of the trip, the total time during which transportation network company services were provided, an itemization of the total fare charged, and, if applicable, that the rider made a cash payment to the driver;


----------



## Veju (Apr 17, 2017)

Now pax are going to get smart and request multiple destinations with up front pricing. Telling them to change destinations is going to be met with reluctance and rider dissatisfaction which will take a toll on driver tips(lol) and ratings.


----------



## dirtylee (Sep 2, 2015)

Chargersrt10 said:


> I can bet there is a change that Uber Is Not telling us about...................


Rates cuts in b4 2018.



Veju said:


> Now pax are going to get smart and request multiple destinations with up front pricing. Telling them to change destinations is going to be met with reluctance and rider dissatisfaction which will take a toll on driver tips(lol) and ratings.


These college kids are already wise to it. I swear half of them also have the driver app.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Veju said:


> Now pax are going to get smart and request multiple destinations with up front pricing. Telling them to change destinations is going to be met with reluctance and rider dissatisfaction which will take a toll on driver tips(lol) and ratings.


I educate riders all the time to make their destination somewhere close to their pickup and change it once the driver arrives and starts the trip.

This negates the higher upfront fare ensuring the pax is paid for actual time and distance based on the route the driver takes not the longer route Uber based the quote on. Pax love it and see it as the driver trying to save them money. 75-80% of the time this "helpful hint" to the pax results in a tip.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> "decent rate" being the operative phrase. All I've seen from Uber since I started driving with them is 3 earnings decreases while they increased their earnings with direct charges to the rider.


Thats Right !
Every Decrease to us means an Increase to Uber !
" LOWER RATES MEANS MORE MONEY!"

NO NEED TO TIP !

Disgusting !



mattadams said:


> True, but even looking at the rate cuts, look how oversaturated uber is in pretty much every market! That means that there are so many people willing to work for that rate, that they often won't find work to do because there aren't enough passengers to meet the supply! Everyone has a price they are willing to work for and every passenger has a price they'll take the ride for. If they were offering $2/mile, they'd have tons of drivers, but not enough passengers because passengers would find other means of transportation (bus, train, get a ride, take a bike, don't go at all, etc.). If they were offering lets say 20 cents a mile, they'd have tons of passengers, but not enough drivers!
> Unfortunately, based on this reasoning, at least in markets like denver, they are currently over-paying drivers, because there are too many people willing to work for the current rate and not enough work to do... so only with a boost in passengers or a drop in drivers would the system achieve equilibrium.
> I don't expect any employer to be "fair" to their employees, I expect them to maximize their profit as much as possible, while paying workers what is reasonable to keep them around, yet paying enough to reduce turnover and ensure workers put in a decent amount of effort.
> But all of that gets away from the topic at hand anyway, so I apologize for derailing the conversation.


REGULATION



Veju said:


> It's a big club folks, and you and I are not in the club. This is separating the laborer from his labor. Further alienation of the worker is classic Marx folks.


And " Lower rates means more money" is classic Orwell #!#


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

UberTaxPro said:


> ,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Funny how they send drivers that screenshot of a decent ride. Then pax get this screenshot showing them how little they can pay for a ride.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Cableguynoe said:


> Funny how they send drivers that screenshot of a decent ride. Then pax get this screenshot showing them how little they can pay for a ride.
> View attachment 121533


All of that " Talking out of both sides of the mouth" causes teeth to be knocked out.
UNION.


----------



## Jermin8r89 (Mar 10, 2016)

Dan Smith said:


> Oh Man... Something smells fishy.
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-on-predicting-how-much-you-re-willing-to-pay


Reminds me of minority report. Sci-fi is becomeing real. We all know its always big corps takeing over the world.

(Uber is reading all of this and knows who we are)



Cableguynoe said:


> Funny how they send drivers that screenshot of a decent ride. Then pax get this screenshot showing them how little they can pay for a ride.
> View attachment 121533


Is it me or does ubers always "honest" "positivity" scares you


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Wait until the Uber pool rides are run by Robo cars and a riot breaks out in the car with a Robot that can do NOTHING about it !
Then the Horror begins !
Remember: Uber ultimate goal is to ELIMINATE AND EXPLOIT THE DRIVERS WHO BUILT THEM !


----------



## mattadams (Apr 19, 2016)

Yeah... still trying not to derail, but keep in mind uber has no minimum wage, they want as many people on the roads as possible so passengers can get a ride as quickly and conveniently as possible. It costs them very little extra money to have 1000 drivers vs. having 100. Yet, at least in most markets, this means uber drivers sitting on their thumbs waiting for ride requests to come in. I know I've had days where I will sit for an hour or two without a single ride request. That means that the rate I'm making, ultimately, becomes less than minimum wage. And the fact is, they could offer lower, and still have plenty of people lined up to do the work. Why? Because there's very little barrier or cost to entry, and it is one of the few part time/full time jobs you can do as much of or as little as you want, so it's very appealing to people with other full-time jobs, retirees, single parents while their kids are at school, etc. etc... But the long and the short of it is... if drivers are sitting around with no rides because there aren't enough passengers... then either uber is charging the perfect amount, or they could be charging even less, winning more market share, and convincing more people to take uber over alternate means of transportation.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

mattadams said:


> Yeah... still trying not to derail, but keep in mind uber has no minimum wage, they want as many people on the roads as possible so passengers can get a ride as quickly and conveniently as possible. It costs them very little extra money to have 1000 drivers vs. having 100. Yet, at least in most markets, this means uber drivers sitting on their thumbs waiting for ride requests to come in. I know I've had days where I will sit for an hour or two without a single ride request. That means that the rate I'm making, ultimately, becomes less than minimum wage. And the fact is, they could offer lower, and still have plenty of people lined up to do the work. Why? Because there's very little barrier or cost to entry, and it is one of the few part time/full time jobs you can do as much of or as little as you want, so it's very appealing to people with other full-time jobs, retirees, single parents while their kids are at school, etc. etc... But the long and the short of it is... if drivers are sitting around with no rides because there aren't enough passengers... then either uber is charging the perfect amount, or they could be charging even less, winning more market share, and convincing more people to take uber over alternate means of transportation.


That is exactly why Taxi has a little thing called " REGULATION".
Because the wild wild west of hire driving occured over 100 years ago.

Now Uber is reinventing the mess.


----------



## mattadams (Apr 19, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> That is exactly why Taxi has a little thing called " REGULATION".
> Because the wild wild west of hire driving occured over 100 years ago.
> 
> Now Uber is reinventing the mess.


So... do you want to be more regulated, or do you want to be treated like an employee? If regulated, meaning the government steps in and says who can and can't be a driver, having maximums, etc. that means much less drivers on the road but it also means increased taxes and fees for whatever you're doing, probably special certification, etc. If you look at Uber's in NYC, they are already going through this as their cars are about as regulated as the cab industry there. For exactly the same reason - too many cars were on the road, causing too much traffic and not being a benefit to anyone. 
If treated like an employee, where uber says they are only going to hire x number of people and no more, and you'll have to wait for one to leave to hire another, etc. that means working the shifts they tell you, at the places they tell you, not having the ability to decline rides, etc. This is what many taxi drivers deal with and me personally, I have no interest in that. It's why I uber and why I don't drive a cab.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Quit making excuses for Tyranical Uber.
Are they paying you ?
Face the Reality that WEare already treated as employees.

THAT DOG DONT HUNT !


----------



## mattadams (Apr 19, 2016)

Umm they pay me when I drive for them? 
But just to be clear, you are the one who recommended regulation, similar to the taxi industry... apparently unaware of what that means.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

It means not stepping into a total snake pit everytime i hit the street.
App. On or off.


----------



## Buckiemohawk (Jun 23, 2015)

They need regulations and this is just another example of their baloney. You have regulated min fare of 1.50 in Orlando. plus 35 cents a minute wait time. You cannot charge a customer one price and pay the other driver while pocketing the money. That is rotten and should be illegal


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Buckiemohawk said:


> They need regulations and this is just another example of their baloney. You have regulated min fare of 1.50 in Orlando. plus 35 cents a minute wait time. You cannot charge a customer one price and pay the other driver while pocketing the money. That is rotten and should be illegal


We MUST HAVE REPRESENTATION.

ENOUGH HAVING CONTRACTS THROWN AT US LAST MINUTE WITH NO WARNING OR INPUT !

We are DICTATED TO !
NOT INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS !

We need a UNION !


----------



## Jermin8r89 (Mar 10, 2016)

We must stop major corprations from centralizeing everything. Esspecally well SDVs are around the corner.


----------



## Anthony McPeake (Dec 10, 2014)

Come Monday, I wont be accepting this. I suggest you all do the same. Between the short notice, the ambiguity and typical Uber BS, this smells like BS. Futhermore I suspect that it will be retracted and discussed publically. And what does this mean for surge. If fairs are not connected to driver payment, then they could surge and not pay us any more. I know some of you depend on Uber for lively hood. Go to Lyft. The best thing WE can all do is to not log in and accept this come Monday. I was really counting on making some extra money the next few months, but I am not going to give my rights away. I will be finally getting signed up with Lyft. Uber has proven time and time again that they are not here to support their partners. I will be talking to my attorney (Yes I have one and if you would like to learn how you can get access to one for next to nothing PM me). 

Don't give up your rights, this is an important moment in our relationship with Uber to send a message and exercise what little power we have!


----------



## Bean (Sep 24, 2016)

Monday should be interesting indeed. Hopefully the media picks up on this BS. I'd feel like a fool signing the agreement as it is currently written.


----------



## Jo3030 (Jan 2, 2016)

Uber is trying to formalize what wasn't clearly defined before - from a legal standpoint.
They're just trying to not get sued, that's all.
But honestly, it could be surging 8x, they could tell you it's not and pocket ALL of the difference.
This is where I have a problem w/ how things are and giving them that much leeway.


----------



## elelegido (Sep 24, 2014)

Jo3030 said:


> Uber is trying to formalize what wasn't clearly defined before - from a legal standpoint.
> They're just trying to not get sued, that's all.
> But honestly, it could be surging 8x, they could tell you it's not and pocket ALL of the difference.
> This is where I have a problem w/ how things are and giving them that much leeway.


Yes, the up front pricing skims are effectively a surge for Uber on which they pay base rates to drivers.

Someone else said that this a precursor to another rate drop. I don't think so; I think rates have generally bottomed out. From hereon in they will continue to pay dynamically - low/base pay when demand is low and raise it to attract drivers when needed via surge and boost. Incidentally, surge has now completely disappeared from the riders' point of view. It will be interesting to see if they keep it for drivers. I think that they will replace it with a more focused version of boost.


----------



## BobCat Ridge (Sep 7, 2015)

Revolution, it's not just for the French. Everyone get a new gig Monday or you are the problem by accepting this.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Clearly... based on this...

Driver surge could disappear, while rider surge could vastly increase, and nothing for the drivers.

So... overall i'm looking forward to this...


110% monthly driver turnover or bust! (this would result to a 10% loss in drivers per month.)


Way to combat driver retention Travis, way to go.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

mattadams said:


> Personally I have no issue with this. I get that it is their right to make as much money as they can and I have the right to either accept the rates I'm offered, or not.
> In my real job, my time is often contracted out through my employer. The rate that the customer pays is often thousands of dollars more per week than I earn. I am perfectly ok with it, because I've agreed to tthe salary I receive, and I acknowledge that much of that money also goes to salaries of people who support me but aren't being paid directly, or to administrative costs, etc. I acknowledge that I in no way could earn the kind of money I'm earning without the company doing all the work for me that they are doing.
> It isn't that different from uber really. I could never make the kind of money on my own, with the technology investments, the marketing, the bookkeeping, etc. If they are able to charge the customer a little more and I still earn a decent rate, I don't have issue with it...


"I still earn a decent rate."

There's the rub...


----------



## Buckpasser (Sep 30, 2015)

Go public you PUBER ****s so we can SHORT your TAXI Company thats all it is nothing more with a Bunch of EMPLOYEES posing as Self employed independent contractors , we should be able to set our own fares if self employed YOU LOSE EVENTUALLY UBER go public now please !


----------



## Georgie Jung (Mar 9, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> *Driver Partner Agreement
> 
> RASIER, LLC
> ADDENDUM*
> ...


This is NOT the _contract_ I signed a year ago. You cannot void a binding agreement without cause to instate a new agreement for your gain Uber.

Keep in mind. If you sign a contact, it is binding. You are bound by the contract of that date and cannot be obligated to sign a new contract without cause. Another words I will be seeking legal advice.


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

Georgie Jung said:


> This is NOT the _contract_ I signed a year ago. You cannot void a binding agreement without cause to instate a new agreement for your gain Uber.
> 
> Keep in mind. If you sign a contact, it is binding. You are bound by the contract of that date and cannot be obligated to sign a new contract without cause. Another words I will be seeking legal advice.


Yes they can,

Your 2 choices are to accept the new contract, or uninstall the driver app.


----------



## Georgie Jung (Mar 9, 2017)

Mears Troll Number 4 said:


> Yes they can,
> 
> Your 2 choices are to accept the new contract, or uninstall the driver app.


Not my two choices. Remember, I still have a binding agreement under the first contract. 
I SIGNED AN AGREEMENT... Just because you have a NEW agreement does not void the FIRST agreement. Uber cannot terminate without cause and does not reserve rights to force a new agreement on the drivers bound by a previous contract. Bottom line.

OBEY do as you're TOLD not as you think. Sign new contract or delete the app. WEAK. How about use your brain and contact https://drivershaverights.com.cutestat.com/ talk to an attorney. Understand that you CANNOT VOID A CONTRACT AND FORCE TO SIGN A NEW ONE WITHOUT NOTICE. THANKS... ps use your head.


----------



## Tired of this (Apr 10, 2015)

I had a suspicion that Uber was Surge stealing on stacked pings, but I am not certain. Now with this new agreement, they legally can do this. 

I would sometimes accept a ride at 1.8, get a stacked ping at 1.2. Now while waiting for that passenger, I check the passenger app and realize there the map is showing a 3.2 surge from the same area as my stacked ping. It is possible that the surge has gone up since my acceptance, but it happens too often that I suspect Uber is pocketing even more by sending stacked pings out to the lowest bidder while charging pax the higher rate. Has anyone else suspected this was going on?


----------



## Georgie Jung (Mar 9, 2017)

mattadams said:


> Umm they pay me when I drive for them?
> But just to be clear, you are the one who recommended regulation, similar to the taxi industry... apparently unaware of what that means.


Taxis get paid more. Union. Sure. Jimmy Hoffa. Thanks


----------



## Retired Senior (Sep 12, 2016)

All I got from UBER yesterday was a note on the bottom of the home page that I will now be getting food delivery pings. I had thought that this bulls##t was put to rest months ago. I am old with physical problems that do not permit me to do food deliveries. I guess I have to fight this war all over again!


----------



## Georgie Jung (Mar 9, 2017)

They sent me to deliver McDonalds today. Hahahaha


----------



## Smashup (Sep 28, 2015)

Jo3030 said:


> Uber is trying to formalize what wasn't clearly defined before - from a legal standpoint.
> They're just trying to not get sued, that's all.
> But honestly, it could be surging 8x, they could tell you it's not and pocket ALL of the difference.
> This is where I have a problem w/ how things are and giving them that much leeway.


This new agreement kills the argument that surge brings out drivers.

And if surge doesn't bring out drivers, why should cities and regulators allow Uber to charge surge?

Uber drivers should demand city and state regulators, representatives and mayors etc. do all they can to stop Uber from charging surge prices when no one, not consumers and not drivers benefit from it.


----------



## Bean (Sep 24, 2016)

I don't think this has been posted here yet but it's relevant to the topic:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-on-predicting-how-much-you-re-willing-to-pay

Particularly this bit:
_"Daniel Graf, Uber's head of product, said *the company applies machine-learning techniques to estimate how much groups of customers are willing to shell out for a ride. Uber calculates riders' propensity for paying a higher price for a particular route at a certain time of day. For instance, someone traveling from a wealthy neighborhood to another tony spot might be asked to pay more than another person heading to a poorer part of town, even if demand, traffic and distance are the same.*"_

So not only are they estimating the trip cost up front and inflating it. But they're personalizing the cost based on how much they think they can squeeze out of each individual pax.

I really cannot believe how low this company is. Uber is like a shady used car lot that scams and hard sells old ladies into buying lemons.


----------



## charmer37 (Nov 18, 2016)

Sad but uber will keep increasing there rate and decreasing drivers pay.



Beur said:


> This is simply
> 
> 1. Uber's way of trying to head off the law suit by the Wilshire Law Firm
> 
> ...


I stopped driving over 2 months ago
Ridesharing is not what it use to be.


----------



## Milito (Apr 26, 2016)

mattadams said:


> Personally I have no issue with this. I get that it is their right to make as much money as they can and I have the right to either accept the rates I'm offered, or not.
> In my real job, my time is often contracted out through my employer. The rate that the customer pays is often thousands of dollars more per week than I earn. I am perfectly ok with it, because I've agreed to tthe salary I receive, and I acknowledge that much of that money also goes to salaries of people who support me but aren't being paid directly, or to administrative costs, etc. I acknowledge that I in no way could earn the kind of money I'm earning without the company doing all the work for me that they are doing.
> It isn't that different from uber really. I could never make the kind of money on my own, with the technology investments, the marketing, the bookkeeping, etc. If they are able to charge the customer a little more and I still earn a decent rate, I don't have issue with it...


You are the reason why Uber still has business, suckers like you think uber is beneficial to you just because you make $9 per hour


----------



## mattadams (Apr 19, 2016)

Milito said:


> You are the reason why Uber still has business, suckers like you think uber is beneficial to you just because you make $9 per hour


Umm if I was making $9 per hour, I wouldn't be doing uber. If that's what people in your market are making, they need to quit immediately. I probably have SOME hours that I make $9 per hour, and other hours I make $40-50/hour, just depends on the rides I get, but it balances out to be enough that its worth my time to do, or I wouldn't do it. 
Is it enough to quit my full-time job with benefits? Not a chance in hell. Is it enough that it is worth doing in my spare time when I have some hours to kill and the need for some extra jingle in my pocket? Absolutely. Would I ever consider doing it full time? Only if I find myself unemployed and need something to help pay the bills while I look for work, otherwise, not a chance. 
Quite honestly, it's a very mindless job. You don't need any special skills or training aside from a decent car and the ability to drive and be reasonably polite to people. You follow pings on a map and then go where the map tells you to drop them off, it's not rocket science. And that's why I like it. My real job is stressful enough. I don't need stress in my second job.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Georgie Jung said:


> This is NOT the _contract_ I signed a year ago. You cannot void a binding agreement without cause to instate a new agreement for your gain Uber.
> 
> Keep in mind. If you sign a contact, it is binding. You are bound by the contract of that date and cannot be obligated to sign a new contract without cause. Another words I will be seeking legal advice.


True - but Uber can introduce a new contract - or addendum and require drivers to agree to the updated/new terms if they wish to continue the relationship. It's simple: If you don't accept the new terms, you no longer get access to the driver app. There is nothing in the original or updated agreements that guarantees our continued access to the driver app in perpetuity under the terms we agreed to... in fact, quite the opposite; the agreements we entered into specifically state that Uber can change the terms as they see fit whenever they want to. Our only recourse is to not accept the new terms - and then no longer be able to drive. (same with Lyft)

The only change Uber has ever made to the agreement that did not require drivers to agree (ie: allowed us to 'opt-out') was the change to the terms of the arbitration clause.



Georgie Jung said:


> Not my two choices. Remember, I still have a binding agreement under the first contract.
> I SIGNED AN AGREEMENT... Just because you have a NEW agreement does not void the FIRST agreement. Uber cannot terminate without cause and does not reserve rights to force a new agreement on the drivers bound by a previous contract. Bottom line.
> 
> OBEY do as you're TOLD not as you think. Sign new contract or delete the app. WEAK. How about use your brain and contact https://drivershaverights.com.cutestat.com/ talk to an attorney. Understand that you CANNOT VOID A CONTRACT AND FORCE TO SIGN A NEW ONE WITHOUT NOTICE. THANKS... ps use your head.


You're right - it doesn't void the original agreement - but you're ignoring the fact that your existing agreement allows Uber to deny you access to the driver app for any reason - at their sole discretion (which includes your choosing not to agree to updates to the agreement). Uber is under no obligation to provide you continued access to their driver app for any period of time. And lastly, this isn't a 'new agreement' - it is an update only to section 4 (FARES) of your current agreement, necessitated because Uber has changed how they quote fares to riders.


----------



## Gubber Singh (Nov 18, 2015)

Enough is enough. I refuse to sign this new agreement.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Gubber Singh said:


> Enough is enough. I refuse to sign this new agreement.


hmmm... so you were willing to live with Uber charging the rider more than the actual fare yesterday, but you won't be willing to live with that tomorrow - just because you have to acknowledge it via the agreement? What changed for you? (just curious)


----------



## Retired Senior (Sep 12, 2016)

I don't know.... I have been making about $400 - $500 a week after subtracting cost of fuel. I did get kicked off of food stamps and Medicaid, so now I have no health insurance. I still have a lot of repairs and maintenance to do to my condo, (after 10 years of neglect) but the end is in sight. My siblings are treating me as the elder brother again, instead of a Martian who simply looks like their brother. I have credit card companies offering me credit cards for the first time in a decade.

Even tho by saying this I realize that I am admitting that my life had become very small and pitiful compared to many of you others, Uber has been a benefit to me. I did as someone suggested and "googled" driving jobs in Connecticut. My osteo-arthritis (no cartilage left in right knee) makes it impossible to perform some jobs... (delivery of food where I need to walk quickly is out... I can't carry a food item with one hand, use my cane with the other and move fast... just does not work!) But some of the decent paying driving jobs don't require much mobility. I will be pursuing them, while still driving for UBER.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Retired Senior said:


> Even tho by saying this I realize that I am admitting that my life had become very small and pitiful compared to many of you others, ...


Don't be silly - all of our lives are small and pitiful in the great scheme of things - or at least equally meaningful.


> Uber has been a benefit to me.


Good for you - you're not alone. I just wish everyone could be as fortunate.


> I can't carry a food item with one hand, use my cane with the other and move fast... just does not work!


Have you tried the HurryCane? hehe ok - bad pun - just couldn't resist. Hope you can get the knee repaired or replaced.


----------



## Jacob THE DRIVER (Dec 4, 2016)

Being a driver isnt all that its cracked up to be huh lmao Iv been in this industry for 20 years it doesn't matter the driver will always get the crap end of the stick at least back in the day u could get lucky and find a decent owner who actually cared about his drivers and you would be ok now its just uber makes your ass sore from more than just sitting on it for hours at a time


----------



## Jo3030 (Jan 2, 2016)

How many people quit after this?
Since it's now clear and in black and white.


----------



## SafeT (Nov 23, 2015)

FUber is just saying they will charge the customer as much as possible and pay the driver as little as possible, and they will pocket the difference of the two fares. Thats why they sre called FUBER.


----------



## REX HAVOC (Jul 4, 2016)

UberTaxPro said:


> Making Earnings Easier to Understand
> Hi xxxxx,
> 
> *Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.
> ...


I asked for an increase in the mileage rate. I guess they didn't get that request.


----------



## Adieu (Feb 21, 2016)

UberSurge is now FOR UBER

Yaaaay


----------



## Jo3030 (Jan 2, 2016)

REX HAVOC said:


> I asked for an increase in the mileage rate. I guess they didn't get that request.


They got it, they are just sending the payment to their own accounts.


----------



## Charlie Schwartz (Aug 17, 2016)

Smashup said:


> This new agreement kills the argument that surge brings out drivers.
> 
> And if surge doesn't bring out drivers, why should cities and regulators allow Uber to charge surge?





Bean said:


> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-on-predicting-how-much-you-re-willing-to-pay
> 
> Particularly this bit:
> _"Daniel Graf, Uber's head of product, said *the company applies machine-learning techniques to estimate how much groups of customers are willing to shell out for a ride. Uber calculates riders' propensity for paying a higher price for a particular route at a certain time of day. For instance, someone traveling from a wealthy neighborhood to another tony spot might be asked to pay more than another person heading to a poorer part of town, even if demand, traffic and distance are the same.*"_
> ...


Guess what, folks... surge was a scam. It wasnt about supply and demand, it was about machine learning. They made up random surges at random times to "see how much people are willing to pay to ride a particular route at a certain time of day". Now that they've got their data, they can go ahead and replace surge with Boost (I still suspect that there will still be surges. Sometimes there indeed is an unpredicted supply-demand issue).

Oh, and that bit about rich people getting charged more is all spin. We all know that the highest discrepancies are the long trips, essentially someome taking a long 30 mile trip (where as we know Uber is cheaper by about 80% from traditional modes of transportation) will certainly be willing to pay more, and why should the driver get a cut?

Presumably it also applies to rush hour and maybe airport trips. I doubt it affects the price of trips to "tony neighborhoods" at all.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

All Lyft has to do is to NOT do this and they will start to eat away at Uber. 

However, if they start doing this then it only means they are basically colluding together and unfortunately since Trump is president he will see to it that there is no antitrust investigation whatsoever into their collusion.


----------



## Tnasty (Mar 23, 2016)

Lyft is doing the same thing just ask your pax.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Jo3030 said:


> They are basically saying they are able to rip off the passengers and only pay you for time & distance now, officially.
> By agreeing to the agreement, you can't sue them.


Except they changed the agreement AFTER the fact


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

It seems to me there is a mistake in the wording of 4.4 in this update. 
Anyone else see a glaring 'error' or am I just not understanding the Ubereeze:

*4.4 Our Service Fee*. In consideration of your use of the Uber Services, you will pay us a service fee
("*Service Fee*") that is on a per-Ride basis. For each Ride, the Service Fee equals the Rider Payment
minus: (a) the Fare; (b) Tolls; (c) any other fees retained by us (_e.g._, booking fee); and (d) applicable
taxes and surcharges. *In the event of a Ride where the Fare is greater than the Rider Payment*
(excluding fees retained by us, and taxes and surcharges), *no Service Fee will be charged for that
Ride*. In such case, any excess amounts that you receive will be shown as an adjustment to your
Service Fee(s) (or if necessary, as an adjustment to another payment owed to you).​
'FARE' is what our earnings are based on: base/time/mileage/surge
'RIDER PAYMENT' is the 'upfront fare' quoted to a rider - and what the rider actually pays.

So, according to the above, if the actual earnings ('fare') is $30, but the quoted fare ('rider payment') is $25, 
not only will the driver receive the full earnings ($30), 
Uber will also NOT charge the driver the commission (Uber Service Fee') for that entire ride!?


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

mattadams said:


> Personally I have no issue with this. I get that it is their right to make as much money as they can and I have the right to either accept the rates I'm offered, or not.
> In my real job, my time is often contracted out through my employer. The rate that the customer pays is often thousands of dollars more per week than I earn. I am perfectly ok with it, because I've agreed to tthe salary I receive, and I acknowledge that much of that money also goes to salaries of people who support me but aren't being paid directly, or to administrative costs, etc. I acknowledge that I in no way could earn the kind of money I'm earning without the company doing all the work for me that they are doing.
> It isn't that different from uber really. I could never make the kind of money on my own, with the technology investments, the marketing, the bookkeeping, etc. If they are able to charge the customer a little more and I still earn a decent rate, I don't have issue with it...


We are not paid a salary, nor do we earn a decent rate


----------



## Atom guy (Jul 27, 2016)

mattadams said:


> Personally I have no issue with this. I get that it is their right to make as much money as they can and I have the right to either accept the rates I'm offered, or not.
> In my real job, my time is often contracted out through my employer. The rate that the customer pays is often thousands of dollars more per week than I earn. I am perfectly ok with it, because I've agreed to tthe salary I receive, and I acknowledge that much of that money also goes to salaries of people who support me but aren't being paid directly, or to administrative costs, etc. I acknowledge that I in no way could earn the kind of money I'm earning without the company doing all the work for me that they are doing.
> It isn't that different from uber really. I could never make the kind of money on my own, with the technology investments, the marketing, the bookkeeping, etc. If they are able to charge the customer a little more and I still earn a decent rate, I don't have issue with it...


The point is (or was) that we are independent contractors, and we pay Uber a % of OUR fares to use Uber's platform to connect us with passengers. So our earnings were in direct relation to what the passengers paid. Now, with "upfront pricing," our earnings are not directly tied to the fare the passenger is charged. So WE are no longer charging the passenger a fare and sending Uber their cut, UBER is charging the passenger a fare and sending us OUR cut. A major leap towards us just being employees.


----------



## Buckiemohawk (Jun 23, 2015)

Atom guy said:


> The point is (or was) that we are independent contractors, and we pay Uber a % of OUR fares to use Uber's platform to connect us with passengers. So our earnings were in direct relation to what the passengers paid. Now, with "upfront pricing," our earnings are not directly tied to the fare the passenger is charged. So WE are no longer charging the passenger a fare and sending Uber their cut, UBER is charging the passenger a fare and sending us OUR cut. A major leap towards us just being employees.


Essentially, this makes you employees. Take it to a lawyer


----------



## excel2345 (Dec 14, 2015)

UberTaxPro said:


> Making Earnings Easier to Understand
> Hi xxxxx,
> 
> *Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.
> ...


What all this actually seems to mean is there will NEVER be a rate increase. Uber will just increase their end, not the base rates.
What you earn now is what you will earn in 3 years unless Uber decides that you need more to pay for your car(that ain't happenin)


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> True - but Uber can introduce a new contract - or addendum and require drivers to agree to the updated/new terms if they wish to continue the relationship. It's simple: If you don't accept the new terms, you no longer get access to the driver app. There is nothing in the original or updated agreements that guarantees our continued access to the driver app in perpetuity under the terms we agreed to... in fact, quite the opposite; the agreements we entered into specifically state that Uber can change the terms as they see fit whenever they want to. Our only recourse is to not accept the new terms - and then no longer be able to drive. (same with Lyft)
> 
> The only change Uber has ever made to the agreement that did not require drivers to agree (ie: allowed us to 'opt-out') was the change to the terms of the arbitration clause.
> 
> You're right - it doesn't void the original agreement - but you're ignoring the fact that your existing agreement allows Uber to deny you access to the driver app for any reason - at their sole discretion (which includes your choosing not to agree to updates to the agreement). Uber is under no obligation to provide you continued access to their driver app for any period of time. And lastly, this isn't a 'new agreement' - it is an update only to section 4 (FARES) of your current agreement, necessitated because Uber has changed how they quote fares to riders.


The last sentence in the first paragraph says:* "Our only recourse is to not accept the new terms - and then no longer be able to drive. (same with Lyft)." *

There is also another alternative: FILE FOR PARITAL OR FULL UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. The nature of the relationship between Uber and the Driver has materially changed with the new TOS. In ALL THE PREVIOUS CONTRACTS (TOS) the Driver compensation was based on COMMISSION and in the New Contract it is based on the whim of Uber concerning milage, time, surge factor, incentives. Drivers are no longer Independent Contractors so they can go collect unemployment. The Europeans recognize Uber smoke and mirrors.

*Brussels in push on social protection for gig economy workers*

*http://www.afr.com/news/politics/wo...ction-for-gig-economy-workers-20170426-gvswca

Uber has corrupted at the Governmental Executive (Governors) and Legislative (Senators and Committees) levels, but not yet the Judicial. Europe is in the process of ruling that Uber is a taxi company not a tech company. Recognizing the obvious.

New Uber blow as European legal adviser says service should be licensed like taxis 

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/11/uber-cabs-taxis-us-app-ecj

*

Time to go to the lawyers.

*Uber "Terms and Conditions" Depriving Users of Constitutional Rights*

*https://blog.caesarnapoli.com/2016/...ns-depriving-users-constitutional-rights.html*


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

Georgie Jung said:


> This is NOT the _contract_ I signed a year ago. You cannot void a binding agreement without cause to instate a new agreement for your gain Uber.
> 
> Keep in mind. If you sign a contact, it is binding. You are bound by the contract of that date and cannot be obligated to sign a new contract without cause. Another words I will be seeking legal advice.





Georgie Jung said:


> Not my two choices. Remember, I still have a binding agreement under the first contract.
> I SIGNED AN AGREEMENT... Just because you have a NEW agreement does not void the FIRST agreement. Uber cannot terminate without cause and does not reserve rights to force a new agreement on the drivers bound by a previous contract. Bottom line.
> 
> OBEY do as you're TOLD not as you think. Sign new contract or delete the app. WEAK. How about use your brain and contact https://drivershaverights.com.cutestat.com/ talk to an attorney. Understand that you CANNOT VOID A CONTRACT AND FORCE TO SIGN A NEW ONE WITHOUT NOTICE. THANKS... ps use your head.


 your contract is a day to day contract. Not year to year.


----------



## RideStreets (Jun 2, 2016)

A few years ago, Uber tried this with an arbitration agreement to avoid drivers joining a class action lawsuits. However, there was a ruling stating that they had to allow drivers to opt out of the the new arbitration agreement. The driver could opt out by sending an email to [email protected].

In the email, the driver had to send their name, and email and phone number on their driver account as well as a statement saying that they were opting out of the agreement.

I'm sending the following notification to uber. I don't know if it'll work but I figure it's worth a try. I'm no lawyer but I'm posting it just in case anyone else wants to try as well. Make sure to make the necessary changes to percentages you receive and uber takes for trips. I drive with Lyft also so if they try to kick me off the uber platform I can still drive with Lyft. Just keep that in mind if you decided to use this.

My name is (Your Name) and I live in (where you live). On this day, May 21st, 2017, 
I am formally notifying Uber of my intent to opt-out of the amendment to the terms and conditions set to go into effect on Monday, May 22nd, 2017. Any excess rider payments charged to the rider above the booking fee and fare (calculated by time and distance or minimum fare) shall be considered a surge fee and 80% of that additional charge paid by the rider shall be paid to the driver, (Your Name). Uber shall continue to collect it's fee off 20% in accordance with our current agreement. Failure to abide by this notification may result in my participation in class action or individual litigation against Uber for breach of contract and/or fraud.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

RideStreets said:


> My name is (Your Name) and I live in (where you live). On this day, May 21st, 2017,
> I am formally notifying Uber of my intent to opt-out of the amendment to the terms and conditions set to go into effect on Monday, May 22nd, 2017. *Any excess rider payments charged to the rider above the booking fee and fare (calculated by time and distance or minimum fare) shall be considered a surge fee and 80% of that additional charge paid by the rider shall be paid to the driver, (Your Name). Uber shall continue to collect it's fee off 20% in accordance with our current agreement. Failure to abide by this notification may result in my participation in class action or individual litigation against Uber for breach of contract and/or fraud.*


The last part of you email is not going to fly, you're trying to renegotiate the terms of you pay.

Stick with opting out of arbitration only. Uber is essentially screwing themselves with this move. Nothing to stop a new employee/independent contractor lawsuit, among others.


----------



## westsidebum (Feb 7, 2015)

Welcome to being an uber serf. 

Seriously, this is not how a so called technology intermediary is supposed to operate.


----------



## Smashup (Sep 28, 2015)

uberdriverfornow said:


> All Lyft has to do is to NOT do this and they will start to eat away at Uber.
> 
> However, if they start doing this then it only means they are basically colluding together and unfortunately since Trump is president he will see to it that there is no antitrust investigation whatsoever into their collusion.


I've never witnessed Lyft do anything other than copy Uber, even when changing direction would be a smart way to undercut Uber.

Lyft is Uber's *****.


----------



## REX HAVOC (Jul 4, 2016)

Buckiemohawk said:


> Essentially, this makes you employees. Take it to a lawyer


Except I can take a break or play hooky from work whenever I want.


----------



## Rick N. (Mar 2, 2016)

DO NOT SIGN, IF WE SIGN JUNO LYFT AND GETT WILL FOLLOW WE MUST FOR ONCE STICK TOGETHER ON THIS!!!


----------



## Dback2004 (Nov 7, 2015)

Very interesting. I'm not surprised they're trying to head off the breach of contract lawsuits over upfront pricing, but they've now severely altered the independent contractor relationship by reselling services instead of acting as a commission-based agent. I've been wondering about trying to get out of the binding arbitration clause, I wonder if I accept this addendum if that gives me right to opt-out now as the terms have changed... I'm going to give it a try anyway (even though my interest in the after-fact opt-out was to sue over upfront pricing )


----------



## Haines (Jan 27, 2017)

Mazda3 said:


> I'm driving the long way wherever I go with the pax.


Read the bit where it says they will refund the pax for bad routes.



Rick N. said:


> DO NOT SIGN, IF WE SIGN JUNO LYFT AND GETT WILL FOLLOW WE MUST FOR ONCE STICK TOGETHER ON THIS!!!


No sign - No drive. Coercion at its best.


----------



## Wardell Curry (Jul 9, 2016)

They wouldnt let me online until I officially agreed to their new exorbitant upfront pricing scheme.


----------



## mattadams (Apr 19, 2016)

It's not a new scheme... they've been doing it for months... and if you'r that opposed, just don't agree to it, and don't uber anymore.
I once had a lawyer friend, and we were talking about all the license agreements and other legal forms you have to accept to continue. I asked if he read them all. He said why, you can't change the terms if you don't agree... you either have to agree or don't get the service... so, make the call...


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

Tnasty said:


> Lyft is doing the same thing just ask your pax.


In our market, Lyft's fare estimator doesn't work. Had a spinning circle till recently. Now it just says na. Pax have no clue if they are paying prime time or not.

I still want to get paid what I'm owed from the rides I took under the previous TOS. I have the luxury of a real job so I can wait this out, but it's unfortunate for the thousands of drivers who just have to click I agree and keep going.

We can't solve this. THIS NEEDS TO BE IN MEDIA EVERYWHERE! Get the press out of Trump's ass and TELL THE PASSENGERS HOW BAD DRIVERS ARE GETTING SCREWED!

Oh, and read my signature. It's been there for over a year now.


----------



## Wardell Curry (Jul 9, 2016)

I know they have been doing it for months. Let me rephrase. Their newer upfront pricing scheme where they take even more from the pax and pay the driver the same.


----------



## renod babek (Feb 10, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> A.K.A.= sugar coating theft and deciet.


Ib4 e except after c.&add a P.
Wtf! The drivers will be pulling their hair out trying to figure it all out.


----------



## Haines (Jan 27, 2017)

mattadams said:


> It's not a new scheme... they've been doing it for months... and if you'r that opposed, just don't agree to it, and don't uber anymore.
> I once had a lawyer friend, and we were talking about all the license agreements and other legal forms you have to accept to continue. I asked if he read them all. He said why, you can't change the terms if you don't agree... you either have to agree or don't get the service... so, make the call...


The only difference I see on the rates Uber is quoting me is 25% less which is what they charge us in Nashville. They stated that their fee would no longer be visible. Am I missing something?


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

Haines said:


> Am I missing something?


Yes. Uber can charge the passenger whatever they want, but you will only get paid 75% of the actual miles and minutes driven times any surge multiplier.


----------



## Filinator13 (Apr 7, 2017)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> It seems to me there is a mistake in the wording of 4.4 in this update.
> Anyone else see a glaring 'error' or am I just not understanding the Ubereeze:
> 
> *4.4 Our Service Fee*. In consideration of your use of the Uber Services, you will pay us a service fee
> ...


I also had trouble understanding this.


----------



## Wardell Curry (Jul 9, 2016)

They no longer show the total fare on trips,just the gross payout. So now you cant compare with what the pax paid. Uber thinks they are slick.


----------



## Dback2004 (Nov 7, 2015)

I got the notice this morning. Seems to be the exact same addendum as previously posted regardless of market. The legal language is quite interesting.

_"you will pay us a service fee ("Service Fee") that is on a per-Ride basis. For each Ride, the Service Fee equals the Rider Payment minus: (a) the Fare; (b) Tolls; (c) any other fees retained by us (e.g., booking fee); and (d) applicable taxes and surcharges"_​
They've tried to define the Service Fee as whatever they can sell our service for minus a time/mileage "fare" for us. It's essentially a variable fee based on whatever they can charge in upfront pricing.

They're also modifying the definition of fare...

_where "Fare" is a base fare amount plus actual distance and/or time amounts (or as required by applicable law), provided that distance and/or time amounts *may be predetermined in certain situations, such as for flat rate* and minimum fare trips, or estimated where GPS information for that trip is unavailable
_​What gets me here is the part about flat-rate fares (https://help.uber.com/h/8eb0b499-3277-4907-b37a-03d7cb31580f). So with that little bit of wording they can now upfront price what they're going to pay us instead of actual time & mileage.

What a crock of S! I really don't see how this will hold up in court that they're still claiming to be a payment processor/agent and technology company and NOT reselling transportation services!


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

JimS said:


> Yes. Uber can charge the passenger whatever they want, but you will only get paid 75% of the actual miles and minutes driven times any surge multiplier.


Yes, that's what it says - they are separating FARES and EARNINGS.
But no, that's not what I'm talking about.
The sentence that reads 
"In the event of a Ride where the Fare is greater than the Rider Payment (excluding fees retained by us, and taxes and surcharges), *no Service Fee will be charged for that Ride*"​says "NO SERVICE FEE WILL BE CHARGED FOR THAT RIDE"... _that's the ENTIRE RIDE_.


----------



## Haines (Jan 27, 2017)

JimS said:


> Yes. Uber can charge the passenger whatever they want, but you will only get paid 75% of the actual miles and minutes driven times any surge multiplier.


They've been doing that for some time. I saw once that I got $2 more than the quoted price. Have you noticed any great difference on today's rides? I'm just getting ready to get out tonight.


----------



## Retired Senior (Sep 12, 2016)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> *Driver Partner Agreement
> 
> RASIER, LLC
> ADDENDUM*
> ...


----------



## Haines (Jan 27, 2017)

You're funny. Liked the part about waking up and seeing the message. Same happened to me. Wouldn't worry about it but see how you could feel that way. Some pretty unethical things happen. It would be different if we weren't just another computer chip to them.


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

*It's an estimated raise of $7.43 million a month in New York City alone that Uber just gave itself *at people's expense. And they are selling it as "Making Earnings Easier to Understand" to drivers. And many drivers buy into it...

http://fortune.com/2017/05/20/uber-new-pricing-angry-drivers/


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

MSUGrad9902 said:


> It was a serious stretch of logic to make the argument that before you were entitled to receive a flat % of what they charged the pax. The new addendum spells it out clearly though - you are paid time and distance at your city rates plus surge or promos, if any.


Uber the " TECHNOLOGY " service is supposed to take 25% of DRIVER EARNINGS.
PERIOD.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

tohunt4me said:


> Uber the " TECHNOLOGY " service is supposed to take 25% of DRIVER EARNINGS.
> PERIOD.


Says who? Where is it written that Uber the technology company can't take whatever they can get from riders, too?


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Says who? Where is it written that Uber the technology company can't take whatever they can get from riders, too?


Steal as much as you can run off with.

The UBER WAY !

NO NEED TO TIP !


----------



## JD352 (Apr 17, 2017)

They already do all of the above. By the means of an "upfront fare adjustment". They give an estimate, then if your ride falls short of the estimate, they up-charge the pax. Uber pockets the up-charge and drivers don't see a dime of it. Being more transparent with it, is actually scarier.


----------



## Roadster4 (Oct 10, 2016)

JD352 said:


> They already do all of the above. By the means of an "upfront fare adjustment". They give an estimate, then if your ride falls short of the estimate, they up-charge the pax. Uber pockets the up-charge and drivers don't see a dime of it. Being more transparent with it, is actually scarier.


Exactly and that's precisely why they were sued. I don't know about everybody else but I don't consider it a legal agreement when Uber pushes a document on people's smart phones and tell them to agree to it or else they won't be able to Sign on.


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

Dback2004 said:


> I got the notice this morning. Seems to be the exact same addendum as previously posted regardless of market. The legal language is quite interesting.
> 
> _"you will pay us a service fee ("Service Fee") that is on a per-Ride basis. For each Ride, the Service Fee equals the Rider Payment minus: (a) the Fare; (b) Tolls; (c) any other fees retained by us (e.g., booking fee); and (d) applicable taxes and surcharges"_​
> They've tried to define the Service Fee as whatever they can sell our service for minus a time/mileage "fare" for us. It's essentially a variable fee based on whatever they can charge in upfront pricing.
> ...


It's not going to be upheld in court. Europe (to be finalized end of this year) and Brazil have determined that Uber Drivers are employees. Uber is controlling the Price, the Terms of Service contract and Behavior of Drivers doing the service.

The determination of "Employee" vs "Independent Contractor" is determined by three basic factors according to the IRS: Behavior, Finance, Type of Relationship. Uber is trying to deny that they are trying to control all three. Uber can fool Some of the Politicians but not All of the Courts. Here is the IRS rules. See third section down in red "Common Law Rules."

*Independent Contractor (Self-Employed) or Employee?*

*https://www.irs.gov/businesses/smal...ependent-contractor-self-employed-or-employee*


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Ca$h4 said:


> It's not going to be upheld in court. Europe (to be finalized end of this year) and Brazil have determined that Uber Drivers are employees.
> 
> The determination of "Employee" vs "Independent Contractor" is determined by three basic factors according to the IRS: Behavior, Finance, Type of Relationship. Uber is trying to deny that they are trying to control all three. Uber can fool Some of the Politicians but not All of the Courts. Here is the IRS rules. See third section down in red "Common Law Rules."
> 
> ...


Lots of threads on here about this topic. I tend to agree that eventually Uber would lose the argument - but long before that happens the chances are that Congress will add a new category of worker: 'Independent Employee' or 'Contracted Employee' or some type of hybrid in-between IC and Employee ... OR, Uber will be using self-driving cars in all major markets.

But back to the IRS - it is not so easy as you make it sound. First, each of those 'three basic factors' have a dozen or more 'tests' and examples. Second, the IRS doesn't write 'law', only regulations and guidelines to support the administration of law. Only a court of law can make a legal ruling on the worker status issue. The IRS can only write an 'opinion' and then defend that opinion when challenged in court. (And this is a case that would no doubt take years to make its way up tho the Supreme Court).

Just for kicks, if you want to, write out the description of an Uber Driver's work and submit it on IRS form SS-8 to request an opinion of the driver's status. In six months you'll get a letter back from IRS with an opinion. Send the same SS-8 in again and six months later you'll get another opinion letter from IRS and there's a 50/50 chance it will hold the opposite opinion. (BTDT!)

An IRS opinion is just that. Only a court can make a ruling.


----------



## JasonB (Jan 12, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> Steal as much as you can run off with.
> 
> The UBER WAY !
> 
> NO NEED TO TIP !


Yup.


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Lots of threads on here about this topic. I tend to agree that eventually Uber would lose the argument - but long before that happens the chances are that Congress will add a new category of worker: 'Independent Employee' or 'Contracted Employee' or some type of hybrid in-between IC and Employee ... OR, Uber will be using self-driving cars in all major markets.
> 
> But back to the IRS - it is not so easy as you make it sound. First, each of those 'three basic factors' have a dozen or more 'tests' and examples. Second, the IRS doesn't write 'law', only regulations and guidelines to support the administration of law. Only a court of law can make a legal ruling on the worker status issue. The IRS can only write an 'opinion' and then defend that opinion when challenged in court. (And this is a case that would no doubt take years to make its way up tho the Supreme Court).
> 
> ...


Sure there is alot to nuance about but Uber is controlling - behavior, price, TOS contract.

Instead of asking the IRS for an opinion, it would be more fun going to apply for Partial or Full Unemployment Benefits. Summer slowdown just around the corner for the Drivers. I believe in London Uber Drivers are starting to get benefits.


----------



## JasonB (Jan 12, 2016)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> OR, Uber will be using self-driving cars in all major markets.


Not ALL markets. California already kicked Fuber's self-driving cars to the curb and told them
to get the **** out.

Even if they are allowed back in at some point, anyone who thinks self-driving cars are just
going to be a boon for Uber's business model without any major adjustments to said model,
is totally and completely delusional.

Do you really think politicians in highly democratic cities like LA and San Francisco are
just going to let fleets of self-driving cars run rampant in the streets, stealing jobs and causing
congestion, WITHOUT grabbing a piece of the pie for themselves?

Let's start by calling it "The very expensive self-driving cab tax". Or, the tax that could render
Travis's dream of a fleet of self-driving vehicles completely useless with one swipe of a pen.

Taxes and a mass of regulations that haven't even been dreamed up yet will stop Fuber
and it's self driving car fantasies dead in it's tracks for many years to come.

At least in all of Fuber's most profitable markets, which also tend to be democratic and
tax/regulation heavy.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

JasonB said:


> Do you really think politicians in highly democratic cities like LA and San Francisco are
> just going to let fleets of self-driving cars run rampant in the streets, stealing jobs and causing
> congestion, WITHOUT grabbing a piece of the pie for themselves?


Uber couldn't care less about local regulations. They have their sights set on bigger targets with authority over local legislators. Uber (and Lyft) lawyer-lobbyists are writing STATE laws to wrest local control from city councils. Something like 14 states have already enacted TNC written (obviously TNC favorable) state laws that make local legislation moot - including things like defining TNC drivers as ICs, guaranteeing access to public airports, setting the liability requirements for insurance, making it legal to use a personal vehicle to drive-for-hire without a livery registration or commercial insurance, prohibiting street-hails of TNC drivers, prohibiting 'cash' rides by drivers that don't go through a TNC app, etc.


----------



## DexNex (Apr 18, 2015)

mattadams said:


> I got the same email and was a little confused, I probably read it a few times. To me though it doesn't seem like anything is changing, at least as far as what we are paid. The only confusion for me seems to be the differences between the flat rate and what we're paid. When most of us signed up, passengers were given "estimates" of their ride, but didn't really know what it'd cost until the ride was over as it wouldn't be calculated until we finished the trip... Then, whatever the final fare was, we got 75%, uber got 25% (or 80/20 if you were in early enough).
> Now, most are given upfront pricing, which is based on estimates of time and routes taken, but the actual time and distance might be greater or lesser, but we still get paid based on the routes we take... assuming we're not going obviously out of our way, that hasn't really changed that I'm aware of. For example, if a person is going from the airport to a hotel downtown, they might get quoted $30 based on the expected mileage, tolls, and distance the system assumes it will take. They still get charged $30 even if you end up sitting in bumper to bumper traffic and the ride takes 10 minutes longer than expected, or you decide to take the toll road instead for a quicker route, even though that wasn't in the original estimate. I think their estimations for the most part are probably pretty close, but I'm sure there are plenty of instances where that ends up not being the case. It might be that the final ride would've actually cost them $35 or $25... but we still get paid based on the $25 or $35 that the ride would've actually cost, even though the rider still only pays the $30.


Not exactly. In many cases, Uber will chose the longest route for estimating the pax's fare. If you go the regular route, which is often the route the pax would expect you to go, Uber gets to keep the extra fare. It's more a scam on the pax then it is on us, watch your suggested routes in the Uber app and you will see the crazy routing they use to determine the padded fare.



Veju said:


> Now pax are going to get smart and request multiple destinations with up front pricing. Telling them to change destinations is going to be met with reluctance and rider dissatisfaction which will take a toll on driver tips(lol) and ratings.


I drive XL. With different rates being charged to different pax, wait till I get a crowd of 6 people that all show a different rate for the same trip.



Anthony McPeake said:


> Come Monday, I wont be accepting this. I suggest you all do the same. Between the short notice, the ambiguity and typical Uber BS, this smells like BS. Futhermore I suspect that it will be retracted and discussed publically. And what does this mean for surge. If fairs are not connected to driver payment, then they could surge and not pay us any more. I know some of you depend on Uber for lively hood. Go to Lyft. The best thing WE can all do is to not log in and accept this come Monday. I was really counting on making some extra money the next few months, but I am not going to give my rights away. I will be finally getting signed up with Lyft. Uber has proven time and time again that they are not here to support their partners. I will be talking to my attorney (Yes I have one and if you would like to learn how you can get access to one for next to nothing PM me).
> 
> Don't give up your rights, this is an important moment in our relationship with Uber to send a message and exercise what little power we have!


Lyft uses the same model in many markets. They are doing the same thing.



uberdriverfornow said:


> All Lyft has to do is to NOT do this and they will start to eat away at Uber.
> 
> However, if they start doing this then it only means they are basically colluding together and unfortunately since Trump is president he will see to it that there is no antitrust investigation whatsoever into their collusion.


Lyft already does it.



Atom guy said:


> The point is (or was) that we are independent contractors, and we pay Uber a % of OUR fares to use Uber's platform to connect us with passengers. So our earnings were in direct relation to what the passengers paid. Now, with "upfront pricing," our earnings are not directly tied to the fare the passenger is charged. So WE are no longer charging the passenger a fare and sending Uber their cut, UBER is charging the passenger a fare and sending us OUR cut. A major leap towards us just being employees.


Also with taxes. We are no longer paying them a commission on the fare.


----------



## uber strike (Jan 10, 2016)

UberTaxPro said:


> Making Earnings Easier to Understand
> Hi xxxxx,
> 
> *Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.
> ...


Sf drivers have nothing to complain about though. With higher rates and a base fare they make good money compared to La drivers. This same trip would be about $9.00 in Los Angeles. We have a Zero base, And low rates.
Even UberMan is talking about this. Check out the video on You Tube #DELETEUBER


----------



## NITWITone (Jul 18, 2016)

Chargersrt10 said:


> I can bet there is a change that Uber Is Not telling us about...................


Look at your base fare rate for each trip (it will be less than the base fare of 1.15 or what part of the country when you first signed on)


----------



## NorCalPhil (Aug 19, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> We MUST HAVE REPRESENTATION.
> We need a UNION !


Please, no.

Grew up in a union family. Worked union jobs. Paid union dues. Never again.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

The wording now makes it clear that uber can charge whatever they want to the pax but still pay the driver for time and distance driven.

That gets them off the hook from drivers screaming at them, but what if pax start getting upset?

What if pax start asking how much the bill is on the driver side and then when they see it's less they cry bloody murder?


----------



## marcoracecar (May 23, 2017)

I might randomly start asking my passengers what they're quoted if they're up for conversation. I'll then let them know how much I'm being paid and how much they should've paid, all in the interest of transparency. It would be fun to see a class action lawsuit between the riders and Uber if this produces enough noise.


----------



## Retired Senior (Sep 12, 2016)

marcoracecar said:


> I might randomly start asking my passengers what they're quoted if they're up for conversation. I'll then let them know how much I'm being paid and how much they should've paid, all in the interest of transparency. It would be fun to see a class action lawsuit between the riders and Uber if this produces enough noise.


Hell, I started doing this today.... this morning a couple new to UBER asked me how the rates were calculated... I told them about the contract revision that I was forced to agree to yesterday, and I also told them that it seems that while UBER claims it will continue to pay me the basic rate per miles, it now claims the right to charge the passengers whatever UBER believes that it can get away with. I did say that I was not entirely sure of the legal and contractual stuff, but it did seem that people in Fairfield County might well be paying a higher price for the same amount of distance than people in New Haven County or the Greater Waterbury area.


----------



## Tony G (Apr 20, 2017)

UberTaxPro said:


> Making Earnings Easier to Understand
> Hi xxxxx,
> 
> *Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.
> ...


please read

please read this attached Bloomberg article , *uber ows 45 millions to drivers in ny city*


----------



## Jdemonto (Aug 10, 2015)

Beur said:


> I educate riders all the time to make their destination somewhere close to their pickup and change it once the driver arrives and starts the trip.
> 
> This negates the higher upfront fare ensuring the pax is paid for actual time and distance based on the route the driver takes not the longer route Uber based the quote on. Pax love it and see it as the driver trying to save them money. 75-80% of the time this "helpful hint" to the pax results in a tip.


Yep I educated my riders and both times received a $10 tip


----------



## YourPrivateDriver (Jul 5, 2016)

Retired Senior said:


> Hell, I started doing this today.... this morning a couple new to UBER asked me how the rates were calculated... I told them about the contract revision that I was forced to agree to yesterday, and I also told them that it seems that while UBER claims it will continue to pay me the basic rate per miles, it now claims the right to charge the passengers whatever UBER believes that it can get away with. I did say that I was not entirely sure of the legal and contractual stuff, but it did seem that people in Fairfield County might well be paying a higher price for the same amount of distance than people in New Haven County or the Greater Waterbury area.


no one forced you to sign any contract. if drivers were smarter THERE WOULDNT BE ANY UBER DRIVERS


----------



## Retired Senior (Sep 12, 2016)

YourPrivateDriver said:


> no one forced you to sign any contract. if drivers were smarter THERE WOULDNT BE ANY UBER DRIVERS


If I had other viable options at the moment I might not be driving for Uber. I'd quit today if you would be willing to give me $100 a day free and clear! Yes, I know that is ridiculous, just as I think your statement that "no one forced you to sign any contract" is rather simplistic. Circumstances and limited options forced my hand. What's your excuse?


----------



## Trump Economics (Jul 29, 2015)

UberTaxPro said:


> Making Earnings Easier to Understand
> Hi xxxxx,
> 
> *Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.
> ...


My favorite part of their propaganda machine?

*"These updates will not change your earnings.* This is not a rate cut -- *this is a payday loan.* You'll earn the same amount, for the same trip, on Monday, as you do today -- _*less than minimum-wage."*_


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

UberTaxPro said:


> Making Earnings Easier to Understand
> Hi xxxxx,
> 
> *Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.
> ...


On mine, no mention as to how they calculate the rider's fee, so that I can determine what exact percentage I am earning from the total, and it certainly isn't 80%, as I was promised. Also, I noticed my rate no longer includes a base fair, and that is a tremendous loss, so working the streets for quantity of rides is not as feasible as working the airport for not as many rides, but longer was, so that the absent base fair minimizes this loss.



LA Cabbie said:


> View attachment 121485
> lol driver continuing to earn minimum fares while uber makes extra cash by ripping off the passengers.


Higher or lower my arse, they will always be higher which means your percentage is less and less. In other words, we are getting screwed.



NorCalPhil said:


> Please, no.
> 
> Grew up in a union family. Worked union jobs. Paid union dues. Never again.


Depends on the Union. I've had good experience with them.


----------



## UofMDriver (Dec 29, 2015)

Lyft is doing upfront pricing too now. Theses companies are cutting the drivers out of earnings and ripping off passengers.


----------



## Wil_Iam_Fuber'd (Aug 17, 2015)

tohunt4me said:


> Just in from Uber Corporate meeting . . .


They got the, "Monkey see no, hear no evil" part down. It's the, "Monkey do no evil" part they're struggling with. Lol.



Michael - Cleveland said:


> There is a reason congress passed the FLSA (and companies have been finding ways to avoid compliance ever since). That reason is to curtail the exploitation of labor in this country. Now we're getting into political territory - and I'm not going to climb on a soap-box other than to point to the increase in the concentration of wealth in the US over the last two decades among the wealthiest - while wages and the standard of living for the majority have been stagnant or decreased (in relative dollars).
> 
> What Uber is doing is exploitative.


Hey Zoos and can I get an Amen brother! This is TWO things you've posted we completely agree on in the last two months. WTH is going on here?

Now the further point here, is I believe this idea is at the very heart of the Uber investment story. Their real innovation is in changing the basic business model of employment practices. "Give me an I, give me a C, what's it spell? IC a train a coming". And "employees" are in the way.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Wil_Iam_Fuber'd said:


> They got the, "Monkey see no, hear no evil" part down. It's the, "Monkey do no evil" part they're struggling with. Lol.
> 
> Hey Zoos and can I get an Amen brother! This is TWO things you've posted we completely agree on in the last two months. WTH is going in here?
> 
> Now the further point here, is I believe this idea is at the very heart of the Uber investment story. Their real innovation is in changing the basic business model of employment practices. "Give me an I, give me a C, what's it spell? IC a train a coming". And "employees" are in the way.


The entire 'gig economy' is nothing more than a 'scheme' to shift expenses from a company to workers - and at the same time allowing a company to completely avoid any employer responsibilities to its workers: One giant 'scheme' to by-pass the FLSA - and our current do-nothing congress, does nothing to update the laws it passed to protect workers from exploitation.


----------



## Nightdriver27 (Aug 27, 2016)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Exactly. Under the terms of the current driver agreements, a driver could make the case that Uber owes the driver for not just a % of base/time/mileage, but also for the difference between that actual fare and the 'ESTIMATED/UP-FRONT FARE'. Uber needed to close that ambiguity in the driver agreement. Under the terms of the current agreement, all a rider and driver have to do is request that Uber reduce the fare to the 'actual' fare (agreed upon between rider and driver) and Uber would legally have to comply - the driver's earnings would stay the same, but Uber would be out the jacked up difference.
> 
> It will be interesting to see the wording of the new driver agreement and if it removes the whole bit about how riders are the direct customers of the driver and how Uber is 'only' a third party payer and how fares are only 'recommended fares to be used as defaults in the even that riders & drivers don't request a different fare basis'. If that is all eliminated, Uber contractually takes control of all rider fares and moves one step closer to losing the argument about how they are not an employer of the driver.





UberTaxPro said:


> Making Earnings Easier to Understand
> Hi xxxxx,
> 
> *Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.
> ...





Michael - Cleveland said:


> Exactly. Under the terms of the current driver agreements, a driver could make the case that Uber owes the driver for not just a % of base/time/mileage, but also for the difference between that actual fare and the 'ESTIMATED/UP-FRONT FARE'. Uber needed to close that ambiguity in the driver agreement. Under the terms of the current agreement, all a rider and driver have to do is request that Uber reduce the fare to the 'actual' fare (agreed upon between rider and driver) and Uber would legally have to comply - the driver's earnings would stay the same, but Uber would be out the jacked up difference.
> 
> It will be interesting to see the wording of the new driver agreement and if it removes the whole bit about how riders are the direct customers of the driver and how Uber is 'only' a third party payer and how fares are only 'recommended fares to be used as defaults in the even that riders & drivers don't request a different fare basis'. If that is all eliminated, Uber contractually takes control of all rider fares and moves one step closer to losing the argument about how they are not an employer of the driver.


----------



## Nightdriver27 (Aug 27, 2016)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Exactly. Under the terms of the current driver agreements, a driver could make the case that Uber owes the driver for not just a % of base/time/mileage, but also for the difference between that actual fare and the 'ESTIMATED/UP-FRONT FARE'. Uber needed to close that ambiguity in the driver agreement. Under the terms of the current agreement, all a rider and driver have to do is request that Uber reduce the fare to the 'actual' fare (agreed upon between rider and driver) and Uber would legally have to comply - the driver's earnings would stay the same, but Uber would be out the jacked up difference.
> 
> It will be interesting to see the wording of the new driver agreement and if it removes the whole bit about how riders are the direct customers of the driver and how Uber is 'only' a third party payer and how fares are only 'recommended fares to be used as defaults in the even that riders & drivers don't request a different fare basis'. If that is all eliminated, Uber contractually takes control of all rider fares and moves one step closer to losing the argument about how they are not an employer of the driver.





UberTaxPro said:


> Making Earnings Easier to Understand
> Hi xxxxx,
> 
> *Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.
> ...





Michael - Cleveland said:


> Exactly. Under the terms of the current driver agreements, a driver could make the case that Uber owes the driver for not just a % of base/time/mileage, but also for the difference between that actual fare and the 'ESTIMATED/UP-FRONT FARE'. Uber needed to close that ambiguity in the driver agreement. Under the terms of the current agreement, all a rider and driver have to do is request that Uber reduce the fare to the 'actual' fare (agreed upon between rider and driver) and Uber would legally have to comply - the driver's earnings would stay the same, but Uber would be out the jacked up difference.
> 
> It will be interesting to see the wording of the new driver agreement and if it removes the whole bit about how riders are the direct customers of the driver and how Uber is 'only' a third party payer and how fares are only 'recommended fares to be used as defaults in the even that riders & drivers don't request a different fare basis'. If that is all eliminated, Uber contractually takes control of all rider fares and moves one step closer to losing the argument about how they are not an employer of the driver.


----------



## Wil_Iam_Fuber'd (Aug 17, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> The entire 'gig economy' is nothing more than a 'scheme' to shift expenses from a company to workers - and at the same time allowing a company to completely avoid any employer responsibilities to its workers: One giant 'scheme' to by-pass the FLSA - and our current do-nothing congress, does nothing to update the laws it passed to protect workers from exploitation.


Ok, now that's two in a row. I'm really starting to worry. Did someone kidnap the real Michael - Cleveland and replace him with this funky dog Avatar?


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Wil_Iam_Fuber'd said:


> Ok, now that's two in a row. I'm really starting to worry. Did someone kidnap the real Michael - Cleveland and replace him with this funky dog Avatar?


Nothing has changed about my opinions or how I state them... maybe it's just that your drugs have worn off? <ducking>


----------



## Dback2004 (Nov 7, 2015)

UofMDriver said:


> Lyft is doing upfront pricing too now. .


I've only been on Lyft for a short time but I've come to realize they're basically Uber with a different logo, US-based support that isn't 100% robots, and with in-app tipping. Other than those things, they basically do the same thing Uber does a month later.


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

Dback2004 said:


> I've only been on Lyft for a short time but I've come to realize they're basically Uber with a different logo, US-based support that isn't 100% robots, and with in-app tipping. Other than those things, they basically do the same thing Uber does a month later.


Uber and Lyft are both part of the TNC misclassification scam. Uber leads because it has the most Fare Subsidizing Money to burn = $13 Billion from stupid Wall Street and Silicon Valley investors. In reality, TNC's are Taxi companies that use mobile phones as meters not TECH companies. All the TNC's are failing and losing money, big money, Uber lost $3 billion last year. * So now in money losing desperation,* the TNC's, with Uber in the lead, are trying to pull off a Hail Mary Pass with New Terms Of Service and a New Pricing System, started, last week, May 22, 2017. Uber (TNC's) are controlling the TOS contract and the Price of each ride and claiming that Drivers are Independent Contractors. The new contract (TOS) of May 22, 2017 has to be brought to court by some Drivers. Perhaps, Drivers will go to collect Partial Unemployment and say they are Employees not Independent Contractors. Uber's New Pricing System separates what the Passenger pays and what the Driver earns. Drivers earns by milage and time, but Passenger pays whatever Uber wants. This is a *Gipsy Taxi Model*. Passengers never know what they will have to pay until the last minute. Prices change every 5 to 10 minutes. (see the four attachments below). Prices vary over 30% from 7:30 to 8:30 am.* Gipsy Taxi.* Of course, Uber can be ruined by Drivers if the Drivers don't answer calls for 15 minutes during rush hours and only answer other Platform calls which are all busy during rush hours. Perhaps have a Driver Targeting Network Channel. Play off one platform against another. Make a deal to answer one Platforms call and not another for 15 minutes periods during rush periods of the day. *That's Driver Flexibility, Flexible Hours. *



Elephant said:


> Uber prices between 5am to 10am
> From 1 market st to sfo
> View attachment 123458
> View attachment 123459
> ...


----------



## ganerbangla (Mar 4, 2017)

Jo3030 said:


> They are basically saying they are able to rip off the passengers and only pay you for time & distance now, officially.
> By agreeing to the agreement, you can't sue them.


You are right uber just took 30 fare 11 dollar fee ripped off driver


----------



## AVLien (Mar 4, 2017)

I don't know about you guys, but I'm making *A LOT* less than I was a couple of weeks ago. This can (& undoubtedly will) be explained away by minutiae, but in essence *we are making less money despite Uber clearly admonishing us that we aren't*. I just drove a pax _half way across town_, they _changed their mind about where they wanted to go_,* I assumed this wouldn't completely bend me over a barrel. It did.*

_How does that work anyway?_ If my *pax wants to go somewhere other than their originally stated destination*; what then? The pax was charged (roughly, but damned close to) *$10*. I received *$6* Uber kept *$4*. They were supposed to keep *25%* _according to the original agreement_, not *40%*. I get that they pulled an "_or else_" move with the contractual changes, but seriously *WTF?*

Can we all band together & build a *rideshare co-op* already? Why do none of the workers get to have control over the means of production here? This seems like a house of cards to me. Why not _open a window_, or_ sneeze_ (as it were)? *If we all stopped driving for a week........ <-THAT is why they don't want unions to form!!! *


----------



## Mars Troll Number 4 (Oct 30, 2015)

AVLien said:


> I don't know about you guys, but I'm making *A LOT* less than I was a couple of weeks ago. This can (& undoubtedly will) be explained away by minutiae, but in essence *we are making less money despite Uber clearly admonishing us that we aren't*. I just drove a pax _half way across town_, they _changed their mind about where they wanted to go_,* I assumed this wouldn't completely bend me over a barrel. It did.*
> 
> _How does that work anyway?_ If my *pax wants to go somewhere other than their originally stated destination*; what then? The pax was charged (roughly, but damned close to) *$10*. I received *$6* Uber kept *$4*. They were supposed to keep *25%* _according to the original agreement_, not *40%*. I get that they pulled an "_or else_" move with the contractual changes, but seriously *WTF?*
> 
> Can we all band together & build a *rideshare co-op* already? Why do none of the workers get to have control over the means of production here? This seems like a house of cards to me. Why not _open a window_, or_ sneeze_ (as it were)? *If we all stopped driving for a week........ <-THAT is why they don't want unions to form!!! *


More than likely we will see all the little ride shares that popped up in Austin collaspe in the next few months. The problem is that a not-for-profit coop will have higher rates than uber because uber treats us like trash.

And that price diferential will kill any Coop.


----------



## Ca$h4 (Aug 12, 2015)

AVLien said:


> I don't know about you guys, but I'm making *A LOT* less than I was a couple of weeks ago. This can (& undoubtedly will) be explained away by minutiae, but in essence *we are making less money despite Uber clearly admonishing us that we aren't*. I just drove a pax _half way across town_, they _changed their mind about where they wanted to go_,* I assumed this wouldn't completely bend me over a barrel. It did.*
> 
> _How does that work anyway?_ If my *pax wants to go somewhere other than their originally stated destination*; what then? The pax was charged (roughly, but damned close to) *$10*. I received *$6* Uber kept *$4*. They were supposed to keep *25%* _according to the original agreement_, not *40%*. I get that they pulled an "_or else_" move with the contractual changes, but seriously *WTF?*
> 
> Can we all band together & build a *rideshare co-op* already? Why do none of the workers get to have control over the means of production here? This seems like a house of cards to me. Why not _open a window_, or_ sneeze_ (as it were)? *If we all stopped driving for a week........ <-THAT is why they don't want unions to form!!! *


You don't have to strike for a week. Only 15 to 30 minutes during rush hours. Like from 8am to 8:20 am. done randomly. Drivers need a networking app to coordinate "lightning strikes" during rush hour. Best to form Co-op one man, one vote to coordinate when to go off-line, book off, or just let jobs time out. Don't take Uber jobs during rush hour is basic strategy.


----------



## Bean (Sep 24, 2016)

Ca$h4 said:


> You don't have to strike for a week. Only 15 to 30 minutes during rush hours. Like from 8am to 8:20 am. done randomly. Drivers need a networking app to coordinate "lightning strikes" during rush hour. Best to form Co-op one man, one vote to coordinate when to go off-line, book off, or just let jobs time out. Don't take Uber jobs during rush hour is basic strategy.


You go ahead and organize that and let us know how it worked out.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

UberTaxPro said:


> Making Earnings Easier to Understand
> Hi xxxxx,
> 
> *Our commitment* to you is to be clear and straightforward about your earnings. We're making a number of changes that will make your earnings easier to understand and access. We will also be updating our driver partner agreement to more clearly reflect the way you earn. This will take effect on Monday, May 22nd.
> ...


NO NEED TO TIP !


----------



## Georgie Jung (Mar 9, 2017)

Cableguynoe said:


> your contract is a day to day contract. Not year to year.


If that was true wouldn't the new contract require a signature to the terms of agreement?


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

Georgie Jung said:


> If that was true wouldn't the new contract require a signature to the terms of agreement?


Electronic signatures. This is 2017. 
You signed it to app with your user name and password which verified you're identity. 
Then you agreed to the terms. We all had to do it.


----------

