# AB5 - do you support it or not?



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

While I realize this forum is only a small percentage of Lyft drivers, I would like to get an idea (to help support my claim) of how many drivers here are in favor of AB5 or aren't.

I vote no. I like my freedom. Yes Lyft controls the rides, but they don't control me. Being an employee changes all that.


----------



## Invisible (Jun 15, 2018)

I support some form of regulation, but absolutely wouldn’t want to be a Lyft employee.


----------



## oldnavyht3 (Jul 17, 2019)

I whole heartly support and love the fact that AB5 was introduced and that companies including uber/lyft are squirming. The work world is being screwed and misinterpreting rules and manipulating work classifications to save money and is far time for this crap to stop. We get our money from uber/lyft who "IS AN EMPLOYER" that is a company that has flexible work hours. What other transportation company do you know of says "you are your own business" when you have to use the companies employer labels on your car, abide by that companies rules and regulations, have that companies app on your phone. If thats the case then every UPS driver is his and her own businessman/woman as well. Go somewhere with that crap "we are our own business". I like driving for lyft but dont piss on my pants leg and say its raining.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

This is a fake choice. Uber and Lyft could have restructures so that you were truely an IC. They already made the choice not to do that and furthermore set things up in NYC to rtation time slots etc... when they could have approached things differently. They are the ones making "employee" as unpalatable as possible when it could be a very flexible arrangement if they so choose. Then we have the fact that they appear to be paying services to gather signatures for a ballot initiative and you see that it's all about getting their way not what's equitable for drivers and company alike.


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

Fake choice? I'm not going to argue your points because you are right that U/L made their choice and in a way is bringing the problem upon themselves for not dealing with it before the government(s) start stepping in.

I just want to know if you support AB5, as is, or not. Everyone here knows that Uber and Lyft are going to look out for their own interests first. Business is business. While I agree with you that sometimes it takes a hard push to get action, and AB5 is a hard push, I disagree with being forced to become an employee and losing most, if not all, of my freedom. Maybe some people will like it, but I'd much rather have things they way they are now than to get paid minimum wage and being told when and where I will drive.


----------



## oldnavyht3 (Jul 17, 2019)

Ozzone said:


> Fake choice? I'm not going to argue your points because you are right that U/L made their choice and in a way is bringing the problem upon themselves for not dealing with it before the government(s) start stepping in.
> 
> I just want to know if you support AB5, as is, or not. Everyone here knows that Uber and Lyft are going to look out for their own interests first. Business is business. While I agree with you that sometimes it takes a hard push to get action, and AB5 is a hard push, I disagree with being forced to become an employee and losing most, if not all, of my freedom. Maybe some people will like it, but I'd much rather have things they way they are now than to get paid minimum wage and being told when and where I will drive.


your drinking their koolaid and thinking into it a little too much. Dont let their scare tactics reel you in. we all know if they set hours drivers would drop and they would drastically lose profits for awhile. The way your talking in htat last line your falling for their trap hook, line, and sinker.


----------



## TPAMB (Feb 13, 2019)

Short and simple, I like the affects it had on changes to drivers pay etc. I likely wouldn’t like the affects to IC status. I’m in Florida.


----------



## Dropking (Aug 18, 2017)

Ozzone said:


> While I realize this forum is only a small percentage of Lyft drivers, I would like to get an idea (to help support my claim) of how many drivers here are in favor of AB5 or aren't.
> 
> I vote no. I like my freedom. Yes Lyft controls the rides, but they don't control me. Being an employee changes all that.


Totally. AB5 the only reason that Uber is finally showing destinations and estimated trip earnings in the ping, something they have been hiding from drivers for years and Lyft is still hiding. Attaining employee status will allow us to unionize, negotiate better rates, and negotiate hours (despite the companies trying to scare you into believing you will lose flexibility). Total win.


----------



## oldnavyht3 (Jul 17, 2019)

Dropking said:


> Totally. AB5 the only reason that Uber is finally showing destinations and estimated trip earnings in the ping, something they have been hiding from drivers for years and Lyft is still hiding. Attaining employee status will allow us to unionize, negotiate better rates, and negotiate hours (despite the companies trying to scare you into believing you will lose flexibility). Total win.


DROPKING! THANK YOU! SOMEONE UNDERSTANDS THIS! YOU ARE A GOD AMONGST MEN... At least a god with understanding why AB5 is fighting for the gig economy when people in this thread are crying that they like being independent (sheep) contractors not realizing what people are really trying to get or get back for them. Man I gotta go take care of something in the restroom after you post the understanding behind the struggle.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

if it wasn't for AB5 calif drivers wouldn't have the full info ping. As long as AB5 brings on goodies, all for it. If it brings on I'm an employee, I'm against. Period. Goodies, yes. Control, no.


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

SHalester said:


> if it wasn't for AB5 calif drivers wouldn't have the full info ping. As long as AB5 brings on goodies, all for it. If it brings on I'm an employee, I'm against. Period. Goodies, yes. Control, no.


And I agree with this 100%. As long as it just scares the companies into making it more of an IC environment, then good. However, the law wasn't written to scare them - it was written to force them which forces us to become employees. That I am 100% against so that's why I say no.

All of you provide good arguments to the benefit of being an employee but those benefits don't outweigh being my own boss with my time. That's the main reason I drive.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Ozzone said:


> All of you provide good arguments to the benefit of being an employee but those benefits don't outweigh being my own boss with my time.


not me. I'm done being an employee. Really don't want to go back to that setup as I know exactly what it means; many who love AB5 have never been employees, so they have no clue.


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

SHalester said:


> not me. I'm done being an employee. Really don't want to go back to that setup as I know exactly what it means; many who love AB5 have never been employees, so they have no clue.


I'm not going to generalize but I suspect most don't really know what they are getting into.


----------



## oldnavyht3 (Jul 17, 2019)

SHalester said:


> not me. I'm done being an employee. Really don't want to go back to that setup as I know exactly what it means; many who love AB5 have never been employees, so they have no clue.


So then remind me, what is the difference between a "contractor".....and an " independent contractor"?


----------



## losiglow (Dec 4, 2018)

I have a hard time _not_ dismissing anything that comes from California lawmakers. That whole state is one giant clusterf*ck. There's not a lot of legislation that's come from Cali in the last decade or so that hasn't been shortsighted. However, I can't deny that the changes so far have been positive. Although it hasn't reached other states, the additional information they're giving drivers in CA now is what they should have been giving all along.

Still, I voted No because I simply don't want, nor do I need, to be an employee for Uber or Lyft. You can say that they would still offer flexibility but ultimately you'll be obligated to follow their rules, work the hours you're required to, take the rides they give you, even drive a certain kind of vehicle or cater to pax in a certain way. Yes, all of that may be negotiable and still have an aspect of flexibility. But once it's established, it will be the rule. Even if it's reasonable, it's going to limit flexibility.


----------



## Disgusted Driver (Jan 9, 2015)

losiglow said:


> I have a hard time _not_ dismissing anything that comes from California lawmakers. That whole state is one giant clusterf*ck. There's not a lot of legislation that's come from Cali in the last decade or so that hasn't been shortsighted. However, I can't deny that the changes so far have been positive. Although it hasn't reached other states, the additional information they're giving drivers in CA now is what they should have been giving all along.
> 
> Still, I voted No because I simply don't want, nor do I need, to be an employee for Uber or Lyft. You can say that they would still offer flexibility but ultimately you'll be obligated to follow their rules, work the hours you're required to, take the rides they give you, even drive a certain kind of vehicle or cater to pax in a certain way. Yes, all of that may be negotiable and still have an aspect of flexibility. But once it's established, it will be the rule. Even if it's reasonable, it's going to limit flexibility.


Definitely some craziness from CA but their auto emission standards were a good thing.

Problem with this whole thread from my perspective at least is that while I understand what has been written about AB5, I don't feel I understand all of the potential and ramifications just yet.


----------



## peteyvavs (Nov 18, 2015)

Ozzone said:


> While I realize this forum is only a small percentage of Lyft drivers, I would like to get an idea (to help support my claim) of how many drivers here are in favor of AB5 or aren't.
> 
> I vote no. I like my freedom. Yes Lyft controls the rides, but they don't control me. Being an employee changes all that.


But you're working for free, U/L are paying executives multimillion dollar salaries and millions more in options off of our labor and equipment. At least with AB5 Uber and maybe Lyft will begin to respect those who generate their paychecks.


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

peteyvavs said:


> But you're working for free, U/L are paying executives multimillion dollar salaries and millions more in options off of our labor and equipment. At least with AB5 Uber and maybe Lyft will begin to respect those who generate their paychecks.


First of all, I'm not working for free.

The only positive thing about AB5 is that it is forcing U/L to start seeing us as IC's and start giving us what we should have had all along. The negative is that we will not be independent if we are forced to become employees. Some may like that, many won't.


----------



## troothequalstroll (Oct 12, 2019)

You will never be an employee just treated like one.

Under no circumstances is Uber Lyft going to start mileage, maintenance, gas reimbursement, SOC security credits, unemployment, workers comp, overtime after 40+ hours, minimum wage, FICO, holiday pay, vacation sick days, etc etc etc

They will change the app to comply you'll always be an independent contractor they will just find ways to treat you like an employee while they bribe their way through court this case been dragging on since 2016

1 year tips added
This year details will be added
Next year fares will get regulated
All in-between they'll add tricks & scams designed to circumvent the law like being able to lower your rate which I guarantee not 1 driver wants but thousands of will just to get rides


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

oldnavyht3 said:


> So then remind me, what is the difference between a "contractor".....and an " independent contractor"?


Neither are employees and that is what AB5 is about.


----------



## oldnavyht3 (Jul 17, 2019)

Ozzone said:


> First of all, I'm not working for free.
> 
> The only positive thing about AB5 is that it is forcing U/L to start seeing us as IC's and start giving us what we should have had all along. The negative is that we will not be independent if we are forced to become employees. Some may like that, many won't.


So what is the difference between a "contractor"....and an " independent contractor"?


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

The supporters of AB5 are a small percentage of the actual RS drivers in Calif. This is an example of the squeaking wheel gets the attention.
I do not want a work schedule nor be considered an employee. 
AB5 supporters say that a work schedule will not happen, that drivers will retain their work flexibility but they do not explain how.
I do not see how a driving schedule will not be necessary. They say that U/L are lying. It looks to me like both sides are not being truthful. 
Now AB5 supporters are moving toward a Union --- I do not see that making a difference. 
Too many questions and not enough answers.
The proposals presented by U/L and the other companies are a good start. Well worth the read----
Protect App-Based Drivers & Services for more information. This proposal will be on the Nov 2020 ballot. If it passes -- it will replace AB5.



Ozzone said:


> First of all, I'm not working for free.
> 
> The only positive thing about AB5 is that it is forcing U/L to start seeing us as IC's and start giving us what we should have had all along. The negative is that we will not be independent if we are forced to become employees. Some may like that, many won't.


--------------------
????? I believe you mean " stop seeing drivers as IC's "


----------



## RideshareSpectrum (May 12, 2017)

I support A 5 in when it positively affects me. **** off and figure it out otherwise. Nahahahahaah


----------



## AsleepAtTheWheel (Nov 17, 2019)

oldnavyht3 said:


> DROPKING! THANK YOU! SOMEONE UNDERSTANDS THIS! YOU ARE A GOD AMONGST MEN... At least a god with understanding why AB5 is fighting for the gig economy when people in this thread are crying that they like being independent (sheep) contractors not realizing what people are really trying to get or get back for them. Man I gotta go take care of something in the restroom after you post the understanding behind the struggle.


You do realize AB5 was targeted at lyft and uber. Large cab unions paid the governor some cash. He took the money and passed the bill but that effects massive amounts of people. They have independent constructions, nurses, truckers and even cab drivers that lease the cabs. If it's fully enforced, Uber and lyft could just pull out of Cali. That's what the bill wants them to do. Cab rates will sky rocket. #2 They will for sure no matter what allow you to drive only around 25 hour a week tops to have to not pay anything because you are a part time worker. #3 schedule shifts. You might have to go out at 3 am one day and 3 pm the next day.



Ozzone said:


> While I realize this forum is only a small percentage of Lyft drivers, I would like to get an idea (to help support my claim) of how many drivers here are in favor of AB5 or aren't.
> 
> I vote no. I like my freedom. Yes Lyft controls the rides, but they don't control me. Being an employee changes all that.


The main fact of it all is that after a company goes public, no matter what law, not matter what happens, the employee will never benefit but just lose money. Keep dreaming your pipe dreams.


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

oldnavyht3 said:


> So then remind me, what is the difference between a "contractor".....and an " independent contractor"?


---------------------
I'm going to muddy the waters here. Canada and Spain have a RS classification called , " Dependent Contractors ".



Dropking said:


> Totally. AB5 the only reason that Uber is finally showing destinations and estimated trip earnings in the ping, something they have been hiding from drivers for years and Lyft is still hiding. Attaining employee status will allow us to unionize, negotiate better rates, and negotiate hours (despite the companies trying to scare you into believing you will lose flexibility). Total win.


--------------------
Sorry but Lyft does show the approximate destination and the trip earnings, IF you AR is high enough. 
Frankly, I do not see how setting schedules can be avoided if drivers become employees. Saying that this will not happen does not make it so. No one supporting AB5 has yet to produce another alternative because there isn't one. The most that can happen is offer a bid for the time frame that you want to drive and hope that you win. 
Forming a Union or joining a current established union -- is that really the answer ? How many drivers will join ? My guess is under 40% of the total Calif drivers. That number of drivers that log off on a strike will not make a difference. Why ?? Because 80% to 90% of drivers will have to stay off line for weeks in order to bring U/L to their knees. Not many drivers can afford not to drive for one day much less for weeks.
Another fact to consider -- most drivers, 80+%, only drive part time ( under 20 hours / week ) Are they asking for the benefits of a full time employee ? That will definitely never happen. A Union will NEVER be able to get benefits of a full time employee that a driver that only works 20 hours per week. 
The offers currently on the table submitted by U/L. etc. are interesting. Each driver has to evaluate and decide what is best.
Read them for yourself and decide. >>>>> Protect App-Based Drivers & Services


----------



## Woohaa (Jan 15, 2017)

KK2929 said:


> The supporters of AB5 are a small percentage of the actual RS drivers in Calif.


Have any data to back up that assertion? Seems highly unlikely without it.


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

Woohaa said:


> Have any data to back up that assertion? Seems highly unlikely without it.


-------------------------
Highly Unlikely, --- I definitely disagree. No, I have no data, since this is a fairly new area. It is difficult to even find out how many Uber & Lyft drivers there are in Calif. Time will tell but I have heard very few drivers state that they want to be an employee or join a Union. And I have been to the meetings for supporters of AB5 and a Union. In talking to people, who are knowledgeable, I have heard very few support AB5 and that is on this forum and talking face to face. If you can disprove my statement, please produce it and we will talk further. 
Time will tell.


----------



## AngelAdams (Jan 21, 2019)

Invisible said:


> I support some form of regulation, but absolutely wouldn't want to be a Lyft employee.


You already are, you're an unpaid intern lol.



Ozzone said:


> And I agree with this 100%. As long as it just scares the companies into making it more of an IC environment, then good. However, the law wasn't written to scare them - it was written to force them which forces us to become employees. That I am 100% against so that's why I say no.
> 
> All of you provide good arguments to the benefit of being an employee but those benefits don't outweigh being my own boss with my time. That's the main reason I drive.


If you do over 20% of your business with the same entity, you're their employee. AB is more about overall corporate welfare. It has less to do with actual drivers.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

AngelAdams said:


> you do over 20% of your business with the same entity, you're their employee.


Horse poo.


----------



## AngelAdams (Jan 21, 2019)

SHalester said:


> Horse poo.


Reality, deal with it!


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

AngelAdams said:


> Reality, deal with it!


Maybe the planet u circle. Have you even been an employee? Ever?


----------



## AngelAdams (Jan 21, 2019)

SHalester said:


> Maybe the planet u circle. Have you even been an employee? Ever?


Yes, combined total of 10 years. I've also been an entrepreneur for 10 years. 
it's by far easier being an employee. But being free is also amazing. 
that doesn't change the fact, if you do most of your business with the same entity, you're an employee!
One has nothing to do with the other.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

AngelAdams said:


> that doesn't change the fact, if you do most of your business with the same entity, you're an employee!


Nope. Try again? You opinion in fantasy land, sure. Real world, nope. Or u have a funny definition of employee.


----------



## AngelAdams (Jan 21, 2019)

SHalester said:


> Nope. Try again? You opinion in fantasy land, sure. Real world, nope. Or u have a funny definition of employee.


Ok, lol. Let's see I've owned two businesses, been an employee for 10 years for a business within a business. Am now starting two independent projects for 2020. I've paid more taxes than the president and have dealt with almost all forms of employment. 
Having the ability to work your own hours doesn't make you an independent contractor. It makes you none vital and disposable. 
last person you should be coming up against on employment.

the ironic part is, my cousin and I had six Uber drivers at one point. We were their employers while WE weren't classified as employees under Uber. Even though we were essentially reselling their service.

being an employee means you do the employers bidding. Follow their rules and regulation. While the employers have to follow rules and regulations set forth for them. 
AB is nothing but rules for the employer (Uber,Gryft)

your fear is losing you ability to work on your own schedule. That will not change under AB, in order for your nightmare to come true, Uber would have to build a network of monitors and managers to manage said employees. Not to mention a whole team just for auditing. 
they don't have the funds nor the will to do that. So instead they will spend every penny they have to misguide, confuse, and scare you into submission.
So to answer your question, yes I have prior experience as an employee and an independent contractor. Shit I still do contract work to this day. But it's under my terms.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

TL. 
you have no clue what Uber will do if we ‘become’ employees. You can speculate all u want. But it won’t be all honey n rainbows like AB5 supporters believe. 
but ur silly opinion we are all employees if we do a certain amount of hours is el nutto.
If I wanted to be supervised or have a manager I would not have retired.


----------



## AngelAdams (Jan 21, 2019)

SHalester said:


> TL.
> you have no clue what Uber will do if we 'become' employees. You can speculate all u want. But it won't be all honey n rainbows like AB5 supporters believe.
> but ur silly opinion we are all employees if we do a certain amount of hours is el nutto.
> If I wanted to be supervised or have a manager I would not have retired.


Yes we do, that's literally the point. To know what Uber is doing lol. Read the bill.


----------



## Jon77 (Dec 6, 2018)

Whether you are pro or anti-Ab5 the fact remains that ever since Uber has had the fear of God put into them, things have been getting better for California drivers as far as choices.
If they were not afraid like they are now, we wouldn’t have upfront fare amount, drop off location and direction, and we would be still worried about our acceptance rates.
Also we finally got a reprieve regarding the constant never ending pay cuts.

Ever since it’s got crappier for Uber the company, it’s gotten better for drivers as far as becoming true independent contractors, and being able to make informed business decisions based on profit or loss factors.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

AngelAdams said:


> To know what Uber is doing lol.


your head must be fully in the sand. Uber has given Calif drivers some nice toys, no doubt. But, I"m afraid, none of us became employees on 1/1. That is a fact. The bill does not control what Uber would do if they were forced to make us employees. Another fact. It won't be we get goodies, toys, benefits and raises with nothing on the 'other' foot happening. You say you were employee, did you totally forget what being an employee entails? 
You still don't get it; thank goodness it is locked up in courts....for years I strongly recommend you read all the threads on this over the past 6 months. Already been hashed to death. 
LOL? what is that? AOL speak? sheesh.


----------



## AngelAdams (Jan 21, 2019)

SHalester said:


> your head must be fully in the sand. Uber has given Calif drivers some nice toys, no doubt. But, I"m afraid, none of us became employees on 1/1. That is a fact. The bill does not control what Uber would do if they were forced to make us employees. Another fact. It won't be we get goodies, toys, benefits and raises with nothing on the 'other' foot happening. You say you were employee, did you totally forget what being an employee entails?
> You still don't get it; thank goodness it is locked up in courts....for years I strongly recommend you read all the threads on this over the past 6 months. Already been hashed to death.
> LOL? what is that? AOL speak? sheesh.


Oh my word, in this case I have a bridge for sale, if you're interested.

It's truly sad, the ignorance is severe. 
to know U/L is to go to the beginning. 
did I mention we used to get $2.00 a mile and lyft took 5% Commission to where they are now.


----------



## Woohaa (Jan 15, 2017)

KK2929 said:


> -------------------------
> Highly Unlikely, --- I definitely disagree. No, I have no data, since this is a fairly new area. It is difficult to even find out how many Uber & Lyft drivers there are in Calif. Time will tell but I have heard very few drivers state that they want to be an employee or join a Union. And I have been to the meetings for supporters of AB5 and a Union. In talking to people, who are knowledgeable, I have heard very few support AB5 and that is on this forum and talking face to face. If you can disprove my statement, please produce it and we will talk further.
> Time will tell.


Actually, the onus should be on you presenting material to support your claim as opposed to anyone being responsible to disprove it. In either regard I hope AB5 is upheld in the courts.


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

AngelAdams said:


> Ok, lol. Let's see I've owned two businesses, been an employee for 10 years for a business within a business. Am now starting two independent projects for 2020. I've paid more taxes than the president and have dealt with almost all forms of employment.
> Having the ability to work your own hours doesn't make you an independent contractor. It makes you none vital and disposable.
> last person you should be coming up against on employment.
> 
> ...


-------------------------
Would you offer a scenario on how, if drivers are employees, Uber and Lyft can operate without setting up work schedules ?


----------



## AngelAdams (Jan 21, 2019)

KK2929 said:


> -------------------------
> Would you offer a scenario on how, if drivers are employees, Uber and Lyft can operate without setting up work schedules ?


The way IHSS is doing it.


----------



## nonononodrivethru (Mar 25, 2019)

Ozzone said:


> While I realize this forum is only a small percentage of Lyft drivers, I would like to get an idea (to help support my claim) of how many drivers here are in favor of AB5 or aren't.
> 
> I vote no. I like my freedom. Yes Lyft controls the rides, but they don't control me. Being an employee changes all that.


Trip information is vital. I can't believe it has taken this long to get it.


----------



## dauction (Sep 26, 2017)

> your fear is losing you ability to work on your own schedule. That will not change under AB5


Umm BS ...

Under AB UBER can at ANYTIME start setting hours for Drivers... AND I would suspect that if Uber and Lyft continue losing this AB5 battle they they WILL start setting Hours to get Drivers in an UPROAR to help pressure the State to backoff


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

AngelAdams said:


> If you do over 20% of your business with the same entity, you're their employee.


I prefer to stick with the actual definition of an employee - not your interpretation of it.


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

AngelAdams said:


> The way IHSS is doing it.


=--------------------------
That may mean something to you but it means nothing to me. What does that stand for ?


----------



## AngelAdams (Jan 21, 2019)

KK2929 said:


> =--------------------------
> That may mean something to you but it means nothing to me. What does that stand for ?


In Home Supportive Services. Caregivers get a set amount of hrs and they choose when and where to work.



Ozzone said:


> I prefer to stick with the actual definition of an employee - not your interpretation of it.


Sure
a person employed for wages or salary, especially at nonexecutive level.


----------



## oldnavyht3 (Jul 17, 2019)

dauction said:


> Umm BS ...
> 
> Under AB UBER can at ANYTIME start setting hours for Drivers... AND I would suspect that if Uber and Lyft continue losing this AB5 battle they they WILL start setting Hours to get Drivers in an UPROAR to help pressure the State to backoff


Uber and lyft can "try" and then start losing drivers and most importantly "money" Because many people will start not being able or want to work the schedule hours.



KK2929 said:


> ---------------------
> I'm going to muddy the waters here. Canada and Spain have a RS classification called , " Dependent Contractors ".
> 
> 
> ...


setting schedules would be the most dangerous thing U/L could do. they would lose drivers due to not being able or not wanting to work set hours and then U/L would go even more stupider by giving out outrageous rides knowing they could set wages that would make people start figuring out they are being played. All the two companies have to do is set wages back to 2015 and this would go away because back then no one complained about wages until they both started playing the wage cut competition game and thats when the mud slinging started.


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

Ozzone said:


> I prefer to stick with the actual definition of an employee - not your interpretation of it.





AngelAdams said:


> Sure
> a person employed for wages or salary, especially at nonexecutive level.


So explain to me how that confirms this:



AngelAdams said:


> If you do over 20% of your business with the same entity, you're their employee.


Where is 20% in the definition?


----------



## AngelAdams (Jan 21, 2019)

Ozzone said:


> So explain to me how that confirms this:
> 
> Where is 20% in the definition?


God you're an idiot.


----------



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

As an EMPLOYEE you would be entitled to min wage plus .58 a mile.

In California if you drive 20 miles per hour that would be in the $27+ tips range per hour.


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

Woohaa said:


> Have any data to back up that assertion? Seems highly unlikely without it.


---------------------------
This is taken from "The Rideshare Guys" RS driver survey of 2019. 
Note - the sampling for this question was 911 drivers.

66% want to be Independent Contractors
15.8% want to be employees

If you are not familiar with this blog, he has some very interesting information, especially from this survey alone. 
If you want to read all the results to 20 questions enter into search - The Rideshare Guys survey 2019

*Uber and Lyft Drivers Want to Be Independent Contractors*
Even though AB5 in California has gotten a TON of media attention, political support and retweets on Twitter, most drivers want to be independent contractors. In our 2019 survey, *66% of drivers said they wanted to be independent contractors *vs 15.8% who wanted to be an employee. This number lines up with my anecdotal conversations and also makes a lot of sense when you think about the fact that most drivers are doing this part-time, so they often value the flexibility more than the pay.

Turning drivers into employees could adversely impact older drivers - 43% of drivers we surveyed are older than 61 and a full 10% are over 71 years old. If Uber and Lyft drivers are required to drive certain shifts, it could hurt older drivers who need flexibility. Older drivers often are supplementing their retirement nest egg and some can only drive when they feel comfortable such as during daylight hours.

83.5% of drivers we surveyed work for more than one service. In other industries, employees are sometimes forbidden to concurrently work for a competitor. Imagine if Uber enacted such a rule to its drivers who are now classified as employees. It could damage Lyft's ability (or other gig companies) to attract drivers while simultaneously limiting income opportunities for gig-workers. It could also make it difficult for new companies to enter the market and compete.

You can see in the chart below that Uber has 50.8% market share amongst all gig companies and 23% of drivers do both Uber and Lyft. So if those dual app drivers had to choose one or the other, Uber's total market share could go as high as 73.8% in this scenario.


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> As an EMPLOYEE you would be entitled to min wage plus .58 a mile.
> 
> In California if you drive 20 miles per hour that would be in the $27+ tips range per hour.


As an EMPLOYEE you would not be entitled to choosing your own schedule and where you want to drive. For many, that fact outweighs the potential for extra money.


----------



## AngelAdams (Jan 21, 2019)

Ozzone said:


> As an EMPLOYEE you would not be entitled to choosing your own schedule and where you want to drive. For many, that fact outweighs the potential for extra money.


Yes, you can. You just don't show up to work lol.


----------



## moJohoJo (Feb 19, 2017)

RE :
*Uber and Lyft Drivers Want to Be Independent Contractors*
This reminds me of another fake poll put out by the media, especially, Yahoos fake polls . No driver wants to be an independent driver at $5 to $8 an hour average after expenses . If it means averaging $28 an hour minimum plus SSS for mileage every driver would prefer to be an employee which we already are anyways so there won't be much of a difference . They set the rates . They hire and fire at will. They determine what car you drive, not us . A Contractor sets his own rates & terms and doesn't get threatened . We already are employees but by using deception they try to make the drivers believe they are contractors because they can keep screwing the drivers by calling them contractors .


----------



## Jon77 (Dec 6, 2018)

I would rather be a true independent contractor but still I reluctantly support AB5.

If nothing else it’s putting Uber‘s feet to the fire.
Because the threat of AB5 California drivers now have.

A. Full disclosure more or less regarding what we will make before we even except the job

B. Commissions capped at 25% 

C. A counter offer from Uber/Lyft that will probably be on the ballot this November 

The counter offer although not ideal has a lot of things that are an improvement from what we had 2 months ago.

Unfortunately we still have a few negatives.

1. Timeouts and threats for not excepting the unprofitable rides

2. The inability to defend yourself if you get deactivated 

3. Rates that are still too low 

Things are starting to move in the right direction, without AB5 we would’ve got another pay cut for sure by now, it happened every year like clockwork.

However I definitely see schedules in the future or the inability to go online anytime you want to.
Any business cannot have an unlimited amount of employees on the clock if they have to pay them whether they have work or not.
Anyone who thinks otherwise has never run or managed a business.

I have owned three auto repair shops and a towing business.
I currently manage an auto repair shop, been here for a little over 20 years.
If a business does not match labor costs with the amount of work available then that business will go bankrupt.


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

Jon77 said:


> However I definitely see schedules in the future or the inability to go online anytime you want to.
> Any business cannot have an unlimited amount of employees on the clock if they have to pay them whether they have work or not.
> Anyone who thinks otherwise has never run or managed a business.


Exactly but the vast majority of drivers are older men and women that are driving part-time. Many of those will stop driving if they are forced to adhere to schedules they don't want.

U/L will have to replace them with younger, more conforming drivers. That's not going to be easy to handle the volume of rides they get every day.


----------



## Jon77 (Dec 6, 2018)

Ozzone said:


> Exactly but the vast majority of drivers are older men and women that are driving part-time. Many of those will stop driving if they are forced to adhere to schedules they don't want.
> 
> U/L will have to replace them with younger, more conforming drivers. That's not going to be easy to handle the volume of rides they get every day.


You're right about the older and part timers possibly quitting.
If I have stick to a strict Uber schedule I probably will have to quit as well.
The only way I can drive is if I can fit it around my regular job and my at the moment energy levels.

But the people who can hack it will probably make more money once us fair weather drivers throw in the towel.
Either scenario is ok with me, it's an easy come easy go gig anyways.


----------



## Mash Ghasem (Jan 12, 2020)

AB5 intends on forcing employment on a large number of rideshare drivers who have no intentions whatsoever of being employees, including myself. AB5 is also royally screwing up a lot of non-rideshare contractors trying to run their own businesses.

So NO, I do not support the way AB5 was implemented. I do, however, support regulation of the rideshare industry in order to fully and properly protect drivers, and that is what should have been implemented from the beginning.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Ozzone said:


> Exactly but the vast majority of drivers


Vast majority? Or maybe a sizable percent?


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

Way more than 50% from what I've seen. Here in SoCal, I see U/L drivers all the time and most of them are senior citizens. At least 7 out of 10.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Ozzone said:


> most of them are senior citizens


almost afraid to ask what you think a 'sr' citizen is. :biggrin:


----------



## moJohoJo (Feb 19, 2017)

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


----------



## Jon Stoppable (Dec 11, 2019)

This:



moJohoJo said:


> You will still drive at the hours you choose but the difference is that you will be guaranteed a minimum wage of $18 plus per hour for your driving time and on top of that you will be paid for your mileage


Is inconsistent with this:



> Uber / Lyft will need to cut back on employees because they will not want to pay drivers that sit idle . it will be money thrown away for drivers that are not picking up trips or if it is slow on any given day and when they limit the amount of drivers on the Road that means that there will be more trip requests available for drivers . They will no longer be able to afford an excess of drivers .


You'll be able to choose between zero hours and zero hours after U/L fire you for not accepting every ping or driving a car that costs too much to operate.


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

moJohoJo said:


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


--------------------
You are making assumptions that have no grounds. AB5 does not open the door for any of the issues that you mentioned. As for drivers already being employees -- a minor court made a claim that had no grounds and was later reversed. No one knows what will happen and frankly it will become a dead issue very soon, like the end of Feb. People cannot find work. Not just RS drivers are effected by AB5. Bands, singers, dancers, entertainers cannot find work.
This is a poorly written law and is on its way out.


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

SHalester said:


> almost afraid to ask what you think a 'sr' citizen is. :biggrin:


60+


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Ozzone said:


> 60+


yeah, think you need to bump that to, like, at least 65+. Retirement age is a good level to be called 'sr'.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

KK2929 said:


> --------------------
> You are making assumptions that have no grounds. AB5 does not open the door for any of the issues that you mentioned. As for drivers already being employees -- a minor court made a claim that had no grounds and was later reversed. No one knows what will happen and frankly it will become a dead issue very soon, like the end of Feb. People cannot find work. Not just RS drivers are effected by AB5. Bands, singers, dancers, entertainers cannot find work.
> This is a poorly written law and is on its way out.
> 
> View attachment 419105


Talk about assumptions.

The bill passed 29-11 and 56-15










https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Assembly_Bill_5_(2019)
No way is this bill going to be suspended.


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

observer said:


> Talk about assumptions.
> 
> The bill passed 29-11 and 56-15
> 
> ...


-----------------------------------
Guess again Moderator "Observer" -- You do understand that a large number of Calif. citizens have lost their income because of legislatures attempt to satisfy a small number of RS drivers. Since January 1, Sacramento has received thousands of complaints from people that can no longer earn a living. These complaints are not from RS drivers but from people with totally unrelated jobs/income. 
AB5 is not the answer nor the solution to the problems that drivers are having. You actually think that those numbers you quote mean anything in the long run. Even Gonzalez (the originator) admits that the bill has many flaws. 
The majority of drivers do not want to be employees. AB5 supporters need to stop trying to ram it down the throat of the non-supporters. 
A recent survey of RS drivers conducted by "The Ride Share Guy " showed 66% *DO NOT * want to be employees and 15% want to be employees. The sampling was 911 votes. AB5 supporters are mistaken if they think that being classified as an employee will give them all kinds of benefits. Those "extras" are for full time employees with a good performance record and a positive " company man" attitude. How many drivers fit that description? Anyone that does not work 40 hours a week will not be eligible.
AB5 is a bad law. It is time to admit it and move forward.
February 27 will be the day to watch and see just how much support AB5 has in the Assembly.


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

SHalester said:


> yeah, think you need to bump that to, like, at least 65+. Retirement age is a good level to be called 'sr'.


Well the restaurants I visit think 60 is because they offer discounts. 65 is a universally accepted retirement age which is going to increase as people live and work longer.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

KK2929 said:


> -----------------------------------
> Guess again Moderator "Observer" -- You do understand that a large number of Calif. citizens have lost their income because of legislatures attempt to satisfy a small number of RS drivers. Since January 1, Sacramento has received thousands of complaints from people that can no longer earn a living. These complaints are not from RS drivers but from people with totally unrelated jobs/income.
> AB5 is not the answer nor the solution to the problems that drivers are having. You actually think that those numbers you quote mean anything in the long run. Even Gonzalez (the originator) admits that the bill has many flaws.
> The majority of drivers do not want to be employees. AB5 supporters need to stop trying to ram it down the throat of the non-supporters.
> ...


Not enough people will be affected and not enough legislators to overturn the bill.

The suspension is going nowhere.

We'll see in a few days.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Ozzone said:


> I visit think 60 is because they offer discounts. 65


Hahahaha IHOP is 55. :coolio:


----------



## hpdriver (Jan 24, 2015)

Just raise the rates, you make more, Uber makes more, the IRS makes more. Customers can take a cab if this is not affodable.

AB5 or AB999 don't fkin matter to me. Minimum pay rate should be twice of IRS deduction rates. And 20 cents a minute.


----------



## Jon Stoppable (Dec 11, 2019)

hpdriver said:


> Just raise the rates, you make more, Uber makes more, the IRS makes more. Customers can take a cab if this is not affodable.


RS demand is inelastic, but driver supply is highly elastic. So if you raise rates, rides drop a little but a lot more drivers will chase those rides. You will make slightly more money, but not 2x as you suggest.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

KK2929 said:


> -----------------------------------
> Guess again Moderator "Observer" -- You do understand that a large number of Calif. citizens have lost their income because of legislatures attempt to satisfy a small number of RS drivers. Since January 1, Sacramento has received thousands of complaints from people that can no longer earn a living. These complaints are not from RS drivers but from people with totally unrelated jobs/income.
> AB5 is not the answer nor the solution to the problems that drivers are having. You actually think that those numbers you quote mean anything in the long run. Even Gonzalez (the originator) admits that the bill has many flaws.
> The majority of drivers do not want to be employees. AB5 supporters need to stop trying to ram it down the throat of the non-supporters.
> ...


Update.

https://www.kusi.com/assemblyman-kevin-kileys-bill-to-repeal-ab-5-fails-to-receive-enough-votes/


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

.....and we still ain't employees. Yay. :roflmao:


----------



## Amos69 (May 17, 2019)

Oh H3!! No. This bill did nothing to help anyone. It did however remove opportunity for lots of people. Any time the Gubermint gets its paws on something they are shire to F it up.

They could have just passed a bill that said All RS drivers must receive $1.50 per mile driven and .25 for minute driven.

But they didn't

They said "If you really suck at life we might help you someday" "If you are really good at working things out we will try to knock you down to suck right quick"


----------



## oishiin driving (Feb 24, 2020)

Generally speaking NO, although I voted yes, reluctantly. 
I do not want to be U/L employee at any stretch. I want my freedom.
But in the unchecked climate of corporate greed, there needs to be some sort of a check.
It wasnt necessary pre-Wallstreet. It is now. We all know where their priorities are. 
A simple conference with drivers, an honest teamster solution, would solve the problem very easily. We all know this isn’t going to happen though.


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Ozzone said:


> I vote no. I like my freedom. Yes Lyft controls the rides, but they don't control me. Being an employee changes all that.


If you believe that being an employee means you're being controlled by the employer, you're already being controlled now as an alleged IC.

Not only does Lyft control the rides, they control the price of your services, the type of service you're required to do, the type of car you're using, and of course they control whether or not you're allowed to continue using their "services".



Amos69 said:


> Oh H3!! No. This bill did nothing to help anyone.


False.

AB5 is the reason Uber made major changes such as showing destinations in advance and getting rid of Upfront Pricing, both of which has put more money into the pockets of many drivers.


Amos69 said:


> It did however remove opportunity for lots of people.


AB5 hasn't been put into action yet, so no rideshare driver has had opportunity removed.


Amos69 said:


> Any time the Gubermint gets its paws on something they are shire to F it up.


"Gubermint" getting its paws on rideshare in Seattle has resulted in you being paid among the highest rates in the US, which is putting plenty of extra money into your pockets.


Amos69 said:


> They could have just passed a bill that said All RS drivers must receive $1.50 per mile driven and .25 for minute driven.


I would prefer that bill over employee status even with the .25 per minute rate which is too low for my liking.



Amos69 said:


> They said "If you really suck at life we might help you someday" "If you are really good at working things out we will try to knock you down to suck right quick"


That's a nonsensical sweeping definitive statement.


----------



## Ozzone (Feb 23, 2019)

Nats121 said:


> If you believe that being an employee means you're being controlled by the employer, you're already being controlled now as an alleged IC.
> 
> Not only does Lyft control the rides, they control the price of your services, the type of service you're required to do, the type of car you're using, and of course they control whether or not you're allowed to continue using their "services".


That's true but they don't control when I work or what area I work in. That to me is the major issue. As an employee, those two completely change.


----------



## Legalizeit0 (Jul 26, 2017)

AB5 is horrible for all involved.

You are not an employee of U/L - not even close. 

What is with all the people wanting something for nothing? If you don't like what the job pays, quit. If you are able to work but can't find a job in this economy, it is because you don't really want to work or think you are worth more than you actually are. RS provides good extra income, but the government regulators are working hard to screw it up for all of us.

Regardless of what the AOC/Bernie followers believe, the is no such thing as #FreeStuff


----------



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

Legalizeit0 said:


> AB5 is horrible for all involved.
> 
> You are not an employee of U/L - not even close.
> 
> ...


Well, yes and no.

There should be a pay floor on this gig of min wage. That's all there is to it. the problem is that without us being _legally employees_ that min wage pay floor doesn't exist. If they paid what uber paid here in Orlando when i first signed on I would be toeing the company line and going DOWN WITH THE CAB CARTELS, UBER UBER UBER.

Instead i'm going.. DOWN WITH UBER, YAY TAXIS, the lesser of two evils...

30c a mile?

That's the lowest SO FAR that they are willing to pay while on app. The lowest paying city/market is a number that has consistently gone down over time.

And well... a job is a job.

Just because it's "supposed to be part time" isn't an excuse to pay less than min wage. I pretty much need a job to survive, i could surivive off my government checks if I took in a roommate (which i really really don't want to do).

I collect government checks every month. If i couldn't work my day job i'd be back to NEEDING uber or a taxi money to eat. I choose not to do uber because the pay sucks. Instead i go through the PITA of signing out a cab, force myself into a 12 hour shift, and fiddle around finding a taxi, gassing it up, and polishing the turd (which is the very definition of cleaning a taxi IMHO) because uber isn't worth it anymore.

In the same GD city signing out a taxi for 12 hours is worth it and.... doing uber/lyft during the same TIMES, if not less hours isn't. WHEN I OWN A PERFECTLY OKAYISH uberX vehicle (technically two but a crew cab F150 on uberX? Lol... sure)










Is it a lack of fares during the hours i want to do it?

No..

I assure you when taxi fares exist uber fares exist.

So... in the SAME CITY, i'm better off taking a bigger financial risk (paying for a flat rate taxi rental) and renting a taxi. Whereas i won't use the car i already own to do uber in, where my costs are VS being parked are just the miles i would drive.

THINK ABOUT THIS, THIS is the reality here in a bottom market. And it's a bottom market not because of a lack of fares but because of horrible GD rates paid.

Lyft pays 40c a mile here for those suckers in a rented lyftMobile.

That's not with paid miles getting to pickup either, that's what they get ONLY while they have a customer. Then they have to pay to rent the lyftmobile on top of that.

What song would you be singing if rates were 44% of what they are now?

Because the rates are only going down, never up.


----------



## Legalizeit0 (Jul 26, 2017)

I think you have made my point for me. Lift/Uber has made it so unprofitable for you to drive your own car that you stick with the taxi job.

I think they are pushing us all, to find out the point where people just stop driving, and they will pay us just above that.


----------



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

Legalizeit0 said:


> I think you have made my point for me. Lift/Uber has made it so unprofitable for you to drive your own car that you stick with the taxi job.
> 
> I think they are pushing us all, to find out the point where people just stop driving, and they will pay us just above that.


Funny thing, the government that many are scared of, well in Orlando they regulate...

1. Number of taxis permitted in the city,
2. Rates charged to the customer
3. Taxi rental price.

They regulate all 3 portions of the equation to ensure that taxi drivers can make money. Uber vehemently demands that none of these things should apply to them.


----------

