# grYFT's desperate plea made me tear up....



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)




----------



## JLaw1719 (Apr 11, 2017)

They can both go to hell.


----------



## welikecamping (Nov 27, 2018)

I'm not sure my comments would help


----------



## Illini (Mar 14, 2019)

They're trying to convince us that any improvement in pay and working conditions will require us to become employees. That's complete BS. If they treated the drivers well all along, they wouldn't be in this position as the lawmakers would leave them alone.
How about they increase our rates, and give us COMPLETE destination information including estimated fare prior to us accepting the ride? If they do, we'd be happy to tell the lawmakers to back off.


----------



## welikecamping (Nov 27, 2018)

Right? they can't spare a breath to advocate for drivers, but want us to advocate for them? um, yeah, no. deal with it, lyft.


----------



## Judas Iscariot (Aug 17, 2015)

https://qz.com/1643263/the-cost-to-uber-and-lyft-if-drivers-were-employees/


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

Pax Collector said:


> View attachment 328774


When did this happen? I have heard nothing about this until this post.
No one actually cares about what we think. A broad set of regulations will be set up and then they will move on to the next issue. 
Most important to me is a fair procedure for grievances, operated by a third party. These random permanent deactiviations for no obvious reason are unacceptable.
Running their businesses inefficiently while they rob the drivers and then crying how they are losing money -- unacceptable. 
I will say this -- In May, I tracked my trips and Lyft's cut from my earning has dropped from 50% to about 34% but I also stopped renting a Lyft car.


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

KK2929 said:


> When did this happen? I have heard nothing about this until this post.
> No one actually cares about what we think. A broad set of regulations will be set up and then they will move on to the next issue.
> Most important to me is a fair procedure for grievances, operated by a third party. These random permanent deactiviations for no obvious reason are unacceptable.
> Running their businesses inefficiently while they rob the drivers and then crying how they are losing money -- unacceptable.
> I will say this -- In May, I tracked my trips and Lyft's cut from my earning has dropped from 50% to about 34% but I also stopped renting a Lyft car.


It's an email I got this morning. Sounds like they're concerned that such a bill would drive them out of business. Fine by me.


----------



## WAHN (May 6, 2019)

Pax Collector said:


> It's an email I got this morning. Sounds like they're concerned that such a bill would drive them out of business. Fine by me.


Is this just going to California drivers?


----------



## RDWRER (May 24, 2018)

WAHN said:


> Is this just going to California drivers?


I tell you if it's going to non-Californian drivers it might actually be a criminal offense to knowingly be soliciting non-citizens of the State to lobby lawmakers. Only California citizens are allowed input on laws that govern them.


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

Pax Collector said:


> View attachment 328774


Im in L.A. and have not received anything like this.



Judas Iscariot said:


> https://qz.com/1643263/the-cost-to-uber-and-lyft-if-drivers-were-employees/


------------------------
Well, this article is big news. I find it interesting that U/L would only spent $7 per person on training. 
All those figures and estimates are for full time employees, assuming 40 hours, for drivers, is that 40 hours logged on or pax in the car ? Will U/L try to set up work schedules?
As with the grocery store industry, management schedules everyone under 40 hours so they are classified as part time and receive no benefits. 
Lots of questions and few answers.



Pax Collector said:


> It's an email I got this morning. Sounds like they're concerned that such a bill would drive them out of business. Fine by me.





Pax Collector said:


> View attachment 328774


--------------

Have to read it several times. The implications are very subtle. 
We drivers value the flexibility of the work schedule. They are implying that will be taken away, when that issue has not been established yet. Frankly, I do not see most drivers as qualifying as full time employees. Does full time mean 40 hours of Logged On --- OR --- 40 hours pax related (a) receiving a call (b) driving to pickup (c) trip? Going to be a long week if the latter.
This could get interesting !! Who said the strikes did no good ????



WAHN said:


> Is this just going to California drivers?


-----------------
This particular article is talking about California Legislation, so yes.


----------



## U/L guy (May 28, 2019)

Illini said:


> They're trying to convince us that any improvement in pay and working conditions will require us to become employees. That's complete BS. If they treated the drivers well all along, they wouldn't be in this position as the lawmakers would leave them alone.
> How about they increase our rates, and give us COMPLETE destination information including estimated fare prior to us accepting the ride? If they do, we'd be happy to tell the lawmakers to back off.


Don't forget to tell them to get rid of the ratings system.


----------



## nouberipo (Jul 24, 2018)

I have seen a lot of millennial derived crap from Lyft and Uber but I think this one really does take the cake. Are they that dillusional to post this? With that said, it seems there are ants who drive for non-surge rates so that may be the answer. Come on people, wake up. This plea from Lyft is wrong on so many levels and shows the lengths they will go to in order to stop you from making fair and equitable earnings.



RDWRER said:


> I tell you if it's going to non-Californian drivers it might actually be a criminal offense to knowingly be soliciting non-citizens of the State to lobby lawmakers. Only California citizens are allowed input on laws that govern them.


Please, educate us with this supposed law Uber troll.



KK2929 said:


> Im in L.A. and have not received anything like this.
> 
> 
> ------------------------
> ...


And while it is California Legislation, it does provide a platform from which other states can start proceeding with their own regulations. Eventually, with the gig economy companies skirting so many laws/regulations, I forese federal laws having to be addressed that specifically protect workers from these predatory companies.


----------



## RDWRER (May 24, 2018)

nouberipo said:


> I have seen a lot of millennial derived crap from Lyft and Uber but I think this one really does take the cake. Are they that dillusional to post this? With that said, it seems there are ants who drive for non-surge rates so that may be the answer. Come on people, wake up. This plea from Lyft is wrong on so many levels and shows the lengths they will go to in order to stop you from making fair and equitable earnings.
> 
> 
> Please, educate us with this supposed law Uber troll.
> ...


Troll calling people trolls. Go figure.


----------



## AngelAdams (Jan 21, 2019)

Illini said:


> They're trying to convince us that any improvement in pay and working conditions will require us to become employees. That's complete BS. If they treated the drivers well all along, they wouldn't be in this position as the lawmakers would leave them alone.
> How about they increase our rates, and give us COMPLETE destination information including estimated fare prior to us accepting the ride? If they do, we'd be happy to tell the lawmakers to back off.


And maybe stop micro management and fascist mind games with independent contractors?! Lol

The new bonus is legit going to trigger ALOTTTTT of drivers gambling tendencies. 
The whole penny a second is programming drivers brains. 
It's legit tactics Hitler used to get people behind him.


----------



## Don'tchasethesurge (Dec 27, 2016)

It’s Uber and lyft fault for bring rates so low that people begin to notice...


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

KK2929 said:


> When did this happen? I have heard nothing about this until this post.
> No one actually cares about what we think. A broad set of regulations will be set up and then they will move on to the next issue.
> Most important to me is a fair procedure for grievances, operated by a third party. These random permanent deactiviations for no obvious reason are unacceptable.
> Running their businesses inefficiently while they rob the drivers and then crying how they are losing money -- unacceptable.
> I will say this -- In May, I tracked my trips and Lyft's cut from my earning has dropped from 50% to about 34% but I also stopped renting a Lyft car.


______________________
Correction - just checked and I got it at 9:18 am. They are asking for stories to forward to lawmakers and also have a link for the driver to contact their lawmaker independently. Now the campaign on the radio stations make sense. The D.J. ask for listeners to post their positive experiences with Uber and they will be read on the air.


----------



## kos um uber (Nov 3, 2018)

Pax Collector said:


> View attachment 328774


f ....l/u both


KK2929 said:


> ______________________
> Correction - just checked and I got it at 9:18 am. They are asking for stories to forward to lawmakers and also have a link for the driver to contact their lawmaker independently. Now the campaign on the radio stations make sense. The D.J. ask for listeners to post their positive experiences with Uber and they will be read on the air.


is there any positive


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

Great you Californians will love this. You would be making less through reduced hours, and will be told when and where to work. No more switching to the other app. As employees you'd get fired for under performing. If you hustle, there'd be no extra reward. Drivers who use rideshare as a temp job will be left out. If you really wanted to work an hourly job, probably should have not signed on to a contractor position.


----------



## UberchickATL (Apr 27, 2018)

Don’t fall for it. Anything U/L is against is for their benefit, not ours. Don’t sign it!

Maybe we should be fighting harder to be treated like actual independent contractors. To make an informed decision like a true independent contractor, there needs to be transparency. We should know the upfront pay for each ride plus the destination BEFORE we accept a ride. They should not be allowed to automatically add riders that we did not accept and switch riders mid ride (gryft does both these things). There are so many more examples on how we don’t have the benefit of being an independent contractor.

They have all the control. I believe that If we could cherry pick the rides that work for us, it would increase the fares for all those long pickups. The minimum fares would increase. How about riders putting a tip in app prior to pick up? Those rides would be more desirable and would skirt the surge fares of which U/L keeps a large portion of.


----------



## nosurgenodrive (May 13, 2019)

$1.00 a mile minimum. Nationwide. If you can't offer that, go eat a ...


----------



## Uber_Yota_916 (May 1, 2017)

This is local for me. I wonder how long I could state my case for. Go pro Uber and Lyft and use my mike time to rail on both companies and their Ponzi schemes and multi lvl marking schemes. Or how both companies operate modern day indentured servitude contracts on gullible people. While exploiting freshly minted immigrants.


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

Cali min wag is $12 per hour. In my market i can average 3 fares per hour. Miles agerage around 30 per hour. Best case senario for CA is $12 plus $16 vehicle expence allowance.


----------



## JLaw1719 (Apr 11, 2017)

doyousensehumor said:


> Great you Californians will love this. You would be making less through reduced hours, and will be told when and where to work. No more switching to the other app. As employees you'd get fired for under performing. If you hustle, there'd be no extra reward. Drivers who use rideshare as a temp job will be left out. If you really wanted to work an hourly job, probably should have not signed on to a contractor position.


Straw-man argument much? None of us living in California are clamoring for this. What we are interested in is being true contractors and not being in this grey area where we're kind of treated like employees while carrying the IC label.

Most also interested in seeing both companies go up in flames at this point.


----------



## 1.5xorbust (Nov 22, 2017)

Anything lyft recommends is not in your best interest.


----------



## RDWRER (May 24, 2018)

JLaw1719 said:


> Straw-man argument much? None of us living in California are clamoring for this. What we are interested in is being true contractors and not being in this grey area where we're kind of treated like employees while carrying the IC label.
> 
> Most also interested in seeing both companies go up in flames at this point.


You really shouldn't preach for all Californians, you immediately destroy your own argument when you do...


----------



## JLaw1719 (Apr 11, 2017)

RDWRER said:


> You really shouldn't preach for all Californians, you immediately destroy your own argument when you do...


What are you talking about? I'm clearly talking about those of us who reside in places like the SF forum.


----------



## RDWRER (May 24, 2018)

JLaw1719 said:


> What are you talking about? I'm clearly talking about those of us who reside in places like the SF forum.


"None of us living in California"

You can talk about your own views all you want but once you start to claim that you are talking about other people's views you get on their bad side as soon as they differ from yours even ever so slightly.


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

JLaw1719 said:


> Straw-man argument much? None of us living in California are clamoring for this. What we are interested in is being true contractors and not being in this grey area where we're kind of treated like employees while carrying the IC label.
> 
> Most also interested in seeing both companies go up in flames at this point.


Ok Lyft sends out an email basicaly warning "drivers should speak up if you don't want to become hourly employees"

Overwelmimg responce on this thread is basicly "@#$% you Lyft."

Have no worries, Lyft will do what it takes for their end. You guys are going to get the short end of the stick. After all you haven't noticed that everytime U/L change something, things get worse?


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

nosurgenodrive said:


> $1.00 a mile minimum. Nationwide. If you can't offer that, go eat a [email protected]


$2 minimum. Now THAT'S a plea I can get behind.


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

JLaw1719 said:


> *What we are interested in is being true contractors*


Then wake up and *gasp* take the little hint Lyft sent in that "pathetic" email, and let California know!!!

The email said to express it in your own way after all.


----------



## Wrb06wrx (Sep 20, 2017)

If the judge in california makes the case for us to be considered employees it has implications for all of us because now there is legal precedent. The other thing is that it will only make things better for them in the ivory towers not us out in the trenches pay rates should be better I agree 100% but IC status is better for us as a whole we need things like full destination info and estimated fare so that we as ICs can make an informed decision when you're subbing work though not every job is a winner I speak from experience outside of rideshare but as long as you can keep the doors open it's ok if you're generally profitable


----------



## dmoney155 (Jun 12, 2017)

So this is going to become a job with schedule...so some will make more money, but others will be out of the job. Nice. What everyone here fails to understand is that there is finite amount of money to go around. So right now if all they got is $100, and there is 100 drivers, everyone gets a $1... and everyone complains cuz it;s not enough... what will happen is, they will only allow 10 drivers to be online, so 10 will make $10, but guess what, other 90 will make 0. So to all these who want more, I hope you will be the ones of the 90 left with 0. At least now you all got opportunity to make something, when more regulation comes, only few will make more... and yes, I know all of you think you will be those lucky 10 making more, but guess what, only 10 of you can be 10, not all 100.... so good luck to all you 90 who will make 0.


----------



## BeansnRice (Aug 13, 2016)

KK2929 said:


> ______________________
> Correction - just checked and I got it at 9:18 am. They are asking for stories to forward to lawmakers and also have a link for the driver to contact their lawmaker independently. Now the campaign on the radio stations make sense. The D.J. ask for listeners to post their positive experiences with Uber and they will be read on the air.


If this is the case, that lawmakers are listening to grievances and experiences now, perhaps this is the chance to write a strong letter and send it directly to your representative.

Look at it like a strike but expressing your opinions on paper.

Do SOMETHING if you care about your income opportunity.

Yes U/L has been super shady but things are coming to head now.

Send your grievances and concerns to your rep right away.

Make it short and to the point .

Use bullet points.

Leave your contact info .


----------



## Declineathon (Feb 12, 2019)

The main point is CA loves unions. If we can get collective bargaining we can make real change in rates, deactivation recourse, safety, etc. 

That last Strike was a warmup. 

Lets have another, and another,


----------



## RDWRER (May 24, 2018)

dmoney155 said:


> So this is going to become a job with schedule...so some will make more money, but others will be out of the job. Nice. What everyone here fails to understand is that there is finite amount of money to go around. So right now if all they got is $100, and there is 100 drivers, everyone gets a $1... and everyone complains cuz it;s not enough... what will happen is, they will only allow 10 drivers to be online, so 10 will make $10, but guess what, other 90 will make 0. So to all these who want more, I hope you will be the ones of the 90 left with 0. At least now you all got opportunity to make something, when more regulation comes, only few will make more... and yes, I know all of you think you will be those lucky 10 making more, but guess what, only 10 of you can be 10, not all 100.... so good luck to all you 90 who will make 0.


I don't know about you but I'm interested in making more than $1...


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

kos um uber said:


> f ....l/u both
> 
> is there any positive


Uber will quite happily give you a script.


----------



## dmoney155 (Jun 12, 2017)

RDWRER said:


> I don't know about you but I'm interested in making more than $1...


Everyone is... but how do you now it will be you who will make more than $1, and not me, or the another driver you just passed today. Today everyone has equal opportunity to make money, some will make more and some will make less. If the regulations force the company to do something, they will do it, but that will come at some other cost... and that's what no one is focusing on. There is only so much money to go around, if they are forced to pay someone more that means someone else will be out of a job... and how do you know you will be at the money receiving end and not at the out of the job end?


----------



## RDWRER (May 24, 2018)

dmoney155 said:


> Everyone is... but how do you now it will be you who will make more than $1, and not me, or the another driver you just passed today. Today everyone has equal opportunity to make money, some will make more and some will make less. If the regulations force the company to do something, they will do it, but that will come at some other cost... and that's what no one is focusing on. There is only so much money to go around, if they are forced to pay someone more that means someone else will be out of a job... and how do you know you will be at the money receiving end and not at the out of the job end?


No. You said right now everyone has the equal opportunity to make 1 measly dollar. That's not making money, it's just driving for charity.


----------



## dmoney155 (Jun 12, 2017)

RDWRER said:


> No. You said right now everyone has the equal opportunity to make 1 measly dollar. That's not making money, it's just driving for charity.


Well if that's the case, why not just stop driving now and let others make money who feel this is worthwhile for them.... at least now you have choice to do so... once regulations come about, the choice will be made for you.

Right now when it is slow I chose not to drive. Once regulations kick in you won't have that choice... select few ill make $10, other will be told to look elsewhere... I rather make that choice myself than have that choice forced upon me.

What I'm getting at, everyone thinks with regulations everyone will make good money... I guarantee you that will not be the case. Only selected few will... the rest will have nothing.... If you rather have nothing then stop driving now. I rather have measly dollar than nothing.... because odds that you will be one who will get more money are slim. If you think you will be the one making all the money then please tell me why you think it will be you and not any of the other 1000s of other drivers.


----------



## GotstaGetALLDat (Jan 19, 2017)

"It would cost us BIG."
lol... take it from your stack of billions that you've raped and pillaged from us during the last few years you've slashed our wages to almost nothing, you dumb bastards


----------



## Judas Iscariot (Aug 17, 2015)

KK2929 said:


> All those figures and estimates are for full time employees, assuming 40 hours, for drivers, is that 40 hours logged on or pax in the car ?


Did you even read the article?



> Barclays based its estimates on a part-time driver who averages $15,600 a year in ride-hail income ($20 an hour for 15 hours a week, 52 weeks a year).


You can't comment on the article if you didn't read the article.


----------



## WAHN (May 6, 2019)

Judas Iscariot said:


> You can't comment on the article if you didn't read the article.


Yes, yes you can. :roflmao:


----------



## Judas Iscariot (Aug 17, 2015)

WAHN said:


> Yes, yes you can. :roflmao:


True, I forgot "the internet" factor.


----------



## Another Uber Driver (May 27, 2015)

WAHN said:


> Is this just going to California drivers?


I did not get it nor am I aware that any driver in Washington Market did. I would assume that only California drivers got it.


----------



## Bob Reynolds (Dec 20, 2014)

If Uber and Lyft had done the right thing and not forced most drivers into poverty wage pay then there would never have been a need for this legislation to force Lyft and Uber to comply with the existing labor laws that almost every other business has to comply with.

Lyft and Uber should have been paying an honest days pay for an honest days work. They have not done that and have indicated in their IPO that they have no intention of doing so. Now the legislators have to step in and force Uber and Lyft to do what they were supposed to be doing all along.

The bill is most likely going to pass. There is strong support for it. What Uber and Lyft are trying to do is to get a carve out that would exempt them from having to comply with the provisions of the bill. If they were able to do this then it would be a disaster for the drivers.

If you want to actually read the bill and send a message to the committee that now has the bill, I did start this thread that explains how you can do this:

https://uberpeople.net/threads/cali...s-bill-information-and-call-to-action.334315/


----------



## New2This (Dec 27, 2015)

I don't know the intricacies of the CA bill. I don't need to.

If Uber/Lyft want you to do something and say it's for driver's benefit, there's a 99.999999999999999999997% chance it's NOT to our benefit but Uber/Lyft's. 

Anytime they've said "this will help you/your earnings won't change" it's been bullshit. This is no different. 

The fact that Uber/Lyft came together for something makes me want to oppose it just because.

I want to see this go through and pummel both stocks.


----------



## nouberipo (Jul 24, 2018)

dmoney155 said:


> Everyone is... but how do you now it will be you who will make more than $1, and not me, or the another driver you just passed today. Today everyone has equal opportunity to make money, some will make more and some will make less. If the regulations force the company to do something, they will do it, but that will come at some other cost... and that's what no one is focusing on. There is only so much money to go around, if they are forced to pay someone more that means someone else will be out of a job... and how do you know you will be at the money receiving end and not at the out of the job end?


No everyone does NOT have equal opportunity to make money. The algorithm determines who gets rides and who doesn't based on many variables including how long you have been driving. I presume you are new to this otherwise you wouldn't have said that everyone has equal opportunity which they do not by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## kevin92009 (Sep 11, 2016)

welikecamping said:


> I'm not sure my comments would help


You're valued comments are always welcome here in this community.



Illini said:


> They're trying to convince us that any improvement in pay and working conditions will require us to become employees. That's complete BS. If they treated the drivers well all along, they wouldn't be in this position as the lawmakers would leave them alone.
> How about they increase our rates, and give us COMPLETE destination information including estimated fare prior to us accepting the ride? If they do, we'd be happy to tell the lawmakers to back off.


exactly , let us see the destinations and choose wisely ourselves instead of hiding information .


----------



## dmoney155 (Jun 12, 2017)

GotstaGetALLDat said:


> "It would cost us BIG."
> lol... take it from your stack of billions that you've raped and pillaged from us during the last few years you've slashed our wages to almost nothing, you dumb bastards


Dude, they're not going to give anything back... you ever see any enterprises giving anything back? did Travis gave anything back? he took his billions and moved on to the next thing.


----------



## kevin92009 (Sep 11, 2016)

dmoney155 said:


> Dude, they're not going to give anything back... you ever see any enterprises giving anything back? did Travis gave anything back? he took his billions and moved on to the next thing.


wouldn't be surprised if travis is trying to expand his 1099 exploitation models on his new kitchen business.


----------



## dmoney155 (Jun 12, 2017)

nouberipo said:


> No everyone does NOT have equal opportunity to make money. The algorithm determines who gets rides and who doesn't based on many variables including how long you have been driving. I presume you are new to this otherwise you wouldn't have said that everyone has equal opportunity which they do not by any stretch of the imagination.


Been doing it for a while actually... and yes, everyone has equal opportunity... everyone can drive whenever they want... everyone has equal chance of making money out of this....... some are better at it than others, like any task. I welcome new players to the game any time. Not afraid of competition. I rather have me choosing when to drive, then some regulation making that choice for me. Like that 12hrs limit, how is that working out for any benefit? It's absurd that a governing body needs to tell me when I am too tired to drive.



kevin92009 said:


> wouldn't be surprised if travis is trying to expand his 1099 exploitation models on his new kitchen business.


Yep basically that's what he is doing... more kudos to him... always moving forward with new ideas. Contrast that with drivers trying to go back to the taxi model with all their regulations and caps, then take a look who is better off.


----------



## mbd (Aug 27, 2018)

dmoney155 said:


> So this is going to become a job with schedule...so some will make more money, but others will be out of the job. Nice. What everyone here fails to understand is that there is finite amount of money to go around. So right now if all they got is $100, and there is 100 drivers, everyone gets a $1... and everyone complains cuz it;s not enough... what will happen is, they will only allow 10 drivers to be online, so 10 will make $10, but guess what, other 90 will make 0. So to all these who want more, I hope you will be the ones of the 90 left with 0. At least now you all got opportunity to make something, when more regulation comes, only few will make more... and yes, I know all of you think you will be those lucky 10 making more, but guess what, only 10 of you can be 10, not all 100.... so good luck to all you 90 who will make 0.


It is a shell game ... money comes from one driver's pocket , to the next
This is not msft or google, companies making billion dollar profits per month.

VC's not going to put up any moneys now. Eventually, they will have to pass on the expenses to the pax or move out of California


----------



## dmoney155 (Jun 12, 2017)

mbd said:


> It is a shell game ... money comes from one driver's pocket , to the next
> This is not msft or google, companies making billion dollar profits per month.
> 
> VC's not going to put up any moneys now. Eventually, they will have to pass on the expenses to the pax or move out of California


Yep, first time I heard of it, I already knew it can't last... to be honest I am surprised it lasted that long. It shows how desperate people are, which is scary outlook of our economy. But whatever it is, I'm just here to try to make some profit out of it, and any regulation will make it harder to do so in my opinion..... personally I would love to see them (or some other company to step in) that will make it more of an auction system. Make it truly driven by the market. One can dream I guess heh.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

Illini said:


> They're trying to convince us that any improvement in pay and working conditions will require us to become employees. That's complete BS. If they treated the drivers well all along, they wouldn't be in this position as the lawmakers would leave them alone.
> How about they increase our rates, and give us COMPLETE destination information including estimated fare prior to us accepting the ride? If they do, we'd be happy to tell the lawmakers to back off.


?



doyousensehumor said:


> Great you Californians will love this. You would be making less through reduced hours, and will be told when and where to work. No more switching to the other app. As employees you'd get fired for under performing. If you hustle, there'd be no extra reward. Drivers who use rideshare as a temp job will be left out. If you really wanted to work an hourly job, probably should have not signed on to a contractor position.


Absolutely! Well stated.


----------



## The Entomologist (Sep 23, 2018)

Don't let the shills misinform you, boys.

A. Uber and Lyft cannot function as employers, they will do everything they can to make you a contractor, employment is not an option for them.

B. Being an employee allows everyone to unionize, U/L's worst nightmare, don't think for a second you'll be picking all trips at 10-15 bucks an hour, LOL, not even in their wildest dreams, if they fail to remedy what the drivers ask for, then another company who does contracting right will take over for them, don't think these companies are the very last cokes in the desert, these companies are easy to replace and has been done already in Texas when they kicked them to the curb, their only solution was to go bribe people at state level so they would be let back in to do things their way, no one missed them for the few months they left and other companies who paid right took over for them, this was until the cancer came back through bribery.

Both Uber and Lyft count on your ignorance to help them.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

The Entomologist said:


> Don't let the shills misinform you, boys.
> 
> A. Uber and Lyft cannot function as employers, they will do everything they can to make you a contractor, employment is not an option for them.
> 
> ...


?


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

Judas Iscariot said:


> Did you even read the article?
> ___________________
> 
> ???? Of course, I read the article. Stupid question. The point I am trying to make is this -- All those employer cost figures are based on full time employees that are working 40 hours per week. benefits, taxes, etc. There are many ways for an employer to keep an employee in the "part time" status, where they do not have to pay all those fee. Sorry that was " over " your head but thank you for posting the article. I found it very informative.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

Bob Reynolds said:


> If Uber and Lyft had done the right thing and not forced most drivers into poverty wage pay then there would never have been a need for this legislation to force Lyft and Uber to comply with the existing labor laws that almost every other business has to comply with.
> 
> Lyft and Uber should have been paying an honest days pay for an honest days work. They have not done that and have indicated in their IPO that they have no intention of doing so. Now the legislators have to step in and force Uber and Lyft to do what they were supposed to be doing all along.
> 
> ...


Down with this ridiculous, Socialistic bill. ???


----------



## libingbing (Apr 17, 2017)

Gryft wanted to charge a pax $130+ from DFW to East Dallas last night while paying driver normal rate. I did pax a favor and cancelled ride. Drove pax there for $75 cash.


----------



## rideshareapphero (Mar 30, 2018)

They won't give us a script unless we send a message to their drivers support of course.


----------



## Uber1111uber (Oct 21, 2017)

Anyone have a link to the actual bill? Also what kind of timeframe are we looking at to see if this passes? 
Thanks


----------



## Bob Reynolds (Dec 20, 2014)

I have the information about the bill and a link here:

https://uberpeople.net/threads/cali...ation-and-call-to-action.334315/#post-5102854


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

doyousensehumor said:


> Great you Californians will love this. You would be making less through reduced hours, and will be told when and where to work. No more switching to the other app. As employees you'd get fired for under performing. If you hustle, there'd be no extra reward. Drivers who use rideshare as a temp job will be left out. If you really wanted to work an hourly job, probably should have not signed on to a contractor position.


Another ant who doesn't get it.



dmoney155 said:


> So this is going to become a job with schedule...so some will make more money, but others will be out of the job. Nice. What everyone here fails to understand is that there is finite amount of money to go around. So right now if all they got is $100, and there is 100 drivers, everyone gets a $1... and everyone complains cuz it;s not enough... what will happen is, they will only allow 10 drivers to be online, so 10 will make $10, but guess what, other 90 will make 0. So to all these who want more, I hope you will be the ones of the 90 left with 0. At least now you all got opportunity to make something, when more regulation comes, only few will make more... and yes, I know all of you think you will be those lucky 10 making more, but guess what, only 10 of you can be 10, not all 100.... so good luck to all you 90 who will make 0.


All they have to do is STOP HIRING MORE DRIVERS. Even with higher rates, there will be attrition.


----------



## Uber1111uber (Oct 21, 2017)

Bob Reynolds said:


> I have the information about the bill and a link here:
> 
> https://uberpeople.net/threads/cali...ation-and-call-to-action.334315/#post-5102854


Thanks

So its sounds like this will 100% pass and the differences will be you will have to wear an uber or lyft shirt while working, have a decal and set hours ahead of time for the downside. For the upside you will get paid time off, workers comp., insurance, retirement etc. Also will cost uber and lyft TONS of money ?


----------



## RetiredMechanicUberDriver (Jun 18, 2019)

Look at what Austria just did to them. LMAO!!


----------



## dmoney155 (Jun 12, 2017)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Another ant who doesn't get it.
> 
> 
> All they have to do is STOP HIRING MORE DRIVERS. Even with higher rates, there will be attrition.


Why you need them to stop accepting more drivers? why not decide for yourself when it is worth and when it is not worth being out there.


----------



## Bob Reynolds (Dec 20, 2014)

dmoney155 said:


> Why you need them to stop accepting more drivers? why not decide for yourself when it is worth and when it is not worth being out there.


There are a number of reasons for Lyft and Uber to manage the number of drivers needed to service a trade area.

1. Only Lyft and Uber know the real number of riders, in a trade area, that they need to service at any given time. They do not share this information with the drivers.

2. If Lyft and Uber actually had to pay drivers while they are on the clock (on the app) waiting for a driver then they would surely manage them properly to make sure that they are positioned into areas that really have business and move them from areas where there is no business.


----------



## Cstrewd (Jun 19, 2019)

libingbing said:


> Gryft wanted to charge a pax $130+ from DFW to East Dallas last night while paying driver normal rate. I did pax a favor and cancelled ride. Drove pax there for $75 cash.


Yes. That's exactly what you do !!! Excellent move !!


----------



## stevenh1975 (Aug 4, 2015)

Lyft just did a rate cut in San Diego, California ! Wow few day after they ask you to support them. Way to go !


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

Companies are not in business to make employees rich.

Work for a company if you are not happy move on.

I for one want nothing to do with being an employee for Uber and or Lyft. I like my freedoms.

The grass is always greener on the other side. When you get to the other side the same statement still applies.

Every job I left started as a great job for a small company, they get bought out and everyone is told it will be great nothing will change. Guess what it is all lies to keep people working until they get through the transition. Then the true colors come out.

If Uber and Lyft were smart, they would pull out of CA if this passes. that includes their corporate offices. The state officials in California are doing this for one reason and only one reason, *MONEY*! Look at all the money the state will rake in from employment taxes. Follow the *MONEY* people, this is not in the best interest of the drivers.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

doyousensehumor said:


> Great you Californians will love this. You would be making less through reduced hours, and will be told when and where to work. No more switching to the other app. As employees you'd get fired for under performing. If you hustle, there'd be no extra reward. Drivers who use rideshare as a temp job will be left out. If you really wanted to work an hourly job, probably should have not signed on to a contractor position.


That's what ppl said about the changes in NY. Yet, they have not pulled out of the city or state, imagine that. No one is on a set schedule. The companies complain and file lawsuits to prevent it, but in the end it's just a shifting of money to where it belongs.



New2This said:


> Uber/Lyft want you to do something and say it's for driver's benefit, there's a 99.999999999999999999997% chance it's NOT to our benefit but Uber/Lyft's.
> 
> Anytime they've said "this will help you/your earnings won't change" it's been bullshit. This is no different


How do I Like this post multiple times?


----------



## BeansnRice (Aug 13, 2016)

stevenh1975 said:


> Lyft just did a rate cut in San Diego, California ! Wow few day after they ask you to support them. Way to go !


Please show before n after rate cards.
Thanks


----------



## Tnasty (Mar 23, 2016)

Lyft is very content on playing games until they get the driverless cars on the road.


----------



## Hagong (Jan 17, 2017)

Once upon a time, a woman was picking up firewood. She came upon a poisonous snake frozen in the snow. She took the snake home and nursed it back to health. One day the snake bit her on the cheek. As she lay dying, she asked the snake, "Why have you done this to me?" And the snake answered, "Look, *****, you knew I was a snake."


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

dmoney155 said:


> Why you need them to stop accepting more drivers? why not decide for yourself when it is worth and when it is not worth being out there.


1. Read what I replied to. What you're saying is not related at all. My point was no one has to get "fired" to limit drivers. Just stop the onboarding.
2. Eventually there up is NO TIME it is worth being out there. My town is 99% there now.


----------



## beezlewaxin (Feb 10, 2015)

doyousensehumor said:


> Then wake up and *gasp* take the little hint Lyft sent in that "pathetic" email, and let California know!!!
> 
> The email said to express it in your own way after all.


Lyft states, "We want you to say what you value about your work with Lyft..."

I would not be surprised if only those responses that fit what they want will be forwarded to the state legislature. The rest will never see the light of day.

If you have something honest (aka negative) to say don't do it through Lyft. Send it directly.


----------

