# The truth of prop 22. 26c a minute 30c a mile.



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

OK guys...

1.2X min wage?
30c a mile?


What does this REALLY MEAN?


1.2 X $13= $15.60 an hour

BUT IT'S NOT, it's only while on pings.

so your looking at 26 a minute 30c a mile.


A 30 minute 10 mile trip would only pay...
$7.80 (in time)+ $3.00 (in mileage) or $10.80.


----------



## SFTraffic (Apr 19, 2016)

It means vote NO and reject the offer.


----------



## IthurstwhenIP (Jan 12, 2018)

Vote no. If I am an employee they can pay me to watch ******* until a high surge ping comes in. Don’t want do give up up then I am good


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

IthurstwhenIP said:


> Vote no. If I am an employee they can pay me to watch inappropriate site until a high surge ping comes in. Don't want do give up up then I am good


If your an employee and you refuse a ping you'll be fired, you think there will be a surge? No you'll get minimum wage an hour and .30 a mile period. No surge, no bonus, no nothing else

Vote yes on Prop 22, stay an independent contractor, you do not want to be Uber's wage slave


----------



## SFTraffic (Apr 19, 2016)

NicFit said:


> If your an employee and you refuse a ping you'll be fired, you think there will be a surge? No you'll get minimum wage an hour and .30 a mile period. No surge, no bonus, no nothing else
> 
> Vote yes on Prop 22, stay an independent contractor, you do not want to be Uber's wage slave


This is factually incorrect to suggest .30 a mile period. You get full mileage reimbursement in California as an employee. That's .575 cents in 2020.


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

SFTraffic said:


> This is factually incorrect to suggest .30 a mile period. You get full mileage reimbursement in California as an employee. That's .575 cents in 2020.


And that's what you get now? Last I checked I get more then that per mile


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

IthurstwhenIP said:


> Vote no. If I am an employee


...and if AB5 is it and you are not selected to be an employee? Then what. Kinda makes prop 22 the least evil thing to happen.


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

90% of current drivers will not be hired as employees if Prop 22 fails

Vote yes on Prop 22


----------



## Boca Ratman (Jun 6, 2018)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> OK guys...
> 
> 1.2X min wage?
> 30c a mile?
> ...


My understanding is this is the minimum. It would stay like it is now, and then this would be supplemental if the minimum wasn't earned.


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

Boca Ratman said:


> My understanding is this is the minimum. It would stay like it is now, and then this would be supplemental if the minimum wasn't earned.


I think it's for stuff like long distant pings and when you have time wasters like I wanna go through the drive thru. Maybe also will make sure Uber can't cut rates to where you would be paid less then minimum wage. I thinks it's a safety net so people don't feel like they get short changed


----------



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

are you guys telling me that if uber could get away with paying this and calling it 20% over min wage they won't?


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> are you guys telling me that if uber could get away with paying this and calling it 20% over min wage they won't?


I make on average more then double minimum wage, you want to be payed for every minute you work then go flip burgers, I have made $100 an hour multiple times doing this, you think that will be there when your an employee? No, surge will be gone, you will get minimum wage only and Uber will pocket the rest, why? Because that's how employees are treated. A store can sell $100k of merchandise in a day, you think the cashier gets anymore then that? No, they get their minimum wage and that's it. Don't be a part of Biden's socialist America and vote yes on Prop 22


----------



## IthurstwhenIP (Jan 12, 2018)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> are you guys telling me that if uber could get away with paying this and calling it 20% over min wage they won't?


math is hard


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

NicFit said:


> I think it's for stuff like long distant pings and when you have time wasters like I wanna go through the drive thru. Maybe also will make sure Uber can't cut rates to where you would be paid less then minimum wage. I thinks it's a safety net so people don't feel like they get short changed


If UBER hadnt CUT RATES 
SO MANY TIMES

NONE OF THIS WOULD BE HAPPENING !


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

tohunt4me said:


> If UBER hadnt CUT RATES
> SO MANY TIMES
> 
> NONE OF THIS WOULD BE HAPPENING !


Yep, Prop 22 means they can't cut rates any more. If it fails then 90% of drivers are out of the job. The rest left will get minimum wage and vehicle reimbursement while Uber pockets all the rest of the fares


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Drivers NEED a Union.

Too many Issues NOT being addressed !


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

NicFit said:


> Yep, Prop 22 means they can't cut rates any more. If it fails then 90% of drivers are out of the job. The rest left will get minimum wage and vehicle reimbursement while Uber pockets all the rest of the fares


Why would Uber pay you more than "double minimum wage" if it can pay another driver much less?

You're going to be one of the first divers that Uber cuts.

Why would Uber pay you 100 dollars an hour if it can pay someone else $15.40 an hour?



NicFit said:


> I make on average more then double minimum wage, you want to be payed for every minute you work then go flip burgers, I have made $100 an hour multiple times doing this, you think that will be there when your an employee? No, surge will be gone, you will get minimum wage only and Uber will pocket the rest, why? Because that's how employees are treated. A store can sell $100k of merchandise in a day, you think the cashier gets anymore then that? No, they get their minimum wage and that's it. Don't be a part of Biden's socialist America and vote yes on Prop 22


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

observer said:


> Why would Uber pay you more than "double minimum wage" if it can pay another driver much less?
> 
> You're going to be one of the first divers that Uber cuts.
> 
> Why would Uber pay you 100 dollars an hour if it can pay someone else $15.40 an hour?


Yeah, they will pay your wage and pocket the rest of the surge they charge customers

This is another reason I'm voting yes on Prop 22, 90% of the driver now won't be hired and that's after months of rideshare being shut down.You can't be an employee if they won't hire you, think your really going to be one of the lucky ones they hire either?


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

NicFit said:


> Yeah, they will pay your wage and pocket the rest of the surge they charge customers
> 
> This is another reason I'm voting yes on Prop 22, 90% of the driver now won't be hired and that's after months of rideshare being shut down.You can't be an employee if they won't hire you, think your really going to be one of the lucky ones they hire either?


Why would Uber hire any driver at 100 an hour if they can pay another driver $15.40 an hour? Uber is going to cut all those that make too much money.

Wouldn't you do the same?

No, I would never drive for Uber.


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

observer said:


> Why would Uber hire any driver at 100 an hour if they can pay another driver $15.40 an hour? Uber is going to cut all those that make too much money.
> 
> Wouldn't you do the same?
> 
> No, I would never drive for Uber.


Uber didn't hire me at $100 an hour, because I get a cut of the surge I got $100 for that hour, you think if I was an employee I would still get them at cut? No, they'll pay someone $15.40 an hour and pocket the rest. This is another reason they can't make us employees, they are going to take all of the surge and fare cuts away, you will get $15.40 an hour and that's it


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

NicFit said:


> Uber didn't hire me at $100 an hour, because I get a cut of the surge I got $100 for that hour, you think if I was an employee I would still get them at cut? No, they'll pay someone $15.40 an hour and pocket the rest. This is another reason they can't make us employees, they are going to take all of the surge and fare cuts away, you will get $15.40 an hour and that's it


If you were Uber and you had a choice to pay someone $100 dollars an hour or pay $15.40 an hour to someone else.

Would you pay $100 or $15.40?


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

observer said:


> If you were Uber and you had a choice to pay someone $100 dollars an hour or pay $15.40 an hour to someone else.
> 
> Would you pay $100 or $15.40?


Don't know, they probably don't want the hassle of micromanaging employees, right now it's set up so we get a cut of the pay, if they make us employee they won't pay us the difference and keep the $100


----------



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

NicFit said:


> I make on average more then double minimum wage, you want to be payed for every minute you work then go flip burgers, I have made $100 an hour multiple times doing this, you think that will be there when your an employee? No, surge will be gone, you will get minimum wage only and Uber will pocket the rest, why? Because that's how employees are treated. A store can sell $100k of merchandise in a day, you think the cashier gets anymore then that? No, they get their minimum wage and that's it. Don't be a part of Biden's socialist America and vote yes on Prop 22


You know what min wage really means?

$13 an hour plus 57.50a mile.

By my guestimation min wage In California is roughly in the range of $27 an hour, plus benifits.

So... $26 an hour? Sure... sure.., I'd buy that your getting double $13. But I doubt your getting $50.

Truth of the matter min wage is a heck of a lot higher than you think it is.

If min wage came to Orlando in this gig I'd take uberx pings in the taxi. Because why not?

mileage reimbursement would pay for the taxi easily and min wage plus tips? Well that pays me. Plus once I max out the hours on Uber i,d still have "time" left on the taxi rental to do more.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

NicFit said:


> Don't know, they probably don't want the hassle of micromanaging employees, right now it's set up so we get a cut of the pay, if they make us employee they won't pay us the difference and keep the $100


That's not what I asked.

What would YOU do, would you pay someone a $100 an hour or would YOU pay someone else $15.40 an hour?

To do the same trip.


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

observer said:


> That's not what I asked.
> 
> What would YOU do, would you pay someone a $100 an hour or would YOU pay someone else $15.40 an hour?
> 
> To do the same trip.


If it was my employee I'd pay them $15.40 and pocket the $100, if it was my independent contractor then I'd collect my cut and they collect the $100. I think AB5 we are not going to have access to anything but a wage, that's why staying away from employee status would be worth more


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

NicFit said:


> If it was my employee I'd pay them $15.40 and pocket the $100, if it was my independent contractor then I'd collect my cut and they collect the $100. I think AB5 we are not going to have access to anything but a wage, that's why staying away from employee status would be worth more


You're too generous.

I'd pay out the $15.40 and keep the difference.

Uber will do the same.


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

observer said:


> You're too generous.
> 
> I'd pay out the $15.40 and keep the difference.
> 
> Uber will do the same.


That's what I feel like they will do if we are employees, why would they pay us anything more then an hourly wage anymore?

As of right now I can still make $100 an hour, Uber gets their cut and everyone is happy


----------



## Woohaa (Jan 15, 2017)

Uber and Lyft want to be the only companies that claim you're an independent contractor yet treat you like employees. They can't have it both ways.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

NicFit said:


> That's what I feel like they will do if we are employees, why would they pay us anything more then an hourly wage anymore?
> 
> As of right now I can still make $100 an hour, Uber gets their cut and everyone is happy


Why wouldn't they do they pay more than they had to under Prop 22?

There is no guarantee you'll be paid what you are making now.


----------



## NicFit (Jan 18, 2020)

observer said:


> Why wouldn't they do they pay more than they had to under Prop 22?
> 
> There is no guarantee you'll be paid what you are making now.


? on the first sentence. There no guarantee when you open a restaurant you'll make money, why do people think they should be guaranteed anything with Uber, that's not what I signed up for. If you couldn't figure out how to make money without AB5 then you should find another job. I didn't sign up for Uber to have this wage slave crap, I hate it, I don't want no wages and benefits and other crap taken out of my pay, I want all the pay and figure it out myself. That's what being an independent contractor is. What AB5 is doing is forcing me to go back to being under someone else's control, with Uber if I don't want to work that day I can choose not to. If I'm an employee then I have to work shifts, which destroys my freedom. I would rather move elsewhere then to conform to someone's else schedule


----------



## Paul Vincent (Jan 15, 2016)

NicFit said:


> If your an employee and you refuse a ping you'll be fired, you think there will be a surge? No you'll get minimum wage an hour and .30 a mile period. No surge, no bonus, no nothing else
> 
> Vote yes on Prop 22, stay an independent contractor, you do not want to be Uber's wage slave


Obviously you missed the part about no surge with prop 22. What the rider pays for a ride is inconsequential to the driver. No more percentage of the fare. You get $0.26 a minute and 30 cents a mile... that's it! To earn extra earnings depends on tips and incentives. You should read a proposition before you vote for it. But yes you will be able to log on whenever you want but your earnings will be greatly diminished. I totally understand your position my concern is that you don't realize how much of a pay cut your Independence will cost you. AB5 is not much better but that's all there is folks.



observer said:


> Why wouldn't they do they pay more than they had to under Prop 22?
> 
> There is no guarantee you'll be paid what you are making now.


That is why they want prop 22 so badly. They'll be able to make some nice profits finally.
If Uber charges $1 a mile and pays the driver $0.30 a mile the car drives on the platform for 100,000 miles that = $70,000 for rideshare and $30,000 for the driver. 
70/30 split.


----------



## Illini (Mar 14, 2019)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> A 30 minute 10 mile trip would _AT MINIMUM_ only pay...
> $7.80 (in time)+ $3.00 (in mileage) or $10.80.


FIFY


----------



## Gigworker (Oct 23, 2019)

If prop 22 passes, Uber would still have to pay drivers enough to motivate us to drive. If drivers ends up making less money under prop 22, Uber would have a difficult time keeping drivers. I think the guarantee money in prop 22 is less than we make now, but I think Uber would have to pay drivers more than the guarantee hourly rate in order to keep drivers working. Who would drive intoxicated people home for around minimum wage ? If prop 22 passes, I don’t think anything would change. If prop 22 fails, everything would change.


----------



## Paul Vincent (Jan 15, 2016)

NicFit said:


> Yep, Prop 22 means they can't cut rates any more. If it fails then 90% of drivers are out of the job. The rest left will get minimum wage and vehicle reimbursement while Uber pockets all the rest of the fares


Prop 22 means RATES ARE IRRELEVANT, $0.26 per minute $0.30 per mile plus tips and incentives for the drivers. Whatever Uber charges the rider it doesn't matter that has nothing to do with what the driver receives under prop 22.



Gigworker said:


> If prop 22 passes, Uber would still have to pay drivers enough to motivate us to drive. If drivers ends up making less money under prop 22, Uber would have a difficult time keeping drivers. I think the guarantee money in prop 22 is less than we make now, but I think Uber would have to pay drivers more than the guarantee hourly rate in order to keep drivers working. Who would drive intoxicated people home for around minimum wage ? If prop 22 passes, I don't think anything would change. If prop 22 fails, everything would change.


When they need more drivers on the road they'll have incentives, that's how drivers will earn more but not through the rates. It's written that way in prop 22.


----------



## Alloverthemap (Sep 3, 2017)

I haven't been following this issue very closely from afar (I'm in Massachusetts), but if drivers are considered employees and not independent contractors, then doesn't the onus fall on the company to provide a solid basis for employee termination? Can you imagine the legal bills that would be involved with that, since most terminations result from he said / she said conflicts of which there is no record? I supposed mandating a dash-cam would follow, but who would pay for it? Another sticky wicket.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Alloverthemap said:


> to provide a solid basis for employee termination?


not in calif. It is a 'at will' employer. They can fire for nearly any reason but a few 'third rail' reasons.

In the state of *California, at-will employment* means that the employer or the *employee* may terminate the *employment* relationship at *any* time, for *any reason*, so long as the *reason* is not illegal. ... If an *employee* is *fired* for *any* of these *reasons*, they may be entitled to sue the employer for *employment* discrimination


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

SHalester said:


> not in calif. It is a 'at will' employer. They can fire for nearly any reason but a few 'third rail' reasons.
> 
> In the state of *California, at-will employment* means that the employer or the *employee* may terminate the *employment* relationship at *any* time, for *any reason*, so long as the *reason* is not illegal. ... If an *employee* is *fired* for *any* of these *reasons*, they may be entitled to sue the employer for *employment* discrimination


This one is really tricky.

If the employee can prove a pattern of the employer not firing other employees for the same reason, he may be able to win a lawsuit. It all depends on the consistency of the employer.

Even if terminated under these circumstances, the employee would very likely be eligible for unemployment since there is no proof he did anything wrong.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

which is why, in calif, most employers have written employee guidelines and official HR depts that have employee files. Written up, right in the file it goes. When said employee is fired for being in violation of something or other the UI contacts said HR dept. They produce the 3 (or however many write ups there are) and that is that for the UI claim. Your mileage may differ.

But, anyone who suggest Prop 22 will give 'job protection' they are clearly barking at the moon. While altered.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

SHalester said:


> which is why, in calif, most employers have written employee guidelines and official HR depts that have employee files. Written up, right in the file it goes. When said employee is fired for being in violation of something or other the UI contacts said HR dept. They produce the 3 (or however many write ups there are) and that is that for the UI claim. Your mileage may differ.
> 
> But, anyone who suggest Prop 22 will give 'job protection' they are clearly barking at the moon. While altered.


That is why it's important for employers to be consistent with discipline. When they aren't is when there's a good possibility of a lawsuit.

Unemployment Insurance in California is very pro employee. Warnings don't mean a whole lot if they are based on hearsay without a serious investigation.



Alloverthemap said:


> I haven't been following this issue very closely from afar (I'm in Massachusetts), but if drivers are considered employees and not independent contractors, then doesn't the onus fall on the company to provide a solid basis for employee termination? Can you imagine the legal bills that would be involved with that, since most terminations result from he said / she said conflicts of which there is no record? I supposed mandating a dash-cam would follow, but who would pay for it? Another sticky wicket.


If a webcam is required, the employer would have to provide it.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

observer said:


> Warnings don't mean a whole lot if they are based on hearsay without a serious investigation.


well, trust me, that is what the HR dept is for.....in many companies with more than 50 employees. Most companies have a 3 write up you are gone policy and that is that. Documented with witness statements etc. With the employee signing the write up. Hard to beat.

There is another reason nearly all companies do it: help when the UI comes to the door and says the company's UI ins payment is going up.

but, yup, ex-employee can cry, whine, moan and lie and often times Cal EDD will believe 'em and grant UI........after an investigation, that is...

.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

SHalester said:


> well, trust me, that is what the HR dept is for.....in many companies with more than 50 employees. Most companies have a 3 write up you are gone policy and that is that. Documented with witness statements etc. With the employee signing the write up. Hard to beat.
> 
> There is another reason nearly all companies do it: help when the UI comes to the door and says the company's UI ins payment is going up.
> 
> ...


We had almost a thousand employees and as GM I always checked with HR to make sure I crossed my "T"s and dotted my "I"s before I fired anyone.

Having 3 warnings is nice but you don't even need one warning to terminate.

The problem with the 3 warning rule is that you have to be *consistent* with ALL employees. If you let someone get away with 4-5-6 warnings then the 4-5-6 warnings becomes the new threshold.

Yes, the employers rates will go up if an employee gets awarded UI benefits.

That's why some employers try to prove that a firing was for cause.

When I was laid off I was ready with pictures of my supposed violations, being grossly overlooked at other locations.

The company decided not to contest my Unemployment Insurance.

The warnings I recieved would have been thrown out in a hearing (and been grounds for a whistleblower lawsuit).

They made the right choice.

BTW, I knew two years ahead of time I was going to be laid off. I knew exactly how they were going to do it and I prepared.

I fired hundreds of employees over the years. I knew all the red flags.


----------



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

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> A 30 minute 10 mile trip would only pay...
> $7.80 (in time)+ $3.00 (in mileage) or $10.80.


Why do you think U/L wrote it and are paying 200 mil to make it reality.

More importantly is the clause that we can not collectively bargain. So it will be locked in with no regard to inflation coming to a town near you or Gas price index.

I read the average miles per full hour is 20-25

I read the average engaged time is 2/3 of an hour

Lets Count 8 full hours and 200 miles.

With minimum wage protection it is

8x15= 120$
200x .57 = 114$

120+114=234$

Total before tip 234$

29.25$ per full hour before tip.

Under prop 22

Engaged time 2/3 of 8 = 5.33 hours
5.33x (1.20 x 15) = 96$

Miles 200x .30 = 60$

96$ + 60$ = 154$

Total before tip 154$

19.25$ per full hour

10 $ less under prop 22 and no protections or benefits. While you have 2,500 deductible on insurance.
Under prop 22, if you don't like 19.25 or slightly above, there is no collective bargaining, you leave, someone else will do the job.

Under employee status you can collectively bargain on matters and minimum wage increases through time. You get protections, benefits, and no deductible for damage and accidents.


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

I will crack Lyft hacks said:


> Under employee status you can collectively bargain on matters and minimum wage increases through time.


Nope. Employee status alone does not give one any bargaining power. You want the job, they make an offer, you accept or not. Period. And if hired and after a while you want a raise you ask your boss and he/she laughs. You keep working, or quit. Period.

Unless you are referring to a union employee. That can only happen if 50% + 1 vote to organize. Uber drivers, getting to 50%. Herding kittens is easier. &#129335;‍♂ &#129318;‍♂ And this only happens if Prop 22 fails. The remaining active drivers who are 'hired' will not want to rock the boat by trying to become unionized. They will just be happy they were hired......


----------



## Basketball 9to5 (Jun 21, 2020)

tohunt4me said:


> If UBER hadnt CUT RATES
> SO MANY TIMES
> 
> NONE OF THIS WOULD BE HAPPENING !


It amazes me most drivers can't comprehend prop 22..Uber and Lyft never cared about us never!!!..this pandemic really exposed Uber and Lyft they are treacherous I'm praying that this prop 22 fails miserably..I think a hybrid contractor title where we aren't employees but it benefits us more as being protected from Uber and Lyft scandalous practices and ways..prop 22 is a lose lose for riders and drivers....you think it's bad now just wait..if it passes

Uber and Lyft owe the state at least 430 million dollars such a blessing we got unemployment I would rather them leave the state...6 years of driving unfair deactivations.. being penalized for cancellations etc...a mess these companies need to be regulated


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Basketball 9to5 said:


> you think it's bad now just wait..if it passes


I'm sorry. AB5 is better? Can you detail that and include how you feel about all the drivers who won't be hired. thanks.


----------



## Basketball 9to5 (Jun 21, 2020)

SHalester said:


> I'm sorry. AB5 is better? Can you detail that and include how you feel about all the drivers who won't be hired. thanks.


Modify AB5 or come up with a hybrid model one thing for sure shit is not working as is..prop 22 is not good for us at all..


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Basketball 9to5 said:


> Modify AB5 or come up with a hybrid model one thing for sure shit is not working as is..prop 22 is not good for us at all..


AB5 is not being modified anytime soon, so that is a nonstarter. Prop 22 is clearly the lesser of 2 evils. Think of it that way. The alternative is WORSE.


----------



## Basketball 9to5 (Jun 21, 2020)

Like I said before we as drivers don't have any solidarity.... everybody is focused on remaining independent...the issue is labor laws and having benefits and having a minimum wage that benefits us..

I'm convinced Uber and Lyft got most drivers brainwashed..

Lesser of 2 evils..funny guy


----------



## SHalester (Aug 25, 2019)

Basketball 9to5 said:


> I'm convinced Uber and Lyft got most drivers brainwashed..


..speak for yourself, please. Not all of us do RS to make a living and many or most of us so don't want to be employees.

My floor is minimum wage for my entire shift; I know a lot of posters here cheat by just thinking of time going to/with a pax as their per hour. If I can't gross over $13 an hour in my market, I'm driving while altered. Guaranteeing me minimum wage really doesn't float my boat at all and I'm not even in this to make huge bank. And being an employee again really sinks said boat....right to the bottom of the ocean.


----------



## RockemSockem (Sep 1, 2020)

The only reason they are talking about minimum pay is because their back is against the wall,without this ruling they would have just bled us dry.


----------



## Basketball 9to5 (Jun 21, 2020)

SHalester said:


> ..speak for yourself, please. Not all of us do RS to make a living and many or most of us so don't want to be employees.
> 
> My floor is minimum wage for my entire shift; I know a lot of posters here cheat by just thinking of time going to/with a pax as their per hour. If I can't gross over $13 an hour in my market, I'm driving while altered. Guaranteeing me minimum wage really doesn't float my boat at all and I'm not even in this to make huge bank. And being an employee again really sinks said boat....right to the bottom of the ocean.


that's you..yes some drivers drive full time...Uber and Lyft been breaking labor laws...we need protections...fair wages..does uber and Lyft have guys under hypnosis..geesh


RockemSockem said:


> The only reason they are talking about minimum pay is because their back is against the wall,without this ruling they would have just bled us dry.


Yes sir thank you most drivers are mentally stuck on saving there independent status and freedom to drive...most drivers are clueless things will get worse Uber and Lyft don't give and never gave a rats azz about us..this pandemic no compassion it's been horrible...praying that prop 22 passes..

Sorry praying that it FAILS!!!!!!


----------

