# Uber drivers granted class action status in lawsuit over tips



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/01/us-uber-tech-drivers-lawsuit-idUSKCN0R14O920150901

Win! Thank you Judge Chen....

In the ruling, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen in San Francisco said drivers could sue as a group. Such a designation means the suit could cover more than 160,000 California drivers and could give plaintiffs more leverage to negotiate a settlement.


----------



## Simon (Jan 4, 2015)

This is a good win


----------



## thehappytypist (Oct 9, 2014)

Awesome!


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/01/us-uber-tech-drivers-lawsuit-idUSKCN0R14O920150901
> 
> Win! Thank you Judge Chen....
> 
> In the ruling, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen in San Francisco said drivers could sue as a group. Such a designation means the suit could cover more than 160,000 California drivers and could give plaintiffs more leverage to negotiate a settlement.


Awesome for California drivers but the rest of America in limbo.


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

excerpt from Forbes ..

<<An Uber spokewoman said the company plans to appeal the court's decision on certification.>>

after reading this i went into a complete state of shock! Uber is appealing????? (sarcasm)


----------



## UberBlackDriverLA (Aug 21, 2014)

HUGE WIN!!!!!


----------



## CommanderXL (Jun 17, 2015)

Nice! But that lawsuit is not about tips, it's about employment status: independent contractor or employee.


----------



## CommanderXL (Jun 17, 2015)

"In arguing against class action status, Uber had submitted sworn statements from hundreds of drivers supporting the company. However, _Chen rejected this evidence because the statements could have been the product of biased questions._"

Ya think?


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

CommanderXL said:


> Nice! But that lawsuit is not about tips, it's about employment status: independent contractor or employee.


Correct!


----------



## Like...are you my uber? (Jun 11, 2015)

Whatever happened to the tip lawsuit? I used to be an uber black driver in the beginning and all the customers thought tip was incorporated into the price. Is that suit still going?


----------



## UberBlackDriverLA (Aug 21, 2014)

CommanderXL said:


> Nice! But that lawsuit is not about tips, it's about employment status: independent contractor or employee.


It's about both.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

riChElwAy said:


> excerpt from Forbes ..
> 
> <<An Uber spokewoman said the company plans to appeal the court's decision on certification.>>
> 
> after reading this i went into a complete state of shock! Uber is appealing????? (sarcasm)


Yes, but they appeal to the 9th Circuit, who ruled for Fedex drivers


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Like...are you my uber? said:


> Whatever happened to the tip lawsuit? I used to be an uber black driver in the beginning and all the customers thought tip was incorporated into the price. Is that suit still going?


I believe all of these claims are part of the lawsuit, tips, IC v. employee, etc. The IC v. employee claim is the one that gets the most attention.


----------



## CommanderXL (Jun 17, 2015)

UberBlackDriverLA said:


> It's about both.


Tips are a part of this lawsuit but this isn't the tips lawsuit.

This lawsuit is _Douglas O'Connor et al v. Uber Technologies Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 13-3826.
_
The issue is whether or not, as misclassified employees, Uber partners should be reimbursed for expenses and tips.

The tips lawsuit it _Ehret vs. Uber Technologies Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 14-00113.
_
It's about whether or not customers were defrauded by Uber for saying tips were included. (I think)


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

What are these tips that uber withheld from us? I also don't think that the majority of us want to be employees, I think we want to be true, independent contractors


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Txchick said:


> Awesome for California drivers but the rest of America in limbo.


In good time. Courts will now be required to use the new guidelines for classifying workers as IC v. employees issued by the National Labor Department in July 2015 in cases brought throughout the country. If you look at these guidelines, it is almost as if they were designed to classify Uber drivers as employees...


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

CommanderXL said:


> Tips are a part of this lawsuit but this isn't the tips lawsuit.
> 
> This lawsuit is _Douglas O'Connor et al v. Uber Technologies Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 13-3826._
> 
> The tips lawsuit it _Ehret vs. Uber Technologies Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 14-00113._


Attached is at the second amended complaint in _Douglas O'Connor et al v. Uber Technologies Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 13-3826._. It's list the causes of action in this case, which includes claims that drivers should have received tips.


----------



## CommanderXL (Jun 17, 2015)

ginseng41 said:


> What are these tips that uber withheld from us? I also don't think that the majority of us want to be employees, I think we want to be true, independent contractors


As one of the lawyers said, it doesn't matter what anyone wants or prefers. It matters what the law says. Period.


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

ginseng41 said:


> I think we want to be true, independent contractors


<<I think we want to be true, independent contractors>>

The Uber model will come crashing down if it becomes a true independent contractor situation.

The Uber product is 100% about pleasing THE RIDING PASSENGER.

Uber's market is to please THE RIDING PASSENGER who has for so long hated traditional taxi service.

As we are witnessing, the only way to achieve the goal of PLEASING THE RIDING PASSENGER is to control the driver.

Taxi drivers are not controlled by their companies.

Uber drivers are controlled by Uber.

The only way to "fix" the traditional taxi system is to treat drivers like employees so that the RIDING PASSENGER is happy.

Uber is trying to achieve this, but only by cheating the system every which way they can.


----------



## UberBlackDriverLA (Aug 21, 2014)

CommanderXL said:


> As one of the lawyers said, it doesn't matter what anyone wants or prefers. It matters what the law says. Period.


Very true! Also this from the judge...

"In arguing against class action status, Uber had submitted sworn statements from hundreds of drivers supporting the company. However, Chen rejected this evidence because the statements could have been the product of biased questions."

In other words, Uber is misleading you to believe that an IC status is better. In reality, it is not.


----------



## CommanderXL (Jun 17, 2015)

Thanks for the court document! After reading it, I guess I'm more wrong than right here.

This is the tip lawsuit relevant to drivers and is also a lawsuit about employment status and expenses. So I guess this would be _the_ tip lawsuit. Lol

But there is also another lawsuit about tips, but it's about whether customers were defrauded and overcharged.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Sharon Liss Riordan was appointed class counsel (to the disappointment of Uber)....

However, based on a quick read of today's ruling, the class certification does not cover anyone who did not opt out of the arbitration provision on time depending on the date of the original partner agreement! Interesting.... I'm a bit surprised given the court's earlier finding that the arbitration provision was unconscionable. Hopefully, Sharon Liss Riordan will send out notices to drivers and let them know where they stand.

*To new drivers: It is imperative that you opt-out of the arbitration provision w/in 30 days of signing up (or whatever it says in the current agreement)!*


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

An employee classification is definitely not best for all of us. I'd have to quit if I couldn't work whenever I wanted. While I plan to do that, regardless, in a few years, not being able to attend classes, doctors appointments, family emergencies etc., will cause hardship on a lot of people. Many would be left with no income at all.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

CommanderXL said:


> Thanks for the court document! After reading it, I guess I'm more wrong than right here.
> 
> This is the tip lawsuit relevant to drivers and is also a lawsuit about employment status and expenses. So I guess this would be _the_ tip lawsuit. Lol
> 
> But there is also another lawsuit about tips, but it's about whether customers were defrauded and overcharged.


It's all very confusing. I believe some of the cases were consolidated.... I could be wrong though. I haven't dug that deep into this.


----------



## Woober (Oct 12, 2014)

Is there anyway for a driver to find out whether he opted in or opted out?


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

ginseng41 said:


> An employee classification is definitely not best for all of us. I'd have to quit if I couldn't work whenever I wanted. While I plan to do that, regardless, in a few years, not being able to attend classes, doctors appointments, family emergencies etc., will cause hardship on a lot of people. Many would be left with no income at all.


Don't worry yet. If drivers are classified as "employees", I don't think they will be employees as we have know employees with set schedules. The main issue here is pay, protection of labor laws and reimbursement for expenses. I think with all of these cases, we will see a new type of employee that won't look like the typical 9-5 type of employee. This is new territory.


----------



## UberBlackDriverLA (Aug 21, 2014)

ginseng41 said:


> An employee classification is definitely not best for all of us. I'd have to quit if I couldn't work whenever I wanted. While I plan to do that, regardless, in a few years, not being able to attend classes, doctors appointments, family emergencies etc., will cause hardship on a lot of people. Many would be left with no income at all.


Those are scare tactics by Uber... They will lose 95% of their drivers if they schedule drivers. They will figure out a way to make it flexible still.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Woober said:


> Is there anyway for a driver to find out whether he opted in or opted out?


Did you send a notice to Uber or Sharon Liss Riordan's office? What year did you sign up with Uber?


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

UberBlackDriverLA said:


> Those are scare tactics by Uber... They will lose 95% of their drivers if they schedule drivers. They will figure out a way to make it flexible still.


Total scare tactics by Uber and all other companies that are trying to have workers remain IC so they can reap the benefits and make more money. It's total manipulation and BS. Without the drivers, Uber is WORTHLESS!


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> Don't worry yet. If drivers are classified as "employees", I don't think they will be employees as we have know employees with set schedules. The main issue here is pay, protection of labor laws and reimbursement for expenses. I think with all of these cases, we will see a new type of employee that won't look like the typical 9-5 type of employee. This is new territory.


I think if they end up classifying everyone as an employee, they will realize that they have far too many. They'll get rid of anyone unwilling to work the hours chosen by uber . In all honesty, what percentage of drivers do you think could be taken off the road with a negligible effect on providing easily obtainable rides for passengers? I'm guessing in most markets, around half


----------



## CommanderXL (Jun 17, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> <<I think we want to be true, independent contractors>>
> 
> The Uber model will come crashing down if it becomes a true independent contractor situation.
> 
> ...


Yeah, basically that's why the difference is important and not just a matter of anyone's preference. Uber is basically receiving the legal benefits of employees (a duty of loyalty, complete control, etc.) without the associated costs. Said differently, Uber is getting all the financial benefits of having independent contractors (lower costs, liability, etc.) without giving up any of the associated drawbacks.

They are accepting the benefits of each but the costs and responsibilities of neither.

They are having their cake and eating it, too.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> Sharon Liss Riordan was appointed class counsel (to the disappointment of Uber)....
> 
> However, based on a quick read of today's ruling, the class certification does not cover anyone who did not opt out of the arbitration provision on time depending on the date of the original partner agreement! Interesting.... I'm a bit surprised given the court's earlier finding that the arbitration provision was unconscionable. Hopefully, Sharon Liss Riordan will send out notices to drivers and let them know where they stand.
> 
> *To new drivers: It is imperative that you opt-out of the arbitration provision w/in 30 days of signing up (or whatever it says in the current agreement)!*





Woober said:


> Is there anyway for a driver to find out whether he opted in or opted out?


Even if you are beyond the 30 day window you should go to uberlawsuit.com.

In case the 30 day opt out arbitration clause is upheld in court (not likely, I 'm pretty sure Uber will lose this too) the law firm will represent you on an INDIVIDUAL basis. But you must register on website.

Uberlawsuit.com


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

from Biz Insider...

<<In a decision granting class action status to the lawsuit, Judge Edward Chen of the U.S. District Court Northern District of California cited Uber's training materials, which included instructions on how to clean the car and how drivers should look, as one example of how Uber exercised a right to control its drivers.>>

<<In one San Francisco onboarding script cited in Chen's opinion, drivers are told to "make sure the radio is off or on soft jazz or NPR." Another Uber training manual recommended that there should be no papers in the visor, the front seat should be forward, the rims should be spotless, and drivers should not "forget to shower.">>


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

ginseng41 said:


> I think if they end up classifying everyone as an employee, they will realize that they have far too many. They'll get rid of anyone unwilling to work the hours chosen by uber . In all honesty, what percentage of drivers do you think could be taken off the road with a negligible effect on providing easily obtainable rides for passengers? I'm guessing in most markets, around half


First of all, in many of the markets, Uber has hired way too many drivers, which has significantly cut into per driver pay. Drivers would benefit overall if there were less drivers. Secondly, Uber does not necessarily have to have drivers with set schedules. There is no reason it can't remain the way it is now. They already have enough control. Uber needs to accommodate the drivers's schedules to some degree to keep the amount of drivers online as demand requires. It will change though. Not sure how. But, honestly it needs to change. I don't think that creating $5 per hour jobs is the type of jobs we need to be creating in the US.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

*Exerpt from uberlawsuit.com website.*

The next step in the case will now be for the court to decide class certification, which would define the scope of the case and which drivers can be covered under it. The court has set a hearing on class certification for August 6, 2015. We expect that Uber will argue that most drivers are bound by an arbitration clause, which prevents them from benefiting from a class action case in court. In another case (which challenges Uber's background checks), the same judge who is presiding over our case ruled that Uber's arbitration clause is unconscionable and unenforceable. However, Uber has appealed that decision. In the event that the arbitration clause is ultimately enforced, we plan to file individual arbitration cases for drivers who may be bound by the arbitration clause. So if you did not opt out of Uber's arbitration clause within 30 days of accepting the agreement (and most drivers did not), please CONTACT US so that we can add you to our list of drivers to pursue individual arbitration if we need to do that, so that you can be assured of being covered by the result we obtain. If you accepted an Uber contract within the last 30 days, you can still opt out of the arbitration clause by emailing [email protected] and saying you want to opt out of the arbitration clause. IN OTHER WORDS, EVEN IF WE WIN THE CASE, YOU MAY NOT RECOVER ANYTHING FROM IT UNLESS YOU CONTACT US TO SIGN UP FOR ARBITRATION. SO PLEASE EMAIL ELIZABETH LOPEZ, AT [email protected], TO SIGN UP FOR ARBITRATION, IN THE EVENT THAT WE NEED TO FILE INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATIONS FOR DRIVERS. MORE THAN A THOUSAND DRIVERS FROM AROUND THE COUNTRY HAVE ALREADY CONTACTED US TO JOIN OUR LIST.

*^^Exerpt from uberlawsuit.com^^*


----------



## Lack9133 (Mar 26, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> <<I think we want to be true, independent contractors>>
> 
> The Uber model will come crashing down if it becomes a true independent contractor situation.
> 
> ...


Great post. You couldn't be more spot on. The reason taxi companies are hated so much is because they must cater to both the driver and passenger. When you only give both sides 50% of what they want, you're hated by both sides. The minute the courts start requiring Uber to pander more to their drivers, they will have to do so at the expense of passengers and from there, they become just another taxi company in the eyes of the public.


----------



## Lack9133 (Mar 26, 2015)

ginseng41 said:


> An employee classification is definitely not best for all of us. I'd have to quit if I couldn't work whenever I wanted. While I plan to do that, regardless, in a few years, not being able to attend classes, doctors appointments, family emergencies etc., will cause hardship on a lot of people. Many would be left with no income at all.


Uber will never have employee drivers. Just because they lost this lawsuit doesn't mean they are going in that direction. Drivers will most likely be IC's under a new more driver friendly business model.


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

Uber drivers used to be happy and provide a better than taxi experience for less than taxi rates. When uber got greedy and cut rates to a point where, in most markets, it was impossible for drivers to provide this service at a decent profit, the shit hit the fan. I'm guessing that this lawsuit would never have happened if uber had been responsible and all parties would have been happy.


----------



## CommanderXL (Jun 17, 2015)

Gemgirlla said:


> Sharon Liss Riordan was appointed class counsel (to the disappointment of Uber)....
> 
> However, based on a quick read of today's ruling, the class certification does not cover anyone who did not opt out of the arbitration provision on time depending on the date of the original partner agreement! Interesting.... I'm a bit surprised given the court's earlier finding that the arbitration provision was unconscionable. Hopefully, Sharon Liss Riordan will send out notices to drivers and let them know where they stand.
> 
> *To new drivers: It is imperative that you opt-out of the arbitration provision w/in 30 days of signing up (or whatever it says in the current agreement)!*


Uber modified the Agreement last November to account for the judges earlier ruling, so, for example, it now has the opt out clause in bold letters.


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

Lack9133 said:


> Uber will never have employee drivers. Just because they lost this lawsuit doesn't mean they are going in that direction. Drivers will most likely be IC's under a new more driver friendly business model.


<<Drivers will most likely be IC's under a new more driver friendly business model.>>

if that were to happen, a good chance the Uber product will go to shit


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

riChElwAy said:


> <<Drivers will most likely be IC's under a new more driver friendly business model.>>
> 
> if that were to happen, a good chance the Uber product will go to shit


It already has. In order to provide stellar service, stellar drivers are nearer and they won't work for peanuts


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

All these developments pose a simple question.. Is the traditional taxi service unfixable?


----------



## Micmac (Jul 31, 2015)

Gemgirlla said:


> Sharon Liss Riordan was appointed class counsel (to the disappointment of Uber)....
> 
> However, based on a quick read of today's ruling, the class certification does not cover anyone who did not opt out of the arbitration provision on time depending on the date of the original partner agreement! Interesting.... I'm a bit surprised given the court's earlier finding that the arbitration provision was unconscionable. Hopefully, Sharon Liss Riordan will send out notices to drivers and let them know where they stand.
> 
> *To new drivers: It is imperative that you opt-out of the arbitration provision w/in 30 days of signing up (or whatever it says in the current agreement)!*


I think if you opt out you ll get fired by Uber .


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Micmac said:


> I think if you opt out you ll get fired by Uber .


No, Uber cannot retaliate for opting out. By signing up you are putting Uber on notice that they cannot retaliate against you.


----------



## UberBlackDriverLA (Aug 21, 2014)

Micmac said:


> I think if you opt out you ll get fired by Uber .


Negative. The judge already warned Uber about that.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

BTW, this not only pertains to Uber, but to any other employer that asks you to sign an arbitration clause at time of hire. 

You can opt out there too by sending them a registered letter opting out within the thirty days.


----------



## UberBlackDriverLA (Aug 21, 2014)

observer said:


> The next step in the case will now be for the court to decide class certification, which would define the scope of the case and which drivers can be covered under it. The court has set a hearing on class certification for August 6, 2015. We expect that Uber will argue that most drivers are bound by an arbitration clause, which prevents them from benefiting from a class action case in court. In another case (which challenges Uber's background checks), the same judge who is presiding over our case ruled that Uber's arbitration clause is unconscionable and unenforceable. However, Uber has appealed that decision. In the event that the arbitration clause is ultimately enforced, we plan to file individual arbitration cases for drivers who may be bound by the arbitration clause. So if you did not opt out of Uber's arbitration clause within 30 days of accepting the agreement (and most drivers did not), please CONTACT US so that we can add you to our list of drivers to pursue individual arbitration if we need to do that, so that you can be assured of being covered by the result we obtain. If you accepted an Uber contract within the last 30 days, you can still opt out of the arbitration clause by emailing [email protected] and saying you want to opt out of the arbitration clause. IN OTHER WORDS, EVEN IF WE WIN THE CASE, YOU MAY NOT RECOVER ANYTHING FROM IT UNLESS YOU CONTACT US TO SIGN UP FOR ARBITRATION. SO PLEASE EMAIL ELIZABETH LOPEZ, AT [email protected], TO SIGN UP FOR ARBITRATION, IN THE EVENT THAT WE NEED TO FILE INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATIONS FOR DRIVERS. MORE THAN A THOUSAND DRIVERS FROM AROUND THE COUNTRY HAVE ALREADY CONTACTED US TO JOIN OUR LIST.
> 
> Excerpt from uberlawsuit.com


Love it! Love it! Love it!
160,000 California Uber drivers with the opportunity to be pitchers instead of catchers!


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

regarding tips....

outside of this lawsuit per se, does this now mean that Uber will be required to include a Tipping feature within the app?


----------



## UberBlackDriverLA (Aug 21, 2014)

riChElwAy said:


> regarding tips....
> 
> outside of this lawsuit per se, does this now mean that Uber will be required to include a Tipping feature within the app?


No


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

They Ultimately Could be


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

UberBlackDriverLA said:


> Negative. The judge already warned Uber about that.


It is amazing what ridiculous rumors get spread....


----------



## Micmac (Jul 31, 2015)

I m gonna opt out to get some Tips bro


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/01/us-uber-tech-drivers-lawsuit-idUSKCN0R14O920150901
> 
> Win! Thank you Judge Chen....
> 
> In the ruling, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen in San Francisco said drivers could sue as a group. Such a designation means the suit could cover more than 160,000 California drivers and could give plaintiffs more leverage to negotiate a settlement.


Clarification on lawsuit: Uber driver class-certification applies to Calif. drivers who joined before June 2014 and not through third party: http://t.co/f8McvJ2OW2


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> Sharon Liss Riordan was appointed class counsel (to the disappointment of Uber)....
> 
> However, based on a quick read of today's ruling, the class certification does not cover anyone who did not opt out of the arbitration provision on time depending on the date of the original partner agreement! Interesting.... I'm a bit surprised given the court's earlier finding that the arbitration provision was unconscionable. Hopefully, Sharon Liss Riordan will send out notices to drivers and let them know where they stand.
> 
> *To new drivers: It is imperative that you opt-out of the arbitration provision w/in 30 days of signing up (or whatever it says in the current agreement)!*


Uber driver class-certification applies to Calif. drivers who joined before June 2014 and not through third party: http://t.co/f8McvJ2OW2


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

Micmac said:


> I think if you opt out you ll get fired by Uber .


I did & had no issue.


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

UberBlackDriverLA said:


> Love it! Love it! Love it!
> 160,000 California Uber drivers with the opportunity to be pitchers instead of catchers!





UberBlackDriverLA said:


> Love it! Love it! Love it!
> 160,000 California Uber drivers with the opportunity to be pitchers instead of catchers!


nope..around 15,000 drivers Uber driver class-certification applies to Calif. drivers who joined before June 2014 and not through third party: http://t.co/f8McvJ2OW2


----------



## UberBlackDriverLA (Aug 21, 2014)

Txchick said:


> nope..around 15,000 drivers Uber driver class-certification applies to Calif. drivers who joined before June 2014 and not through third party: http://t.co/f8McvJ2OW2


Uber is going to have to go to through tens of thousands of arbitrations in Cali alone when their employees are deemed employees.


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> It is amazing what ridiculous rumors get spread....





UberBlackDriverLA said:


> Uber is going to have to go to through tens of thousands of arbitrations in Cali alone when their employees are deemed employees.


Yes hope that happens & if this class action is won then drivers in state by state will start filing lawsuits.


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

UberBlackDriverLA said:


> Uber is going to have to go to through tens of thousands of arbitrations in Cali alone when their employees are deemed employees.


What does that mean joined Uber thru 3rd party??


----------



## Taxi Driver in Arizona (Mar 18, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> All these developments pose a simple question.. Is the traditional taxi service unfixable?


I wonder how this will impact the taxi industry in general. I'm an independent contractor at my cab company, but because they own the vehicle, the IC relationship is slightly different from the ride-hail/UberX/gypsy model.


----------



## GooberX (May 13, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> regarding tips....
> 
> outside of this lawsuit per se, does this now mean that Uber will be required to include a Tipping feature within the app?


Why such low aspirations???

No, what would be best is if drivers got a chance to set the rates,

Keep your damn tips, you cheapskates, it's now a $3 base, $2.25 per mile, and $.35 per minute.

It's a $7 minimum, but hey......care for a piece of gum?


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

Taxi Driver in Arizona said:


> I wonder how this will impact the taxi industry in general. I'm an independent contractor at my cab company, but because they own the vehicle, the IC relationship is slightly different from the ride-hail/UberX/gypsy model.


all of this has to also have the taxi companies on alert as well..

pre-Uber the taxi companies had a somewhat "bossy" tone with their drivers, telling them what to wear, just being ********* in general, and now that The Uber Scare has arrived and threatened their very existence, as drivers are leaving the taxi companies in droves, the taxi companies have now taken a more gentle tone with their once-bullied drivers.. taxi drivers are more "free" at this moment

so if Uber eventually "goes away" then the taxi companies will likely return to being great big assholes to their drivers

and then another Uber will come along and scare the shit out of them again, drivers will abandon them again

and on and on the circle of life goes...


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

GooberX said:


> Why such low aspirations???
> 
> No, what would be best is if drivers got a chance to set the rates,
> 
> ...


everything you just stated says two words... INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR

if Uber drivers were truly independent contractors, the whole Uber "product" would be dramatically different

right now, as is, people "call an Uber" and the parameters of the experience are all set within the Uber app

if it were truly an independent contractor experience, people wouldn't be "calling an Uber" .. they would "use the Uber app" to "find a good deal with some driver out there"

Any Uber driver that says "I don't want to be an employee of Uber" well you are currently being treated like an employee of Uber


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> <<I think we want to be true, independent contractors>>
> 
> The Uber model will come crashing down if it becomes a true independent contractor situation.
> 
> ...


Allow me to put this in perspective:
Up to the late 1970s, with the EXCEPTION of NYC, cab companies controlled their drivers by SPLITTING the meter on some percentage of comissions. Often the company was on the cuff for gas.
At the end of a shift, meter metrics were run by an employee of the garage.
What happened? You can't control cabbies. 
"That runs $5. I'll do it for $4 OFF the meter".
Also, the cab owner didn't make much on a slow day.
The cab owners of the Western world went to their cities who licensed them.
"We want less restrictions on our drivers, and more control over our income!".
Translation- "give us third world monkeys, and let us lease out our cab shifts".
Done.
Insurance went through the roof, most sane customers dropped the cabs and went with luxury sedans (if they could afford them).
The new technology showed a way for a company like Uber to GET A PIECE OF EVERY JOB, PERIOD, and get complete control over the drivers through the tech, and by not allowing them to own a real taxi or livery.
Sad that it is controlled by Satan himself.


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

I don't want to be an employee. I'm quite happy being an IC.


----------



## volksie (Apr 8, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> regarding tips....
> 
> outside of this lawsuit per se, does this now mean that Uber will be required to include a Tipping feature within the app?


I doubt it! But, the public will now see Uber in a different light.
Riders were duped into believing they tipped drivers. They may want 20% restitution also!


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

JimS said:


> I don't want to be an employee. I'm quite happy being an IC.


Where is your IC status? Can you build clientelle? Can you advertise? 
I'm going to go out on a limb here and give you the benefit of the doubt.
Did you mean "I'd like to be a true IC"?


----------



## volksie (Apr 8, 2015)

RIDERS THINK DRIVERS LIE!
They ask us, "How does tipping work? INCLUDED RIGHT?"
We say NO, Uber never passes a tip on to us! UNTIL NOW, THEY THOUGHT WE WANTED A DOUBLE TIP!
Uber has publicly been caught LYING TO IT'S CUSTOMERS! A very big deal!


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

I'm unsure how customers can sue over this. How can we claim tips from them either when an amount /percentage was never implied or was it somehow? I've never used uber, just lyft


----------



## Bob Reynolds (Dec 20, 2014)

Bottom line is that Uber needs to fix the fares NOW so that drivers make a living wage after paying their vehicle expenses. If Uber does not adjust their business model NOW then Uber will be out of business when the day of reckoning does happen. This is because they will not have the money to pay all of the back wages, expenses and penalties that the courts will determine are due to the drivers.

Get rid of these silly $4 fares and charge the passengers what it really takes to provide a great service. Make sure the drivers are making at least the minimum wage (after paying vehicle costs and expenses) and get this business back on target. The passengers will pay for this great service. 

We have lost so many good drivers because they aren't making money with the ultra low Uber fares. The lower fares did not bring in more money or business for the drivers. This brings in inexperienced drivers that don't provide the quality service that passengers were getting.


----------



## Lack9133 (Mar 26, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> <<Drivers will most likely be IC's under a new more driver friendly business model.>>
> 
> if that were to happen, a good chance the Uber product will go to shit


Agreed. But so will their product if they are employees considering scheduling drivers for spikes in demand is nearly impossible in the on demand transportation industry. Uber was walking a very fine line in order to keep service levels where they were and they just fell off that line.


----------



## Lack9133 (Mar 26, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> All these developments pose a simple question.. Is the traditional taxi service unfixable?


Very good question. I think improvements could be made but in order to be fair, both drivers and passengers must make some concessions. In a world where both sides only get 50% of what they want, neither side will ever truly be happy.


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

Lack9133 said:


> Very good question. I think improvements could be made but in order to be fair, both drivers and passengers must make some concessions. In a world where both sides only get 50% of what they want, neither side will ever truly be happy.


But both sides were happy until they got greedy. Yes they could increase fares a bit without passengers being too upset but in the markets where it's 0.75, it would have to double at least which would piss off customers. Also, they'd have to admit they were wrong which they have a history of refusing to do


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Where is your IC status? Can you build clientelle? Can you advertise?
> I'm going to go out on a limb here and give you the benefit of the doubt.
> Did you mean "I'd like to be a true IC"?


Every year, the GM of our dog an pony show needs to scramble and scurry about the office and gather documents which prove to Workman's Comp that the taxi drivers they lease to are in fact independent contractors. As a taxi driver, I am allowed to develop my own customers, though I personally prefer to subordinate that kind of work to dispatched calls when possible. As a night driver, it simply isn't as crucial. Another way they prove that is by having other work they themselves have paid employees to handle. That would be courier work of all kinds, luggage delivery. Employees of the company are paid their hourly wage to schlepp crap about the region. If they don't have enough coverage on their side, they farm the work out to taxi drivers who bill the taxi company for the work, and at a much greater price.

That said, every year we need to keep submitting documents to prove that drivers are still ICs. It never ends.


----------



## AJUber (Jun 23, 2015)

I want my Tips Uber, you holding out on me and telling Pax wrong Information.


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

ginseng41 said:


> But both sides were happy until they got greedy. Yes they could increase fares a bit without passengers being too upset but in the markets where it's 0.75, it would have to double at least which would piss off customers. Also, they'd have to admit they were wrong which they have a history of refusing to do


At double the rate, things would be better, but it would still be very difficult to set money aside for acquiring another car which is inevitable if you are going to be around.

The dynamic pricing system has some real flaws. There are major structural problems which very much promote abuse. Uber, by transferring the burden of ownership onto the shoulders of the drivers is suddenly able to do the impossible. The impossible being that their fleet is designed for peak business and when things are at less than peak, well the drivers will just work it out. It is not that simple.

Uber is not in any way self limiting. They are able to put a virtually unlimited fleet on the road, so they kind of do need that price fluctuation to make things work. Consider this: If rate really were fair and reasonable relative to cost in a market saturated with drivers, those drivers are going to try to all be working, all the time. Nobody would make any money ever, sure they would be making just as little while driving less, but that wouldn't work.

The system by their design has no real limits. The only way they can limit the number of drivers at all is by exacting a price whereby driving is not a practical option for most people, just the desperate few, or those who are truly hooked, and then that serves as their base.

What wold the rates need to be for the work to be truly sustainable? What would keep an Uber driver around year after year, able to replace their car and afford real collision coverage? We know they don't want drivers to have commercial insurance, I assume that is so they remain unable to create their own business.......

There are serious concerns if you look at the system from the perspective of a driver, particularly if you would like to do it for more than 6-9 months. Look at travis' history, most of his ventures have not lasted terribly long. He is all about making money off disruption. I have spent a lot of time thinking about this, my perspective is that of a 15 year taxi driver. I see many drivers as having had a sweet, intense honeymoon with Travis, that must have been nice for the lucky few, but mostly, I just don't see how the model could be designed for a person to do this for the long haul.

The mindset at Uber is too toxic, they are robber barons, some other participant would have to appear with a more equitable philosophy and structure.

Think about it: there model is designed to transfer the burden of ownership (car) away from the entity running the show. That isn't a plan, it is a scheme. Accepting that drivers needs clearly are not being met, is such a scheme (if you agree) fixable?


----------



## LAuberX (Jun 3, 2014)

I have been driving UberX since December of 2013, I emailed the attorney today.

Being reimbursed for vehicle expenses would be HUGE.

Uber On


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

I think the system could be fixable. Implement fair pricing and a driver cap per market accomplished in 2 ways.

First, limit the total drivers in the market to a number twice what the max on a 90% of peak need would be. For example, if the most requests ever made in 30 minutes is 100, limit total driverstwhile to 180.

Second, have caps for drivers who are able to log on at times. Again, I'd use 90% of peak demand for that period. For example on a Tuesday night, allow fewer on than a Saturday. 

If both were done in a dynamic model, people who have been doing this a while would know when to log on, make their money and be done. Massive need times like nye would be covered and excess hiring could stop.


----------



## UberNorthStar (Jul 7, 2015)

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0R14O920150901

Currently there is a Lyft ad in the middle of the story. LOL!


----------



## Lack9133 (Mar 26, 2015)

ginseng41 said:


> But both sides were happy until they got greedy. Yes they could increase fares a bit without passengers being too upset but in the markets where it's 0.75, it would have to double at least which would piss off customers. Also, they'd have to admit they were wrong which they have a history of refusing to do


We were not speaking of Uber drivers, we were speaking of taxi which obviously the general public has issues with considering taxi companies do in fact at times give driver needs consideration over public needs. In terms of Uber, if drivers were happy, we wouldn't have this forum. Obviously, not everyone was happy with the situation.


----------



## MrsUberJax (Sep 2, 2014)

WHEN will the public see that the rates UBER unfairly sets are so low that drivers, who need the work, are being UNFAIRLY forced to PAY THE COSTS of the entire operation -while UBER waits for the $50 BILLION IPO. Its just not right.

The only way that drivers will gain support is if we make clear that the drivers (the little guys) are bearing the entire cost of Uber's (the big guy)costs and their trip to the IPO. Exploitation and capitalism at its finest. Uber, the transportation sweatshop app.


----------



## UberNorthStar (Jul 7, 2015)

Txchick said:


> What does that mean joined Uber thru 3rd party??


My "shot in the dark" on this means one applied directly w/Uber, not going through an online employment agency or the State Employment Agency. I wonder if this would apply to people who signed up & a referral bonus was given. (??)

Anyone else care to answer the question?

JM2¢W


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

volksie said:


> I doubt it! But, the public will now see Uber in a different light.
> Riders were duped into believing they tipped drivers. They may want 20% restitution also!


The original lawsuit on tips was brought by customers. They were mislead into believing that part of the fare actually went to the drivers as a tip. Originally, when customers signed up for Uber, they would be asked what percentage they wanted to tip and it was saved on their profile. The original Uber customers thought they were tipping the drivers. I have yet to hear of any of the original drivers receiving any tip via the Uber App. Not sure when Uber changed this to stopped asking the new customers when they signed up what percentage they want to tip.


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

When Uber loses, I don't see Drivers in California becoming Employees.

I would think that Uber would need to compensate Drivers per current Labor Laws (1st step). Then they would work out a deal to change their business model, as required, to keep drivers going forward as 1099 OnDemand Workers. There might even be a schedule set up were Uber must change the Uber - Driver Terms of Service Contract to meet Independent Contractor status with some changes required to be a) immediately, b) In 6 months, and c) In 1 year ?

Re the compensation side of it, Uber might decide to workout a deal (not sure how this works or if possible). For example, I would consider the choice of a dollar compensation or Uber stock pre IPO. The stock offer would be at a factor of the dollar compensation like 1.5x or 2x.

This would be similar to how pre-IPO companies sometimes compensate employees. So with this scenario, I could:

- Play it safe and take cash offer
- Get compensated with pre-IPO stock
- Keep pre-IPO stock or sell my private equity stock to another investor
https://equityzen.com/

* I have no experience about Labor Laws so I'm basically just talking what-ifs.


----------



## arto71 (Sep 20, 2014)

UBER NEWSROOM 
https://newsroom.uber.com/2015/09/oconnorfacts/
*A Few Facts About The O'Connor Court Case*
September 1, 2015 Posted by Abby Horrigan

There has been a great deal of interest in a California court case - O'Connor v. Uber Technologies - brought by three drivers who believe they should be treated as employees not independent contractors. They want to be reimbursed for their expenses - such as fuel and insurance - as well as alleged unpaid tips and have sought to sue Uber on behalf of every driver who has ever used our app in the State of California. That is a total of about 160,000 people.

Today, the Court declined to certify this very broad class of people, instead opting for a much smaller group - so small in fact that it even excludes one of the original plaintiffs. While this is just one step in legal proceedings that may well play out over several years, we wanted to share some details about today's ruling:


*Only a few hundred drivers who are actively driving with Uber today can now be part of this case. *This is because the ruling found that only drivers who either stopped driving _before June 2014_ or drove after June 2014 but chose to opt out of the arbitration option in their agreements, are eligible. Most of the growth in driver numbers has happened since then - not just in California but across the United States and the rest of the world. 
*Before June 2014, our business in California was mostly UberBLACK, primarily drivers who work for limo companies: they cannot be part of the case. * This is because the Court has ruled that those drivers never had a contract directly with Uber. In fact, one of the three plaintiffs - Thomas Colopy - has only worked for limo companies and so can no longer be included in the case. 
*Individuals who registered with Uber as a corporation also cannot participate in the class*. That means people like Barbara Berwick, who sought reimbursements from the California Labor Commissioner, would not qualify.
So the class moving forward will be significantly less than 160,000. Indeed our early estimates show that the potential class is fewer than 15,000 drivers - that's less than 10 percent of the total.And there is a chance that this number will fall further depending on the outcome of the appeal in another case - Gillette v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Despite these facts, we will likely still appeal because partners use Uber on their own terms, and there really is no typical driver - the key question at issue here. When asked in a survey earlier this year, most drivers said they love being their own boss. And it's no wonder: Uber fits around their lives, not the other way around. Most drivers who use the Uber app already have full-time careers or part-time jobs. Many are students or retirees. About half of drivers in the U.S. work less than 10 hours per week. And, most drivers vary the number of hours they drive each week significantly. You're more likely to find someone who drives five hours one week, 15 hours the next, and eight hours the week after, than one who drives 10 hours week after week.

_Abby Horrigan is the Managing Counsel for Employment at Uber._

Categories: Driver Jobs, Headlines, Impact


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

arto71 said:


> UBER NEWSROOM
> https://newsroom.uber.com/2015/09/oconnorfacts/
> *A Few Facts About The O'Connor Court Case*
> September 1, 2015 Posted by Abby Horrigan
> ...


Uber koolaid


----------



## LAuberX (Jun 3, 2014)

fingers crossed the court finds the "opt out" clause shaky... 'cuz it is!


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Txchick said:


> Uber koolaid
> View attachment 12823


Thanks!
For a second I thought I was reading a real news release, not UberLawKoolaid.

It's been a truly long day.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Txchick said:


> Uber koolaid
> View attachment 12823


This is great LMAO!


----------



## UberNorthStar (Jul 7, 2015)

Huberis said:


> What wold the rates need to be for the work to be truly sustainable? What would keep an Uber driver around year after year, able to replace their car and afford real collision coverage? We know they don't want drivers to have commercial insurance, I assume that is so they remain unable to create their own business.......


Q1 - 1) A fare that is 75% per mile & per minute of the local taxis. 2) A lower commission (15%) to Uber. 3) Encourage tipping. 4) Either do away with the rate system or make the scale 1 - 10 with a 6.5 being the lowest a driver is allowed to go. 5) Do not act like an employer by putting restrictions on what an IC can do as a businessman. 6) Put a limit on the # of drivers on the road at any one time.

I own. my business. The above would keep Uber as my vendor.

JM2¢W


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

The drivers' attorney issued a statement about the court's decision and how drivers who are not in the class Judge Chen certified can proceed. See the website cited below:

http://uberlawsuit.com

The site says: 
"SO IF YOU HAVE DRIVEN FOR UBER SINCE JUNE 2014 - OR IF YOU HAVE DRIVEN FOR UBER AT ANY TIME IN CALIFORNIA THROUGH A CORPORATE NAME OR AN INTERMEDIATE COMPANY (LIKE A LIMOUSINE COMPANY) - and you want to be part of this case, you will need to CONTACT OUR FIRM and sign up to bring your claim individually. Nearly two thousand Uber drivers from around the country have already contacted us to join our list.

We filed this case on behalf of Uber drivers across the country. In an early ruling, the court agreed with us that the case could proceed on behalf of drivers nationwide. In a later ruling, however, the judge changed his mind and limited the case to drivers in California. We think this decision was incorrect and we plan to appeal it. But meanwhile, if you have driven for Uber anywhere in the United States, and did not opt out of the arbitration clause within 30 days of accepting Uber's licensing agreement, PLEASE CONTACT US to obtain a form to return to us so that we can pursue an individual claim for you, in the event that we have to pursue these claims individually, rather than through the class action."

"In order to join our list of drivers interested in the case, and to sign up for us to represent you individually in the event that we need to pursue individual cases (such as in arbitration) to collect any wages that may be owed to you based on Uber's misclassification of drivers, PLEASE CONTACT US to obtain a form to return to us. To stay informed, and be added to our list of drivers interested in the case, please e-mail your name and contact information to:

Lichten & Liss-Riordan, P.C.
729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000
Boston, MA 02116
www.llrlaw.com
Tel: (617) 994-5800
Fax: (617) 994-5801

Elizabeth Lopez, Paralegal
[email protected]law.com

Shannon Liss-Riordan, Lead Counsel
[email protected]

Adelaide Pagano, Associate Attorney
[email protected]

Uber cannot legally retaliate against you for cooperating with the lawsuit."


----------



## Uberamstel (Jul 30, 2014)

CommanderXL said:


> Yeah, basically that's why the difference is important and not just a matter of anyone's preference. Uber is basically receiving the legal benefits of employees (a duty of loyalty, complete control, etc.) without the associated costs. Said differently, Uber is getting all the financial benefits of having independent contractors (lower costs, liability, etc.) without giving up any of the associated drawbacks.
> 
> They are accepting the benefits of each but the costs and responsibilities of neither.
> 
> They are having their cake and eating it, too.


And STILL losing money?


----------



## Kylie Andrews (Sep 3, 2015)

Well, earnings are based on the number of rides completed and fares per ride. These are the Uber rates in Toronto. Much better fares than those here in the states. The average UberX driver reports making about $500/week part time, $900 full time, depending on the market.


----------



## glados (May 23, 2015)

If you are not in California, *DO NOT SIGN AWAY YOUR RIGHTS TO THE ARBITRATION PAYOUT *to the law firm.

After the class action case is decided or settled, it will be incredibly easy for you to claim the same in arbitration. It is just a low stress phone call. *There is no point in giving 40-70% of your potential payout to a law firm for filing an arbitration claim and making a 15 minute phone call! *The whole point of arbitration (as intended) is to make claims cheap and easy to pursue WITHOUT a lawyer.


----------



## glados (May 23, 2015)

Uberamstel said:


> And STILL losing money?


Would you:

1) Take $100 today
or
2) Pay $100 today and take a risk adjusted gain of $230 in one year

Any company with access to financing that doesn't choose (2) is stupid.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

glados said:


> If you are not in California, *DO NOT SIGN AWAY YOUR RIGHTS TO THE ARBITRATION PAYOUT *to the law firm.
> 
> After the class action case is decided or settled, it will be incredibly easy for you to claim the same in arbitration. It is just a low stress phone call. *There is no point in giving 40-70% of your potential payout to a law firm for filing an arbitration claim and making a 15 minute phone call! *The whole point of arbitration (as intended) is to make claims cheap and easy to pursue WITHOUT a lawyer.


Do you think Uber won't send a lawyer to represent them at arbitration?

Uber pays for the arbitration, and there will be thousands of arbitrations, whose best interests will the arbitrators keep in mind in their "decisions".

The drivers?

Or the hand that feeds them?


----------



## Taxi Driver in Arizona (Mar 18, 2015)

What's the over-under on how long this case takes to get to a final ruling? 2 years? 5 years? 8 years?


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

*Analysis: Uber will survive, no matter what courts decide
http://www.sfchronicle.com/business...481531.php?t=32ccbda1cf&cmpid=twitter-premium*

_"Even if Uber loses this case, it will be free to restructure its relationship with its drivers in such a way that the drivers would actually be bona fide independent contractors," Chen wrote in a 68-page decision._


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

chi1cabby said:


> *Analysis: Uber will survive, no matter what courts decide
> http://www.sfchronicle.com/business...481531.php?t=32ccbda1cf&cmpid=twitter-premium*
> 
> _"Even if Uber loses this case, it will be free to restructure its relationship with its drivers in such a way that the drivers would actually be bona fide independent contractors," Chen wrote in a 68-page decision._


Of course.
In fact, Uber could have avoided a lengthy court battle and let owner ops get licensed and insured properly, and found DIFFERENT ways to deal with drivers with low ratings, like filter their pings more to match them with low rated pax, for instance. 
So much immaturity in fighting the system.


----------



## Bob Reynolds (Dec 20, 2014)

To put this another way. Uber can move towards fixing this issue right now and stop (or limit) further liability or potential liability for back wages, expenses and penalties going forward. It is very simple and can be done with a simple app adjustment.

Here is what Uber needs to do immediately:

1. Provide a tip button on the app.

2. Increase the fares to something close to what the taxis are charging. The riders can chose Uber or a taxi. 

3. Charge per rider. (This will eliminate riders trying to overload the vehicles) This is the single biggest PIA issue we face as drivers these days. Uber should ask how many passengers are requesting the ride. That will allow Uber to send the proper number of vehicles to pick up the riders. It also will eliminate the 1 star ratings because we can't take 5 people in a four passenger vehicle. 

4. Charge for each piece of baggage or "cargo" (other than personal items) that is put in the vehicle. We are not UberMOVE, but it is becoming a problem. We aren't getting paid to load and move. I had one passenger that had me move a canoe from the shopping mall to his hotel. This took a lot of extra time and I was not paid for it nor did I receive a tip. This means my hourly wage moves down to below minimum wage. 

5. Once the business is stabilized, then Uber can adjust how many drivers they need online at a particular time and at a particular location to cover the business. 

In the end Uber will lose all of these lawsuits. It's just a matter of time. Since it is going to happen, a good smart executive will make the needed changes now to "fix" the problem and quit fighting a futile effort that would result in the destruction of the business. If Uber takes the position to fight till the death, then they will just be paving the way for another APP based application to come along, make the necessary changes and watch their business flourish.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

*Page 25
Order Granting In Part and Denying In Part Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification (.pdf, 195 KB)







*


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

1) Uber decides that it is cheaper to pay now (sooner) than later. 
_ Uber is not at this point yet. Could drag on and on or change next month._

2) They are forced by the Courts/Regulatory Agency to do so.
_ Maybe the Courts will rule against Uber now and going forward but who does the enforcement? Forced means what is on the books now and what new/modified regulations are in the pipeline and whether those enforcing will have wee baby teeth or nasty big canines. _

3) Public opinion is so negative that Uber decides to compensate Drivers and change going forward.
_Don't see that the general public and/or PAX caring enough to force this card._

4) Drivers stop driving in such numbers that Uber changes. Must also carry over to new Drivers.
_ Anything is possible but highly unlikely._

5) Current investors start cashing out and/or new investors stop pumping money in until this is resolved. IPO promised on a set schedule and this court case is holding up the IPO. Investors just not seeing this cash cow as risk-reward worthy until Employee-Independent Contractor court cases / regulations finalized?
_ This is a possibility._

_6) _Bill and Melinda Gates or another large forward thinking foundation sets-up a Non-Profit to support the OnDemand Worker. _ 
Oh, wait, Microsoft just sold part of their Bing Mapping Business with 100 Microsoft Associates now working for Uber. Anyway, some big philanthropist's foundation decides to focus on the OnDemand Workforce knowing that if they don't the government will F'k it up._

7 Bernie Sanders gets elected.
_ Just threw that one in._


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Bob Reynolds said:


> To put this another way. Uber can move towards fixing this issue right now and stop (or limit) further liability or potential liability for back wages, expenses and penalties going forward. It is very simple and can be done with a simple app adjustment.
> 
> Here is what Uber needs to do immediately:
> 
> ...


Dude...
cancel the canoe next time!


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Dude...
> cancel the canoe next time!


Dude...
Try contributing something of substance for a change next time!


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

JimS said:


> I don't want to be an employee. I'm quite happy being an IC.


a better way to say it... i am happy being classified as an IC while I'm being treated like an employee


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

ginseng41 said:


> I'm unsure how customers can sue over this. How can we claim tips from them either when an amount /percentage was never implied or was it somehow? I've never used uber, just lyft


Uber tells riders "No need to tip your driver" this means tip is included


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)




----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)




----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

these above excerpts are examples showing what life might be like if this were a true independent contractor situation.. drivers settings rates, drivers controlling surge .. so for the driver who says "i like being an IC, I don't want to be an employee" just look at what you are missing out on here.. your power as a true independent contractor is being hijacked by Uber.. as an IC you are the one who should be in control, making decisions, negotiating prices, etc 

i think the drivers who say this are fearing they will be losing out on "i set my own hours" whereas that is not the case, you can still be an employee and set your own hours, Uber wouldn't work otherwise


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

glados said:


> If you are not in California, *DO NOT SIGN AWAY YOUR RIGHTS TO THE ARBITRATION PAYOUT *to the law firm.
> 
> After the class action case is decided or settled, it will be incredibly easy for you to claim the same in arbitration. It is just a low stress phone call. *There is no point in giving 40-70% of your potential payout to a law firm for filing an arbitration claim and making a 15 minute phone call! *The whole point of arbitration (as intended) is to make claims cheap and easy to pursue WITHOUT a lawyer.


You still need a lawyer for arbitration. I think you are confusing it with small claims court. By opting out, drivers are also allowed to file a claim any court, including small claims. If drivers don't opt out, the only legal remedy drivers are allowed to pursue is via arbitration. Also, based on the arbitration provision, I believe Uber picks the arbitrators. That's not how a fair arbitration provision works. Generally, both sides get to pick an arbitrator. The way the provision is written, it is very one sided and Uber retains all the power. I think it is doubtful that an Uber driver would stand a fair chance in arbitration, which is likely the reason Judge Chen's previously stated the arbitration provision may be unconscionable, although he declined to address that issue as of now. I haven't fully read the Sept. 1st order and am not exactly sure why he seems to have stepped away from that position. A bit disappointing actually.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Taxi Driver in Arizona said:


> What's the over-under on how long this case takes to get to a final ruling? 2 years? 5 years? 8 years?


After all the appeals, likely 2-3 years.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

riChElwAy said:


> View attachment 12851


Uber argued that some drivers have negotiated higher rates to the court???? That's perjury. Wow.


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)




----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

this document above is Judge Chen referring to the Stars Rating System 

i argue that the ratings system alone makes each Uber driver an employee

the manner in which Uber uses this star system is 100% an employer controlling things

to those Uber drivers who say "i like being an independent contractor" tell me what independent contractors out there are subject to such an abusive ratings system 

the ratings system is 100% geared toward pleasing the riding passenger and is 100% geared toward controlling the Uber driver

imagine Uber driver life without the ratings system.. that is where independent contractor status is


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> After all the appeals, likely 2-3 years.


Normally, yes.

But the whole OnDemand, Uber, TNC, what is an Employee / IC morphing into, and how will backroom negotiating influence Uber decision making going forward? Will this shorten the process?


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

What about raising rates means more drivers and fewer pings and less surge don't some of y'all understand? This is just as asinine as fast food workers demanding $15/hr to flip a burger. The business will close before it loses money. That, and these jobs probably shouldn't be depended on for full time salaries. Hate to bring it out like this, but if your sole qualification for an earning is driving a car, then go to school or become a hack. If you want to make some descent spare change, this can work. If you can't get it to work, then there are other jobs out there. Go find 'em.

Now, I'm all for allowing and encouraging tips. But I don't see where that's addressed here in this decision to accept the class action status. But guess what? Many tipped positions (especially as employees) are heavily guarded by unions. Once this happens, only high seniority employees with no personable skills who can't get fired will be the ones pulling in these jobs.

Be careful what you ask for.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

observer said:


> Do you think Uber won't send a lawyer to represent them at arbitration?
> 
> Uber pays for the arbitration, and there will be thousands of arbitrations, whose best interests will the arbitrators keep in mind in their "decisions".
> 
> ...


*12. What is the standard for arbitrator bias?*
An area of unconscionability which courts are very sensitive to in general is any biased method of selecting the arbitrator. For instance, if the employer maintains complete control over selection of the arbitrator, most courts have found the agreement unenforceable. Unfortunately, this is a situation that is still somewhat difficult to discover, as employers often use what appear to be neutral or independent agencies to supply arbitrators. However, in many situations, these agencies actually advertise their services exclusively to employers and emphasize that they are a means of controlling the cost of employee claims. Also, there are times when arbitrators do regular business with an employer and depend upon the income from that employer's business. All of these are factors that can influence a court in deciding whether an arbitration "agreement" is unenforceable because it does not protect the employee's right to a neutral party as an arbitrator.

An exerpt from,

https://www.workplacefairness.org/forced-arbitration-agreements


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

SCdave said:


> Normally, yes.
> 
> But the whole OnDemand, Uber, TNC, what is an Employee / IC morphing into, and how will backroom negotiating influence Uber decision making going forward? Will this shorten the process?


excellent input! the top brass at Uber (The Goldman Sachs Machine) must really be feeling pressured here.. despite the fact that this court drama can play out for years, they know that the day is coming, when all these drivers here today, on September 3rd 2015, will be subject to retroactive minimum wage, worker's comp, payroll taxes, tipping reimbursements, and on and on and on


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> this document above is Judge Chen referring to the Stars Rating System
> 
> i argue that the ratings system alone makes each Uber driver an employee
> 
> ...


In and of itself, the rating system is unobtrusive. 
My last association used CabHound, which had a star system.
Since I'm a 5 star driver, I had no problem with this.
The difference is, Uber uses it to penalize, scare, and fire.


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

I wonder if uber will stop deactivating drivers for low ratings now and try to talk it back as not knowing it happened


----------



## frndthDuvel (Aug 31, 2014)

ginseng41 said:


> I think if they end up classifying everyone as an employee, they will realize that they have far too many. They'll get rid of anyone unwilling to work the hours chosen by uber . In all honesty, what percentage of drivers do you think could be taken off the road with a negligible effect on providing easily obtainable rides for passengers? I'm guessing in most markets, around half


They could reduce the pool of Drivers simply by setting the age of the car criteria. Providing a better rider experience and justification for higher rates at the same time. 
Anything performance related to winnow Drivers might not be as clean. As somebody could argue some of those ratings were based on factors such being a non native language speaker, so that is is unfair to that community of Drivers. Age of the car is clear cut. Then they could go to a secondary requirement that used the rating system.


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

They could stop hiring. They'll probably require a minimum of hours a week. Want a vacation? Oh sorry, you're deactivated


----------



## KofiTaxi (Aug 18, 2015)

glados said:


> If you are not in California, *DO NOT SIGN AWAY YOUR RIGHTS TO THE ARBITRATION PAYOUT *to the law firm.
> 
> After the class action case is decided or settled, it will be incredibly easy for you to claim the same in arbitration. It is just a low stress phone call. *There is no point in giving 40-70% of your potential payout to a law firm for filing an arbitration claim and making a 15 minute phone call! *The whole point of arbitration (as intended) is to make claims cheap and easy to pursue WITHOUT a lawyer.


 This is bad advice. as a little guy why not take something instead of holding out for something bigger that isnt certain at all. and Uber will still be fighting those arbitration as well. it will not be as simple as "making a phone call."


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

frndthDuvel said:


> They could reduce the pool of Drivers simply by setting the age of the car criteria. Providing a better rider experience and justification for higher rates at the same time.
> Anything performance related to winnow Drivers might not be as clean. As somebody could argue some of those ratings were based on factors such being a non native language speaker, so that is is unfair to that community of Drivers. Age of the car is clear cut. Then they could go to a secondary requirement that used the rating system.


Except this is contrary to everything Uber has done to this point. Uber wants MORE drivers, not less.


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

observer said:


> Except this is contrary to everything Uber has done to this point. Uber wants MORE drivers, not less.


They won't if we have to be treated as employees


----------



## KofiTaxi (Aug 18, 2015)

JimS said:


> What about raising rates means more drivers and fewer pings and less surge don't some of y'all understand? This is just as asinine as fast food workers demanding $15/hr to flip a burger. The business will close before it loses money. That, and these jobs probably shouldn't be depended on for full time salaries. Hate to bring it out like this, but if your sole qualification for an earning is driving a car, then go to school or become a hack. If you want to make some descent spare change, this can work. If you can't get it to work, then there are other jobs out there. Go find 'em.
> 
> Now, I'm all for allowing and encouraging tips. But I don't see where that's addressed here in this decision to accept the class action status. But guess what? Many tipped positions (especially as employees) are heavily guarded by unions. Once this happens, only high seniority employees with no personable skills who can't get fired will be the ones pulling in these jobs.
> 
> Be careful what you ask for.


So basically, we should accept rates that are sub minimum wage BC of a chance the business might close up?

Perhaps, if you have a business model that requires workers to ear less than a living wage then something is screwed up with your business model.

Perhaps, the uber cut could be lowered and they would still be widely profitable.

Why is it okay for Travis and his friends to be as greedy and demand as much as they want but we can't ask for something close to a living wage when we bear all the cost of the business....


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

KofiTaxi said:


> So basically, we should accept rates that are sub minimum wage BC of a chance the business might close up?
> 
> Perhaps, if you have a business model that requires workers to ear less than a living wage then something is screwed up with your business model.
> 
> ...


He follows uber logic. People would rather work 90 hours a week if they're always be busy than 40 and have a life


----------



## Sacto Burbs (Dec 28, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> The drivers' attorney issued a statement about the court's decision and how drivers who are not in the class Judge Chen certified can proceed. See the website cited below:
> 
> http://uberlawsuit.com
> 
> ...


I opted out, have requested the form, and yes chi1cabby , I do talk out of both sides of my mouth 

Wait, wait, it looks like I'm part of that group that got certified - I've got class!


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

There is no major downside in the long-run when Uber Drivers get re-classified, Uber accepts this re-classification of Drivers being Employees, stops fighting with appeals, refrains from trying to spin and see what sticks, and finally modifies their Driver Terms of Service Contract. There may be inconveniences but more upside immediately and going forward.

Just as importantly, the narrative needs to be changed now so that Corporate Businesses (and even App Startups) who wrongly think that having costs/risks of doing business transferred to the OnDemand Worker without adequate compensation "just because we can" should be allowed to continue with this business model.

So what can be done now while we're waiting for these lawsuits to be worked out? Uber and companies who depend on OnDemand Workforces should be forced to come up with sample profit/loss models that fairly demonstrate what Net Profits will be. If they say, "Well, this is difficult" or " We have such a diverse group of partners", then the answer is, "Then you shouldn't be in this business guys and gals". Having Uber quote Driver Earnings without disclosing expected or some baseline / average Net Profits shouldn't be allowed.

If Uber has an IPO and puts out phony numbers or tries to deceive investors / share holders, the SEC investigates and lays out some very stiff fines and penalties.

Why does Uber and other companies that have OnDemand Workforces get a free pass not to fully disclose the risks of Driving and expected Net Profits?


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> excerpt from Forbes ..
> 
> <<An Uber spokewoman said the company plans to appeal the court's decision on certification.>>
> 
> after reading this i went into a complete state of shock! Uber is appealing????? (sarcasm)


Try not to rot your brain reading Forbes, it sucks.

I'm sure some people will love to poke fun at this source, however, worker's rights is a central focus at MJ:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics...s-may-soon-be-over-heres-why-thats-good-thing


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

I'd be highly amused if the appeal finds that all California drivers are part of the class


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

ginseng41 said:


> They won't if we have to be treated as employees


True, but that is exactly why Uber will not hire drivers as employees.

They will tweak their operations just enough to barely meet the minimum independent operator requirements.


----------



## ginseng41 (Nov 30, 2014)

observer said:


> True, but that is exactly why Uber will not hire drivers as employees.
> 
> They will tweak their operations just enough to barely meet the minimum independent operator requirements.


They may have no choice if they want to stay in business. Sure some stuff like not terminating drivers for ratings is easy to adjust. Inability to set our own prices may not be something they'll do


----------



## glados (May 23, 2015)

No, Uber has a LOT of choices. They have a nuclear option, plan B.

If Uber drivers are classified as employees, then they will no longer be able to deliver current margins with paid drivers. That's okay, _they don't need you_.

Uber will turn their US model into real 'ridesharing'. Anyone will be able to choose their destination, and if there's a match they pick up a pax. They get something like $0.25 a mile in the form of gas cards. There will be no part time drivers, no full time drivers, just ridesharing.

People here have turned into this generation's cab drivers. They want governments to apply overburdenous workplace laws and tell people: "No, you CANNOT work for uber". You seem to think that being classified as employees will help you -- sure it could give you a payout if you fit in the class, but then there will be no uber the way you know it.


----------



## KofiTaxi (Aug 18, 2015)

Bob Reynolds said:


> To put this another way. Uber can move towards fixing this issue right now and stop (or limit) further liability or potential liability for back wages, expenses and penalties going forward. It is very simple and can be done with a simple app adjustment.
> 
> Here is what Uber needs to do immediately:
> 
> ...


You make great points here. The issue is that once Uber makes the changes outlined above then they are in fact no different from a taxi company. right now they can pretend to be "ride sharing" but the points above would basically be "walk like a duck, quack like a duck...." That is why i agree with a few posters that Travis' plan is to keep us around for as along as necessary to get to his IPO and then he and the goldman machine are out with us holding the bag.


----------



## KofiTaxi (Aug 18, 2015)

glados said:


> No, Uber has a LOT of choices. They have a nuclear option, plan B.
> 
> If Uber drivers are classified as employees, then they will no longer be able to deliver current margins with paid drivers. That's okay, _they don't need you_.
> 
> ...


disagree. at some level they do need us. we are the ones burning through the equity in our cars to be drivers. your hypothetical doesnt hold b/c at some level they need to pay enough to entice ppl to drive for uber or be attracted to come and drive for uber. that's why some folks on this board have referred to this as a proto-ponzi scheme.


----------



## glados (May 23, 2015)

KofiTaxi said:


> disagree. at some level they do need us.


How much will they pay you, if you're treated as employees? Do you think you'll still gross $0.85, $1, $1.20 / mile with all expenses paid by Uber?

Of course not. They could let you claim expenses, but only allow low maintenance cars with gas+depreciation+maintenance costs of <$0.30 per mile. And then they will pay you something like $0.20 per mile net. MUCH less than what you would have received normally, because now they have the overhead of payrolls tax, managing expenses, etc.

And then a new startup will come along, that doesn't comply with workplace relations laws. They'll pay drivers like ICs, skipping out on the burdenous overhead and payrolls tax. That will disrupt Uber. Rides will pay less than Uber, drivers will earn more than Uber.

It will be Uber 2.0. *Except Uber drivers will be the taxi drivers*. This forum is turning more and more into greedy taxi drivers bickering. "Cap drivers! Add essentially a medallion system!", "Let me do whatever I want and don't deactivate me even if I have a 2.44 rating!", "Add a tip button! Despite US being the only backwards place where everything isn't built into the price and the anarchic concept of tipping is still commonplace!", "I dun wanna pay $1 per ride, but I want app-on commercial insurance and I know Uber is paying James River ~$0.72 per ride for coverage!" etc.

Don't like Uber? Uber won't work for your vehicle? Don't like their operations?

Simple, don't drive for uber. Don't use courts to prevent others from being able to drive for uber at their own will.


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

KofiTaxi said:


> So basically, we should accept rates that are sub minimum wage BC of a chance the business might close up?
> 
> Perhaps, if you have a business model that requires workers to ear less than a living wage then something is screwed up with your business model.
> 
> ...


No. You accept the job as an ic under the terms or you don't.

Listen, I don't disagree that it sucks when they drops rates to pennies above the standard deduction. But I would then never gamble my livelihood on this job.

Uber didn't exist 5 years ago and suddenly it's people RIGHT to earn a living wage from these folks? Says who?


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

ginseng41 said:


> They may have no choice if they want to stay in business. Sure some stuff like not terminating drivers for ratings is easy to adjust. Inability to set our own prices may not be something they'll do


They don't have to set prices, I think they would let only enough drivers access the app as needed at that time.

They would then pay them minimum wage plus some type of incentive to finish rides quickly.

If more drivers are needed and can't be found quickly they could raise the hourly rate creating a true surge, thereby enticing more drivers to turn on their apps.


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

venture capitalists, Travis Kalanicks, Goldman Sachs... these entities do one thing really good.. look for a gigantic opportunity to cash in on an IPO.. pump it up up up and then dump .. imo this is not about the future of transportation, this is not about revolution with driverless cars that magically clean up vomit by themselves, this is not about the Land of Tomorrow... this is all about one thing .. seeing an opportunity to cash in big at the IPO


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

JimS said:


> No. You accept the job as an ic under the terms or you don't.
> 
> Listen, I don't disagree that it sucks when they drops rates to pennies above the standard deduction. But I would then never gamble my livelihood on this job.
> 
> Uber didn't exist 5 years ago and suddenly it's people RIGHT to earn a living wage from these folks? Says who?


Says who? That'd be common sense and common decency. Right now, in the vast majority of places, it isn't even close to that. "suddenly it's people RIGHT to earn a living wage from these folks?" - That's exactly right Jim. What century is this? It is the 21rst century and apparently the lights are dimming on the working man and woman. To date, drivers play a passive role as part of a major cog in a powerful Ponzi scheme with the likes of Goldman Sachs pacing in the background feeding Travis cash for investing in new technologies.

Everyone has their own interest in mind. There is zero issue to be had with someone standing up for their ability to make something truly worth their while.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

JimS said:


> *Uber didn't exist 5 years ago and suddenly it's people RIGHT to earn a living wage from these folks? Says who?*


Dude are you serious or are you trolling the forum? I can't quite tell!

*Says who?*
How about Uber itself?
Guess you didn't hear Uber touting that the median income of NYC Driver being $90K/year.
Guess you didn't hear the Uber radio Ads currently airing throughout the U.S. touting "Life Changing Money"!


----------



## glados (May 23, 2015)

Uber does not have an obligation to hire you.

Uber does not have an obligation to pay you 6 figures.

You're an adult, you are supposed to make your own decisions. That means taking responsibility

If you don't like the terms of Uber... don't drive for uber.


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

glados said:


> How much will they pay you, if you're treated as employees? Do you think you'll still gross $0.85, $1, $1.20 / mile with all expenses paid by Uber?
> 
> Of course not. They could let you claim expenses, but only allow low maintenance cars with gas+depreciation+maintenance costs of <$0.30 per mile. And then they will pay you something like $0.20 per mile net. MUCH less than what you would have received normally, because now they have the overhead of payrolls tax, managing expenses, etc.
> 
> ...


----------



## Txchick (Nov 25, 2014)

glados said:


> Uber does not have an obligation to hire you.
> 
> Uber does not have an obligation to pay you 6 figures.
> 
> ...


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

SCdave said:


> 1) Uber decides that it is cheaper to pay now (sooner) than later.
> _ Uber is not at this point yet. Could drag on and on or change next month._
> 
> 2) They are forced by the Courts/Regulatory Agency to do so.
> ...


Go Bernie!


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

glados said:


> Uber does not have an obligation to hire you.
> 
> Uber does not have an obligation to pay you 6 figures.
> 
> ...


Travis Kalanick's game plan would significantly help to reduce a worker's ability to go work somewhere else. Travis wants to destroy an entire industry. To shrug shoulders and simply walk away is not helping anyone. Enough people will in fact do just that and have already done that.

"You're an adult, you are supposed to make your own decisions. That means taking responsibility"

- That means standing up against a rober baron like Kalanick. It is that simple. Taking responsibility means owning up to your own mistakes for certain, it equally means railing against being exploited and that is what Kalanick is doing through by way of Uber's policies. How does one take responsibility while allowing himself to be abused and taken advantage of for another's personal gain?

Look at all the bullshit concerning head scratching concerning basement rates, faulty rating system, subprime loans..... people spend som much time and energy trying to figure out how to make the rating system fair. Until there is some kind of attempt at balancing of power between Uber corporate and pardner, none of that other sit is going to get fixed, ever. Walking away doesn't do a thing considering Uber has virtually zero barriers for on boarding new drivers.


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

chi1cabby said:


> Dude are you serious or are you trolling the forum? I can't quite tell!
> 
> *Says who?*
> How about Uber itself?
> ...


Amen. As simple as that. Get real.


----------



## 20yearsdriving (Dec 14, 2014)

riChElwAy said:


> these above excerpts are examples showing what life might be like if this were a true independent contractor situation.. drivers settings rates, drivers controlling surge .. so for the driver who says "i like being an IC, I don't want to be an employee" just look at what you are missing out on here.. your power as a true independent contractor is being hijacked by Uber.. as an IC you are the one who should be in control, making decisions, negotiating prices, etc
> 
> i think the drivers who say this are fearing they will be losing out on "i set my own hours" whereas that is not the case, you can still be an employee and set your own hours, Uber wouldn't work otherwise


BINGO!!


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

20yearsdriving said:


> BINGO!!


The drivers bear all the major responsibilities which make allow Uber to haul humans from A to B. The driver pays for the car, even to the tune of usury rates courtesy of Uber and Santander (partners no more). Drivers fuel and maintain the cars. They sit in them for hours or at a moments notice...... Yet they have no leverage and zero actual input.

Then drivers scratch their head and think for hours as to what kind of suggestions they might pass along to make the peer to peer rating system juuust a bit more fair. You have got to be kidding. Look at the structure behind it all. What enables such protocol?

Bingo is right.


----------



## 20yearsdriving (Dec 14, 2014)

Huberis said:


> The drivers bear all the major responsibilities which make allow Uber to haul humans from A to B. The driver pays for the car, even to the tune of usury rates courtesy of Uber and Santander (partners no more). Drivers fuel and maintain the cars. They sit in them for hours or at a moments notice...... Yet they have no leverage and zero actual input.
> 
> Then drivers scratch their head and think for hours as to what kind of sugestions they might pass along to make the peer to peer system juuust a bit more fare. You have got to be kidding.
> 
> Bingo is right.


Man 
I went from surprise to anger to sadness , I almost give up hope

It's been said here a hundred different ways 
YOU DO NOT NEED THE MIDDLE MAN

I guess it takes a lot to understand ???

Finally a step in the right direction


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

JimS said:


> I don't want to be an employee. I'm quite happy being an IC.


They encourage drivers not to carry commercial insurance which makes it impossible to develop their own business. Rates are set so low in most markets that you would be competing against Uber's own pricing structure if you tried to somehow create your own business. You may not want to be an employee, what makes you an IC other than the fact that Uber calls you one? Anything they proclaim should be questioned and held in contempt until proven factual.


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

I am done for the night, time to separate my last two remaining brain cells and put them to bed. Excellent thread. This is the root of all headaches it all rides on how Uber defines its relationship with their so called partners. Want better rates are a better metric by which your performance is evaluated? The drivers need to enforce their own definition of what it is to be an Uber partner now, what it should be in the future and they need to keep it real and grounded. 

Nothing will ever get fixed until this does.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

KofiTaxi said:


> This is bad advice. as a little guy why not take something instead of holding out for something bigger that isnt certain at all. and Uber will still be fighting those arbitration as well. it will not be as simple as "making a phone call."


I'm not giving advice. Just suggestions and information. People are certainly free to do whatever they want. Uber is very lawyered up. I don't suggest anyone trying to go against them on their own without legal advice... at least right now. A person only gets one bite of of the apple. Make sure it's a good one...


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

glados said:


> How much will they pay you, if you're treated as employees? Do you think you'll still gross $0.85, $1, $1.20 / mile with all expenses paid by Uber?
> 
> Of course not. They could let you claim expenses, but only allow low maintenance cars with gas+depreciation+maintenance costs of <$0.30 per mile. And then they will pay you something like $0.20 per mile net. MUCH less than what you would have received normally, because now they have the overhead of payrolls tax, managing expenses, etc.
> 
> ...


I get it. You're a free market shill.
So how do YOU feel about doing the job for free?


----------



## RockinEZ (Apr 29, 2015)

I laid it all out for a pax today that happened to be a bar owner. He said his eyes were opened by our conversation.... He still didn't tip.

The reality is Uber has to act like a responsible company under the law. 

TK's first business was a file sharing business. He likes to make money from other people's property, including sharing our cars and defrauding the public. 

Sociopaths don't get to bend the laws, no matter how much they are worth on paper.


----------



## RockinEZ (Apr 29, 2015)

Woober said:


> Is there anyway for a driver to find out whether he opted in or opted out?


You would know. You had to opt out by sending an email.


----------



## RockinEZ (Apr 29, 2015)

ginseng41 said:


> An employee classification is definitely not best for all of us. I'd have to quit if I couldn't work whenever I wanted. While I plan to do that, regardless, in a few years, not being able to attend classes, doctors appointments, family emergencies etc., will cause hardship on a lot of people. Many would be left with no income at all.


There is little chance Uber would pay for schedulers. This is not a worry at this time.

So far drivers do a great job of scheduling themselves. There are only so many profitable hours in the week, and most of us work those hours.


----------



## RockinEZ (Apr 29, 2015)

ginseng41 said:


> Uber drivers used to be happy and provide a better than taxi experience for less than taxi rates. When uber got greedy and cut rates to a point where, in most markets, it was impossible for drivers to provide this service at a decent profit, the shit hit the fan. I'm guessing that this lawsuit would never have happened if uber had been responsible and all parties would have been happy.


Greed. They could have kept the fares at $1 under taxi fares and this would not be happening now. In San Diego there are several Uber drivers in every location of the city all day and night. Too many drivers competing for too little money. This can not work in the long run.


----------



## RockinEZ (Apr 29, 2015)

Micmac said:


> I think if you opt out you ll get fired by Uber .


Nope, I opted out when I first started driving, and I am still driving after more than 2000 trips.


----------



## RockinEZ (Apr 29, 2015)

ginseng41 said:


> But both sides were happy until they got greedy. Yes they could increase fares a bit without passengers being too upset but in the markets where it's 0.75, it would have to double at least which would piss off customers. Also, they'd have to admit they were wrong which they have a history of refusing to do


Not true. Pax would take an Uber over a cab if the fare was less expensive than a cab. The service is superior in most cases. The delta would not have to be great, just there. People will always choose better service for less money.


----------



## RockinEZ (Apr 29, 2015)

ginseng41 said:


> They could stop hiring. They'll probably require a minimum of hours a week. Want a vacation? Oh sorry, you're deactivated


From what orifice are you pulling these opinions?


----------



## RockinEZ (Apr 29, 2015)

glados said:


> How much will they pay you, if you're treated as employees? Do you think you'll still gross $0.85, $1, $1.20 / mile with all expenses paid by Uber?
> 
> Of course not. They could let you claim expenses, but only allow low maintenance cars with gas+depreciation+maintenance costs of <$0.30 per mile. And then they will pay you something like $0.20 per mile net. MUCH less than what you would have received normally, because now they have the overhead of payrolls tax, managing expenses, etc.
> 
> ...


You miss the point. Uber will not make drivers employees. Their business model would collapse. They are a VC supported business. If the VCs get nervous, Uber fails. 
Drivers instead will be treated as true ICs.


----------



## RockinEZ (Apr 29, 2015)

JimS said:


> No. You accept the job as an ic under the terms or you don't.
> 
> Listen, I don't disagree that it sucks when they drops rates to pennies above the standard deduction. But I would then never gamble my livelihood on this job.
> 
> Uber didn't exist 5 years ago and suddenly it's people RIGHT to earn a living wage from these folks? Says who?


The courts, Specifically CA Dist 9, and they are deciding that now.


----------



## KofiTaxi (Aug 18, 2015)

JimS said:


> No. You accept the job as an ic under the terms or you don't.
> 
> Listen, I don't disagree that it sucks when they drops rates to pennies above the standard deduction. But I would then never gamble my livelihood on this job.
> 
> Uber didn't exist 5 years ago and suddenly it's people RIGHT to earn a living wage from these folks? Says who?


Jim, you are current that we should accept the terms as an IC. If that's true, then Uber should let us set rates as well. Instead of telling us how much we can charge, when there is a surge. Imagine a world, where Uber is in fact just a tech company. You would log onto the system set your rate for that day and PAX would hire you if they wanted to pay your fare. That would be a true IC. If Uber wont let us do that, then it is hard to say we are true ICs and I guess we are more like employees who should have the base level labor protections.

So no, I am not saying we have a "RIGHT" to anything; just that the company either treat partners as true ICs or else as regular employees - right now it is heads they win and tails we lose....


----------



## glados (May 23, 2015)

KofiTaxi said:


> Jim, you are current that we should accept the terms as an IC. If that's true, then Uber should let us set rates as well.


IC won't mean you get to set rates. Technically, IC means you get to offer rates, BUT uber is under no obligation to accept your rates.

Uber is 100% operating within the IC framework by saying "We will ONLY accept $1.10 / mile, $0.15 / min". Do you really want Uber to waste time adding a form that will auto-reject you if you don't enter the pre-set rates?


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

glados said:


> *Uber is 100% operating within the IC framework *by saying "We will ONLY accept $1.10 / mile, $0.15 / min".


I didn't realize that Judge Chen already has a verdict from the jury in the *UberLAWSUIT* and was posting it here as glados!


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

For many commenting here, they are blending "what is current law" and "what is future law" in describing what an Independent Contractor is in relation to Uber (TNC business).

This blending is what Uber is doing by ignoring current law because the OnDemand Workforce is cool, interesting, beneficial, flexible, adaptable, provides weekly cash Drivers see in bank accounts, provides a popular transportation alternative to consumers, fits the Smartphone App Business model, and " because we're Uber and we can until we are stopped in court".

It is confusing for not only TNC Drivers, but TNC consumers (PAX, Riders), and government officials (regulators, legislators).

Who isn't it confusing for? It isn't confusing for Corporate Uber who has a game plan that has worked amazingly well. The basic game plan was to transfer the cost of growing a Transportation Network onto the individual Drivers but not be required to invest capital into the Vehicles required to grow that network. To be able to control the Transportation Network Drivers like they are Employees but treat those Employees like Independent Contracts; not pay for vehicle cost/expenses, not pay for employee related payroll, not pay for employee related taxes and benefits.

We can say this Game Plan was/is a sleazy game plan but it has worked. Now they have been called out on that game plan in court and try as they might to spin it, Uber has been defined legally as an Employer.

As confusing as this has been for the general public, the courts in general and one Judge in California specifically has figured it out.

So what is not confusing? Uber is an Employer with Employees up until the point current California laws change and/or Uber changes their Terms of Service Contract for Drivers.


----------



## KofiTaxi (Aug 18, 2015)

glados said:


> IC won't mean you get to set rates. Technically, IC means you get to offer rates, BUT uber is under no obligation to accept your rates.
> 
> Uber is 100% operating within the IC framework by saying "We will ONLY accept $1.10 / mile, $0.15 / min". Do you really want Uber to waste time adding a form that will auto-reject you if you don't enter the pre-set rates?


Jim - good point. However, if Uber was operating 100% within the framework, then WE would set the rates and PAX would determine if they hire us. Uber would merely be the platform as it claims to be. That isn't what is happening here. Why? B/c if you are on the system and a ping comes through and you cancel too many times you are going to get a stern email from uber or just straight deactiviation. As a true IC, i should be able to cancel as many trips as I want without losing access to the platform. Put another way, if uber wasn't a dispatch company and merely just a tech platform then why would they care 1. what rate i choose to charge PAXs and 2. whether i decide to cancel as many times as i please.

Jim, you make good points. Uber needs to maintain a proper IC relationship or else a proper employer relationship. It currently - illegally - cherry picks from the best part of each and leaves behind the obligations/requirements.


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

Keep in mind, too, if Uber allows us to set our rates, I'm afraid government will then regulate our rates.


----------



## KofiTaxi (Aug 18, 2015)

JimS said:


> Keep in mind, too, if Uber allows us to set our rates, I'm afraid government will then regulate our rates.


Jim, you make good points so i'm curious to hear your view on uber's bind regarding the employee relationship and the IC relationship and how uber picks and chooses the benefits but leaves behind the obligation. your response about government setting rates is interesting but, respectfully, didnt really provide us with your views nor stay on the topic of the thread.

also, you say govt regulating rates is a bad thing. note, in NYC, TLC regulates the rates and drivers are not making sub minimum wage like they are on uber. with government oversight of rates at least you would get a rate that is at the break even point.


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

JimS said:


> Keep in mind, too, if Uber allows us to set our rates, I'm afraid government will then regulate our rates.


Travis regulating your rates is a complete shit show. Currently, rates are set on a whim in order to meet whatever Uber feels is in their best interest. 95% of of all markets (just a guess) the established markets anyway have base rates set so far below cost, the results are paralytic if running an independent business is the concern. In the smallest minority of markets, the new markets, base rates are set so high, for the purpose of luring and hooking new drivers, there is zero incentive to consider a need to actually protect yourself as a small independent business might (commercial insurance, work independent of Uber etc).

The pricing system as it stands is beyond broken. You may not want price regulation, but the people you have partnered with are absolutely destroying your argument as to why it is best to be avoided. Travis is stomping out that fire himself. If it comes to pass that Uber rates scheduling becomes regulated, it should come as no surprise. You don't have to like it or think it's a good idea, but the powers have clearly been waving their middle fingers at the regulatory powers that be...... good luck with that one, who knows?


----------



## Huberis (Mar 15, 2015)

This may already be posted:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox...atus_over_tips_employment_classification.html

Here is a bit of a spoiler:

"Why does Uber care so much? Because having its drivers, which the company currently treats as independent contractors, reclassified as employees could be very, very bad for business. Uber is part of what's alternatively known as the "on-demand," "gig," or "1099" economy, the last being a nod to the tax forms that the IRS requires of most independent contractors. These businesses are lean by design. In the gig economy, startup empires are built without actually owning anything or employing anyone-summoned from thin air by technology and algorithms that connect two sides of a marketplace. And so Uber owns no cars, and employs no drivers. Where the company once described itself as a "ride-sharing" service and "transportation network," its preferred moniker these days is "lead generation."

Uber is undoubtedly very rich, with a valuation that at last count topped $50 billion. But a ruling that its drivers are not, in fact, contractors and are instead employees-people entitled to traditional protections like a minimum wage and benefits-could shake its business model to the very core. And that's not something that any company wants to reckon with."


----------



## HollyD (Jul 8, 2015)

Either way, by Uber deliberately telling customers NOT to tip specifically they are working to block, regardless of their awareness or not, the rights of both the driver and passenger. Uber is working towards rolling out driverless car and investing in the direction. So...what makes anyone driving at this moment think that uber cares one iota about a group of people Uber is working very hard to make obsolete. *We are just a tool to help them brand themselves. *


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Woober said:


> Is there anyway for a driver to find out whether he opted in or opted out?


Even if you are beyond the time-frame for opting out as stated in the 2014 agreement, you can still send in an opt-out notice (as it my be possible to claim that Uber did not properly inform you of the option, or the time-frame. 
Regardless of the time-frame, you should still MAIL in an opt-out notification to Uber and keep a copy of that for your records. The address to send in your opt-out is in your Partner Agreement.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

_The CLASS "... excludes Uber drivers who work for a third-party company 
and more recent drivers who are bound by Uber's 2014 arbitration clause."_

*OPT-OUT NOW.* 
Even if you are well beyond the time-frame outlined in the partner agreement,
you should still mail in an letter opting out of the binding arbitration provision.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Even if you are beyond the time-frame for opting out as stated in the 2014 agreement, you can still send in an opt-out notice (as it my be possible to claim that Uber did not properly inform you of the option, or the time-frame.
> Regardless of the time-frame, you should still MAIL in an opt-out notification to Uber and keep a copy of that for your records. The address to send in your opt-out is in your Partner Agreement.


Even if not within the thirty day time frame, the law firm at uberlawsuit.com will take drivers cases on an individual basis instead of class action.

You can also opt out there, I think if you mail in your opt out, you should send it in registered mail so you have proof.


----------



## Dave W (Sep 22, 2014)

Besides the California court ruling there was also a ruling not too long ago that went in favor of an UBER driver in Florida who filed for unemployment compensation. The state employment commission ruled in favor of the driver and ordered UBER to pay unemployment compensation. State ruled that the driver was in fact an EMPLOYEE and NOT an IC, based upon the current driver parameters. So this sets a precedent at least in FL that drivers are in fact employees. Of course UBER appealed the ruling. Not sure where it stands now. Can you imagine UBER suddenly having to pay unemployment for every driver they terminate without probable cause? They would go bankrupt. Uber will try and keep everything tied up in the courts until they can go public with their stock or Travis will sell the company to someone who will have to abide by these court rulings and they will realize that the business model is not profitable and end up filing for bankruptcy and then reorganize. Companies do it all the time. Trump has done it. Dump your current business model, change the name, reorganize and start over. It's a great business model if handled properly and run efficiently. Travis cares about $$ and that's all. If we get an owner who actually gives a crap about its employees (drivers) this could end up being a good livelihood in the long run. Anyone have Warren Buffett on speed dial ? .


----------



## Karen NY (Aug 29, 2015)

Every driver needs to inform every passenger who ASKS that we are no tipped as they might believe. Most people are unaware. And then there are just some who are cheap and wouldn't tip anyway. I just need to understand dhow people consider this "good money" when I started last weekend, worked 16 hours hours this weekend and earned 190. During SURGE pricing ??


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

glados said:


> If you are not in California, *DO NOT SIGN AWAY YOUR RIGHTS TO THE ARBITRATION PAYOUT *to the law firm.
> 
> After the class action case is decided or settled, it will be incredibly easy for you to claim the same in arbitration. It is just a low stress phone call. *There is no point in giving 40-70% of your potential payout to a law firm for filing an arbitration claim and making a 15 minute phone call! *The whole point of arbitration (as intended) is to make claims cheap and easy to pursue WITHOUT a lawyer.


glados this is Misleading and blatantly against Drivers' self interest!

*All NEW DRIVERS: *
Please read your Partnership Agreement. New Drivers have 30 Days to Opt-out of *Binding Arbitration.*


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> Sorry Gemgirlla, this is the right thread to challenge glados' misleading assertions.


Thanks... there were way too many posts on the other thread.  I don't know what he is talking about that arbitration is meant to be cheap and easy to pursue without a lawyer. He must be confusing it with small claims court. People always hire lawyers to represent them at arbitration. I'm sure Uber would love it if drivers didn't retain counsel to represent them at arbitration but that's not advisable.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> Actually Gemgirlla, glados knows exactly what he posts is misleading and Not in the best interests of the Drivers. But what if misleading the Drivers is his goal? You see, he is a Self appointed or a designated Uber Rep on the Forum. Just a cursory reading of his postings makes it pretty obvious.


Or maybe just an idiot  Hard to tell the different LOL


----------



## Sacto Burbs (Dec 28, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> glados this is Misleading and blatantly against Drivers' self interest!
> 
> *All NEW DRIVERS: *
> Please read your Partnership Agreement. New Drivers have 30 Days to Opt-out of *Binding Arbitration.*


chi1cabby exclamation marks, seriously? The guy is a truly fine troll. No way he is in Australia. glados my hat is off to you.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Sacto Burbs said:


> chi1cabby exclamation marks, seriously? The guy is a truly fine troll. No way he is in Australia. glados my hat is off to you.


And, if he is in Australia, what could he possibly know about arbitration in the US? I'm confused but then again I don't read his posts just chi1cabby's responses.


----------



## driveLA (Aug 15, 2014)

where do i sign up for the lawsuits


----------



## UberBlackDriverLA (Aug 21, 2014)

driveLA said:


> where do i sign up for the lawsuits


www.uberlawsuit.com


----------

