# Surge throttled when Uber has active quests



## nonononodrivethru

Surge is throttled from the driver's perspective, but Uber is still charging the passengers extra and taking 50-60%.

The quests are becoming a scam. When you ask driver support, they claim there is a lack of demand.

It will now be common to expect this behavior at the end of every quarter.

Time to lawyer up.


----------



## RightTurnOnRed

They know what they are doing is very shady. Thats probably why they switched the drivers compensation from a pre detemined percentage to miles & distance. ?


----------



## 125928

Why continue to drive?


----------



## Cold Fusion

Why the surprise?
?Uber clearly stated in their IPO prospectus
they would take more money ? from drivers.

Uber even added "_we expect driver dissatisfaction to continue"_

Wall Street, the public, government, regulators and Investors were OK with this
because drivers are disposable oversupplied Gig workers.

Maybe u should apply to the other flexible schedule, no supervision & no skill required gigs ✔


----------



## TomH

Cold Fusion said:


> Why the surprise?
> ?Uber clearly stated in their IPO prospectus
> they would take more money ? from drivers.
> 
> Uber even added "_we expect driver dissatisfaction to continue"_
> 
> Wall Street, the public, government, regulators and Investors were OK with this
> because drivers are disposable oversupplied Gig workers.
> 
> Maybe u should apply to the other flexible schedule, no supervision & no skill required gigs ✔


So true. Drivers are just costs that need to be reduced as much as possible.


----------



## Iann

Uber and lyft can charge whatever they want for the Pax. 
We all agreed that we get paid by the minute and mile. 
They don't have to pay us the surge if they don't want to. 
When they pay it they are being nice.


----------



## DriverMark

nonononodrivethru said:


> Surge is throttled from the driver's perspective, but Uber is still charging the passengers extra and taking 50-60%.
> 
> The quests are becoming a scam. When you ask driver support, they claim there is a lack of demand.
> 
> It will now be common to expect this behavior at the end of every quarter.
> 
> Time to lawyer up.


Screenshots of rider fares you have had where they paid Surge and you didn't get it please. If you want to "Lawyer Up", well, you better have proof of your accusations.

p.s. - I'm not saying it isn't happening, but people like to toss this stuff around without showing proof. Lyft, I have first hand experiences of this happening. Uber, I haven't seen it, but also don't look at each and every fare breakdown in detail.


----------



## nonononodrivethru

They all pretty much look like this.

I know my market. Always surges at certain points of Monday and Tuesday. NOTHING the past two days.


----------



## Dekero

Here's a shot of what UBER was charging a rider to get from where I was back to my home 27 mins away (during a surge ..see photo) and at the exact same time what Lyft was charging... Riders need to be looking at the 2 options.. this is plain Robery....And to be charging the passenger TRIPLE and offering us $7.75 

BITE ME UBER


----------



## tohunt4me

nonononodrivethru said:


> Surge is throttled from the driver's perspective, but Uber is still charging the passengers extra and taking 50-60%.
> 
> The quests are becoming a scam. When you ask driver support, they claim there is a lack of demand.
> 
> It will now be common to expect this behavior at the end of every quarter.
> 
> Time to lawyer up.


The WHOLE THING WAS A SCAM !

SINCE DAY ONE.

YOU HAVE BEEN " PAVLOVS DOG" !


----------



## Diamondraider

Dekero said:


> Here's a shot of what UBER was charging a rider to get from where I was back to my home 27 mins away (during a surge ..see photo) and at the exact same time what Lyft was charging... Riders need to be looking at the 2 options.. this is plain Robery....And to be charging the passenger TRIPLE and offering us $7.75
> 
> BITE ME UBER


Send this to the media. Definitely Jalopnik.
Jalopnik is doing a good job making folks aware of our complaints.


----------



## 2smart2drive

father of unicorns said:


> Why continue to drive?


Because: 1) What other options are out there without a commitment? 2) "Lawyering Up" is a good thing: when one group of people takes advantage over another group of people simply because "they Can"- to stand-up for your interests is a better way to go ahead than to back-up without protesting, and simply retreat, give up or blindly obey.

If this was the case throughout history, slavery would remain legal; kingdoms would continue to flourish - not just here, globally...

FAIR business practices are important.
At times, Push-Back is needed. 
Nothing wrong with that.


----------



## nonononodrivethru

Imagine if you AirBnBed your house and they decided market value and what your take was worth?

Do you people not see how illegal what these companies are doing with the rates?


----------



## CTK

RightTurnOnRed said:


> They know what they are doing is very shady. Thats probably why they switched the drivers compensation from a pre detemined percentage to miles & distance. ?


Nope. We always got time & miles. Always. What they changed is that the passengers used to be charged actual time & miles too, and they're not anymore



nonononodrivethru said:


> Surge is throttled from the driver's perspective, but Uber is still charging the passengers extra and taking 50-60%.
> 
> The quests are becoming a scam. When you ask driver support, they claim there is a lack of demand.
> 
> It will now be common to expect this behavior at the end of every quarter.
> 
> Time to lawyer up.


Lawyer up? Lol.

You people watch too much TV.


----------



## nonononodrivethru

CTK said:


> Nope. We always got time & miles. Always. What they changed is that the passengers used to be charged actual time & miles too, and they're not anymore
> 
> 
> Lawyer up? Lol.
> 
> You people watch too much TV.


Lawyers got you the ability to dismiss your acceptance rate.


----------



## CTK

nonononodrivethru said:


> Lawyers got you the ability to dismiss your acceptance rate.


The ability to dismiss your acceptance rate? What does that even mean?


----------



## TPAMB

Long haul


----------



## nonononodrivethru

Uber and Lyft are both settling lawsuits as fast as they get them. They know they're wrong.



CTK said:


> The ability to dismiss your acceptance rate? What does that even mean?


You used to be deactivated if your acceptance rate fell below a certain percentage and couldn't qualify for bonuses.


----------



## 2smart2drive

CTK said:


> Nope. We always got time & miles. Always. What they changed is that the passengers used to be charged actual time & miles too, and they're not anymore
> 
> 
> Lawyer up? Lol.
> 
> You people watch too much TV.


UBER was penalizing their 'independent contractors' as if employees. Well, THAT changed AFTER some of the drivers "decided to lawyer-up" and pushed back.

The Judge's (court) ruling made Uber complicit - they quit using drivers' "excessive cancellations and declines" for punitive reasons, excluding drivers with high cancellation rates from receiving promotions and quests other drivers received.


----------



## nonononodrivethru

More proof


----------



## Dekero

Hahaha I love when Uber tries to scare tactic me into doing it their way... Umm NOPE. stop sending me [email protected]@t rides and I'll stop cancelling on so many...


----------



## CTK

2smart2drive said:


> UBER was penalizing their 'independent contractors' as if employees. Well, THAT changed AFTER some of the drivers "decided to lawyer-up" and pushed back.
> 
> The Judge's (court) ruling made Uber complicit - they quit using drivers' "excessive cancellations and declines" for punitive reasons, excluding drivers with high cancellation rates from receiving promotions and quests other drivers received.


Wrong. You can still be deactivated for excessive cancellations.

The obvious difference between these two scenarios is that we, as drivers, electronically accepted the terms under which we are paid. WE ARE STILL PAID UNDER THOSE TERMS, the ones we had to agree to in order to go online. What Uber charges the rider doesn't affect that in any way, at all.

Obviously as a driver I'd have appreciated each rider increase to increase my pay as well, but that it didn't doesn't violate our agreement with Uber at all. Since it is therefore a clear two party agreement - Uber wrote it, driver agreed to it - it seems unlikely any lawyer you'd "lawyer up" with world have a leg to stand on.


----------



## nonononodrivethru

CTK said:


> Wrong. You can still be deactivated for excessive cancellations.
> 
> The obvious difference between these two scenarios is that we, as drivers, electronically accepted the terms under which we are paid. WE ARE STILL PAID UNDER THOSE TERMS, the ones we had to agree to in order to go online. What Uber charges the rider doesn't affect that in any way, at all.
> 
> Obviously as a driver I'd have appreciated each rider increase to increase my pay as well, but that it didn't doesn't violate our agreement with Uber at all. Since it is therefore a clear two party agreement - Uber wrote it, driver agreed to it - it seems unlikely any lawyer you'd "lawyer up" with world have a leg to stand on.


The whole fact that they're doing a bait and switch with surge pricing and the fact that they're hiding themselves as booking agents when the contract is between the driver and the passenger is grounds enough. Why do you think Uber settles on all of these lawsuits? They never fight them they settle. Because they know they're wrong.


----------



## CTK

nonononodrivethru said:


> The whole fact that they're doing a bait and switch with surge pricing and the fact that they're hiding themselves as booking agents when the contract is between the driver and the passenger is grounds enough. Why do you think Uber settles on all of these lawsuits? They never fight them they settle. Because they know they're wrong.


Well alrighty then you solved it.

Tell me this though: drivers have been whining and threatening to sue over rider's "dynamic pricing" since it began years ago. Why then are we still talking about it? Why is Uber still doing it the same way? Shouldn't at least one of those lawsuits have worked by now?


----------



## nonononodrivethru

CTK said:


> Well alrighty then you solved it.
> 
> Tell me this though: drivers have been whining and threatening to sue over rider's "dynamic pricing" since it began years ago. Why then are we still talking about it? Why is Uber still doing it the same way? Shouldn't at least one of those lawsuits have worked by now?


The lawsuits are working. Uber and Lyft just recently started taking more of the share. So it's time for a new lawsuit.


----------



## CTK

nonononodrivethru said:


> The lawsuits are working. Uber and Lyft just recently started taking more of the share. So it's time for a new lawsuit.


Lol you consider their taking more as evidence that the lawsuits are working? That's odd logic even for an Uber driver.

Here's what I don't get. For years people have been on this forum threatening to sue, threatening to lawyer up, threatening legal action, blah blah blah. Why haven't you seen an attorney yet? Seriously, if it's so doable, why not just do it??


----------



## nonononodrivethru

CTK said:


> Lol you consider their taking more as evidence that the lawsuits are working? That's odd logic even for an Uber driver.
> 
> Here's what I don't get. For years people have been on this forum threatening to sue, threatening to lawyer up, threatening legal action, blah blah blah. Why haven't you seen an attorney yet? Seriously, if it's so doable, why not just do it??


The other lawsuits were forcing them to not treat us as employees but treat us as independent contractors.

I'm not threatening to sue them. I actually am suing them.


----------



## CTK

nonononodrivethru said:


> The other lawsuits were forcing them to not treat us as employees but treat us as independent contractors.
> 
> I'm not threatening to sue them. I actually am suing them.


Well good for you! Let us know how that works out for you.


----------



## Drivincrazy

I started driving Uber 1/31/16. Sixteen months later, Uber took away the 75/25% fare split. It did not begin, base rate+time+distance. It was a % of the fare. Travis decided to gamble away any integrity Uber had left at that point. It was either accept the new terms or we were barred from driving. 
I received my notice while driving. This whole scam might be beatable cuz no actual documents were sent...only demanding e-mails. Of course, Uber is tech company, so, perhaps they will tell the court..."it's in the email, judge."


----------



## CTK

Drivincrazy said:


> I started driving Uber 1/31/16. Sixteen months later, Uber took away the 75/25% fare split. It did not begin, base rate+time+distance. It was a % of the fare. Travis decided to gamble away any integrity Uber had left at that point. It was either accept the new terms or we were barred from driving.
> I received my notice while driving. This whole scam might be beatable cuz no actual documents were sent...only demanding e-mails. Of course, Uber is tech company, so, perhaps they will tell the court..."it's in the email, judge."


What changed was that Uber used to charge rider fares as actual time and distance as well, and we got either 75 or 80% of that (less thre booking fee). After Aug 2016 the drivers retained the same time and distance rates, but the riders paid an upfront price very loosely based on time and distance estimates.


----------



## 2smart2drive

Drivincrazy said:


> I started driving Uber 1/31/16. Sixteen months later, Uber took away the 75/25% fare split. It did not begin, base rate+time+distance. It was a % of the fare. Travis decided to gamble away any integrity Uber had left at that point. It was either accept the new terms or we were barred from driving.
> I received my notice while driving. This whole scam might be beatable cuz no actual documents were sent...only demanding e-mails. Of course, Uber is tech company, so, perhaps they will tell the court..."it's in the email, judge."


Uber is (1) a fancy dispatching company that created (2) an online technology (3) to implement & improve potential clients' transportation needs (4) by means of replacing traditional taxi services' (a) call-in and (b) catch-me-if-you-can systems with (c) an online app.
Everything Uber say for them being strictly "technologic" is a scamming BS of shameless and unparalleled proportions.

Uber Technologies Co. patented numerious software algorithms (USA Registered Patents*) - to improve, modernize, implement the dispatching of incoming ride-requests (including operational softwares for driverless cars) - are in service of ONLY one purpose: TRANSPORTATION of people.

Uber's on-demand and per-request services (compared to generic pre-scheduled systems of buses, trains, subways, etc) - still TRANSPORT people. Regardless of Uber Technologies Company's "use of technology" - their main one CORE PURPOSE and REASON of being in business is transportation of people.
uber's claim to be Tech company" is the same as if taxi companies start calling themselves "phone companies" (or telephone providers, or something, lol) - because they need to use "telephone lines" to dispatch calls to cabdrivers. Dah, Dara?!

The day courts approve Uber as the "technology" to escape AB5, is the D-day (the Death Day) if the Rule of Law in this county: RIP - unbiased and independent ?? judicial system; it was good to know you, while you lasted.


----------



## peteyvavs

Iann said:


> Uber and lyft can charge whatever they want for the Pax.
> We all agreed that we get paid by the minute and mile.
> They don't have to pay us the surge if they don't want to.
> When they pay it they are being nice.


When 2 parties are in a contract to perform services then both parties should be allowed to negotiate rates, with U/L all decisions are unilateral and driver's are forced into agreement.
This will eventually be U/L undoing.


----------



## Wild Bill Yahoo

nonononodrivethru said:


> Imagine if you AirBnBed your house and they decided market value and what your take was worth?
> 
> Do you people not see how illegal what these companies are doing with the rates?


So.... what exactly is illegal about selling a service on the open market and paying the expense (the driver) a set rate per mile/minute as per the agreed upon contract with the driver?

I don't get the illegality part. Can you explain please?



nonononodrivethru said:


> The whole fact that they're doing a bait and switch with surge pricing and the fact that they're hiding themselves as booking agents when the contract is between the driver and the passenger is grounds enough. Why do you think Uber settles on all of these lawsuits? They never fight them they settle. Because they know they're wrong.


LOL... They settle because it is cheaper to settle than litigate. Get your facts straight.


----------



## nonononodrivethru

Wild Bill Yahoo said:


> So.... what exactly is illegal about selling a service on the open market and paying the expense (the driver) a set rate per mile/minute as per the agreed upon contract with the driver?
> 
> I don't get the illegality part. Can you explain please?
> 
> 
> LOL... They settle because it is cheaper to settle than litigate. Get your facts straight.


It's illegal because they steal market value from the drivers and don't let the driver negotiate the contract, which is not how independent contractors work. They are tying market value into ridiculous quests, which is a veiled performance standards. Additionally, they are determining market value for themselves, not the driver, and handling all of the money. PayPal and eBay were broken up for these vary same reasons. There's no transparency and a conflict of interest.

It's not cheaper than litigating it. They settle because they are at fault.


----------



## james725

nonononodrivethru said:


> Surge is throttled from the driver's perspective, but Uber is still charging the passengers extra and taking 50-60%.
> 
> The quests are becoming a scam. When you ask driver support, they claim there is a lack of demand.
> 
> It will now be common to expect this behavior at the end of every quarter.
> 
> Time to lawyer up.


The sky is blue


----------



## nouberipo

Cold Fusion said:


> Why the surprise?
> ?Uber clearly stated in their IPO prospectus
> they would take more money ? from drivers.
> 
> Uber even added "_we expect driver dissatisfaction to continue"_
> 
> Wall Street, the public, government, regulators and Investors were OK with this
> because drivers are disposable oversupplied Gig workers.
> 
> Maybe u should apply to the other flexible schedule, no supervision & no skill required gigs ✔


Or maybe Uber and Lyft should follow laws that used to give parameters on what is right and wrong in society instead of creating their own unethical, immoral, and illegal cultures which they can get away with due to money and connections (as it is in all third world countries).


----------



## VictorD

nonononodrivethru said:


> Time to lawyer up.


For what? What are you entitled to that you're not receiving?

Nothing. Exactly. You're getting *exactly *that to which you agreed under the TOS.

Oh, but that was then, right? Now, you've decided that you don't like that agreement, so it's the government's responsibility to intervene and force these companies to give you what you want, huh?

Cry me a ****ing river. And please make sure my Big Mac is made fresh. The last one tasted like it had been sitting for an hour.



CTK said:


> ... if it's so doable, why not just do it??


Most of these idiots drive because they couldn't learn how to cook French Fries and you expect them to know how to bring litigation against a multi-billion dollar corporation.


----------



## nonononodrivethru

VictorD said:


> For what? What are you entitled to that you're not receiving?
> 
> Nothing. Exactly. You're getting *exactly *that to which you agreed under the TOS.
> 
> Oh, but that was then, right? Now, you've decided that you don't like that agreement, so it's the government's responsibility to intervene and force these companies to give you what you want, huh?
> 
> Cry me a @@@@ing river. And please make sure my Big Mac is made fresh. The last one tasted like it had been sitting for an hour.
> 
> 
> Most of these idiots drive because they couldn't learn how to cook French Fries and you expect them to know how to bring litigation against a multi-billion dollar corporation.


Each ride is a contract between driver and passenger with a market value. Uber is only entitled to a booking fee and will eventually have to allow a third party money platform to handle all of the transactions. Just watch.


----------



## indydriver68

Uber will do it’s undoing all on it’s own in due time. Uber hasn’t been able to get out of its own way to be a profitable and respected company. And they still can’t to this day. Now that Uber is publicly traded there is only so long a string of losses will be tolerated by shareholders before they dump the board, put company up for sale, cut their loses and run and Uber stock tanks even more or any combination of the above. 

Play the game that puts the most money if your pocket and quit worrying about quests and consecutive runs. They are nice when they occasionally fit into your driving plan but those are strictly for Uber’s benefit. 

And for the record I think Uber is a bunch of crooks and thieves for taking half or more of a fare. But figure out the parameters that usually creates it then you can avoid it. Doesn’t always work. I occasionally get those still but not often. And yeah it still pisses me off. But then again I am always happiest when Uber loses money on a fare.


----------



## spinacheggs

So I did a 3-ride streak with Uber at night this weekend. I swear I thought the 2nd and 3rd rides of the streak had small surges attached. When I checked later, they didn't give me surge pay, but I did get the 3-ride streak bonus. This wasn't the display bug on the bottom bar of the app. The surge amounts were displayed on the acceptance dialog box.

Is this deliberate and common?


----------



## indydriver68

spinacheggs said:


> So I did a 3-ride streak with Uber at night this weekend. I swear I thought the 2nd and 3rd rides of the streak had small surges attached. When I checked later, they didn't give me surge pay, but I did get the 3-ride streak bonus. This wasn't the display bug on the bottom bar of the app. The surge amounts were displayed on the acceptance dialog box.
> 
> Is this deliberate and common?


If you had a flat rate surge show in the acceptance dialog box then you should have received that in addition to the consecutive bonus provided you completed the 3 ride streak. Friday night sucked here but Saturday night after 11pm took off with surging all over downtown and outer areas. On shorter rides I received the surge and consecutive trip bonus and on some of the longer runs even had the surge adjusted up as well as the consecutive bonus.

I broke the consecutive bonus a few times by declining a ride which was done since Uber likes to keep drawing you farther and farther out where there are a lot less drivers available to take rides when I want to go back toward downtown and areas where it's surging. So each time I broke the consecutive trip bonus my trip history showed some note saying you declined a ride with a ! Inside a triangle in red like some warning sign that you did a bad thing. Lol .... F*** Uber...lol


----------



## Wild Bill Yahoo

nonononodrivethru said:


> It's illegal because they steal market value from the drivers and don't let the driver negotiate the contract, which is not how independent contractors work. They are tying market value into ridiculous quests, which is a veiled performance standards. Additionally, they are determining market value for themselves, not the driver, and handling all of the money. PayPal and eBay were broken up for these vary same reasons. There's no transparency and a conflict of interest.
> 
> It's not cheaper than litigating it. They settle because they are at fault.


You're delusional. IC's aren't entitled to any perceived market value. Thousands of IC's in all lines of work are payed an agreed amount for certain tasks. Even by the hour in a lot of cases. Construction, merchandising, legal, retail etc.

But wait... Ubers different... ya right :thumbup:


----------



## TX Uber Ant

True story in Dallas Texas tonight.


----------



## lyft_rat

CTK said:


> Wrong. You can still be deactivated for excessive cancellations.


The consensus is that there is no evidence of deactivation based solely on excessive cancellation. In every reported case of deactivation there was something else fishy about the driver. On the other hand, there is little need to cancel often if you know your market and filter heavily on acceptance.


----------



## 25rides7daysaweek

nonononodrivethru said:


> Surge is throttled from the driver's perspective, but Uber is still charging the passengers extra and taking 50-60%.
> 
> The quests are becoming a scam. When you ask driver support, they claim there is a lack of demand.
> 
> It will now be common to expect this behavior at the end of every quarter.
> 
> Time to lawyer up.


There sure was a lower demand yesterday....


----------



## L DaVinci

Dekero said:


> Hahaha I love when Uber tries to scare tactic me into doing it their way... Umm NOPE. stop sending me [email protected]@t rides and I'll stop cancelling on so many...


I reject all short trips, Uber can go F themselves


----------



## nouberipo

CTK said:


> Wrong. You can still be deactivated for excessive cancellations.
> 
> The obvious difference between these two scenarios is that we, as drivers, electronically accepted the terms under which we are paid. WE ARE STILL PAID UNDER THOSE TERMS, the ones we had to agree to in order to go online. What Uber charges the rider doesn't affect that in any way, at all.
> 
> Obviously as a driver I'd have appreciated each rider increase to increase my pay as well, but that it didn't doesn't violate our agreement with Uber at all. Since it is therefore a clear two party agreement - Uber wrote it, driver agreed to it - it seems unlikely any lawyer you'd "lawyer up" with world have a leg to stand on.


Drivers are paid under terms that for many means below minimum wage in the United States. Yes, drivers are employees no matter what they put in the two party agreement. They can write whatever they want in the agreement but it is not ethical nor legal in terms of employment laws and regulations which the courts are hearing now. I cannot believe the US has gotten to the point where they have to go to court to pay employees a minimum wage and benefits that are covered in employment laws. As Uber and Lyft act as rogue companies with no respect for the laws of this country, maybe they should base it out of the third world (there are already third world programmers programming the algorithms, third world crisis phone help, third world "driver support", and third world leadership. Just as in the third world, laws are viewed as not pertaining to them even though US employment laws and regulations were put in place BECAUSE of companies like Lyft and Uber who exploit workers and bring down society as a whole with their unethical, immoral, and illegal operations.



spinacheggs said:


> So I did a 3-ride streak with Uber at night this weekend. I swear I thought the 2nd and 3rd rides of the streak had small surges attached. When I checked later, they didn't give me surge pay, but I did get the 3-ride streak bonus. This wasn't the display bug on the bottom bar of the app. The surge amounts were displayed on the acceptance dialog box.
> 
> Is this deliberate and common?


Deliberate and unethical. You should be getting the surge AND the quest as they are two separate things. Last night they did the same with two of my rides and after many phone calls to the third world call center in Manila finally got them to pay. It is very sad that you have to constantly take screenshots of any and all surges as they will lie as part of the Uber/Lyft cultures. Think about it, if they got away with taking just two dollars from each driver every day and if 1 million trips are made per day that would be millions of dollars stolen from drivers. Stealing is another law in the US but one that Uber and Lyft operate as if they are immune to it which with their money and connections are apparently so.


----------



## 2smart2drive

Wild Bill Yahoo said:


> So.... what exactly is illegal about selling a service on the open market and paying the expense (the driver) a set rate per mile/minute as per the agreed upon contract with the driver?
> 
> I don't get the illegality part. Can you explain please?
> 
> It's totally 'legal' (agree or leave) of the free market. But, the debate here is about Uber's claim: their drivers are ''independent' contractors. Uber is not a transportation company. It's the logistics company. Uber had to cut many corners before its Tipping Point, and this is one of them:
> 
> I am an independent contractor in my main biz. I know the difference between being an independent contractor and what driving for Uber is... I set the prices. I have the tools to negotiate. BOTH parties are satisfied with an outcome (or their is no deal). I know (get informed) about my deals UPFRONT, before I can agree or decline (not AFTER as with Uber - the craziest thing ever: accept the ride, drive there, THEN, if you 'don't want it', you can decline?). Uber's biz model for the drivers is "don't ask, do tell" - worked for them. Not for their drivers: the "how much, to where and how far" are kept in secrets BECAUSE UBER KNOWS VERY WELL that most trips will be declined due to their unprofitably. Hmmmm.... But is it 'legal'?
> Uber's drivers are treated like employees: pre-set (per mile and minute) prices; changed without notice, at any time. Drivers agreed to accept all deals (acceptance) without questioning. Rejections (unwanted & canceled) trips, although, are technically "allowed", are highly punishable in many subtle ways and levels (this deals are forced, not "agreed upon") - "no independence" list goes on and on... Most people are inclined to agree that "independent L/Uber's contractors" are hired workers, only with flexible schedules.
> 
> The scoop and borderlines of the 'legality' to call its workers 'independent contractors' instead, is yet to be determined.


----------

