# SF leaders pledge to explore ‘every single legal remedy’ to protect gig workers as employees



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

https://www.sfexaminer.com/the-city...l-remedy-to-protect-gig-workers-as-employees/
Local hearing called as state weighs changes to legal protections for contractors


JOE FITZGERALD RODRIGUEZ
Jun. 28, 2019 5:15 p.m.
THE CITY
San Francisco officials are about to look in every nook and cranny of local law for ways to enforce worker protections for thousands of "gig workers," following a state Supreme Court ruling known commonly as the "Dynamex" decision.
That legal analysis is taking place even as the state legislature considers Assembly Bill 5, authored by Assemblymember Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego), which would cement the Dynamex decision in California law.
Dynamex is already rippling throughout California, as many workers formerly seen as independent contractors have now been classified as employees - even dancers in local strip clubs, as The Examiner has previously reported.
But AB 5 could strengthen that reclassification, advocates hope, cementing worker protections across the state. It is still winding its way through the state senate.
Uber and Lyft are heatedly fighting AB 5, fearing it would reclassify their drivers as employees, instead of independent contractors.
With the stroke of a pen, the companies could be required to spend millions providing worker protections like sick leave and healthcare. They have argued publicly that AB 5 threatens the flexibility of the gig economy, that most of their drivers enjoy being able to begin or end work at their leisure, especially in light of how many drive as a second or third job.
Many drivers disagree, however, and recent protests have seen dozens of gig workers calling out Uber in front of their offices.
In the meantime, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors is working with the City Attorney's Office and the Office of Labor and Standards Enforcement to explore ways Dynamex could protect gig workers.
"Are we enforcing every single legal remedy we have right now?" said Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, in a City Hall hearing Friday afternoon. "We should be using every tool in the toolbox," he added, and "there's tremendous political will on this board to make this happen."
Mandelman and Supervisor Gordon Mar called for a hearing into the gig economy, which drew dozens of workers, from Uber and Lyft drivers to domestic workers, as well as allies from the labor community, calling for greater protections. Those ride-hail drivers were organized by Gig Workers Rising, a movement of independent contractors that have begun to rally and organize in the same vein as unions.
"One time it happened I had to stop working for one month for health reasons," said Rasheed Alsanea, a 12-year San Francisco resident who said he's driven for Uber and Lyft for six years.
Without employee protections, his month off work was financially devastating, he said.
"In that month I had to pay my insurance, the car finance," he said. "No one was paying me for this month."
Friday's hearing was also a major show of solidarity for the local labor movement, in what some said was a maturation of Gig Workers Rising's organizing.
The Progressive Workers Alliance, Jobs with Justice SF, the San Francisco Labor Council, SEIU 1021, SEIU United Service Workers West, Teamsters Joint Council 7 and United Food Workers and Commercial union all came out in solidarity with the gig workers, asking the Board of Supervisors to add pressure to state politicians who will decide the fate of gig workers' classifications.
"We have laws on the books, we need to make sure workers are getting their minimum wage," said Jane Martin, an organizer with SEIU USWW. "We've never let an army of corporate lawyers stand in our way in the past."


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

KevinH said:


> "One time it happened I had to stop working for one month for health reasons," said Rasheed Alsanea, a 12-year San Francisco resident who said he's driven for Uber and Lyft for six years.
> Without employee protections, his month off work was financially devastating, he said.
> "In that month I had to pay my insurance, the car finance," he said. "No one was paying me for this month."


If he was an employee at McDonalds or Burger King, would they pay his insurance, or make the payment on his car? No! Minimum wage jobs don't do that, and Uber/Lyft would be no different.

People just need to learn personal responsibility and plan for those rainy days.


----------



## UberAdrian (May 26, 2018)

Fozzie said:


> If he was an employee at McDonalds or Burger King, would they pay his insurance, or make the payment on his car? No! Minimum wage jobs don't do that, and Uber/Lyft would be no different.
> 
> People just need to learn personal responsibility and plan for those rainy days.


Here in Canada everybody has employment insurance, it pays you most of your usual wages for up to a year if you can't work for any reason. Behind that there's a separate safety net for disabilities and behind that there's a general safety net for everyone called welfare.

Do you guys not have any of this?


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

UberAdrian said:


> Here in Canada everybody has employment insurance, it pays you most of your usual wages for up to a year if you can't work for any reason. Behind that there's a separate safety net for disabilities and behind that there's a general safety net for everyone called welfare.
> 
> Do you guys not have any of this?


Each individual state has their own "Unemployment Insurance" program, which is paid for by EMPLOYERS and available to their EMPLOYEES who meet minimum employment longevity requirements and who are unemployed due to means beyond their control. If you quit, you get nothing. If you get fired for unacceptable work performance, you get nothing. (and benefits are extremely restrictive, lasting from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, it only covers a fraction of your prior earnings, and many places have mandatory minimum job search requirements)

In the case of rideshare, since you don't have an employer, you don't have contributions into the Unemployment Insurance system, and subsequently are disqualified from eligibility.

Unemployed independent contractors have no safety net except that which we build ourselves.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> If he was an employee at McDonalds or Burger King, would they pay his insurance, or make the payment on his car? No! Minimum wage jobs don't do that, and Uber/Lyft would be no different.
> 
> People just need to learn personal responsibility and plan for those rainy days.


No, BK and McDonalds would not pay his payments for him but as an employee disability would have paid him *something.*

Yes, as an employee he would have had to pay a 1% tax on his earnings.



Fozzie said:


> Each individual state has their own "Unemployment Insurance" program, which is paid for by EMPLOYERS and available to their EMPLOYEES who meet minimum employment longevity requirements and who are unemployed due to means beyond their control. If you quit, you get nothing. If you get fired for unacceptable work performance, you get nothing. (and benefits are extremely restrictive, lasting from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, it only covers a fraction of your prior earnings, and many places have mandatory minimum job search requirements)
> 
> In the case of rideshare, since you don't have an employer, you don't have contributions into the Unemployment Insurance system, and subsequently are disqualified from eligibility.
> 
> Unemployed independent contractors have no safety net except that which we build ourselves.


Disability is for nonwork related purposes, as in getting sick.

Unemployment is for getting laid off.


----------



## ANT 7 (Oct 14, 2018)

UberAdrian said:


> Here in Canada everybody has employment insurance, it pays you most of your usual wages for up to a year if you can't work for any reason. Behind that there's a separate safety net for disabilities and behind that there's a general safety net for everyone called welfare.
> 
> Do you guys not have any of this?


Incorrect.

I live in Kanaduh. Unemployment Insurance pays about 60% of your income and is taxable as well. There is a severe and long qualification/vetting process which can take 12 weeks on average. You only receive it if you were laid off or on a medical leave. Quit, or get fired for cause, and you get nada.

The $500 or so a month welfare pays you has similar process that is harder to collect on.

Having said that, if you are a non-caucasian, non-English speaking refugee with zero prospects who enters our country, the liberal pukes in our government will readily give you free money ASAP.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

observer said:


> No, BK and McDonalds would not pay his payments for him but as an employee disability would have paid him *something.*
> 
> Disability is for nonwork related purposes, as in getting sick.
> 
> Unemployment is for getting laid off.


He wouldn't have qualified for disability, since that normally requires a serious illness or injury that lasts a minimum of one year and prevents you from performing pretty much any type of work. Qualifying is tough, and only 30-40% of applicants actually get approved.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

I


Fozzie said:


> He wouldn't have qualified for disability, since that normally requires a serious illness or injury that lasts a minimum of one year and prevents you from performing pretty much any type of work. Qualifying is tough, and only 30-40% of applicants actually get approved.


Yes and no.

I made a mistake, you are correct about Social Security Disability Insurance but in California employees pay for Short Term Disability Insurance.

You can start to collect after 8 days of not working and does not require a serious injury or illness. You do have to be under medical care.

I had to juggle 350+ employees' schedules, while disability wasn't used often, it was used.

Ohhh and I almost forgot, in California employees get three paid sick days. So this driver would have missed out on five days pay, assuming he hadn't used them already.

Another thing I forgot, sick pay is paid wether the employee is full time or part time. I don't remember exactly but it's one hours pay for every 40 hours worked up to 24 hours of sick pay, or something like that. Then you can't accrue anymore sick pay.

You can use the sick pay for yourself or to take care of a family member. The employer cannot ask you why you are using it.

Also, you can be off for up to a year under short term state disability.

I seem to remember one of our guys getting pretty sick from Diabetes???. IIRC he used Short Term DisabiIity for a year then got on Social Security Disability.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> People just need to learn personal responsibility









Fozzie said:


> He wouldn't have qualified for disability, since that normally requires a serious illness or injury that lasts a minimum of one year and prevents you from performing pretty much any type of work. Qualifying is tough, and only 30-40% of applicants actually get approved.


Actually, if his injury happened on the job workers comp would have covered him.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

uberdriverfornow said:


> Actually, if his injury happened on the job workers comp would have covered him.


Yes, but he didn't say he was injured on the job. He stated he couldn't work for "health reasons".

If he had been injured on the job he would have surely mentioned that.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

observer said:


> Yes, but he didn't say he was injured on the job. He stated he couldn't work for "health reasons".
> 
> If he had been injured on the job he would have surely mentioned that.


since we are not given workers comp until ab5 passes you don't really think he would care to specifically mention it if it applied


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

uberdriverfornow said:


> since we are not given workers comp until ab5 passes you don't really think he would care to specifically mention it if it applied


No, I don't think so.

Which has more impact?

I couldn't drive for health reasons.
Or
I got hurt on the job and didn't qualify for workers compensation.

Remember, he was in a meeting to show how he's being screwed by Uber. He would have picked the worst possible proveable scenario.



uberdriverfornow said:


> since we are not given workers comp until ab5 passes you don't really think he would care to specifically mention it if it applied


I may be wrong but the way I understand it Dynamex only affected wage orders. For example, employee must be paid minimum wage and overtime.

Dynamex did not include workers compensation, unemployment insurance, Social Security contribution, etc.

AB5 would change that.

Under Dynamex all workers are presumed to be employees and employers have burden of proof that they are not employees.

Which is one reason that the court applied Dynamex retroactively. Meaning Uber will have to go back and verify that all drivers current _*and former *_were paid at least minimum wage and overtime for all hours they were working and on app. Not just time from pick up to drop off, all time on standby and to pax as well.

This is aside from all business costs borne by drivers.

I don't know , but I doubt, AB5 will apply retroactively.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

observer said:


> No, I don't think so.
> 
> Which has more impact?
> 
> ...


all employees are eligible for workers comp

dynamex didn't immediately change anything in terms of getting benefits....ab5 will mandate it


----------



## kevin92009 (Sep 11, 2016)

uberdriverfornow said:


> Actually, if his injury happened on the job workers comp would have covered him.


uber and lyft still have not changed for the better since that video. and new app features don't cut it lol.


----------



## mbd (Aug 27, 2018)

Home if the tech billionaires have so many homeless people ... why is that ?
I thought they love the needy .
If they can just adopt 5-10 homeless people, and let them just stay in the mansion. Why do the SF billionaires have big gates and security guards with guns ???


----------



## zeroperminute (Jun 19, 2019)

just give me $10 minimum gross $1.50 per mile .30 per minute & the details of my contract & you can keep all the employee bs but if you're going to treat me like an employee i want every single benefit im owed, overtime, soc sec, workers comp, holiday pay, sick pay.......

be a cab company and stop with the technology but it will never happen they dint even charge actual costs


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

zeroperminute said:


> just give me $10 minimum gross $1.50 per mile .30 per minute & the details of my contract & you can keep all the employee bs but if you're going to treat me like an employee i want every single benefit im owed, overtime, soc sec, workers comp, holiday pay, sick pay.......
> 
> be a cab company and stop with the technology but it will never happen they dint even charge actual costs


Sorry, no holiday pay.

At least not in California.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

observer said:


> Sorry, no holiday pay.
> 
> At least not in California.


we will after we get a union contract


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

If San Francisco is thinking about anything to do with employed people, it has to do with taxes.
Taxes.

TAXES!
Guaranteed.
It's not to help you, it's to tax you.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> we will after we get a union contract


LOL Minimum wage job, but "your union" is going to negotiate that for you.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

uberdriverfornow said:


> we will after we get a union contract


Not likely.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> LOL Minimum wage job, but "your union" is going to negotiate that for you.


thats the job of a union



uberdriverfornow said:


> thats the job of a union


find me a union contract without holiday pay

SMW, UFCW, CWA ... all unions ive been in....all had holiday pay


----------



## NotanEmployee (Apr 20, 2019)

Fozzie said:


> LOL Minimum wage job, but "your union" is going to negotiate that for you.


Yesh, the union that takes 1/3 of you pay in dues! ???


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> If he was an employee at McDonalds or Burger King, would they pay his insurance, or make the payment on his car? No! Minimum wage jobs don't do that, and Uber/Lyft would be no different.
> 
> People just need to learn personal responsibility and plan for those rainy days.


Yes workers must have protection from predatory actions just like U/L do. Manipulating drivers, .
Why U/L accepting regular insurance and putting drivers at risk. Why? I can tell you hundreds examples of U/L manipulation. Both companies will open account for underage riders, if something happened driver will be responsible for giving service to underage minors. Both companies must start to have onset approach to this business stop manipulating, misinform public and investor. Uber Vice President mus risighn imidetly


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

NotanEmployee said:


> Yesh, the union that takes 1/3 of you pay in dues! ???


just like Uber....you expect people to work for free

even so, if someone wanted to be a jerk to a union they could even request not to even pay dues


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

NotanEmployee said:


> Yesh, the union that takes 1/3 of you pay in dues! ???


1/3 of your pay in dues?

What union job did you work at?


----------



## Taxi2Uber (Jul 21, 2017)

observer said:


> I
> 
> Yes and no.
> 
> ...


When I was in CA, Short Term Disability was a life saver.
After moving to NV, I suffered an injury and went to Social Services, thinking it'll just be the same as in CA.
I said, "I need start Short Term disablity"
They said, "We don't have that here. Only specific injuries/ailments that last a year or more, that are on the list"
I said, "I'm unable to perform my regular duties at work. What are my options?"
They said, "Change careers....NEXT!"
That was surely a rude awakening for me.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Polomarko said:


> Yes workers must have protection from predatory actions just like U/L do. Manipulating drivers, .
> Why U/L accepting regular insurance and putting drivers at risk. Why? I can tell you hundreds examples of U/L manipulation. Both companies will open account for underage riders, if something happened driver will be responsible for giving service to underage minors. Both companies must start to have onset approach to this business stop manipulating, misinform public and investor. Uber Vice President mus risighn imidetly


The question is: If you want a job with high pay and benefits, WHY ARE YOU STILL DRIVING?

Say AB5 passes and all drivers must be employees... how do you know that you're going to be one of the drivers hired?

If Uber's costs to operate triple, where is that going to come from?

If you demand a minimum wage THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THEY'LL OFFER.

How many hours do you work? If you're an employee, I doubt you'll ever be allowed to drive 30 hrs /wk, and you won't be allowed to drive for both companies. Uber or Lyft... CHOOSE ONE

Can you survive on $12 /hr x 30 hrs a week?

This is the reality that you'll face if AB5 passes. Be careful what you wish for.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> The question is: If you want a job with high pay and benefits, WHY ARE YOU STILL DRIVING?
> 
> Say AB5 passes and all drivers must be employees... how do you know that you're going to be one of the drivers hired?
> 
> ...


lol you act like it could be any worse for drivers than it is now ????

you're basically in the only market in the country where drivers are getting twice the .60 a mile everyone else in the country is so of course you're so anti-driver

drivers elsewhere can't wait til you get reduced down to .60 like all other drivers


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> lol you act like it could be any worse for drivers than it is now ????
> 
> you're basically in the only market in the country where drivers are getting twice the .60 a mile everyone else in the country is so of course you're so anti-driver
> 
> drivers elsewhere can't wait til you get reduced down to .60 like all other drivers


How am I anti driver? I'm anti stupidity. I'm against seeing drivers set unrealistic expectations. My hope is that someone will read one of my posts and say "damn, you know what, Fozzie is right!" Pursuing AB5 is bad news for California, and will be bad news for drivers across the nation.

The difference between you and I is that if I wasn't happy with what I was making, I'd move on and find a job that pays what I demand. I wouldn't advocate changing the whole damn system to suit me.

Yeah, the rates here are higher, but if you're envious of our mediocre pay rates, you really need to raise your expectations.



uberdriverfornow said:


> lol you act like it could be any worse for drivers than it is now ????
> 
> you're basically in the only market in the country where drivers are getting twice the .60 a mile everyone else in the country is so of course you're so anti-driver
> 
> drivers elsewhere can't wait til you get reduced down to .60 like all other drivers


A lot of drivers work more than 30 hrs a week. Almost all drivers nationwide earn more than $12 /hr gross. Are you willing to trade your current earnings for that?

Do the math.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> How am I anti driver? I'm anti stupidity. I'm against seeing drivers set unrealistic expectations. My hope is that someone will read one of my posts and say "damn, you know what, Fozzie is right!" Pursuing AB5 is bad news for California, and will be bad news for drivers across the nation.
> 
> The difference between you and I is that if I wasn't happy with what I was making, I'd move on and find a job that pays what I demand. I wouldn't advocate changing the whole damn system to suit me.
> 
> ...


you go against anything that helps other drivers

ab5 has nothing to do with you nor does it affect you in any way


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> If he was an employee at McDonalds or Burger King, would they pay his insurance, or make the payment on his car? No! Minimum wage jobs don't do that, and Uber/Lyft would be no different.
> 
> People just need to learn personal responsibility and plan for those rainy days.


Not true. Employees and employers contribute to social safety net programs. In this case the employee would be covered by the State Temporary Disability Plan.
These programs like workers compensation and unemployment insurance are not designed to be charity but to provide stability to the economy and buffer the consequences of accidents and misfortune. The city of San Francisco is tired of paying for the ambulance rides and hospital costs of the growing numbers of injured TNC drivers.

These social safety net programs keep circumstances from bankrupting workers and the chain of events that follow as housing is lost and financial obligations to the community are defaulted. One of the big issues for conservative legislators in Sacramento over AB5 is the loss of $Billions of social safety net payments and the financial impact of drivers injured, filing bankruptcy, or becoming homeless.
It is in the interest of you and I that drivers are kept in the workforce and contributing to economy and their community.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> How am I anti driver? I'm anti stupidity. I'm against seeing drivers set unrealistic expectations. My hope is that someone will read one of my posts and say "damn, you know what, Fozzie is right!" Pursuing AB5 is bad news for California, and will be bad news for drivers across the nation.
> 
> The difference between you and I is that if I wasn't happy with what I was making, I'd move on and find a job that pays what I demand. I wouldn't advocate changing the whole damn system to suit me.
> 
> ...


Have a cite for that statement on how much drivers are making?


----------



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

Fozzie said:


> If he was an employee at McDonalds or Burger King, would they pay his insurance, or make the payment on his car? No! Minimum wage jobs don't do that, and Uber/Lyft would be no different.
> 
> People just need to learn personal responsibility and plan for those rainy days.


Let's throw out another "min wage" example.

Take... delivering pizzas...

Pappa John's lost a lawsuit about underpayment of their drivers after calculating their vehicle expenses, and tips.









Papa John's delivery drivers are suing Kentucky franchises over pay


Two Papa John's franchises in Kentucky have been sued by drivers who say delivery costs cut their pay to less than minimum wage.



www.courier-journal.com





Post lawsuit..

https://www.indeed.com/q-Papa-Johns...ml?advn=8698282556046790&vjk=e38f2d39675291af
Delivery Drivers Can Average _*$12 -$17/hour*_ (base pay plus tips and mileage reimbursement)

Currently min wage is 8.46 in florida.

This puts pizza delivery in the....
Duh duh duh...

141%-200% range of min wage.
Minus expenses...

Why don't i do it?

Cause after driving my car all those miles it puts me very near min wage.


----------



## njn (Jan 23, 2016)

"With the stroke of a pen, the companies could be required to spend millions providing worker protections like sick leave and healthcare." 

Or, with the stoke of a pen, the companies could stop operating in California and save millions.

Protect gig workers? That's cute. Gigs only exist because it's not profitable to hire employees. The gigs will disappear.


----------



## losiglow (Dec 4, 2018)

UberBastid said:


> If San Francisco is thinking about anything to do with employed people, it has to do with taxes.
> Taxes.
> 
> TAXES!
> ...


Pretty much. I'm politically independent but SF is so ass-backwards that I'd be hesitant to embrace nearly anything their politicians tout.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

njn said:


> "With the stroke of a pen, the companies could be required to spend millions providing worker protections like sick leave and healthcare."
> 
> Or, with the stoke of a pen, the companies could stop operating in California and save millions.
> 
> Protect gig workers? That's cute. Gigs only exist because it's not profitable to hire employees. The gigs will disappear.


The gigs existed before U/L, they'll exists after them.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

KevinH said:


> Not true. Employees and employers contribute to social safety net programs. In this case the employee would be covered by the State Temporary Disability Plan.
> These programs like workers compensation and unemployment insurance are not designed to be charity but to provide stability to the economy and buffer the consequences of accidents and misfortune. The city of San Francisco is tired of paying for the ambulance rides and hospital costs of the growing numbers of injured TNC drivers.
> 
> These social safety net programs keep circumstances from bankrupting workers and the chain of events that follow as housing is lost and financial obligations to the community are defaulted. One of the big issues for conservative legislators in Sacramento over AB5 is the loss of $Billions of social safety net payments and the financial impact of drivers injured, filing bankruptcy, or becoming homeless.
> It is in the interest of you and I that drivers are kept in the workforce and contributing to economy and their community.


I wonder whatever happened to Omar and his medical bills. He had his jaw broken in two different places and was in the hospital for weeks.

Anyone remember him?

I'm pretty sure we, the taxpayers of California, paid for them.




Fozzie said:


> How am I anti driver? I'm anti stupidity. I'm against seeing drivers set unrealistic expectations. My hope is that someone will read one of my posts and say "damn, you know what, Fozzie is right!" Pursuing AB5 is bad news for California, and will be bad news for drivers across the nation.
> 
> The difference between you and I is that if I wasn't happy with what I was making, I'd move on and find a job that pays what I demand. I wouldn't advocate changing the whole damn system to suit me.


______
People change the "system" when the "system" gets out of control.
_______
Yeah, the rates here are higher, but if you're envious of our mediocre pay rates, you really need to raise your expectations.

_______
If your pay rates are "mediocre" imagine getting half your pay rate.
_______
A lot of drivers work more than 30 hrs a week. Almost all drivers nationwide earn more than $12 /hr gross. Are you willing to trade your current earnings for that?
_______
Exactly $12 /hr _*GROSS.*_

Drivers in California would get $12/hr _*plus*_
expenses.
_______
Do the math.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

observer said:


> If your pay rates are "mediocre" imagine getting half your pay rate.


I wouldn't work for that. Why would anyone?



> A lot of drivers work more than 30 hrs a week. Almost all drivers nationwide earn more than $12 /hr gross. Are you willing to trade your current earnings for that? Exactly $12 /hr _*GROSS.*_


Protip: Sittin' at the airport is BAD.



> Drivers in California would get $12/hr _*plus*_
> expenses.


Assuming that the "*plus* expenses" actually go towards expenses, what do you have remaining? $12 /hr minus taxes, healthcare premiums and other withholdings? That's worse than how things currently are.



Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Let's throw out another "min wage" example.
> 
> Take... delivering pizzas...
> 
> ...


FWIW, I made that delivering for Dominos in Tallahassee from 1978-1980. *FORTY YEARS AGO *


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

uberdriverfornow said:


> just like Uber....you expect people to work for free
> 
> even so, if someone wanted to be a jerk to a union they could even request not to even pay dues


Dues are voluntary. Do not spread fake information, you are not the President



Polomarko said:


> Yes workers must have protection from predatory actions just like U/L do. Manipulating drivers, .
> Why U/L accepting regular insurance and putting drivers at risk. Why? I can tell you hundreds examples of U/L manipulation. Both companies will open account for underage riders, if something happened driver will be responsible for giving service to underage minors. Both companies must start to have onest approach to this business stop manipulating, misinform public and investor. Uber Vice President mus risighn imidetly


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Polomarko said:


> Dues are voluntary. Do not spread fake information, you are not the President


lol did you not even read my post ?



> they could even request not to even pay dues


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> The question is: If you want a job with high pay and benefits, WHY ARE YOU STILL DRIVING?
> 
> Say AB5 passes and all drivers must be employees... how do you know that you're going to be one of the drivers hired?
> 
> ...


Nobody has right to exploits the people manipulating, speculating, lying old the time.


----------



## RabbleRouser (Apr 30, 2019)

Fozzie said:


> LOL Minimum wage job, but "your union" is going to negotiate that for you.


.....as soon as the union negotiators return on the Uber corporate Jet from their Uber paid vacation in the south of France ??


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

Don't compare an independent contractor's net hourly wage against an employee's minimum wage or actual wage.

Independent contractors not only miss out on the social safety net benefits that employees are entitled to, but also have to account for what many analysts call " non-billable work hours". For U/L drivers that would be the time spent handling oil changes, car washes, car repairs, bookkeeping, resolving pay issues and more. Additionally, U/L drivers take on risks that are hard to add $dollar amounts to like accidents, injuries, sudden expenses. Take a look at this piece from the forum MEDIUM:
"When $8.55 An Hour Is Not $8.55"
https://medium.com/@pmacafee/when-8-55-hour-is-not-8-55-hour-c2f2a1ec1c0d


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Polomarko said:


> Nobody has right to exploits the people manipulating, speculating, lying old the time.


You have the option to work in rideshare, not the right to work in rideshare.

If you feel like you're being exploited, don't work there. Go work somewhere else.


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> You have the option to work in rideshare, not the right to work in rideshare.
> 
> If you feel like you're being exploited, don't work there. Go work somewhere else.


Your privilege is showing.
Not everybody has a chance to work whenever or wherever they want. Disabilities, immigrant background, language issues are just s few of the barriers many who are on the edge of economic stability find themselves faced with. A very large number of U/L drivers are immigrants with language issues. Others have education and work history from abroad that is difficult or impossible to verify.
A couple of years ago two clever marketing professionals in Los Angeles created the satire site "Pooper" about an app to pick up pet droppings. To their surprise, more people applied to pick up dog poop than to enroll their pets in the service.

Labor exploitation exists in undeveloped and developing countries that are without labor standards. Do you want to turn the clock back in the U.S.? U/L do.

Read about The Sad Labor Lesson Of Pooper:
https://medium.com/@pmacafee/the-sad-labor-lesson-of-pooper-deb566197e8d


----------



## Nats121 (Jul 19, 2017)

Fozzie said:


> If he was an employee at McDonalds or Burger King, would they pay his insurance, or make the payment on his car? No! Minimum wage jobs don't do that, and Uber/Lyft would be no different.
> 
> People just need to learn personal responsibility and plan for those rainy days.


It'd be real nice if these so-called "gig companies" were forced to learn corporate responsibility.

They treat their workers like employees but dump billions of dollars of "responsibility" per year on the taxpayers.

If one of their drivers gets injured on the job and can't drive, no workers comp. Instead, the driver may end up on welfare.

If a driver gets deactivated (fired), no unemployment insurance. Again, welfare, food stamps, and medicaid.

Due to the pathetically poor pay rates, many drivers working 70-80 hours per week qualify for food stamps, medicaid, and even housing assistance.

There's no such thing as a free lunch for taxpayers, but there sure is for gig companies.



Fozzie said:


> People just need to learn personal responsibility and plan for those rainy days.


Being paid 50-60 cents per mile while paying to maintain a vehicle makes it awfully tough to save for rainy days.


----------



## DriverMark (Jan 22, 2018)

UberAdrian said:


> Here in Canada everybody has employment insurance, it pays you most of your usual wages for up to a year if you can't work for any reason. Behind that there's a separate safety net for disabilities and behind that there's a general safety net for everyone called welfare.
> 
> Do you guys not have any of this?


Curious.... what is your tax rate in Canada on your pay check? And not just trying to troll.... I've heard a lot about 50% taxes in Canada. Expensive to pay for all that stuff and health care, etc. So wondering what the actual deal is.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

UberAdrian said:


> Here in Canada everybody has employment insurance, it pays you most of your usual wages for up to a year if you can't work for any reason. Behind that there's a separate safety net for disabilities and behind that there's a general safety net for everyone called welfare.
> 
> Do you guys not have any of this?


This is America, not Canada. Don't have it and don't want it. Love my independent contractor status.

The I/C status is what makes this the ideal supplemental, income gig. The minute they implement employee status in Georgia, I'm done.

Free Market Capitalist all the way! ???



KevinH said:


> Don't compare an independent contractor's net hourly wage against an employee's minimum wage or actual wage.
> 
> Independent contractors not only miss out on the social safety net benefits that employees are entitled to, but also have to account for what many analysts call " non-billable work hours". For U/L drivers that would be the time spent handling oil changes, car washes, car repairs, bookkeeping, resolving pay issues and more. Additionally, U/L drivers take on risks that are hard to add $dollar amounts to like accidents, injuries, sudden expenses. Take a look at this piece from the forum MEDIUM:
> "When $8.55 An Hour Is Not $8.55"
> https://medium.com/@pmacafee/when-8-55-hour-is-not-8-55-hour-c2f2a1ec1c0d


?????



KevinH said:


> Don't compare an independent contractor's net hourly wage against an employee's minimum wage or actual wage.
> 
> Independent contractors not only miss out on the social safety net benefits that employees are entitled to, but also have to account for what many analysts call " non-billable work hours". For U/L drivers that would be the time spent handling oil changes, car washes, car repairs, bookkeeping, resolving pay issues and more. Additionally, U/L drivers take on risks that are hard to add $dollar amounts to like accidents, injuries, sudden expenses. Take a look at this piece from the forum MEDIUM:
> "When $8.55 An Hour Is Not $8.55"
> https://medium.com/@pmacafee/when-8-55-hour-is-not-8-55-hour-c2f2a1ec1c0d


?????



uberdriverfornow said:


> lol you act like it could be any worse for drivers than it is now ????
> 
> you're basically in the only market in the country where drivers are getting twice the .60 a mile everyone else in the country is so of course you're so anti-driver
> 
> drivers elsewhere can't wait til you get reduced down to .60 like all other drivers


??????


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> You have the option to work in rideshare, not the right to work in rideshare.
> 
> If you feel like you're being exploited, don't work there. Go work somewhere else.


Nobody has right to unlawfully exploits citizens of the USA


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

MiamiKid said:


> This is America, not Canada. Don't have it and don't want it. Love my independent contractor status.
> 
> The I/C status is what makes this the ideal supplemental, income gig. The minute they implement employee status in Georgia, I'm done.
> 
> ...


Im sorry I've read "love my status as an independent contractor." Note you've said "My status" as opposed to being an independent contractor which of course we know you are not.

You love poor pay.
No holidays.
No sick pay.
No medical insurance.

Those who expect you to provide for them must be proud.

Do you have a family? Children?


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Polomarko said:


> Nobody has right to unlawfully exploits citizens of the USA


Unfortunately some people do not understand what Capitalism is. We cannot solve are problems with the same level of thinking that created them. For example Bernie Madoff's Ponzi Scheme Worked until somebody said he is not capitalist he is a gangster, he has no money


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Polomarko said:


> Nobody has right to unlawfully exploits citizens of the USA


If you feel you're being victimized, why don't you just find another job?

You don't have to drive. You CHOOSE to drive. That's not exploitation, that's personal choice.


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> If you feel you're being victimized, why don't you just find another job?
> 
> You don't have to drive. You CHOOSE to drive. That's not exploitation, that's personal choice.


It is not personal it is about business legitimacy


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

DriverMark said:


> Curious.... what is your tax rate in Canada on your pay check? And not just trying to troll.... I've heard a lot about 50% taxes in Canada. Expensive to pay for all that stuff and health care, etc. So wondering what the actual deal is.


Someone living in BC, Canada

1. Making $52k per year CAD
2. Gets paid bi-weekly
3. Works 40 hrs /wk

Approx 21.32% Tax Rate












Polomarko said:


> It is not personal it is about business legitimacy


They are legitimate business entities. (or are you saying that you choose to work for illegitimate companies?)


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

You go home and realized somebody broke into your house. First think you are going to do is Calling Police. Why, you are citizen of this country and you have rights to be protected. If somebody constantly lies, braking all the rules that person or company must be accountable for business practice.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Polomarko said:


> You go home and realized somebody broke into your house. First think you are going to do is Calling Police. Why, you are citizen of this country and you have rights to be protected. If somebody constantly lies, braking all the rules that person or company must be accountable for business practice.


In the United States, there is a presumption of innocence until one is charged with a crime and convicted in a court of law.

Tell me, when were they charged with crimes, and what was the final adjudication?


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> In the United States, there is a presumption of innocence until one is charged with a crime and convicted in a court of law.
> 
> Tell me, when were they charged with crimes, and what ws the final adjudication?


 As a U/L driver I have received there settlement payments so far. The biggest two about insurance and miss-classification are coming soon.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

everythingsuber said:


> Im sorry I've read "love my status as an independent contractor." Note you've said "My status" as opposed to being an independent contractor which of course we know you are not.
> 
> You love poor pay.
> No holidays.
> ...


Dude: Read my lips!!! LOVE MY INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS!

Get it??

Free Market Capitalism! ??????????

MAGA!!!!



Polomarko said:


> It is not personal it is about business legitimacy


No it's not. This is America and it IS about choice. Period.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

MiamiKid said:


> Dude: Read my lips!!! LOVE MY INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS!
> 
> Get it??
> 
> ...


No. Im not getting it. You are not an independent contractor. You might like the status but its not relevant to what you do.


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

everythingsuber said:


> No. Im not getting it. You are not an independent contractor. You might like the status but its not relevant to what you do.


You're telling my status???????

No, I tell YOU my status.

You do not know my financial situation, tax structure or what entity I use. It's on my 126 page tax return however.

Uber's, simply, supplemental, extra fun money for me. Am an investor. Yes, am a driver; but; also own seven figures Uber stock.

Yep, you guessed it. On Uber's side all the way.

Free Market Capitalism. ??????????????????????????



KevinH said:


> https://www.sfexaminer.com/the-city...l-remedy-to-protect-gig-workers-as-employees/
> Local hearing called as state weighs changes to legal protections for contractors
> 
> 
> ...


If this Socialist bill passes, hoping Uber pulls out of California immediately. And all California drivers go without pay, and means to support their family ASAP! ?


----------



## dnlbaboof (Nov 13, 2015)

just raise the rate per mile thats all, we dont need forced hours, not being able to write off miles and being forced to pick up 4.1 pool rides. Being an employee will hurt uber drivers, once you cant write off miles your income goes way up and you could lose benefits from the government.

They could fire you more easily as well


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

MiamiKid said:


> Dude: Read my lips!!! LOVE MY INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS!
> 
> Get it??
> 
> ...


You are not independent contractor by definition. You are something in between. No contractor in this country work for $7 per hour
I am retired contractor and my charge per hour was $125 four years ago. But if you think you are contractor I must say I am not Ronald Reagan. Please go in front of your mirror and ask your self am I Ronald Reagan


----------



## MiamiKid (May 24, 2016)

Polomarko said:


> You are not independent contractor by definition. You are something in between. No contractor in this country work for $7 per hour


WRONG.

Why do brag about being so uneducated?



Polomarko said:


> You are not independent contractor by definition. You are something in between. No contractor in this country work for $7 per hour


Whiners are beneath my class!


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Polomarko said:


> You are not independent contractor by definition. You are something in between. No contractor in this country work for $7 per hour
> I am retired contractor and my charge per hour was $125 four years ago. But if you think you are contractor I must say I am not Ronald Reagan. Please go in front of your mirror and ask your self am I Ronald Reagan


So in four years you went from $125 /hr to $7 /hr, and now you're begging to "upgrade" to minimum wage?










*My recommendation is to give up driving rideshare and go back to doing whatever you were doing that paid $125 /hr.*


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> So in four years you went from $125 /hr to $7 /hr, and now you're begging to "upgrade" to minimum wage?
> 
> View attachment 333055
> 
> ...


My intention is not to convince you in something deferent, people like you do not accept critical opinion. I am trying
To express my opinion to others on this forum. Some people without contra argument start being personal which is not ok. My income from U/L is just some additional money. Unfortunately U/L are not the only one on today's market.Most of the Gig economy company's are the same. 50 years of workers rights has been destroyed it is time to stand up and stop this 19 century business practices. It is immoral unatical and has nothing in common with Capitalisam


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Polomarko said:


> My intention is not to convince you in something deferent, people like you do not accept critical opinion. I am trying
> To express my opinion to others on this forum. Some people without contra argument start being personal which is not ok. My income from U/L is just some additional money. Unfortunately U/L are not the only one on today's market.Most of the Gig economy company's are the same. 50 years of workers rights has been destroyed it is time to stand up and stop this 19 century business practices.


I'm always open to discussion. You, however, don't want discussion. You don't want to hear others points of view. You don't accept anything except that which validates your beliefs. What I'm posting is MY OPINION.

You have the right to enter into contractual agreements with other business entities. You DO NOT have the right to demand that they employ you on your terms. You take what they offer or you find a different gig to perform. Fair enough?


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Some other think you need to know. U/L create unbearable traffic congestion, U/L create air pollution 
and thired U/L creating poverty. So, why they do not like to be regulated 1/ Limitied number of cars in downtown
2/Low carbon emssion car 3/ Drivers earning that provide living 4/ Benefits including social security and madicare participation. If all companies in this country follow U/L all social security fond would be ampaty in no time.


----------



## tmart (Oct 30, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> If he was an employee at McDonalds or Burger King, would they pay his insurance, or make the payment on his car? No! Minimum wage jobs don't do that, and Uber/Lyft would be no different.
> 
> People just need to learn personal responsibility and plan for those rainy days.


Your argument would make sense but cab companies actually charge a premium that actually pays for maintenance and wear and tear on a vehicle, which is sound business sense


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> I'm always open to discussion. You, however, don't want discussion. You don't want to hear others points of view. You don't accept anything except that which validates your beliefs. What I'm posting is MY OPINION.
> 
> You have the right to enter into contractual agreements with other business entities. You DO NOT have the right to demand that they employ you on your terms. You take what they offer or you find a different gig to perform. Fair enough?


It is not as you think. We are citizen of this country we pay taxes we elect our officials Govrament set The Rule of Law and every individual or business entities must obey Rule of Law



Polomarko said:


> It is not as you think. We are citizen of this country we pay taxes we elect our officials Govrament set The Rule of Law and every individual or business entities must obey Rule of Law


Your argument is not right " Find a different gig." Example You came to the basketball field you park you car, you plaid, you came back and see somebody broke into your car. You call police and policeman is not going to tell you Why you parked here. He is going to investigate because it is his duties. So, nobody has right to say I am stealing and if you do not like it you go away.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Polomarko said:


> Some other think you need to know. U/L create unbearable traffic congestion, U/L create air pollution
> and thired U/L creating poverty. So, why they do not like to be regulated 1/ Limitied number of cars in downtown
> 2/Low carbon emssion car 3/ Drivers earning that provide living 4/ Benefits including social security and madicare participation. If all companies in this country follow U/L all social security fond would be ampaty in no time.


We agree that Uber and Lyft cause traffic congestion. The responsible response to that would be to limit/cap the number of drivers on the road at any given time .

We agree that putting more cars on the road causes air pollution. Unfortunately air pollution is happening regardless of whether Uber and Lyft are doing business. I'll agree to the low emission limitation when that limitation is also met by the tens of thousands of gas guzzling trucks and cars on the roads.

We DO NOT agree on your claim that Uber and Lyft cause poverty. If Uber and Lyft went out of business, would you have more money or less money? You benefit from their businesses, you just don't benefit enough to satisfy your demands.

You're an independent business owner. If you want benefits, it' your responsibility to pay for them.



tmart said:


> Your argument would make sense but cab companies actually charge a premium that actually pays for maintenance and wear and tear on a vehicle, which is sound business sense


If that's what you want, there's a easy solution... GO DRIVE A TAXI.



Polomarko said:


> It is not as you think. We are citizen of this country we pay taxes we elect our officials Govrament set The Rule of Law and every individual or business entities must obey Rule of Law


As far as i know, they have followed the law. the law has loopholes which is why AB5 was proposed. Tell me, what law, specifically, have they broken?



> Your argument is not right " Find a different gig." Example You came to the basketball field you park you car, you plaid, you came back and see somebody broke into your car. You call police and policeman is not going to tell you Why you parked here. He is going to investigate because it is his duties. So, nobody has right to say I am stealing and if you do not like it you go away.


Again, if someone broke into your car, a law was broken. Uber and Lyft haven't broken the law. BIG DIFFERENCE.


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Let me get to conclusion. In democratic sociaty like ours no individual or business entities has right to exploit people breaking Rules, manipulating, lying for his own benefit.



Fozzie said:


> We agree that Uber and Lyft cause traffic congestion. The responsible response to that would be to limit/cap the number of drivers on the road at any given time .
> 
> We agree that putting more cars on the road causes air pollution. Unfortunately air pollution is happening regardless of whether Uber and Lyft are doing business. I'll agree to the low emission limitation when that limitation is also met by the tens of thousands of gas guzzling trucks and cars on the roads.
> 
> ...


U/L are registered as Internet companie. I am asking you are they Internet companies or transportation companies


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Polomarko said:


> Let me get to conclusion. In democratic sociaty like ours no individual or business entities has right to exploit people breaking Rules, manipulating, lying for his own benefit.


*You are not being exploited if you choose to do the work*.

Yes, these companies do lie and manipulate drivers, but the remedy for that is to cease doing business together.

If they lie and manipulate you as a independent contractor, do you honestly believe that things will get better if you're an employee? Use your head man... THINK, THINK, THINK!


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

It was nice chatting with you my friend Good Night and remember in 19 century workers fight for 8+8+8
Today is 21 century No exception no exusies. Crucial problem with U/L is how they treat the drivers


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Polomarko said:


> U/L are registered as Internet companie. I am asking you are they Internet companies or transportation companies


They're classified as "technology companies." The government and the courts have upheld that. Until that changes, what I think is irrelevant.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

lol it's the three drivers from other states spouting against ab5



Fozzie said:


> They're classified as "technology companies." The government and the courts have upheld that. Until that changes, what I think is irrelevant.


lol being a technology company or tramsportation company will be irrelevant after ab5 passes


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> We agree that Uber and Lyft cause traffic congestion. The responsible response to that would be to limit/cap the number of drivers on the road at any given time .
> 
> We agree that putting more cars on the road causes air pollution. Unfortunately air pollution is happening regardless of whether Uber and Lyft are doing business. I'll agree to the low emission limitation when that limitation is also met by the tens of thousands of gas guzzling trucks and cars on the roads.
> 
> ...


A court has ruled they did break the law.


----------



## RabbleRouser (Apr 30, 2019)

Fozzie said:


> You have the option to work in rideshare, not the right to work in rideshare.
> 
> If you feel like you're being exploited, don't work there. Go work somewhere else.


⚠ That's the issue:
Most FT careerist Uber drivers have ?No Other Employment Options⚠
Most can't hold a regular job because of

Mental Defect (they can only successfully deal with the riding public 15mins @ a time)
Inability to be supervised
Inability to maintain a schedule
Escalation of supervisor/customer criticism to levels of threats and workplace violence.
Laziness
Immaturity
Entitled behavior

Heck, just read many of the posts throughout this website.
Many reflect the aforementioned characteristics

? My favorite: "_passenger asked me to lower the radio volume , I made sure my Gun was within reach just in case things went south" ✅_

*Frankly, it's getting SAFER to HITCHHIKE *


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> lol being a technology company or tramsportation company will be irrelevant after ab5 passes


I don't believe it will pass.

This proposed law impacts more than just rideshare drivers, and it's because the law is written so broadly that it's doomed to fail in the senate and/or get vetoed by Newsom.


----------



## zeroperminute (Jun 19, 2019)

Polomarko said:


> As a U/L driver I have received there settlement payments so far. The biggest two about insurance and miss-classification are coming soon.


hes missed the half a billion in fines for breaking the law, lost lawsuits & settlements lol

30 mil for lying about tips being included (stealing basically) forgot how many they lost & paid for bait & switch recruitment ads(fraud), the sending of blank contracts deceivin(cooercing) free labor and then threatning (duress)deactivation for cancelling instead of working for free(human trafficking/slavery)

paid a nice settlement for murdering a homeless woman took less than a week to pay her family off

could probably list a dozen other crimes and have evidence of dozens myself

its organized crime & rico has been for years but "burning" 9000$ per MINUTE bribes a lot of city officials who are all complicit in the biggest Ponzi scam since madoff

there's nothing legitimate or legal about an app that attempts to human yraffic me dozens of times a day up to hundreds of times a dayby sending me blank contracts that think im too stupid to do 3rd grade math & drive for free, just because some old, stupid, or desperate person is old, stupid, or desperate doesn't give a "company" the right to try & trick them

someone's picking up the 90% i ignore and cancel & driving from farther & dont live in area so will fail 96% of the time because free labor doesn't fill up gas tanks lol

even if they wanted to work for fred they couldn't agree tothe contract per the 13th amendment & any 3rd grader knows it costs more than $3-4 gross to deliver 100-500+ pounds 3-10 miles & 1971 minimum fares & 1975 .60 per mile cab rates in 2019 doesn't cover costs

so its calculated


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Demon said:


> A court has ruled they did break the law.


That said, what did the court determine was the appropriate penalty for that breech of law?



zeroperminute said:


> hes missed the half a billion in fines for breaking the law, lost lawsuits & settlements lol
> 
> 30 mil for lying about tips being included (stealing basically) forgot how many they lost & paid for bait & switch recruitment ads(fraud), the sending of blank contracts deceivin(cooercing) free labor and then threatning (duress)deactivation for cancelling instead of working for free(human trafficking/slavery)
> 
> ...


----------



## zeroperminute (Jun 19, 2019)

Fozzie said:


> That said, what did the court determine was the appropriate penalty for that breech of law?
> 
> 
> View attachment 333133


that they were guilty of breaking numerous laws & fined them, forced them to change policies etc etc etc

they used to fire over acceptance rate membamembaberry

judge forced them, i heard they do over cancels but cant confirm ive been in the 50% cr range for a while really cant fire someone because they refuse to complete a contract that would require free labor so ill believe when i see it

and i actually put their thefts & document my messages so im not worried i also know its organized crime so back up account ready tp go lol

i have drug trafficking felonies & know this "company" is 100% organized crime and have plenty of evidence to prove lies, negligence, fraud, theft,

lol years ago "support" used to say drive back to where pick up was with app on next time when a x pax should of been xl before they had a button in writing have lots of these too, you know how illegal that is?

pool violates every states distracted driving laws, they used to opt you out of you could copy & paste your states statute but apparently every driver was opting our their "cash cow" of the future so they stopped

an employee can't opt out an independent contractor can doh

independent contractors also have the right to the details of their contract without having to play games, drive miles, or work for free to get them....


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

RabbleRouser said:


> ⚠ That's the issue:
> Most FT careerist Uber drivers have ?No Other Employment Options⚠
> Most can't hold a regular job because of
> 
> ...


So, this is 72% of Uber workforce, 62 billions modern technology company. You made me ??????


----------



## kevin92009 (Sep 11, 2016)

Polomarko said:


> Yes workers must have protection from predatory actions just like U/L do. Manipulating drivers, .
> Why U/L accepting regular insurance and putting drivers at risk. Why? I can tell you hundreds examples of U/L manipulation. Both companies will open account for underage riders, if something happened driver will be responsible for giving service to underage minors. Both companies must start to have onset approach to this business stop manipulating, misinform public and investor. Uber Vice President mus risighn imidetly


dishonesty has gotten way to out of hand, politicians and corporate america seem to make it the norm , what's so damn hard about telling the truth ???


----------



## nouberipo (Jul 24, 2018)

Fozzie said:


> If he was an employee at McDonalds or Burger King, would they pay his insurance, or make the payment on his car? No! Minimum wage jobs don't do that, and Uber/Lyft would be no different.
> 
> People just need to learn personal responsibility and plan for those rainy days.


and Burger King McDonalds employees don't pay employee AND employer taxes nor are required to use their own resources (e.g. car, gas) in order to make money. Your logic is somewhat warped mate but I guess that is one of the conditions for being an Uber shrill writer.



UberAdrian said:


> Here in Canada everybody has employment insurance, it pays you most of your usual wages for up to a year if you can't work for any reason. Behind that there's a separate safety net for disabilities and behind that there's a general safety net for everyone called welfare.
> 
> Do you guys not have any of this?


No, this is the USA which is also why Uber/Lyft can get away with what they have skirting laws. Lobbyists, lawyers, and corporate are able to do as they please here in the US with the US led Congress supporting a President who operates under this mantra. We are a nation of no law cannot be broken if you have money and power.



kevin92009 said:


> dishonesty has gotten way to out of hand, politicians and corporate america seem to make it the norm , what's so damn hard about telling the truth ???


The truth doesn't seem to be in bed with profits in the USA. Profits before people at all cost! It hasn't always been this way but over the past few years there is no denying that the progress that had been made in terms of a society has been eroded. The US is no longer as it once was and mirrors most third world countries in terms of economic disparity, corporate crime, the corrupted courts including the Supreme Court, and the leadership of a dictator.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

nouberipo said:


> and Burger King McDonalds employees don't pay employee AND employer taxes nor are required to use their own resources (e.g. car, gas) in order to make money. Your logic is somewhat warped mate but I guess that is one of the conditions for being an Uber shrill writer.


Label, suppress, silence and try to discredit anyone with an opinion different from your own.

Want to know who else does that... UBER and LYFT.


----------



## kevin92009 (Sep 11, 2016)

nouberipo said:


> and Burger King McDonalds employees don't pay employee AND employer taxes nor are required to use their own resources (e.g. car, gas) in order to make money. Your logic is somewhat warped mate but I guess that is one of the conditions for being an Uber shrill writer.
> 
> 
> No, this is the USA which is also why Uber/Lyft can get away with what they have skirting laws. Lobbyists, lawyers, and corporate are able to do as they please here in the US with the US led Congress supporting a President who operates under this mantra. We are a nation of no law cannot be broken if you have money and power.
> ...


very disappointing the inequality i see, just makes me want to leave the country and find something better elsewhere


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> I don't believe it will pass.
> 
> This proposed law impacts more than just rideshare drivers, and it's because the law is written so broadly that it's doomed to fail in the senate and/or get vetoed by Newsom.


it rolled through the assembly easily and the democrats have a supermajority in the senate

it will pass easily...uber and lyft are simply trying to get an exemption as their only hope


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Demon said:


> Have a cite for that statement on how much drivers are making?


Probably from Uber/Lyft is my guess.


----------



## peteyvavs (Nov 18, 2015)

uberdriverfornow said:


> it rolled through the assembly easily and the democrats have a supermajority in the senate
> 
> it will pass easily...uber and lyft are simply trying to get an exemption as their only hope


I'll give U/L an exemption where the sun doesn't shine, karma is a b....h


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Label, suppress, silence and try to discredit anyone with an opinion different from your own.
> 
> Want to know who else does that... UBER and LYFT.


He's not prohibiting you from having your own opinion, he's calling you out for trying to have your own facts.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Demon said:


> He's not prohibiting you from having your own opinion, he's calling you out for trying to have your own facts.


The fact is that you chose to agree to the current terms and conditions. You can't agree to conditions, then whine when you're held to them.


----------



## zeroperminute (Jun 19, 2019)

Fozzie said:


> The fact is that you chose to agree to the current terms and conditions. You can't agree to conditions, then whine when you're held to them.


illegal terms in CONtracts are NOT binding, ambiguity in them benefits the party that did NOT draft it, & even if you wanted to work for free per the 13th amendment you canNOT.

sending a blank contract that requires labor t drive 1-10 miles pick up 100-500+ pounds & deliver it 1-10 miles for 1970s cab rates or $3-4 GROSS is FREE LABOR. 15+ million times per day Uber lyft violate the 13th amendment of the u s constitution.

in plain open view with receipts to boot because its a "choice"

regulates national per mile per min & min fares & the apps cut of the fare, they cant act in good faith everything they do is to try & trick people into working for free like scratch off lotto tickets 8 outta 10 whammy, 1 covers the gas to play again, & 1 is a winner winner enough for a chicken dinner

RICO


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

zeroperminute said:


> illegal terms in CONtracts are NOT binding, ambiguity in them benefits the party that did NOT draft it, & even if you wanted to work for free per the 13th amendment you canNOT.
> 
> sending a blank contract that requires labor t drive 1-10 miles pick up 100-500+ pounds & deliver it 1-10 miles for 1970s cab rates or $3-4 GROSS is FREE LABOR. 15+ million times per day Uber lyft violate the 13th amendment of the u s constitution.
> 
> ...


You willfully entered into that contract under those terms, and you continue to willfully operate under those terms. You're a victim of your own bad choices.


----------



## kevin92009 (Sep 11, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> The fact is that you chose to agree to the current terms and conditions. You can't agree to conditions, then whine when you're held to them.


i wish uber and lyft would not force you to agree in order to logon and then say well you agreed . forced agreement is not voluntary agreement when they say you can't work unless you sign updated terms. can a lawyer fight this ? i really don't like when they do this .


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> You willfully entered into that contract under those terms, and you continue to willfully operate under those terms. You're a victim of your own bad choices.


Is it a choice? How many people, by choice, entered into a business contract with Bernie Madoff business model?



Polomarko said:


> Is it a choice? How many people, by choice, entered into a business contract with Bernie Madoff business model?


Accusing victim is this what you want tell us.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

kevin92009 said:


> i wish uber and lyft would not force you to agree in order to logon and then say well you agreed . forced agreement is not voluntary agreement when they say you can't work unless you sign updated terms. can a lawyer fight this ? i really don't like when they do this .


YOU DO NOT HAVE A "RIGHT" TO WORK FOR UBER ANY MORE THAN YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO WORK FOR MICROSOFT OR ANY OTHER TECH COMPANY.

They posted the new terms that they require to do business, and you chose to accept that agreement on your own free will. You could just as easily have declined and gone elsewhere for work.

Everytime you login to their driver app, you agree to the current terms. How can you possibly think that you can enter an agreement with Uber/Lyft, then demand different terms after?



Polomarko said:


> Is it a choice? How many people, by choice, entered into a business contract with Bernie Madoff business model?


What Madoff did was securities fraud and intentional breech of SEC regulations. What he did was prohibited by actual US laws.

What Uber and Lyft do is legal, they're just not contract terms that you like, so you try to twist it to meet your agenda.

You don't have a right to drive for these companies, and your contract can be terminated at anytime. Those are the terms that you agreed to.


----------



## njn (Jan 23, 2016)

Just like Dynamex, pay and benefits will be retroactive when AB5 passes. Not just for uber and lyft, but every gig app in the state.


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

njn said:


> Just like Dynamex, pay and benefits will be retroactive when AB5 passes. Not just for uber and lyft, but every gig app in the state.


Wage and hour standards are already set by the Dynamex ruling, and two courts have determined that those standards should be applied retroactively. As it stands now, Dynamex should have a significant effect on settlements for ongoing classification suits.

AB5 will make those standards apply to social safety net programs like workers comp, unemployment and disability benefits, taxes, etc.

Before Dynamex, several courts awarded unemployment and workers comp using the older "Borello" standards the California Supreme Court set up in 1991.

AB5 also has the potential to be a double-edged sword as different industries are currently lobbying for "carve-outs" for their workforces. The version of the bill that passed the Assembly committee already has carve-outs for real estate agents, emergency room physicians and about 4 more groups. If U/L win their lobbying battles in the Senate, they could get carve-outs for some gig-economy sectors, essentially nullifying Dynamex for U/L workers. As it stands now, many in Sacramento think that will be an uphill battle. Even conservative lawmakers are concerned about the lack of contributions to the State's social safety net pools. California is missing $Billions in comp and unemployment contributions for gig-economy workers. And many of those jobs are high risk jobs like driving and almost all have extremely high turnover. When the courts award unemployment benefits or workers compensation, those payments are drawn from the pool whether the employer contributed or not. So all of us are currently subsidizing the gig economy in California.


----------



## peteyvavs (Nov 18, 2015)

Fozzie said:


> The fact is that you chose to agree to the current terms and conditions. You can't agree to conditions, then whine when you're held to them.


When those agreements are unilateral and you aren't given a choice but to accept if you want to stay on U/L platform then YES you can and should whine as loud as you can.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

peteyvavs said:


> When those agreements are unilateral and you aren't given a choice but to accept if you want to stay on U/L platform then YES you can and should whine as loud as you can.


*You don't have a right to drive for Uber and Lyft.*

You CHOOSE to stay on the Uber platform. That's a business CHOICE.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

KevinH said:


> Wage and hour standards are already set by the Dynamex ruling, and two courts have determined that those standards should be applied retroactively. As it stands now, Dynamex should have a significant effect on settlements for ongoing classification suits.
> 
> AB5 will make those standards apply to social safety net programs like workers comp, unemployment and disability benefits, taxes, etc.
> 
> ...


In U/Ls case unemployment would be drawn against U/Ls existing accounts. They do have accounts even though they claim drivers aren't covered because they do have many employees who are not independent contractors. U/L are currently contributing to the pool.


----------



## zeroperminute (Jun 19, 2019)

cant agree to illegal terms cant agree to work for free that CONtract violates the 13th amendment and is breach, uber lyfts terms of service "agreement" doesn't supercede the us Constitution lol

any 3rd grade math student can verify .60 per mile, gallon per gas, and delivering 100-500 pounds 3-10 miles its CALCULATED THEFT preying on & exploiting desperate, old, foreigj born easy to con with games & tricks turning a legit job into a scratch of tickets

microsoft pays their employees the legal minimums as stated by law they also dont hide the details of their independent contractors contracts & expect them to sign blank ones only to later fill it out so it only benefits them lmao

YOU CANNOT AGREE TO WORK FOR FREE OR ILLEGAL 1970s WAGES PERIODT not for a publically traded company with thousands of employees & hundreds of thousands of "independent contractors" you can for sole proprietor Johnny down the blocks 1-10 employee outfit but not "billion" dollar conglomo corp

13TH effing amendment which uber lyft violate 15+ million times PER DAY out of 20+ million trips

biggest human trafficking organized crime ponzi app on the planet & it trades on the stock exchange

80+ million per day cash flow 20+ million rides x $4 minimum from HUMAN TRAFFICKING skimming like an ol vegad casino 37 million dollar condos, 50 million dollar salaries, 1/2 a MILLION sq feet real estate at warirriors new arenas, flying cars, mars scooters, homeless robot lawnmowers, cocaine, prostitutes, & whatever other fantasy scams they can use to launder & shuffle money STOLEN from labor

YOU CAN'T "CHOOSE" to be a HUMAN TRAFFICKING VICTIM because they use an app & threats instead of a gun, knife, compromising photo....& threats

how many drivers have they fired for cancel rates for excercising their international protected human right not to work for free? hundreds of thousands?

how many illegal minimum fare human trafficking victims fits into a 37 million dollar condo? less than 3 days of "burn" baby "burn"(launder skim steal embezzle shuffle snort)


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> YOU DO NOT HAVE A "RIGHT" TO WORK FOR UBER ANY MORE THAN YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO WORK FOR MICROSOFT OR ANY OTHER TECH COMPANY.
> 
> What Madoff did was securities fraud and intentional breech of SEC regulations. What he did was prohibited by actual US laws.
> 
> ...


As the law currently stands, you are correct that Uber/Lyft are operating within the law regarding the the driver agreement.

I think the issue kevin92009 brings up is that one has to agree to the terms before they find out what the job is like or how the terms affect their interactions with their employer. Many feel trapped by the agreement when U/L lowers pay or change the terms of the job and drivers have no means to negotiate. Forced arbitration has recently emerged as entrapment and the silencing of women who have been sexually abused or harassed in the workplace. But the same problem exists for other workplace issues. Also, many agreements are lengthy and written in legaleze and that make the average driver press the button without fully understanding the implications

Imagine an agreement that looked like this.
*"YOU CAN HAVE NO SAY IN HOW YOU ARE PAID"
"YOU CAN NEVER SUE US IN COURT FOR ANY OF OUR WRONGDOINGS"
"ANY FORMAL DRIVER COMPLAINTS MUST BE HEARD BY A PRIVATE JUDGE THAT WE PICK"
"WE CAN UNILATERALLY CHANGE THE TERMS OF OUR AGREEMENT AT ANY TIME"
" IF YOU COLLECT MONEY FROM US BECAUSE OF THE SETTLEMENT OF A COMPLAINT, WE GET TO KEEP IT SECRET"
"YOU CAN NEVER JOIN WITH OTHER DRIVERS AND COMBINE YOUR COMPLAINTS"
"IF YOU DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT THIS AGREEMENT IS ONLY AVAILABLE IN ENGLISH"
"YOU CANNOT EXPERIENCE ANY PART OF THIS WORK WITHOUT FIRST AGREEING TO THESE TERMS"
"YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS TO MINIMUM WAGE, SICK DAYS, AND YOU HAVE TO PAY ALL THE MEDICAL BILLS IF YOU ARE HURT ON THE JOB"*


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

KevinH said:


> Wage and hour standards are already set by the Dynamex ruling, and two courts have determined that those standards should be applied retroactively. As it stands now, Dynamex should have a significant effect on settlements for ongoing classification suits.
> 
> AB5 will make those standards apply to social safety net programs like workers comp, unemployment and disability benefits, taxes, etc.
> 
> ...


We do however subsidize U/L drivers who are on food stamps, welfare and MediCal.

We do the same for Walmart and other companies.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

KevinH said:


> As the law currently stands, you are correct that Uber/Lyft are operating within the law regarding the the driver agreement.
> 
> I think the issue kevin92009 brings up is that one has to agree to the terms before they find out what the job is like or how the terms affect their interactions with their employer. Many feel trapped by the agreement when U/L lowers pay or change the terms of the job and drivers have no means to negotiate. Forced arbitration has recently emerged as entrapment and the silencing of women who have been sexually abused or harassed in the workplace. But the same problem exists for other workplace issues. Also, many agreements are lengthy and written in legaleze and that make the average driver press the button without fully understanding the implications
> 
> ...


*Yet we all keep driving, don't we? -o:*


----------



## zeroperminute (Jun 19, 2019)

KevinH said:


> As the law currently stands, you are correct that Uber/Lyft are operating within the law regarding the the driver agreement.
> 
> I think the issue kevin92009 brings up is that one has to agree to the terms before they find out what the job is like or how the terms affect their interactions with their employer. Many feel trapped by the agreement when U/L lowers pay or change the terms of the job and drivers have no means to negotiate. Forced arbitration has recently emerged as entrapment and the silencing of women who have been sexually abused or harassed in the workplace. But the same problem exists for other workplace issues. Also, many agreements are lengthy and written in legaleze and that make the average driver press the button without fully understanding the implications
> 
> ...


"YOU HAVE TO WORK FOR FREE IF YOU DONT AND CANCEL WE WILL FIRE YOU"

"YOU HAVE TO DRIVE 8 MILES PICK UP 400 POUNDS DELIVER IT ONE IT WILL TAKE 40 MINUTES ENJOY YOUR 30+ RIDE HOME OR WAIT HERE A MINUTE OR 3 HOURS FOR ANOTHER RIDE AND WE WILL PAY YOU $3-4GROSS"

"YOU HAVE TO ACCEPT THIS BLANK CONTRACT DONT WORRY WE WILL FILL IT IN LATER SO IT ONLY BENEFITS US AND YOU WILL LOSE MONEY"

no one would willingly choose to work for free or $3 an hour its desperation and or deception, you go to the senior center to run scams, go down to the boat yards looking for labor ?lol uber lyft are basically mis pimps that troll bus stations for runaways & kids straight PREDATORS

stupid people have rights, seniors have rights, immigrants have rights, desperate people even have rights because they all share the same HUMAN right to not be coerced into working for free

LMAO
BEYONG ILLEGAL BUT 20+ MILLION RIDES PER DAY

ef yo couch uber is rick james ef yo car, ef yo life, ef yo pay work for free beeeetch gimmmie 50% of the fare you do all the work ef it gimmie 90% of that surge fare ho idgaf if that's your car & body pay me bee get out on that street & get my money ho IDGAF if you have to drive free 4 times before we pay you a legal wage just use it to fill that tank up and get me mo money ho wtf i look like accept that ping, go on that quest ho ho ho


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

zeroperminute said:


> "YOU HAVE TO WORK FOR FREE IF YOU DONT AND CANCEL WE WILL FIRE YOU"
> 
> "YOU HAVE TO DRIVE 8 MILES PICK UP 400 POUNDS DELIVER IT ONE IT WILL TAKE 40 MINUTES AND WE WILL PAY YOU $3-4GROSS"
> 
> ...


Is there something wrong with your app that prevents you from turning it off?

When you get pinged, do you not have the option to DECLINE?

When you accept the ride and discover that it's far away, can't you CANCEL?

If you take that far away run for $3 you're a fool.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> You willfully entered into that contract under those terms, and you continue to willfully operate under those terms. You're a victim of your own bad choices.


Drivers willfully entered into a contract and U/L did not uphold their end of it. That was not driver's choice.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Demon said:


> Drivers willfully entered into a contract and U/L did not uphold their end of it. That was not driver's choice.


What part wasn't upheld?

Signing a contract doesn't mean that it's binding indefinitely. Terms change, and you either negotiate, agree or part ways.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> What part wasn't upheld?
> 
> Signing a contract doesn't mean that it's binding indefinitely. Terms change, and you either negotiate, agree or part ways.


The part about being independent contractors.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Demon said:


> The part about being independent contractors.


So you're saying that you're a statutory employee according to your local laws?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> So you're saying that you're a statutory employee according to your local laws?


I'd refer you to the court case.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Demon said:


> I'd refer you to the court case.


Which local court case? Please cite.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Which local court case? Please cite.


Which local court case are you suddenly talking about?


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Demon said:


> Drivers willfully entered into a contract and U/L did not uphold their end of it. That was not driver's choice.


Which means that I don't have to live up to MY end of the contract.

I will:
- Cancel riders that have an animal. I don't care if they're blind - I'll lie and make up a reason for the cancel.
- Cancel rides that take me into the hood. I know I can't do that, but, again, I'll lie and make up a better reason.
- Shuffle pax's at every opportunity.
- Snack on food delivered.
- Make false complaints for pax's leaving a mess in my car collecting extra fees.
- Create fraudulent docs for safety inspections on my car.
- Insist on extra payment for long-hauls.
- Not return $200 phones left in my car - sell em on Craigs List instead.

They don't live up to their agreements. They cheat me.
THEY make the rules ... so, ok, I don't live up to my agreement. I cheat them.

Thems the rules.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

UberBastid said:


> Which means that I don't have to live up to MY end of the contract.
> 
> I will:
> - Cancel riders that have an animal. I don't care if they're blind - I'll lie and make up a reason for the cancel.
> ...


A lot of what you mentioned is illegal so you shouldn't do those things because it would get you in trouble.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

KevinH said:


> https://www.sfexaminer.com/the-city...l-remedy-to-protect-gig-workers-as-employees/
> Local hearing called as state weighs changes to legal protections for contractors
> 
> 
> ...


I don't understand why so many drivers seem to hate Uber but then they want to be Uber employees??!!


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

goneubering said:


> I don't understand why so many drivers seem to hate Uber but then they want to be Uber employees??!!


I think lots of drivers want to be independent contractors and they're upset that U & L are treating them as employees.


----------



## tmart (Oct 30, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> If he was an employee at McDonalds or Burger King, would they pay his insurance, or make the payment on his car? No! Minimum wage jobs don't do that, and Uber/Lyft would be no different.
> 
> People just need to learn personal responsibility and plan for those rainy days.


Your argument doesn't carry very much weight because those workers don't have the wear and tear on their vehicles or maintenance costs associated with their job so it's something completely different



Fozzie said:


> The question is: If you want a job with high pay and benefits, WHY ARE YOU STILL DRIVING?
> 
> Say AB5 passes and all drivers must be employees... how do you know that you're going to be one of the drivers hired?
> 
> ...


Nobody will work for $12 an hour imo long because that will not cover any real expenses for the job - they will be forced to pay what the market will bear.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

tmart said:


> Your argument doesn't carry very much weight because those workers don't have the wear and tear on their vehicles or maintenance costs associated with their job so it's something completely different


If AB5 passes, you'll be a minimum wage earner just like those employees, with the only difference being that you'll receive slight compensation for mileage. (Also, don't expect to longhaul anymore either. You'll receive mileage based on the Uber/Lyft "as the crow flies" route. Anything beyond that you can try to write off your personal taxes as unreimbursed business mileage.



> Nobody will work for $12 an hour imo long because that will not cover any real expenses for the job - they will be forced to pay what the market will bear.


Yet drivers in LA still drive for what, 60 cents a mile? The rideshare companies have dropped rates multiple times, have gotten rid of surge and boosts, but two days ago, on the 4th of July, how many of you went out anting?

If you demand a minimum wage from a company that can't turn a profit, don't expect them to pay you more than that to do a job that tens of thousands of ants will mindlessly do for less.

If the State of California requires that full time drivers receive benefits, don't be surprised when Uber and Lyft cap the number of hours you can be logged into their app at 30 hrs a week MAX. Nobody will be full time, so nobody will need to be provided with benefits. Don't like it? There are thousands of ants that will accept that employment arrangement, so you can take it or go elsewhere.

Being an employee will also end multi apping. You'll have to decide which company you'll want to work for... Uber **or** Lyft. As an employee you WILL be required to accept 100% of the pings sent to you. With few exceptions, you WILL NOT be able to cancel rides you don't want. You can't demand hourly compensation and work for another company. You can't work for Uber and Lyft at the same time and maintain 100% accept/0% cancel rates.

Do you like setting your own hours? Kiss that goodbye under AB5. Expect Uber and Lyft to ASSIGN YOU WORK HOURS every holiday, after every concert and after sporting events with horrible traffic. Also, don't be surprised if Uber and Lyft assign you areas to work. Do you usually work San Francisco? That's nice, but this week you're going to drive in Oakland instead. Do you like waiting at the airport for pings? Sorry, those easy job assignments are being assigned to newbie ants to boost retention. We have "experienced" ants working the WalMart parking lot and doing mandatory pool rides in the hood.

Bottom line is that if you despise Uber and Lyft as independent contractors, why the hell would you want to "upgrade" that status to employee? That's insane!


----------



## UberProphet? (Dec 24, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Yet drivers in LA still drive for what, 60 cents a mile?


I am still waiting to hear your solution to the problem of intentional driver abuse by Uber\Lyft.

Ps. Nice fear mongering from your protected (by an activist city council) perch.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

UberProphet? said:


> I am still waiting to hear your solution to the problem of intentional driver abuse by Uber\Lyft.


The main problem we have right now is caused by Uber and Lyft being able to flood markets with tens of thousands of drivers to suppress pay.

Hard driver caps would solve that problem.

If you limit the number of drivers that can work rideshare in an area, supply and demand will push rates higher. When they can't replace you for less they have to pay you more.



> Ps. Nice fear mongering from your protected (by an activist city council) perch.


Not fear mongering. I'm trying to get people to THINK CRITICALLY about this issue rather than just parrot the "I want to be an employee, get a guaranteed $25 /hr + benefits + mileage and continue to work for both companies. Such unrealistic expectations need to be addressed.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> The main problem we have right now is caused by Uber and Lyft being able to flood markets with tens of thousands of drivers to suppress pay.
> 
> Hard driver caps would solve that problem.
> 
> ...


Making drivers employees would do just that.


----------



## WAHN (May 6, 2019)

Demon said:


> Making drivers employees would do just that.


With quite a few potential downsides to drivers who prefer the flexibility of being an IC.

That said, U/L only have themselves to blame for the potential negative impact it could have on drivers, riders, and all gig companies.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

WAHN said:


> With quite a few potential downsides to drivers who prefer the flexibility of being an IC.
> 
> That said, U/L only have themselves to blame for the potential negative impact it could have on drivers, riders, and all gig companies.


The flexibility would still be there.


----------



## WAHN (May 6, 2019)

Demon said:


> The flexibility would still be there.


You have absolutely no way of knowing that, just as I have no way of knowing that the flexibility won't be there.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Demon said:


> Making drivers employees would do just that.


Making drivers employees will cause Uber and Lyft to pay minimum wage and hire MORE drivers, especially if everyone is part time. Their main increase in expenses would be associated with FULL TIME drivers. Making everyone part time would be a highly effective cost control measure.

If Dominos can turn a profit on low margin pizzas, Uber and Lyft would make a killing with high margin surged rideshare while only paying minimum wage.

Tuesday morning, even when it was slow as hell, between 5:30a and 11:30a (6 hrs) I generated $237 worth of ride revenue. (total amount paid by customers) If I was making $12 /hr, they would have paid me $72 ($12 x 6 hrs) and pocketed the other $165.

Think you're getting ripped off now? Wait til that hits home.


----------



## UberProphet? (Dec 24, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Hard driver caps would solve that problem.


Who would set the hard driver caps? Who would monitor and enforce hard driver caps? What is the intended result from hard driver caps?



Fozzie said:


> If Dominos can turn a profit on low margin pizzas...


Pizza is NOT low margin!!!!!


----------



## WAHN (May 6, 2019)

Fozzie said:


> Tuesday morning, even when it was slow as hell, between 5:30a and 11:30a (6 hrs) I generated $237 worth of ride revenue. (total amount paid by customers) If I was making $12 /hr, they would have paid me $72 ($12 x 6 hrs) and pocketed the other $165.


That doesn't take into account possible mileage/expense reimbursement.

Plenty of hypotheticals to be worked out if/when this finally goes into effect for CA.


----------



## UberProphet? (Dec 24, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> If I was making $12 /hr, they would have paid me $72 ($12 x 6 hrs) and pocketed the other $165.


No allowance for car cost???


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Making drivers employees will cause Uber and Lyft to pay minimum wage and hire MORE drivers, especially if everyone is part time. Their main increase in expenses would be associated with FULL TIME drivers. Making everyone part time would be a highly effective cost control measure.
> 
> If Dominos can turn a profit on low margin pizzas, Uber and Lyft would make a killing with high margin surged rideshare while only paying minimum wage.
> 
> ...


Please explain how you know they'll have to hire more drivers.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

UberProphet? said:


> Who would set the hard driver caps? Who would monitor and enforce hard driver caps? What is the intended result from hard driver caps?


A hard driver cap would limit the number of drivers, decrease traffic, and change the balance of supply and demand that's used to manipulate driver compensation. 


> Pizza is NOT low margin!!!!!


What is the profit on a couple of $14 pizzas? Multiply that margin by 4 or 5 deliveries per hour per driver, subtract the cost of employing those drivers, and the margins are minimal.



UberProphet? said:


> No allowance for car cost???


FFS subtract the goddamn car cost from the fictional ****ing figures.



Demon said:


> Please explain how you know they'll have to hire more drivers.


PRETEND if you want. How do you ****ing people know anything? You're all ****ing guessing too? FFS

Good god man, it's not even 7am and I already need a damn drink just posting on UP.


----------



## WAHN (May 6, 2019)

Fozzie said:


> FFS subtract the goddamn car cost from the fictional @@@@ing figures.


LOL 



Fozzie said:


> PRETEND if you want. How do you @@@@ing people know anything? You're all @@@@ing guessing too? FFS


You might want to step away from the forum for a bit. We people are maddening.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

WAHN said:


> You might want to step away from the forum for a bit. We people are maddening. :wink:


I may stop for a while and make breakfast after the next "discussion" about how to calculate those fictional car expenses... -o:


----------



## UberProphet? (Dec 24, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> What is the profit on a couple of $14 pizzas?


Gross Profit on a $14 pizza is about $9 or $10. 2-3 deliveries per hour per driver is more standard. $4 delivery fee on each order.

Let's say 2 deliveries ($4 each) 3 pizzas ($10 each) or $38 gross profit per hour per driver. Less driver pay and mileage reimbursement. Probably $25\hour profit per driver per hour.

Definitely not low margin!

{Just to be clear, shop cost, overhead, interior wages and food cost must be paid out of this "profit" before net profit can be determined.}


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> A hard driver cap would limit the number of drivers, decrease traffic, and change the balance of supply and demand that's used to manipulate driver compensation.
> 
> What is the profit on a couple of $14 pizzas? Multiply that margin by 4 or 5 deliveries per hour per driver, subtract the cost of employing those drivers, and the margins are minimal.
> 
> ...


Ok, so you're just randomly making stuff up.


----------



## Uber's Guber (Oct 22, 2017)

SF Leaders pledging to protect Gig workers.

Yeah right!.... Those SF Leaders are gonna fix their homeless problem and get all those feces & discarded needles cleaned up as well. :wink:


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Demon said:


> Ok, so you're just randomly making stuff up.


What part is made up?

1 - A hard driver cap would limit the number of drivers TRUE

2 - A hard driver cap would decrease traffic TRUE

3 - A hard driver cap would change the balance of supply and demand that's used to manipulate driver compensation. TRUE


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> What part is made up?
> 
> 1 - A hard driver cap would limit the number of drivers TRUE
> 
> ...


I asked you to prove that you knew they would have to hire more drivers. You responded that you were guessing they would have to hire more drivers.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Demon said:


> I asked you to prove that you knew they would have to hire more drivers. You responded that you were guessing they would have to hire more drivers.


If they cut all drivers down to only part time hours, wouldn't it make sense to double the number of drivers on the road to meet demand? 200k part timers vs 100k full timers. The overhead cost difference between the two is HUGE.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> If they cut all drivers down to only part time hours, wouldn't it make sense to double the number of drivers on the road to meet demand? 200k part timers vs 100k full timers. The overhead cost difference between the two is HUGE.


You're just making more stuff up. How do you know they would have to cut anyone down to part time hours?


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Demon said:


> You're just making more stuff up. How do you know they would have to cut anyone down to part time hours?


Because as a smart businesswoman, that's EXACTLY what I would do.

A full time employee cost much more than two part time employees once you factor in required benefits, insurance, etc. Employer health insurance contribution for a single employee in California alone is over $5k a year. Vacation, sick pay and other misc benefits drive costs even higher.

Two part timers also increase driver availability to drive down your costs.


----------



## UberProphet? (Dec 24, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> What part is made up?
> 
> 1 - A hard driver cap would limit the number of drivers TRUE
> 
> ...


Again, who sets the caps? Who monitors and enforces caps? What is the desired result of having caps?


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

UberProphet? said:


> Again, who sets the caps?
> Who monitors and enforces caps?
> What is the desired result of having caps?


Local county governments, city governments and municipalities could set caps within their jurisdictions.

The authority that sets those caps would enforce it;

Caps would regulate traffic within those jurisdictions to offset the negative impact rideshare causes through increased traffic and congestion.

(or do we disagree on this too?)


----------



## UberProphet? (Dec 24, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Local county governments, city governments and municipalities could set caps within their jurisdictions.
> 
> The authority that sets those caps would enforce it;
> 
> ...


Congratulations! You have just invented The Medallion system. just like the Pharaohs in Egypt 5000 years ago. and the Romans 3000 years ago and the English parliament in 1634, the Hackney carriage Act, and the New York medallion system in 1936.

Welcome to the taxi business. What is very old is new again.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

UberProphet? said:


> Congratulations! You have just invented The Medallion system. just like the Pharaohs in Egypt 5000 years ago. and the Romans 3000 years ago and the English parliament in 1634, the Hackney carriage Act, and the New York medallion system in 1936.
> 
> Welcome to the taxi business. What is very old is new again.


Which goes back to what I've said before... if you want to be an employee and drive, you should be a Taxi driver, not an Uber driver.


----------



## UberProphet? (Dec 24, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Which goes back to what I've said before... if you want to be an employee and drive, you should be a Taxi driver, not an Uber driver.


 So your proposed solution does not work. (If Uber is not a taxi)

Now what do you propose?


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

WAHN said:


> You have absolutely no way of knowing that, just as I have no way of knowing that the flexibility won't be there.


no way in hell they try to set schedules since drivers wouldn't be able to drive anymore

use common sense

no way in hell uber and lyft will try to set schedules since it absolutely won't work, period


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

UberProphet? said:


> So your proposed solution does not work. (If Uber is not a taxi)
> 
> Now what do you propose?


It WOULD work, however it's selfish as hell to force everyone to change simply because you're too stubborn to switch to existing options.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

UberProphet? said:


> So your proposed solution does not work. (If Uber is not a taxi)
> 
> Now what do you propose?


fozzie's solution is the same one Uber is paying her good money to spew....don't do anything...let uber and lyft do anything they want at any time

no way in hell a real actual driver hates other drivers so much


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> It WOULD work, however it's selfish as hell to force everyone to change simply because you're too stubborn to switch to existing options.


It's not at all selfish to have people follow the law.


----------



## WAHN (May 6, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> no way in hell they try to set schedules since drivers wouldn't be able to drive anymore
> 
> use common sense
> 
> no way in hell uber and lyft will try to set schedules since it absolutely won't work, period


Some drivers may not be able to drive any longer if too much flexibility is lost, but there are plenty out there to take their place.

They could do schedules or do something like Lyft is already doing in NYC, not letting drivers log on when they feel they have enough coverage.










https://thehub.lyft.com/what-the-new-tlc-rules-mean-for-you
NYC drivers are not employees but having too many drivers still affects Lyfts bottom line due to a lower utilization rate.

IMO, U/L and any other gig companies affected will absolutely have to implement safeguards to limit driver supply, which would become a financial liability every minute a driver is on the clock without a ride.

That is common sense from the business side of things.

https://uberpeople.net/threads/lyft-shit-is-here-now-controls-our-hours.335033/
https://uberpeople.net/threads/here-we-go-lyft.337457/


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

Demon said:


> It's not at all selfish to have people follow the law.


Uber and Lyft are both technically in compliance with the law, yet you advocate forcibly changing their business model to suit you. Isn't that hypocrisy?


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Uber and Lyft are both technically in compliance with the law, yet you advocate forcibly changing their business model to suit you. Isn't that hypocrisy?


Again, a court has ruled they are not in compliance.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

WAHN said:


> Some drivers may not be able to drive any longer if too much flexibility is lost, but there are plenty out there to take their place.
> 
> They could do schedules or do something like Lyft is already doing in NYC, not letting drivers log on when they feel they have enough coverage.
> 
> ...


not allowing someone to go online is NOT setting a schedule



Fozzie said:


> Uber and Lyft are both technically in compliance with the law, yet you advocate forcibly changing their business model to suit you. Isn't that hypocrisy?


they will have to be in compliance with ab5 when it passes and it will be fun seeing them lose billions more than the $3.5 billion it already loses each year screwing over drivers and riders alike


----------



## WAHN (May 6, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> not allowing someone to go online is NOT setting a schedule


LOL, no shit Sherlock. I didn't say it was.

That's why I said they could do something like that OR schedule blocks and territories similar to the food apps DD and GH.


----------



## The Entomologist (Sep 23, 2018)

Lol, I still don't understand how simply changing the app and the design to comply with the new rules wouldn't be an option?

Are they seriously THAT stupid to try and pay employees? the damage to cars and depreciation alone will make both companies bankrupt by the end of the year.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

WAHN said:


> LOL, no shit Sherlock. I didn't say it was.
> 
> That's why I said they could do something like that OR schedule blocks and territories similar to the food apps DD and GH.


food deliveries are totally different because those drivers are actual IE's and the destination address is maybe a few miles from the pickup address


----------



## WAHN (May 6, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> food deliveries are totally different because those drivers are actual IE's and the destination address is maybe a few miles from the pickup address


I'm guessing you meant IC. From what I've seen AB5 would also apply to food delivery gig workers, but yes, the logistics are different.

The average U/L ride isn't that far.

So, how do you think it would work? If every driver logged into the app is now on the clock with or without a rider, how will costs be controlled.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> fozzie's solution is the same one Uber is paying her good money to spew....don't do anything...let uber and lyft do anything they want at any time
> 
> no way in hell a real actual driver hates other drivers so much


Quite the opposite... I see what's ahead, and It just baffles me how many people here are fighting so hard to become part time minimum wage employees.

Rideshare not working for you? Go work somewhere that fits your needs rather than try to force your changes on everyone else.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> Quite the opposite... I see what's ahead, and It just baffles me how many people here are fighting so hard to become part time minimum wage employees.
> 
> Rideshare not working for you? Go work somewhere that fits your needs rather than try to force your changes on everyone else.


nah, i'd rather have a nice union contract with great pay, great benefits, job security against false complaints, workers comp so i have bodily insurance if hurt while on the job, 401k w/match, mileage and expenses reimbursements, paid days off, and many more great benefits as a result of being an employee


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> *You are not being exploited if you choose to do the work*.
> 
> Yes, these companies do lie and manipulate drivers, but the remedy for that is to cease doing business together.
> 
> If they lie and manipulate you as a independent contractor, do you honestly believe that things will get better if you're an employee? Use your head man... THINK, THINK, THINK!


I must disagree. The very definition of exploitation includes willing participants on both sides of the equation. If there was no acceptance on the part of the worker, then the work would be forced and the term "slavery" would be appropriate.
"*an act that exploits or victimizes someone (treats them unfairly)".*

As for "cease doing business together" you ignore the worker's need to support themselves and family. Many gig economy workers are hobbled by disabilities, immigrant background/language issues or scheduling constraints that make finding enough work to support themselves difficult and in some cases otherwise impossible.

All developed countries have created work rules to provide minimum wage, safe working environments and employer provided social safety nets. Not only are these rules supported by humane values but contribute to reducing crime, financial defaults, welfare costs and contribute to a more stable economic system. The stock marker crash of 1929 occurred before the Fair Labor Standards Act was created and resulted in a depression that lasted over 10 years. When the market crashed again in 2007 the downturn was just a couple of years. Governmental insurance of bank deposits, Federal Reserve Board setting of interest rates, unemployment payments and disability payments not only are good for workers but ensure a stable economy for all of us.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

WAHN said:


> I'm guessing you meant IC. From what I've seen AB5 would also apply to food delivery gig workers, but yes, the logistics are different.
> 
> The average U/L ride isn't that far.
> 
> So, how do you think it would work? If every driver logged into the app is now on the clock with or without a rider, how will costs be controlled.


they are going to have to cap the amount of drivers they have so inactive drivers will be out


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> nah, i'd rather have a nice union contract with great pay, great benefits, job security against false complaints, workers comp so i have bodily insurance if hurt while on the job, 401k w/match, mileage and expenses reimbursements, paid days off, and many more great benefits as a result of being an employee


You want a union contract with great pay and benefits, and you think that Uber and Lyft are going to give it to you?

ROFLMAO

You're not an in demand skilled worker, you're a disposable, minimum wage ant. If these companies didn't care about you as a contractor, how the hell can you expect them to value you as an employee.

Sadly, I see minimum wage, part time hours, no benefits and a non-compete in your future.


----------



## WAHN (May 6, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> they are going to have to cap the amount of drivers they have so inactive drivers will be out


With no limits on number of hours worked per day or per week?


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

WAHN said:


> With no limits on number of hours worked per day or per week?


depends on if they want to pay out overtime for that particular driver


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

KevinH said:


> I must disagree. The very definition of exploitation includes willing participants on both sides of the equation. If there was no acceptance on the part of the worker, then the work would be forced and the term "slavery" would be appropriate.
> "*an act that exploits or victimizes someone (treats them unfairly)".*
> 
> As for "cease doing business together" you ignore the worker's need to support themselves and family. Many gig economy workers are hobbled by disabilities, immigrant background/language issues or scheduling constraints that make finding enough work to support themselves difficult and in some cases otherwise impossible.
> ...


The problem is that you DO NOT have a right to employment. Employment is totally at will.

If you have a family to support, it's your responsibility to find adequate employment to feed and shelter them. If you live in an expensive house and you choose to work part time at McDonalds, you're NOT going to make ends meet, and there's little you can do except to move to an occupation that pays enough to cover your expenses. You can demand that McDonalds pay you more, that they give you benefits etc, but in reality you'll never earn much more than part time minimum wage in that "career."

Rideshare is NOT and in demand occupation, and if you don't agree to minimum wage pay, they'll show you the door and you're on your own.

Serious question: If AB5 passes, you get deactivated, you apply for a job at Uber, and they offer you $12 /hr + 20 cents per mile working part time 9pm - 3am Mon-Thurs, no incentives, no surge, and no benefits, are you going to take it?



uberdriverfornow said:


> depends on if they want to pay out overtime for that particular driver


Why would they pay a driver overtime + benefits when they could have two part time drivers for less? Costs would be MUCH cheaper, and they'd have greater flexibility.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> The problem is that you DO NOT have a right to employment. Employment is totally at will.
> 
> If you have a family to support, it's your responsibility to find adequate employment to feed and shelter them. If you live in an expensive house and you choose to work part time at McDonalds, you're NOT going to make ends meet, and there's little you can do except to move to an occupation that pays enough to cover your expenses. You can demand that McDonalds pay you more, that they give you benefits etc, but in reality you'll never earn much more than part time minimum wage in that "career."
> 
> ...


an employee is an employee, part time or full time

you seem to think that an employer paying benefits for two employees is cheaper than paying benefits for one employee


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> an employee is an employee, part time or full time
> 
> you seem to think that an employer paying benefits for two employees is cheaper than paying benefits for one employee


What benefits will you get as a part time employee? (Answer: NONE) Providing no benefits to two part timers is cheaper than paying benefits to one.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> What benefits will you get as a part time employee? (Answer: NONE) Providing no benefits to two part timers is cheaper than paying benefits to one.


workers comp, fmla, free health care in cities like San Francisco where it is mandated by law, unemployment benefits, union benefits from a union contract

should i go on ?


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> workers comp, fmla, free health care in cities like San Francisco where it is mandated by law, unemployment benefits, union benefits from a union contract
> 
> should i go on ?


LOL @ a rideshare drivers union.

Workers comp and unemployment are givens. Family medical leave and healthcare are situational depending on where you live, but I guess ~$85 /wk towards medical coverage can be considered a benefit for some. (You'd just need to pay the rest of your premium + high deductibles out of your minimum wage salary)


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> LOL @ a rideshare drivers union.
> 
> Workers comp and unemployment are givens. Family medical leave and healthcare are situational depending on where you live, but I guess ~$85 /wk towards medical coverage can be considered a benefit for some. (You'd just need to pay the rest of your premium out of your minimum wage salary)


unions are fighting over who gets to represent drivers

competition is good


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> unions are fighting over who gets to represent drivers
> 
> competition is good


Unions are useless for unskilled labor/minimum wage jobs. One need not look very much further than the fast food industry for proof that unions don't work for low wage earners.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> Unions are useless for unskilled labor/minimum wage jobs. One need not look very much further than the fast food industry for proof that unions don't work for low wage earners.


well, i guess it's a good thing we aren't talking about the fast food industry


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> well, i guess it's a good thing we aren't talking about the fast food industry


 Minimum wage is minimum wage. It doesn't matter if you're flipping burgers or driving rideshare.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> Minimum wage is minimum wage. It doesn't matter if you're flipping burgers or driving rideshare.


even if drivers were only making minimum wage as employees, atleast they'd be making minimum wage WITH benefits...which is a 100 times better than they are doing now

but we all know with a union they will have a contract with great benefits and pay


----------



## jenijazz (Dec 27, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> nah, i'd rather have a nice union contract with great pay, great benefits, job security against false complaints, workers comp so i have bodily insurance if hurt while on the job, 401k w/match, mileage and expenses reimbursements, paid days off, and many more great benefits as a result of being an employee


You will need a time machine to go back to the '70s.


Fozzie said:


> Sadly, I see minimum wage, part time hours, no benefits and a non-compete in your future.


This is more like 21st century employment.
Most benefit managing companies insist on 30/hrs a week or more in order to cover medical, etc. Many employers cap hours at 29 to avoid paying for such bennies. (U/L might be able to negotiate something better but where is their incentive?) Yes, 2 part-timers are cheaper than 1 FT employee.

Although we are low-skill labor, we bring a $XX,XXX piece of gear to the job and that should be reimbursed at the IRS business mile rate of $.58/mile on top of any minimum wage.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

jenijazz said:


> Although we are low-skill labor, we bring a $XX,XXX piece of gear to the job and that should be reimbursed at the IRS business mile rate of $.58/mile on top of any minimum wage.


That would be great, but I doubt wear/tear compensation would ever be that high. I think the 58 cent figure was based on all transportation vehicles, namely $100k semi rigs that get horrible gas mileage. Not sure what your actual cost of operation is, but my gas/maintenance costs are only a fraction of that.

I'd guess Uber would reimburse approx 25 cents a mile, and anything over that you'd have to try to recover at tax time as an unreimbursed business expense.



uberdriverfornow said:


> even if drivers were only making minimum wage as employees, atleast they'd be making minimum wage WITH benefits...which is a 100 times better than they are doing now
> 
> but we all know with a union they will have a contract with great benefits and pay


If minimum wage + benefits is better than what you're doing, you seriously need to give up on driving rideshare.

*I WANT TO BE COMPENSATED IN MONEY, NOT USELESS BENEFITS. *


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> That would be great, but I doubt wear/tear compensation would ever be that high. I think the 58 cent figure was based on all transportation vehicles, namely $100k semi rigs that get horrible gas mileage. Not sure what your actual cost of operation is, but my gas/maintenance costs are only a fraction of that.
> 
> I'd guess Uber would reimburse approx 25 cents a mile, and anything over that you'd have to try to recover at tax time as an unreimbursed business expense.
> 
> ...


if all uber and lyft pay drivers is minimum wage they won't have any drivers


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> if all uber and lyft pay drivers is minimum wage they won't have any drivers


Yet thousands of new ants sign up daily to drive for rates that you say are less than minimum wage. Which is it?


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> Yet thousands of new ants sign up daily to drive for rates that you say are less than minimum wage. Which is it?


depends on the market


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> depends on the market


Name a market that isn't totally oversaturated right now...


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> Name a market that isn't totally oversaturated right now...


sf bay area and new york city


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

NYC doesn't count because it's capped. 

So you're telling me that the bay area isn't totally infested with ants anymore?


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> NYC doesn't count because it's capped.
> 
> So you're telling me that the bay area isn't totally infested with ants anymore?


in states where they make drivers employees it will force uber and lyft to cap drivers so they don't have pay benefits for inactive drivers


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Because as a smart businesswoman, that's EXACTLY what I would do.
> 
> A full time employee cost much more than two part time employees once you factor in required benefits, insurance, etc. Employer health insurance contribution for a single employee in California alone is over $5k a year. Vacation, sick pay and other misc benefits drive costs even higher.
> 
> Two part timers also increase driver availability to drive down your costs.


Uber won't be paying vacation pay as it is not required. In the case of sick pay, the costs for two part time employees actually doubles the cost of one employee since they each get three days sick pay.


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> in *CALIFORNIA IF* they make drivers employees it will force uber and lyft to cap drivers so they don't have pay benefits for inactive drivers


There's nothing that forces Uber and lyft to keep the inactive drivers anyway. A conversation with a programmer to deactivate all inactive drivers will probably happen anyway.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Local county governments, city governments and municipalities could set caps within their jurisdictions.
> 
> The authority that sets those caps would enforce it;
> 
> ...


Not in California.

The CPUC writes TNC regulations. Uber backed state regulation over local regulation. Remember?


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

observer said:


> Not in California.
> 
> The CPUC writes TNC regulations. Uber backed state regulation over local regulation. Remember?


I guess. I may own a home there, but I haven't actually lived in California in almost a decade.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Uber and Lyft are both technically in compliance with the law, yet you advocate forcibly changing their business model to suit you. Isn't that hypocrisy?


"Tecnically" really, really, _*really *_sounds like a weasel word.



Fozzie said:


> I guess. I may own a home there, but I haven't actually lived in California in almost a decade.


It"s Ubers M.O. everywhere. They go to state governments and say we are too big to regulate at the local level.

Here"s some bribe money make the local yokels go away and we will take care of you.

^^^ sarcasm, not sarcasm 

https://www.seattleweekly.com/news/are-uber-and-lyft-plotting-an-end-run-around-seattle-regs/


----------



## tmart (Oct 30, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> If AB5 passes, you'll be a minimum wage earner just like those employees, with the only difference being that you'll receive slight compensation for mileage. (Also, don't expect to longhaul anymore either. You'll receive mileage based on the Uber/Lyft "as the crow flies" route. Anything beyond that you can try to write off your personal taxes as unreimbursed business mileage.
> 
> Yet drivers in LA still drive for what, 60 cents a mile? The rideshare companies have dropped rates multiple times, have gotten rid of surge and boosts, but two days ago, on the 4th of July, how many of you went out anting?
> 
> ...


Most people discussing this issue believe that there will be negotiations, and that nothing much will change. Just more fear-mongering


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

tmart said:


> Most people discussing this issue believe that there will be negotiations, and that nothing much will change. Just more fear-mongering


EMPLOYERS don't negotiate. they offer employment at their terms, and you accept it or go elsewhere.

If you apply at McDonalds or other minimum wage job and you start demanding to set your own hours, to decide whether or not you want to work from day to day, or tell them that in the middle of your shift you may close the store and work across the street at Burger King if they're busy, you're NOT going to get hired. The same applies under AB5.

Too many people want to collect an easy paycheck like a W2 employee, but with the flexibility of independent contract work.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> EMPLOYERS don't negotiate. they offer employment at their terms, and you accept it or go elsewhere.
> 
> If you apply at McDonalds or other minimum wage job and you start demanding to set your own hours, to decide whether or not you want to work from day to day, or tell them that in the middle of your shift you may close the store and work across the street at Burger King if they're busy, you're NOT going to get hired. The same applies under AB5.
> 
> Too many people want to collect an easy paycheck like a W2 employee, but with the flexibility of independent contract work.


stop comparing mcdonalds and burger king jobs to those that have a union....unions are only for jobs where there are people working that plan on retiring there...nobody is working at mcdonalds for life


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> stop comparing mcdonalds and burger king jobs to those that have a union....unions are only for jobs where there are people working that plan on retiring there...nobody is working at mcdonalds for life


Ok.

So which stupid asses are planning to retire as Uber/Lyft drivers?


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Fozzie said:


> Ok.
> 
> So which stupid asses are planning to retire as Uber/Lyft drivers?


first things first....made as employees comes first ..then union contract...then work for years as a driver


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

You're deluded if you think you'll ever make "big" money driving rideshare. If you want a long term driving job, go drive a taxi.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> EMPLOYERS don't negotiate. they offer employment at their terms, and you accept it or go elsewhere.
> 
> If you apply at McDonalds or other minimum wage job and you start demanding to set your own hours, to decide whether or not you want to work from day to day, or tell them that in the middle of your shift you may close the store and work across the street at Burger King if they're busy, you're NOT going to get hired. The same applies under AB5.
> 
> Too many people want to collect an easy paycheck like a W2 employee, but with the flexibility of independent contract work.


"EMPLOYERS don't negotiate. they offer employment at their terms, and you accept it or go elsewhere."

Are you talking about Uber here?


----------



## Fozzie (Aug 11, 2018)

observer said:


> "EMPLOYERS don't negotiate. they offer employment at their terms, and you accept it or go elsewhere."
> 
> Are you talking about Uber here?


If AB5 were passed, then yes, Uber and Lyft. As it is now, such applies to ANY employer that pays minimum wage.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

uberdriverfornow said:


> first things first....made as employees comes first ..then union contract...then work for years as a driver


Being an Uber driver even if it was unionized will never be a good paying career.



Fozzie said:


> If AB5 were passed, then yes, Uber and Lyft. As it is now, such applies to ANY employer that pays minimum wage.


I mean now.

"EMPLOYERS don't negotiate. they offer employment at their terms, and you accept it or go elsewhere."

According to your quote you are defining Uber as an Employer, now.

Drivers don't negotiate. Uber offers employment on their terms. Drivers can accept or go elsewhere.

I think you perfectly described Uber as an employer.


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

Fozzie said:


> Unions are useless for unskilled labor/minimum wage jobs. One need not look very much further than the fast food industry for proof that unions don't work for low wage earners.


This comment is most remarkable. Unions are specifically created to protect workers in unskilled or low skilled jobs. Truck drivers, mine workers, field laborers are all examples of successful unionization of jobs where workers acting alone have almost no say over the terms of their employment. These jobs are low skilled or require no formal training or previous work experience.
The fast food industry is certainly an exception as most workers use that sector as a "bridge" job to add income while continuing an education or building work experience as they lever themselves up to better positions.


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

More Unions, more money for workers! End of the story



Fozzie said:


> Name a market that isn't totally oversaturated right now...


East Bay Area has no drivers. ETA for pick up is 15 to 20 min what usually was 5-8 min
Because of last price cut all drivers are going to SF and SFO
Today at California st. SF I counted 14 of 14 cars were U/L Cars. Same morning East Bay Area I have rejected 3 rides because ETA pick up time was more then 15 min.


----------



## nouberipo (Jul 24, 2018)

Fozzie said:


> Label, suppress, silence and try to discredit anyone with an opinion different from your own.
> 
> Want to know who else does that... UBER and LYFT.


No, I have watched as these companies have wrecked havoc on what is considered fair business practices. I have watched as they kept lowering the "take rate" of drivers. I have watched as they basically take money from the pockets of drivers (and out of the communities in which they live) to give to the investors and workers at these companies. I don't try and suppress anyone's thoughts but I will call them out when they are based on ignorance and not facts. I will discredit anyone who makes up "alternative facts" because there is no such thing. I have never "silenced" anyone. I speak up because others may not. I speak up as I see social injustice. I speak up because Uber and Lyft operate under a guise of being beneficial to societies in which they operate when in reality they are not. I speak as a Ph.D. who has taught university courses on the sharing economy (don't confuse this term with Uber/Lyft as this is no longer the "sharing economy"). The bottom line is that I will speak up when Uber takes advantage of people because they have the lobbyists, the money, and the millennials to create a system that is wrecking havoc on the lives of those who are using their personal resources to provide services and being undercut at every turn....why, because Uber and Lyft know they can. This is why regulators and regulations are around the corner. Uber and Lyft do not represent anything ethical, moral, or socially redeeming. They represent what can eventually happen to the workforce across the world if they aren't stopped in their tracks. I pray that California stands up to Uber and Lyft this week and that it will start a huge ripple affect across the states.


----------



## Polomarko (Dec 20, 2016)

Thank you. Totally agree


----------

