General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBashing Uber and Lyft?
I'm sick of the misinformed and ignorant posts about these driver apps
One poster compared me to a child molester..really?
Fact: background checks ARE required for employment by both companies.
Fact: They don't pay well, I made $93 driving all day yesterday and that does not include gas or water for clients
and I still need to pay taxes from the $93
Fact: Most riders are great but occasionally you get a rider who leaves trash or clips their nails or just reeks of body
odor...in YOUR private car..and I won't comment about trump supporters
Fact: Uber and Lyft rely heavily on ratings and ride acceptance, you get score of 4's consistently on a scale of 1 thru 5 and you WILL have your account closed
Fact: They do have insurance for riders and the drivers, they also require car seats for small children (but riders will lie about the need)
Fact: They ARE considerably cheaper than taxis, I've taken a fair share of disabled riders and they cannot afford a regular taxi so for them we are a godsend
Are they perfect?...hell no but If your having a hard time finding a job or just need extra cash they fit the bill.
On edit: let the flames begin
B2G
(9,766 posts)I am the devil incarnate according to some here.
Ignore them. Good on you for working hard.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)griffi94
(3,733 posts)Since proposition 1 failed yesterday.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)(This is my response in another thread that I copy+pasted here)
My husband and I are weird. We researched Uber because we wanted to invest in the company; and possibly try to get in if/when they go public. Part of that research entailed experiencing Uber from the passenger and driver side.
As someone who was a passenger (about ten times) and a driver (I gave about 75 rides), I can tell you that what you wrote here is absolutely false.
I have plenty of gripes about the way they treat drivers. However, both my husband and I went through the approval process. It is rigorous. You have to submit documentation of a clean driving record, which means you haul your butt to the DMV and obtain your driving record. Mine went back ten years. You also must go through a criminal background check. You are not allowed to drive without this documentation.
You must also submit pics of your car. Inside and out. You are required to send updated photos quarterly, or your driver privilidges are revoked.
You must also submit proof of insurance on a regular basis. They keep track of documents sent and when your insurance expires, and they remind you that if you don't submit proof of current insurance, you are booted as a driver.
Furthermore, passengers rate you. If you're weird, unsafe, moronic or a terrible driver--passengers will rate you low. Rating are from 1-5 (1 lowest). You must maintain over 4.75 or you are in jeapordy. It's not easy! Drivers have been deactivated for falling below a 4.75. It's very hard to maintain that. Try dealing with very drunk people who are angry that you won't drive ten of their closest friends. They punish you (for their stupidity) with the rating system.
I have plenty of gripes about Uber! From a business perspective, I don't believe that the way the treat drivers is a sustainable business model. They slowly lower the rates in cities--which lowers the pay for drivers. When Uber initially begins in a city, drivers can make some decent money. However, the rates are often cut in half--slowly. You can still make money, but you have to drive at the right times and be smart about your strategy. Otherwise, you end up screwed. It shouldn't be like that.
My husband made $650 a month ago, one weekend. It was a busy weekend because of concerts/events. He only worked 16 hours. He rarely drives, but every once in while will do it--if he thinks he can make some money. If you know what you're doing you can make $50 an hour.
I hope the company innovates when it comes to its treatment of the drivers.
B2G
(9,766 posts)I do not hate Uber. It is not perfect though. My primary gripes are that drivers deserve better pay. However, drivers should be able to decide for themselves if they want to do the job. That's the market.
However, these people (in the other thread) who suggest that there are no background checks, or insurance checks or checks on your automobile or that your driver is likely a criminal--are all false.
Demonaut
(8,926 posts)are you kidding me? do you understand the meaning of the word "absolutley"?
Pay depends on the market, I've heard of the $400 a nite in Denver but those days are gone as we have saturated the market with drivers and surge pricing has been drastically reduced.
Some of my riders were/are former drivers and they left the car sharing business as the pay dropped so much..
I don't like to do the late nite runs which pay better but dealing with drunks and idiots is not much fun.
$5.00 rides are very common here in Denver and the suburbs, of that $5.00 uber takes about 30%.
I wish I made $8.00 minimum per fare but again, those days are long gone
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)was a response to someone in another thread who was spreading disinformation. I mention that. Did I not make that clear?
I posted it to show you that I was on your side.
I am...on your side.
We must be experiencing a miscommunication here.
Demonaut
(8,926 posts)Hassin Bin Sober
(26,339 posts)OriginalGeek
(12,132 posts)but I see it now.
OP, I was skeptical of Uber form the passenger POV because of all the negative things I read here and elsewhere but I recently found myself in need of a ride and a taxi wasn't available and Uber was. The ease of use from downloading the app to getting in a car was mind-boggling. Price was great, driver was nice, car was clean. I understand why taxi companies are mad about it but maybe they should learn from it instead of fighting it. In the meantime, I am not too keen restricting how a person can make money within reason. I think Uber is within reason.
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)... trying to make a little (and sometimes it is very little) money to get by.
No one that doesn't need the money is going to open their personal space to strangers. Be kind and tip your drivers well
(my future son in law did this for a couple months when he first moved to Michigan)
Demonaut
(8,926 posts)WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)Uber seeks world domination and pits the have littles against one another. Uber is a symptom of two political parties that have worked together to marginalize Labor. As a result, real wages have been stagnant for 35 years. Now self identifying "Progressives" want to defend an unregulated company that redistrubtes living, middle-class wage jobs (OMFG! In order to support families, taxi fares are higher) to tens of thousands of people who just want to make a few more bucks (while their overlords make billions.) No benefits, no protections, it's Ayn Rand's Walmart model meets Amazon.com.
And for all their talk about having a superior product, they refuse to compete on a level playing field with legal taxi companies. If you like Uber, you should want to see it regulated, just like every business that has ever opened shop anywhere. But Uber believes they are above rules and regulations, and Progressives carry their water.
The Democrats behind Uber are the Rahm Emanuel Democrats.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)I am a democrat and I support this poster trying to make ends meet. I am sure they wish they had a different option and I wish it for them as well ... the odds are they don't. You may not support an individual trying to get through each day however they feel they need to.
They may well prefer to be lectured about progressive values, instead of a post encouraging people that use Uber / Lyft to tip generously while they struggle to make ends meet.
I am sure the OP is grateful for your perspective and will find it comforting as they try to make ends meet. I offer only support to a struggling worker. Perhaps one day they can get a taxi medallion (hoping it is not in my area as that is a truly corrupt system) ... or better yet, find a job that suits there interests and talents.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)support a white male privileged Libertarian juggernaut that believes it's above rules and regulations.
For all you know, the OP is a tool.
Not one of you wants to address regulation, a level playing field, and fair competition. There's something wrong with that. I realize you don't see it. I'm trying to force people to look at it.
Like I said, if you like Uber and want to use and drive for Uber, you should want to see them regulated like all commerce.
White male privilege run wild.
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)Demonaut
(8,926 posts)WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)I'm not singling you out, it's what people do. The OP did it, too.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)pnwmom
(108,995 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)As far as I know there are zero taxi drivers in the country who are even "employees" per se, rather than contractors.
There are contractor associations calling themselves "unions" that represent taxi drivers, but none of them engage in collective bargaining.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)And in Seattle, not only regular cabbies but Uber drivers can join a union:
http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/14/technology/seattle-uber-drivers-union/
The city's new ordinance applies to all taxi drivers in Seattle, including for-hire cabs, taxi companies and app-based on-demand firms such as Uber and Lyft.
Companies like Uber typically classify their drivers as independent contractors. That allows the companies to avoid paying their drivers benefits like overtime and health insurance.
As a result, Councilmember Mike O'Brien noted that many of those workers earn below minimum wage, and they have a difficult time making their voices heard when lodging complaints with their companies.
O'Brien says Seattle's new law will make their businesses safer, and more reliable and cost-effective.
And there's a new union in Chicago:
Its quite an accomplishment, especially since it was just early last year that more than 3,500 city cab drivers began organizing themselves into Cab Drivers United, part of Illinois Council 31. Then, in July 2014, delegates to the 41st AFSCME International Union Convention in Chicago rallied near City Hall, demonstrating solidarity with the drivers campaign to win a voice in the regulatory process that controls their livelihood.
Now the drivers have that voice. Their new union, Cab Drivers United/AFSCME Local 2500, received its charter on Aug. 1, with hundreds signing up to become full dues-paying members of our AFSCME family.
http://www.afscme.org/blog/taking-back-our-union-heres-how-were-growing-stronger
And according to this, there are "union cab driver activists' "across the country."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2015/01/19/can-taxi-unions-build-an-app-to-take-on-uber/
Recursion
(56,582 posts)If you don't do collective bargaining you aren't a "union" in any real sense; any TWA member is free to undercut or outbid any other TWA member for a given shift.
Worse yet, a few of their members are owner-operators who lease out their medallions and cars when they're not working, meaning they represent both labor and management.
Hell, they couldn't affiliate with AFL until AFL very reluctantly put through a rules change recently to allow contractors' associations to affiliate (and, honestly, by that rule change, most chambers of commerce are at least technically able to affiliate now).
In all of the screeds about Uber, nobody has ever actually been able to show that Uber drivers make less than medallion drivers: because they don't.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)They are real unions.
I added some other examples to the previous post.
And here's an another example of the kind of bargaining they can do;
http://www.afscme.org/blog/taking-back-our-union-heres-how-were-growing-stronger
In July, the city dismissed more than half the tickets unjustly issued against the drivers a direct result of the unions new Driver Advocate program. In fact, more than half of the tickets defended by a Driver Advocate have been dismissed outright, while others were amended so that fines were reduced, all thanks to AFSCMEs Driver Advocate program.
The unions review of police ticketing practices against cab drivers also led to a departmental cease and desist order to officers who had made a habit of targeting the drivers.
As drivers discover the power of AFSCME Strong, Cab Drivers United/AFSCME Local 2500 will continue to grow more powerful with each new membership.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)They are lobbying, not bargaining with management.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)And I think you missed the article about Seattle in an earlier post. Seattle not only has collective bargaining for its taxi drivers -- it has extended collective bargaining to its Uber drivers to.
http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2015/12/city-council-votes-on-giving-seattle-rideshare-drivers-union-rights/
Recursion
(56,582 posts)There were complaints in AFL at the time.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)In Seattle both taxi unions and uber drivers can engage in collective bargaining.
http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2015/12/city-council-votes-on-giving-seattle-rideshare-drivers-union-rights/
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Uber and Lyft drivers can (and in places like Seattle, do) collectively bargain, but they aren't taxi drivers, but fleet service drivers. Taxi drivers nowhere in the US collectively bargain.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)For nearly 15 years, taxi workers in New York Cityand now in other citieshave been building a union. They were up against a lot: Each yellow cab taxi driver in New York City has been classified by the city as an independent operatora status that excludes them from coverage by most U.S. labor laws and that means their union cannot appeal to the National Labor Relations Board for recognition of its right to represent workers. But these supposedly unorganizable workers refused to let anybody tell them whether they could be a union or not. They organized a union themselves.
Last year, the NTWA, based in New York and led by Bhairavi Desai, became the latest affiliate union of the AFL-CIO, and the first group to receive an organizing committee charter from Americas largest labor organization in a half-century. The members of NTWA have done groundbreaking work in unifying taxi workers, increasing drivers take-home pay and building a structure to provide the taxi workers access to health care.
The taxi workers are part of a new wave of workers who are organizing against the odds. Car wash workers, domestic workers and others who are not ordinarily thought of as union members are discovering and using the power of collective action to improve their lives and work. In early May, for instance, more than 235 mostly immigrant livery or "Black Car" drivers from Town Car International, located in Queens, voted by a 2-to-1 margin to be represented by the International Association of Machinists (IAM). The Communications Workers of America (CWA) and United Steelworkers (USW) and a few other unions also represent cab drivers.
Being a cab driver in New York City is hard. Workers are often on the streets for 14 or 16 hours a day, six, sometimes seven days a week in what the U.S. Department of Labor labels one of the countrys most dangerous professions.
Taxi workers buy fuel themselves and pay high lease rates for vehiclessometimes more than $60,000 over the usable life of a car worth $30,000. Most taxi workers also must lease medallions, which are the permits required for cabbies to pick up passengers who hail them on the streets of New York City. Garage companies charge drivers a 5 percent fee on every credit card transaction. And as independent contractors, the taxi workers are on their own to buy health insurance.
All the risk is ours, said NTWA member and taxi worker Jamil Hussain. If gas prices rise, we earn less. If its a slow day, we earn less. But the company gets its money no matter what!
For each problem, the NTWA has a solution. It has worked with New York Citys Taxi and Limousine Commission to run a trial program to cut the credit card fees by more than half. It has a health care plan for members in the works. The union has negotiated better car and medallion leases with some companies and has been pressuring others to do the same. Since December, the taxi workers have held more than 50 demonstrations against the companies that refuse to bargain.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)First and foremost is certification by the NLRB. If you aren't certified by the NLRB, then there's zero federal enforcement of the National Labor Relation Act, which is fundamental for all functioning unions. This means your employer doesn't have to recognize the union, bargain with it in any way, and is free to violate whatever agreements might be made outside certification. Employees can also be fired for striking, "union" association, terminated at will, and suffer all sorts of other discriminatory acts that are prohibited by the law.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)And it has been a mess of back-scratching and cronyism. Would any of the parties enjoying the perks of these arrangements benefiting all concerned except the actual consumer, have ever even paid a bit of attention to it if it wasn't for these annoying, pesky, "disruptive" silicon valley libertarian upstarts?
No, no fucking way.
So to all the people pissing and moaning about Uber and Lyft, give me a break. I've lived enough cities where the taxi service was atrocious to nonexistent. Seems to me the defenders of the status quo had their chance to fix it, and didn't.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Which is why you see the moves against Uber and Lyft happening at the city level.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)sendero
(28,552 posts)....taking advantage of a monopoly situation that is overpriced and underperforms (conventional cabs).
If cities didn't milk cab service for revenues driving the prices up to absurd levels and if there weren't tight controls on the number (read availability) of cabs, Uber would have never happened.
It's not the conventional cab drivers' faults this happened, its the city governments'. Their little monopoly play is coming to an end.
People who don't like Uber are free to pay double for a slow-ass conventional cab that will show up eventually.
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)ASAP service for technologically savvy and comfortable people who are smart enough to keep their phone charged, taxi will never beat Uber. But they are getting better, as more and more companies are going online with apps.
But if you still use a flip phone, or a landline, or you need the waitress or desk clerk to call for you, or your battery is dead, or you don't have room on your phone, or you just feel better about paying cash for simple transactions, then Uber and Lyft cannot help you.
If Uber and Lyft succeed in destroying the conventional cab model, it is going to suck for a lot of people.
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)I rarely have need for a cab, but when I do, I use Uber instead. Clean cars, courteous (and safe) drivers. Although it is cheaper, I make up the difference by giving a generous tip to the driver.
I don't take Uber because it's cheaper, because for me, it's not. I take Uber because it's a MUCH more pleasant experience than any taxi I've taken in the last 15 years.
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)People who drive other people for a living, whether rideshare or taxi, have a bad habit of turning bitter before they either quit or are deactivated.
http://uberpeople.net/forums/Complaints/
Sometimes driving people from point to point is one of the coolest jobs in the world. Other times you are angry as hell at the drunk who just puked on you, or scared ****less by the mumbling agitated person sitting behind you, or frustrated by the passenger who got cancelled on twice criticizing everything about your driving, attitude, occupation, and existence.
I bet that, even if Travis K is an atheist, he is praying every day for his driverless fleet.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)Have you met industry standards? Can you?
*fingerprinting
*criminal background check
*DMV driving background check
*drug test
*physical exam
Are you a convicted rapist or felon? Whatever the case may be, Uber has ZERO faith in you or the driver behind the wheel next to you. Did you know Uber and Lyft pulled out of Austin this morning because the city passed and ordinance to have their drivers fingerprinted and run criminal background checks?
Unfortunately for the unwitting public, you know NOTHING about what you're talking about. Unfortunately for Liberals, Thom Hartmann doesn't, either.
Uber lies and settles lawsuits years later. Unfortunately, it's a small price to pay for the goodwill they've already built. And even after the lawsuits settle, no one is the wiser and people like you continue to carry the water for Ayn Rand's favorite billionaires.
Did these reach your Uber inbox?
Uber will pay $10 million to settle lawsuit over driver background checks
http://www.theverge.com/2016/4/7/11389822/uber-lawsuit-background-checks-10-million-settlement
BUSINESS
Uber Agrees to Pay $28.5 Million to Settle False Advertising Case
Ride-hailing service also will change its market language concerning safe rides fee
http://www.wsj.com/articles/uber-agrees-to-pay-28-5-million-to-settle-rider-safety-case-1455228038
https://www.facebook.com/thomshypocrisytoday/
Demonaut
(8,926 posts)from uber and lyft
do you have a list of industry standards, are they different from city to city?
*fingerprinting......................................didn't ask
*criminal background check....................yes
*DMV driving background check...............yes
*drug test............................................didn't ask
*physical exam.......................................yes
My post was less about supporting uber and lyft but more about the unwarranted bashing of the drivers
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)Welcome to the transportation industry. So many of you scabs drive for a few months then you're gone. You're all chasing fools gold.
You conveniently avoided addressing the lawsuits, filed because what you purport to be fact are Uber lies. And they still find tools to perpetuate them.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)A business model that has the worker assume all the costs while the business owner skims the profits...
alarimer
(16,245 posts)In fact all of these "disruptive" companies are merely a return to a pre-regulation era. These are no better (and may be worse) than the Walmarts of the world.
Uber is run by a libertarian asshole, if that gives any indication of how they want things.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)disabled. Here in Chicago and other cities, the disabled have testified they are discriminated against. The disabled get discounted fares and are afraid that Uber is destroying the taxi industry. Uber doesn't have any wheelchair accessible vans.
STFU! You sound like Travis "The Sky is Falling" Kalanick.
Demonaut
(8,926 posts)you NEED source more information about the service and requirements before posting, push yourself a little harder
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)go to city council hearings. So continue bumping this thread, as will I, and make more supporting the scab work for which you get no respect lol
Demonaut
(8,926 posts)lol, you must live in a pumpkin patch
added "multiple"
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)pumpkin patch?
Demonaut
(8,926 posts)and please as you so politely put it ..."stfu"
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)to their insurance company about being Uber drivers. And they never rent cars and use them illegally for commercial purposes.
Demonaut
(8,926 posts)WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)propaganda, that's obvious. But I'm not speaking to you. I'm just using you.
Demonaut
(8,926 posts)need a ride?
fizzgig
(24,146 posts)there are cab stands downtown on the weekends for the bar crowd but need a cab for an emergency in the middle of the day? be prepared to wait two hours for one to show up.
there is one cab company in my city and the puc has routinely denied applications for a second one.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)tantrum throwing, billionaire brats.
Updated at 2:30 p.m. after interview with Ald. Beale: A new ordinance could decimate ridesharing in Chicagoso, UberX and Lyftby requiring all rideshare drivers to get a chauffeur's license.
This ordinance, proposed by Ald. Anthony Beale (9th), would "make it nearly impossible for ridesharing to operate in the city," Lyft spokesperson Chelsea Wilson said in a statement. Uber concurs that the ordinance "threatens to take ridesharing away."
Beale told Chicagoist that really, the issue is that ridesharing has been regulated "piecemeal" in Chicago for too long. He hopes to "level the playing field" for cab companies and rideshare services. He argues that the status quo is "putting hard-working cab drivers out of business... family people who have worked for years."
"The first two years that Uber and Lyft came into the city of Chicago, they were able to operate without a business license," Beale added. "They made hundreds of millions of dollars... while they were operating illegally in the city of Chicago."
If Beale's ordinance passeswhich it could as early as April 13, though Beale predicts that City Council "shenanigans" will hold it up for a whileit would essentially prohibit the part-time rideshare drivers who currently offer cheaper-than-taxi rates and work with only a driver's license. Under the ordinance, all drivers would need to obtain a chauffeur's license, and get background-checked and fingerprinted by the city. Uber and Lyft would also have to meet the same quota as cab companies: five percent of their fleets would need to be accessible to people with disabilities.
Uber reps said in a statement that the ordinance would "force UberX driver-partners to get expensive chauffeurs licenses that are designed for full-time, professional drivers. This would eliminate low-cost options and leave only pricey chauffeur services." Uber added that Beale's ordinance would hurt customers who can't afford traditional taxis.
Lyft expressed similar sentiments in a statement provided by Wilson:
Lyft unequivocally opposes Alderman Beale's proposal to impose a penalty of over $300 on local residents who help provide safe, affordable rides to their fellow Chicagoans. The ordinance as written would make it nearly impossible for ridesharing to operate in the city. We would welcome the opportunity to instead work with Chicago leaders to preserve the economic opportunities ridesharing has brought to the city for drivers as well as local businesses and communities.
Beale questions the companies' claims that they provide affordable rides. "If that's the case, why do they surge price? Cab companies are not allowed to surge price if it's raining, snowing... [Uber and Lyft are] able to charge three times the normal amount [in those circumstances]. So who can afford that?"
He added that Lyft's estimate of the price of a chauffeur's license "sounds excessive. But if the cab drivers can get it and pay for it, why can't [Uber and Lyft]? Why don't they underwrite it? They're making enough money to do that."
Uber said in their statement that Beale's ordinance would "destroy earning opportunities" for the 35,000 part-time UberX drivers in Chicago. Uber argues that UberX provides essential jobs in areas with high unemployment20 percent of UberX drivers live on the South and West sides, the company reports.
Beale argues that rideshare driving jobs are far from lucrative. He claims that the average Uber driver only stays with the company for 2-3 months, high turnover attributable to low, highly-taxed wages.
"The fat cats at the top [of Uber and Lyft] are the ones making hundreds of millions of dollars," Beale said, while people driving for Uber have to pay taxes on the full ride fare, including the cut Uber takes. Combine that with the expense of "wear and tear" on your car, and the rideshare model isn't so sweet for drivers, from Beale's perspective.
Beale added that his ordinance is also a reaction to safety concerns about ridesharing apps. "We don't even know who they are!" he said of rideshare drivers.
As we reported in December, a rogue Lyft driver once followed a passenger who declined a ride, though he was not matched with her. It's unclear how widespread incidents like that are.
Uber has started a petition against Beale's ordinance, which has more than 10,500 signatures so far.
http://chicagoist.com/2016/03/24/ridesharing_in_chicago_could_end_if.php
30 of 50 city council members have co-signed the ordinance but Uber's Mayor, Rahm Emanuel. I thought you guys had a HUGE problem with cronism LOL, Uber is an Emanuel family business.
Uber is FOS. Their drivers are being fingered printed in NYC and the world didn't come to an end. Mayor DeBlasio is about the closest thing we have to a real Democrat today.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)Uber will pay $10 million to settle lawsuit over driver background checks
http://www.theverge.com/2016/4/7/11389822/uber-lawsuit-background-checks-10-million-settlement
BUSINESS
Uber Agrees to Pay $28.5 Million to Settle False Advertising Case
Ride-hailing service also will change its market language concerning safe rides fee
http://www.wsj.com/articles/uber-agrees-to-pay-28-5-million-to-settle-rider-safety-case-1455228038
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)I think Uber and Lyft are the new model of employment in America and we are going to all be working for literal peanuts soon.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)Last edited Mon May 9, 2016, 02:39 PM - Edit history (1)
That's a myth. The taxi industry isn't going anywhere but it's a heavy lift taking on billionaire brats who operate in a Libertarian Utopia of no regulations. Part of the problem is the New Democrats are in cahoots with Silicon Valley, a media darling.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)much about Uber. Now, 33 of 50 want to regulate them. Other cities are doing the same. Uber and Lyft just left Austin this morning because city hall wanted to fingerprint drivers.
Bernie's appeal demonstrates Americans are beginning to care about living wages again despite what Silicon Valley wants everyone to believe while trotting out armies of fodder chasing the crumbs. Even Uber drivers are forming alliances and have the Teamsters support.
We have a hurdle cities like Austin don't have; Uber is Rahm Emanuel's family business. It's getting interesting here. I'll keep you posted.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)Anywhere else, this would be a conflict of interest and Rahm would have to butt out. Instead, he's standing in the way of the ordinance hearing. We could probably take him to court over that.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)It's taken root in many cities and now even Hillary is onboard (despite saying $11 or 12 is enough).
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Paratransit services in the Bay Area are cheap too.
Undercutting wages for a service just hits you in the wallet too. Lyft and Uber used to give better returns to the drivers, and have been reducing that every year. If you figure out how cheap you can hire a person, that's what you will pay them.
Demonaut
(8,926 posts)FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)Save all your receipts, you are going to need to save every penny you can on your taxes. Which you ARE putting money aside for, correct? As an independent contractor, you are responsible for self employment tax. Yes, you gotta pay both employee AND employer share of social security, plus quarterly withholding on federal and state tax.
As well, you need an "Oh, S**t!!!" fund of at least $2000 (preferably $3000+), when your wheels go down. How quick can you get back on the road if your ride breaks down or is in an accident?
Do you have a rideshare policy or rider for your car insurance? Uber's insurance will not cover any period that you are not on a run, or at least enroute to a run. And it only takes care of other people, not you. Damage to your car is on you and your insurance (who may cancel you, refuse the claim, and possibly even sue for fraud if you lie about doing rideshare).
Good luck, roll safely.
Demonaut
(8,926 posts)and maintenance, tires I'm still responsible for too
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)But if you can avoid revealing that you drive for Uber, that is your best bet to keep them from cancelling on you. Like insurance, a lot of warranties have "commercial" or "vehicle for hire" exclusions.
I have all the respect in the world for people like you who are trying to survive in a cold hard world. I have no respect for Uber and the way they blatantly lie and hang their drivers out to dry.
DonRedwood
(4,359 posts)she and my father both worked double jobs in the 1970s to buy a cab permit. The permit cost as much as a house at the time. I'm sure you completely understand how long it would take a taxi cab driver and his wife working double jobs to purchase a house/ cab permit.
then uber comes along and anyone with a car can drive and my mom, who is now almost 80, has a taxi permit that she bought intstead of a house. That's my problem with uber. You got to make my $93 yesterday while the value of a taxi permit in an uber city plumets to nothing and three taxi drivers driving 8 hour shifts can't make a living now.
and while an uber driver gets to drive whatever, a permitted taxi has special insurance, special driver's license, meters, etc. so they cannot compete if they follow the law while uber skirts them.
nothing against uber drivers, you're doing the same job as the taxi drivers i grew up with, but the playing field is making the owners of uber rich while they do nothing, while the permit holders and taxi drivers lose everything.
ananda
(28,876 posts)IF they already do everything they're sposed to, then ...
... why would they care whether the Prop passed or not?
And why leave the city in a huff cuz it didn't?
Some company will fill the void, one that likes Austin
just the way it is ... radical and anti-corporate.