I will never use Uber.

I am big on start up small companies. Those big cab companies are to wealthy and were a monopoly which I hate even more.

Opinions may vary.

They don't have to pay for those overpriced madallions and can do pretty well. My customers who pick me up love the flexibility and the money they make.

I support workers.

You can keep low wage corporations.

Your post are all opinion without direct facts.

Driving a cab has always been a low paying job with dispatching companies skimming off the top.

Uber and Walmart are different only in the size.

Their drivers should unionize, and demand decent wages and benefits.

I support workers, not corporations.

That was my point.

Obviously labor organization and negotiation for better pay and benefits are preferred, but are you under the impression you get that with other cab companies?

Uber uses a business model designed so they don't have to do that.

I support workers right to unionize, not multibillion dollar corporations, ever.

This is about unions rights nor corporate rights.

Most cab companies treat drives as private contractors and pay no benefits and many of those are going through the same legal battles as Uber right now. Unless you did extensive research on how each company operates, you would have no way of knowing whether your driver was getting benefits or not and you can be pretty much certain they aren't unionized as very few are.

...in NYC all cab, Uber and Lyft drivers are independent contractors.

that the traditional drivers are locked into a system where they HAVE to use an agency, which likely owns the (usually pricey and hard to get) medallions. Uber allows anyone to drive, no medallians or tax overhead (for Uber). People want a level playing field, whether it's independent or agency, but not quite this disparate difference.

Most cab companies furnish the cars that drivers use, and I'm sure skim even more off the top for that. At least with Uber the drivers have the option of driving for some other service. Ideally all of these people should be employees with benefits, and if they were unionized it would be even better. I just don't know that boycotting Uber really helps anyone when there's not much in the way of an alternative.

seemingly being anti-union.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251417437

Sanders would support the workers 100%.

What's up?

He is talking about supporting the drivers, because of his personal experience talking with them and listening to them. He uses Uber, so he is being very supportive of them. Every ride is money in their pockets.

And why would you post a link to something he said earlier that has nothing to do with unions or the issue being discussed?

Kind creepy.

What's up with you?

He is talking about supporting the company, BTW. Read the posts please.

...that you disagreeing with him meant that you would accuse him of being anti-union, then chide him about being a Bernie supporter, and then post a link back to one of his Bernie-supportive posts.

The whole thing kinda had a stalkerish feel to it.

And BTW, I am allowed to reply to posts and it's really none of your business. If you think I am stalking: A. Do a search. B. Notify admins.

The new Democracy will come in our workplaces!

Have to beg for permission from their owners to work. They only get wages, and profits go to someone not even paying taxes where they send their kids to school. Uber and lyft didn't want it, but that has nothing to do with anything but profit and permission, nothing toward ownership and real control.

Now they can choose from the choices their owners - who don't do the work - deign to give them. Seems more condescending than democratic.

Uber alone is estimate to be worth $62.5 billion. How much of that do the drivers have?

Respectfully, and it's not just you, but I am astounded at how dilute the definition of democratic workplaces has become, and especially cooperative. Prior to 1925, when people really were fighting and dying for control, they saw association with business unions as quitting, and business spent a lot of money (billions in today's dollars) to make sure everyone thought the same thing. It appears they invested well.

As loose as things are getting I might have to start thinking of our ex-pres shrub as a motivational speaker.

tptb do, phoney up everything real, so people become confused and doubt their own higher selves. That way they can maintain their control over the masses. They really are quite insidious and insane.

Still through all that, we awaken one at a time until a tsunami of sanity returns.

simply by deciding not to take their car out that day?

So it would be about as much of a strike as telling your boss you ate some bad tacos and can't stop shitting.

Is the assumption that you can't drive without joining the Union?

Federal law does not recognize the rights of independent contractors to form unions.

Federal law would need to be changed.

If a bunch of Uber drivers call themselves a "union" and tell Uber that they will stop being Uber drivers unless Uber increases fares, is Uber going to change anything? Presumably Uber needs to keep fares at a level that is going to induce drivers to continue driving for them, unions or no unions.

Drivers could boycott, but there's certainly plenty of people willing to undercut them (if only a former taxi driver). The quality, and ubiquitness, of Uber might suffer though.

A more interesting scenario is that Uber has competitors (e.g.: Lyft). They're playing catch-up. It could be a very interesting development if Lyft recognized their drivers as employees, and getting them to shift over.

The only snag I can find in this scenario is if they consider drivers as employers, are they now subject to livery rules and have to have a medallion? I assume that varies by locale. And, to extend the snag, if they are employees but DON'T need to get medallions, that doesn't seem fair to current taxi employees who do have those requirements.

And just to stretch it out more slightly with another question - let's take NYC (the only place I have a rough idea of how this works) - medallions are too expensive for individual drivers, so I believe taxi companies take them out, equip cars, and bring in drivers. Are THOSE drivers considered employees, or are they 1099's (Independent Contractors)? I do know they need a livery (taxi driver) license individually, but I don't know what that costs. I'd like to think it wasn't a prohibitive amount.

as in, when you literally wave your arm on the street and make eye contact with the driver. When taxis are called by phone (as in livery companies) or by an app (like Uber) no medallion is needed.

Now I know that, at least in my state, and I think the next one down, limousine drivers (which I assume is the closest parallel, situation-wise) have specific livery plates. Do you know what the distinction/rules is with them? Is getting a livery plate just a tax thing, or does it confer other powers?

That the courts should have any say in the free association of workers is fundamentally wrong.

-- Mal

First heard about this when Uber's CEO was interviewed on Colbert's TV show: seems their ultimate plan involves "self-drivers": http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/may/22/uber-self-driving-car-pittsburgh and http://time.com/132124/uber-self-driving-cars/

Self driving is good, but it's still better not being in the city (highway-restricted). This is the ultimate game-changer, but the timeline is far enough out that the other situations still need to be resolved.