• UberPeople.NET - Independent community of rideshare drivers. It's FREE to be a person and enjoy all the benefits of membership. JOIN US! CLICK HERE

An Uber driver files class action suit for skimming pay

BurgerTiime

Well-Known Member
It finally happened. A driver has steeped up and taken action for Uber's "Up front pricing" which skims off the top and does not add up.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/uber-driver-company-isnt-paying-the-full-80-of-a-fare-that-im-owed/

Uber driver: company isn’t paying the full 80% of a fare that I’m owed
Lawsuit: “drivers are paid less than they are contractually entitled to.”
by Cyrus Farivar - Feb 22, 2017 3:00am CST

An Uber driver in North Carolina has sued Uber in a proposed class-action lawsuit. He alleges that he and other drivers like him are consistently underpaid based on the company’s own formula.

Since nearly the beginning, Uber has paid its drivers 80 percent of a given fare. However, in the lawsuit, lawyers representing the driver, Martin Dulberg, claim that the company has now changed the way it calculates what that fare is. The result is that the company consistently pays between 70 and 80 percent—but not the full 80 percent—of what the fare should be.

In the new lawsuit, which was filed Tuesday in federal court in San Francisco, Dulberg's lawyers allege:

For example, on February 2, 2017, Plaintiff drove an UberX passenger from 3408 Cherry Lane in Raleigh, North Carolina, to 101 Macaw Street in Raleigh, North Carolina. The passenger was charged $15.38. This is the Fare. The Booking Fee in Raleigh at the time was $1.80. So Dulberg should have made 80% of ($15.38 - $1.80) = $10.86.

But Dulberg was paid $9.91 (80% of Uber’s backend calculation of $12.39). This is 95 cents less than Dulberg should have made under the Agreement (the difference is magnified on longer rides). Indeed, instead of receiving the promised 80% of the Fare, Dulberg received approximately 73%.

In recent years, the company has faced a slew of lawsuits from drivers and former drivers nationwide who say that they were not paid adequately and/or were not fully compensated as employees, rather than contractors.


Earlier this month, a federal judge in San Francisco approved a settlement between Uber and its customers to settle claims that the company was dishonest about how drivers would receive tips.

Paul Maslo, who oversees the Napoli Shkolink law firm's 10 Uber-related cases, including this one, Dulberg v. Uber, told Ars that the firm's previous nine cases have to do with alleged misclassification of drivers as independent contractors. He noted that this case is different.

"The crux of the complaint is that Uber breaches its agreement with drivers by not paying them the agreed-upon percentage of the fares they generate," he e-mailed. "Several of our clients recently brought this critical issue to our attention, and it’s important for us to ensure that Uber complies with its contractual obligations."

An Uber spokeswoman, Sophie Schmidt, told Ars by e-mail on Tuesday evening that, although the company did not have a comment on the lawsuit for now, "our team is reviewing the complaint. I can keep you posted if that changes."
 

TwoFiddyMile

Well-Known Member
The problem is, it's only class action by one driver.
He'll win. The court will grant him his $1238 in back pay. Uber will laugh it off and it will be swept under the rug.
If this lawyer had any ambition, he'd roll it into something big and create a real class action suit for hundreds of thousands of drivers and really put the screws to Uber.
SMH.
 

tohunt4me

Well-Known Member
It finally happened. A driver has steeped up and taken action for Uber's "Up front pricing" which skims off the top and does not add up.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/uber-driver-company-isnt-paying-the-full-80-of-a-fare-that-im-owed/

Uber driver: company isn’t paying the full 80% of a fare that I’m owed
Lawsuit: “drivers are paid less than they are contractually entitled to.”
by Cyrus Farivar - Feb 22, 2017 3:00am CST

An Uber driver in North Carolina has sued Uber in a proposed class-action lawsuit. He alleges that he and other drivers like him are consistently underpaid based on the company’s own formula.

Since nearly the beginning, Uber has paid its drivers 80 percent of a given fare. However, in the lawsuit, lawyers representing the driver, Martin Dulberg, claim that the company has now changed the way it calculates what that fare is. The result is that the company consistently pays between 70 and 80 percent—but not the full 80 percent—of what the fare should be.

In the new lawsuit, which was filed Tuesday in federal court in San Francisco, Dulberg's lawyers allege:

For example, on February 2, 2017, Plaintiff drove an UberX passenger from 3408 Cherry Lane in Raleigh, North Carolina, to 101 Macaw Street in Raleigh, North Carolina. The passenger was charged $15.38. This is the Fare. The Booking Fee in Raleigh at the time was $1.80. So Dulberg should have made 80% of ($15.38 - $1.80) = $10.86.

But Dulberg was paid $9.91 (80% of Uber’s backend calculation of $12.39). This is 95 cents less than Dulberg should have made under the Agreement (the difference is magnified on longer rides). Indeed, instead of receiving the promised 80% of the Fare, Dulberg received approximately 73%.

In recent years, the company has faced a slew of lawsuits from drivers and former drivers nationwide who say that they were not paid adequately and/or were not fully compensated as employees, rather than contractors.


Earlier this month, a federal judge in San Francisco approved a settlement between Uber and its customers to settle claims that the company was dishonest about how drivers would receive tips.

Paul Maslo, who oversees the Napoli Shkolink law firm's 10 Uber-related cases, including this one, Dulberg v. Uber, told Ars that the firm's previous nine cases have to do with alleged misclassification of drivers as independent contractors. He noted that this case is different.

"The crux of the complaint is that Uber breaches its agreement with drivers by not paying them the agreed-upon percentage of the fares they generate," he e-mailed. "Several of our clients recently brought this critical issue to our attention, and it’s important for us to ensure that Uber complies with its contractual obligations."

An Uber spokeswoman, Sophie Schmidt, told Ars by e-mail on Tuesday evening that, although the company did not have a comment on the lawsuit for now, "our team is reviewing the complaint. I can keep you posted if that changes."
The timeline between investors and learning new tricks is most interesting . . .
I'm just going to sit here and drink my tea. . . and Vodka . . .
 

Attachments

I_Like_Spam

Well-Known Member
If this lawyer had any ambition, he'd roll it into something big and create a real class action suit for hundreds of thousands of drivers and really put the screws to Uber.
SMH.
Its certainly true a class action measure could be very profitable for the lawyer, but I don't think it would put the screws to Uber at all.

A big settlement is made, where the partners get a few extra commissions rebated to them over the next 2 millennia, the total amount calculated into the billions but only a few thousand paid now- lawyers get huge fees, partners get little, Uber looks willing to make amends.
 

SEAL Team 5

Well-Known Member
The problem is, it's only class action by one driver.
He'll win. The court will grant him his $1238 in back pay. Uber will laugh it off and it will be swept under the rug.
If this lawyer had any ambition, he'd roll it into something big and create a real class action suit for hundreds of thousands of drivers and really put the screws to Uber.
SMH.
I thought that drivers are paid on a mile and minute basis. As long as the driver received the agreed upon rate at that time subtract Uber's fee is all he's entitled too. What Uber is paid by the customer should have no impact. Does the agreement between Uber and the driver say a specific distance/time rate or does it say the driver makes 80% of Uber's charge?
 

Mars Troll Number 4

Well-Known Member
I thought that drivers are paid on a mile and minute basis. As long as the driver received the agreed upon rate at that time subtract Uber's fee is all he's entitled too. What Uber is paid by the customer should have no impact. Does the agreement between Uber and the driver say a specific distance/time rate or does it say the driver makes 80% of Uber's charge?

Uber has advertised the HECK out of drivers making 75-80% of the fare over the years, and as of now this is a flat out lie.

The upfront pricing deal could force uber to give back a TON of what they collected since the upfront pricing was put into effect.
 

SEAL Team 5

Well-Known Member
Uber has advertised the HECK out of drivers making 75-80% of the fare over the years, and as of now this is a flat out lie.

The upfront pricing deal could force uber to give back a TON of what they collected since the upfront pricing was put into effect.
Don't really care what they advertise. Uber's advertising has been FOS ever since they started. Safest ride you'll ever have was the worst. It made them change the "Safe Ride Fee" to a "Booking Fee".
It will eventually come down to what is the agreement every time a driver turns on the app? I'm curious to know how many drivers have actually completely read and comprehend the agreement? My opinion is less then 1%. What happens to the upfront pricing when there is a change in destination or a 2 hour traffic delay?
 

Mars Troll Number 4

Well-Known Member
What happens to the upfront pricing when there is a change in destination or a 2 hour traffic delay?
Taximeters came into existence for this very reason. Because you can't always put an upfront price on anything.

I have been able to protest a price on an upfront taxi fare with a billion $ insurance company and get my rate quadrupled.. why... because there was a bad accident on the route and a 3 mile 10 minute ride turned into a 3 mile 40 minute ride.

If i didn't have the meter how would i have calculated the cost of getting stuck on a highway for 30 minutes trying to get past a wreck.

It's just not viable to always use flat rates.
 

ginseng41

Well-Known Member
My passengers and I frequently laugh about them. They tell us to drive the wrong way down one way streets, go through buildings, roads that have been shut down for years and there are roads that exist that uber GPS doesn't have. One is even a highway exit so they want us to go to the next one and then drive back
 

Jinxstone

Well-Known Member
I thought that drivers are paid on a mile and minute basis. As long as the driver received the agreed upon rate at that time subtract Uber's fee is all he's entitled too. What Uber is paid by the customer should have no impact. Does the agreement between Uber and the driver say a specific distance/time rate or does it say the driver makes 80% of Uber's charge?
That is a valid argument and probably similar to what Uber will make in court. However, when Uber enters markets they dodge many local laws and regulations by claiming to be a technology company rather than a transportation company. If they are now taking part of the fare that argument could fall apart for them and make Uber subject to transportation regulations just like taxis. Attacking Uber from that angle might have some success as they would have more to lose if their regulatory holiday ends. It could make them change their policy and offer drivers some compensation.
 

Jermin8r89

Well-Known Member
I wana take my lawyer and go on a crusade against the elites. No more carbon tax, no more uber cheating on us,no more self driveing job killers. For them to kill our jobs i want what ever elites have as they say itll be for "the better". I want my OLYMPIC SIZED POOL! I wont beable to do that on welfare
 

run26912

Well-Known Member
That is a valid argument and probably similar to what Uber will make in court. However, when Uber enters markets they dodge many local laws and regulations by claiming to be a technology company rather than a transportation company. If they are now taking part of the fare that argument could fall apart for them and make Uber subject to transportation regulations just like taxis. Attacking Uber from that angle might have some success as they would have more to lose if their regulatory holiday ends. It could make them change their policy and offer drivers some compensation.
Bingo! You nailed it. Uber claims to be a technology company that simply provides an APP that matches drivers and riders, not a transportation company. Yet, they are the ones that CONTROL the pricing, not the drivers. They are the ones that decide when and how much SURGE to apply. They are completely in CONTROL of the transactions.

However, when tax season comes, UBER passes all the revenues THEY COLLECTED on BEHALF of the DRIVER as GROSS RECEIPTS on the Individual driver's 1099, with suggested deductions including their commissions and fees. The upfront pricing screws the drivers during TAX season because its the DRIVER that is responsible for the accounting of ALL REVENUES that Uber received on their behalf, however, this is no CLARITY on the breakdown of that revenue on a per transaction basis... NONE. Unless the driver CONTACTS the passenger to find out how much they actually paid versus what Uber FALSELY CLAIMS is the "fare". <--- This part is where driver's are left vulnerable if ever audited, because they can't VERIFY the exact total fares nor the ITEMIZATION of the FARES. Worst case, Uber may even stick the driver with the tax liability for the leftover change that they steal from the upfront pricing since it is in excess of the 20-25% commissions they are entitled to.

Bottom line, UBER misleads the regulators by claiming they are a technology, not transportation, company. UBER misleads the IRS, Drivers and Riders acting like a PASS-THRU company, when they are NOT transparent at all. If a Driver is going to be RESPONSIBLE for ALL REVENUES they generate (AS PER 1099), then they have the RIGHT and NEED TO KNOW what the passengers ACTUALLY PAID for their RIDE. UBER WILL NOT SHARE THAT INFORMATION. THAT IS ILLEGAL.

BONG!!!!
 

ginseng41

Well-Known Member
Bingo! You nailed it. Uber claims to be a technology company that simply provides an APP that matches drivers and riders, not a transportation company. Yet, they are the ones that CONTROL the pricing, not the drivers. They are the ones that decide when and how much SURGE to apply. They are completely in CONTROL of the transactions.

However, when tax season comes, UBER passes all the revenues THEY COLLECTED on BEHALF of the DRIVER as GROSS RECEIPTS on the Individual driver's 1099, with suggested deductions including their commissions and fees. The upfront pricing screws the drivers during TAX season because its the DRIVER that is responsible for the accounting of ALL REVENUES that Uber received on their behalf, however, this is no CLARITY on the breakdown of that revenue on a per transaction basis... NONE. Unless the driver CONTACTS the passenger to find out how much they actually paid versus what Uber FALSELY CLAIMS is the "fare". <--- This part is where driver's are left vulnerable if ever audited, because they can't VERIFY the exact total fares nor the ITEMIZATION of the FARES. Worst case, Uber may even stick the driver with the tax liability for the leftover change that they steal from the upfront pricing since it is in excess of the 20-25% commissions they are entitled to.

Bottom line, UBER misleads the regulators by claiming they are a technology, not transportation, company. UBER misleads the IRS, Drivers and Riders acting like a PASS-THRU company, when they are NOT transparent at all. If a Driver is going to be RESPONSIBLE for ALL REVENUES they generate (AS PER 1099), then they have the RIGHT and NEED TO KNOW what the passengers ACTUALLY PAID for their RIDE. UBER WILL NOT SHARE THAT INFORMATION. THAT IS ILLEGAL.

BONG!!!!
This is what I'm worried about. The taxes
 
Top