? Bill to Force Uber & Lyft to Pay 75% of the Fare ?

If this gets passed in Connecticut do you think they will roll it out Nationwide?


  • Total voters
    110

nouberipo

Well-Known Member
Really trying to stay out of this futile discussion. But just imagine if the government regulates uber and enforces any limits as to what it can charge or pay.
Then where will it stop.
Should Apple be forced to a limit price of its products. How about GM, or McDonalds, or Chanel.
The problem with Uber's business model progressively decreasing driver rates is not to be decided by the government. The problem is not Uber. The problem is that drivers take it.
Look, many times I post comments criticizing Uber. But I have never proposed any government intervention.
As much as I disagree with Uber's model, I resent any calls for government setting limits.
you obviously aren't aware of how taxis are regulated in terms of how much they can charge.....Apple doesn't pay their employees under minimum wage and ask their to use their own resources in the process, GM doesn't pay their employees under federal minimum wage and ask theme to use their own resources in the process, McDonalds doesn't pay their employees under minimum wage and ask them to use their own resources in the process, and Chanel doesn't pay their employees under minimum gage and ask them to use their own resources in the process. In fact, most of the companies you mention offer benefits including healthcare.

Employees of Apple, GM, McDonalds, Chanel dont' have to pay employee AND employer taxes.

So yes, Uber and Lyft have unethically managed to create third-world conditions in the first world. I have lived in the third world and the first world and one of the keys is the economic disparity between the top and bottom. Recent data indicates that the United States is number one in terms of economic inequality thus the road to third world stature is being paved and I see companies such as Uber and Lyft at the forefront of creating this new race to the bottom. Without regulation we will become a banana republic.
 

No Prisoners

Well-Known Member
While the government may not be able to regulate uber's model for how it compensates independent contractors, states can file cases against uber for violating anti price gouging rules. In discovery and subpoenas of current and previous tech employees it will be evident that Uber uses algorithm to artificially increase rates to passengers. Utility companies cannot arbitrarily increase rates based on analyzed data of consumers that determine how and when to increase rates. Example, diabetic has a meal or a woman goes into labor, or a person exercising.
Uber uses data such as battery capacity, time and location, type of neighborhood, income capacity, habits.
Surging prices to riders while only paying drivers a fraction demonstrates that surge is not necessary to increase drivers in a specific area. Uber now surges riders without a hint on drivers app about surges.
There are ways to take on uber without a long struggle with lobbied politicians.
Drivers can expose uber by distribution through social media of screen prints of trip statements, exchange information with passengers, demand transparency.
One rule that should be enforced is to make uber and lyft disclose detailed ride receipts to passengers. Including time, miles, driver pay and company share of fares.
This will cause an uproar among riders and consequently make uber's model to implode.
 

Stevie The magic Unicorn

Well-Known Member
I see this law passing.

Orlando for instance has a law (city ordinance but close enough) limiting taxi rental cost. IE the maximum a cab company can charge its drivers to rent a taxi.

(One company out of 4 or 5 total charges the limit on less than half its cabs, everyone else gets charged less)

I rent a “dispatch/streethail only” car that is $50 less than the daily maximum.

The max only gets charged to airport cars (at the most in demand time) to incentivize the cars that don’t have airport stickers.


If Orlando can pass that (with quite honestly no public support or even knowledge or what’s going on) whomever can pass a law setting driver pay at 75% or the Uber/lyft fare all the time.

Frankly... asking for what Uber/lyft used to advertise way back when shouldn’t be too much to ask for. The politicians might just vote for it not knowing that Uber takes more than 25% currently. (Yes I do beleive politicians are that stupid)

The harder Uber fights it the more everyone is going to see Uber for what they are.
 

SurgeMasterMN

Well-Known Member
I see this law passing.

Orlando for instance has a law (city ordinance but close enough) limiting taxi rental cost. IE the maximum a cab company can charge its drivers to rent a taxi.

(One company out of 4 or 5 total charges the limit on less than half its cabs, everyone else gets charged less)

I rent a “dispatch/streethail only” car that is $50 less than the daily maximum.

The max only gets charged to airport cars (at the most in demand time) to incentivize the cars that don’t have airport stickers.


If Orlando can pass that (with quite honestly no public support or even knowledge or what’s going on) whomever can pass a law setting driver pay at 75% or the Uber/lyft fare all the time.

Frankly... asking for what Uber/lyft used to advertise way back when shouldn’t be too much to ask for. The politicians might just vote for it not knowing that Uber takes more than 25% currently. (Yes I do beleive politicians are that stupid)

The harder Uber fights it the more everyone is going to see Uber for what they are.
Truth
 

dryverjohn

Well-Known Member
It’s not really any different than laws regulating what % lawyers can take as a fee in civil lawsuits. Abuses were taking place and government stepped in to regulate it.
43% to the lawyer, not really sure how much that protected the client in a multi million dollar personal injury lawsuit.
 

comitatus1

Active Member
I always vote for freedom.
Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.

Freedom of drivers to refuse to drive if the pay is not enough.
Freedom of drivers to drive if the pay is enough.

Freedom.

I don't want the government telling me what I have to pay my employees, what the passengers have to pay for a ride, what the drivers can receive for pay.

Freedom. Freedom. Freedom.
It's not easy being an adult, it comes with responsibilities.
But the rewards are so great that it's worth it.
You are completely ignorant of history. And stupid.

I bet you don't believe in the Bill of Rights either.

Dumbass.

Chris
 

Sly

Well-Known Member
I always vote for freedom.
Freedom of Uber to charge pax's what the market bears.
Freedom of Uber to pay drivers what the market bears.

Freedom of drivers to refuse to drive if the pay is not enough.
Freedom of drivers to drive if the pay is enough.

Freedom.

I don't want the government telling me what I have to pay my employees, what the passengers have to pay for a ride, what the drivers can receive for pay.

Freedom. Freedom. Freedom.
It's not easy being an adult, it comes with responsibilities.
But the rewards are so great that it's worth it.
Fine why hasn't someone created a business model where they charge admin fees to administrate a network and allow it's members to keep the bulk of the proceeds? Both Uber and Lyft would go broke.
 

Cynergie

Well-Known Member
Understood ?

Maybe instead of a bill someone can organize a Drivers Club to negotiate pay. Anyone else with ideas cause Uber and Lyft will keep bending us over till we tap out then the industry is left with poor quality drivers and service.

I am a free market capitalist as well but u as a driver have to agree where they started their rate take several years ago and where they are now is ridiculous. I would never argue for my own rate cut so I do not understand your logic other than standing firm on a political point. Hey I voted Trump also and will vote for him again but we need more of the take as drivers.
  • The Rideshare sector was conceived as a gig economy.
  • A gig economy is one that provides TEMPORARY employment positions and creates fluid work contracts for short-term engagements
  • Rideshare drivers are consequently classified as gig economy workers. By default of this
  • Rideshare was NEVER intended to evolve into the full time profession rideshare workers have made it to be. It was designed to be a supplemental PART TIME -- not primary-- source of income. Which means
  • Rideshare drivers are INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS. They are NOT traditional Uber/Lyft employees, do not have payroll taxes deducted, and so do not receive a traditional W-2 from LyfUber. Consequently,
  • As independent contractors, rideshare drivers are NOT covered under most federal employment statutes. So the concept of any protection from federal employment statues DO NOT APPLY. By default of this labor status, any independent contractor labor organization aka driver clubs and/or unionization gets even more complicated and challenging to implement. So expect passage of said bill to follow suit.
  • Rideshare contract terms are written by LyfUber legal department. For the benefit of LyfUber/all LyfUber employees and mutally exclusive to rideshare contractors. And so are designed to favor LyfUber where potential employment/labor disputes like the discussions in this thread are concerned.
  • Rideshare drivers are 100% disposable labor resources (as LyfUber deactivations prove) and are in process of being phased out with IT via driverless vehicle technology. Once this IT becomes a viable market product, the human element of the rideshare phenomenon will be obsoleted.
Passing that bill is going to take some serious $$$ in lobbying on part of rideshare drivers as a collective organization. Who, by default of their PT, minimum wage work status, are likely going to be collectively broke on a national basis. So best start a collection fund to save up ASAP. But know that LyfUber also possesses similar lobbying resources. And that for ever $1 said rideshare driver fund collects towards lobbying said bill, LyfUber is likely matching funding with $1000......

If 1,000 rideshare drivers nationwide were to donate exactly $1 to such a pro driver lobby fund, LyfUber would be donating $1 Million lobbying Congress to protect their corporate labor interests (particularly their IPO which their bloated rideshare driver labor force continues to harm) at the national level. So best of luck on lobbying that bill at the state level. Assuming it can find the desk of the least corrupt state politician who possess a moral conscience that is.....

ps: Know that you have the right as a rideshare driver to punish LyfUber where it hurts the most i.e their free independent contractor labor pool. By permanently and proactively removing said free labor pool. Opting to walk away from said gig economy and obtaining traditional/self employment in another labor sector.
Post automatically merged:

Sir I beg to differ. Someone posted this here. Uber took more than 75%.
And the reason for that is because they CAN.

And will continue doing so in the future because they CAN.

Because rideshare drivers are not traditional LyfUber employees. So LyfUber CAN.

Rideshare drivers are temporary gig economy workers.

Repeat: as a rideshare driver, you provide a cheap, unskilled, and disposable labor source for LyfUber. The simple fact they can deactivate drivers at whim -- with zero penalty from any industry/government overight/regulation -- is 100% proof of this.

* Striking will not rectify the fact you're a cheap, unskilled and highly disposable source of labor.
* Organizing into formal labor associations/unions will not rectify the fact you're a cheap, unskilled and highly disposable source of labor.
* Lobbying politicians/Congress at the state/national level will not rectify the fact you're a cheap, unskilled and highly disposable source of labor.


An inconvenient reality which apparently still continues to elude many LyfUber drivers who actually believe they're being exploited by the system.
 
Last edited:
Top