Honestly, this is probably more important than NYC

Funkeetooown

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
If they classify us as employees, the model crumbles and everybody goes home.
I'd be out, that's for sure. Part of me feels a bit bad for Uber/Lyft, like the tiniest of violins playing the shortest note ever, because I don't think this was ever the intention. I'm not going to knock those of you that do this to keep the lights on, you have your reasons and I'm not judging anyone, but I don't think the intention was ever for rideshare to be the primary source of income for anyone. In many ways, much of this fuss isn't even U/L's fault, but another symptom of whatever name historians give to the current economic structure that's masquerading as capitalism.
 

Funkeetooown

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
All i know is .80 a mile and especially the per minute rate is not enough when all costs are on me.
The per minute rate is such an easy fix. It's 2018, up to the moment traffic data is abundant. Honestly, and I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion, without traffic, the base rates aren't terrible. I had a later in the evening pickup in Wicker Park on Monday night going out to Elmhurst. Straight down Ashland to 290 and out to a bunch of roads I've never heard of, got a pickup like two minutes after the drop off going back to the city. All in, for an hour and 20 minutes of my time, I made $50.48 in fares with a $5 tip from rider #1. Without the tip, that's $37.95/hr gross. I didn't have to hit the brakes save for red lights, stop signs and exits. Now, those same exact two trips at this very moment, according to live traffic data I sourced from the wise and powerful Google, would take closer to 2.5 hours. So, the same 49 miles. but at 2.5 hours only pays you $66.23 and because it took an additional hour and change, your gross hourly rate drops all the way down to $26.40. Uber knows this, Lyft knows this, but neither one wants to do anything for fear of losing market share.
 
Last edited:

LEAFdriver

Well-Known Member
Moderator
They can convert workers to employees and retain control over their work rules and their rates. Or they can contract with true independent contractors. The only thing they can’t do after Dynamex is have their cake and eat it too.”

How long have we been telling them this? :rolleyes:
 

Nu1

Well-Known Member
If they classify us as employees, the model crumbles and everybody goes home.
100% true. U/L need drivers but when you hire bad drivers then you get in trouble. When drivers can’t make 15$/h driving rideshare U/L should terminate them because if not they are going after you for low wages..... and then politicians jump in ( to gain political share) and then we are scrued.

Because of who?!?!

If uber would be smart now, they shoud focus on good drivers that would never want to be employee, who would easily make 25$/h or more.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SatMan

Well-Known Member
I'd be out, that's for sure. Part of me feels a bit bad for Uber/Lyft, like the tiniest of violins playing the shortest note ever, because I don't think this was ever the intention. I'm not going to knock those of you that do this to keep the lights on, you have your reasons and I'm not judging anyone, but I don't think the intention was ever for rideshare to be the primary source of income for anyone. In many ways, much of this fuss isn't even U/L's fault, but another symptom of whatever name historians give to the current economic structure that's masquerading as capitalism.
As long as uber is making money they don't care what the drivers do. If it is suppose to be a gig, then uber should limit either hours or number of trips take during the day/week/month. But we all know that won't happen.
 

UberBeemer

Well-Known Member
As long as uber is making money they don't care what the drivers do. If it is suppose to be a gig, then uber should limit either hours or number of trips take during the day/week/month. But we all know that won't happen.
Locally, we have a 10 hour limit per 24 hour period. Not sure what compliance rate might be though.
 

SatMan

Well-Known Member
Locally, we have a 10 hour limit per 24 hour period. Not sure what compliance rate might be though.
That is a Chicago requirement, not ubers.
Which is not unreasonable. If this is suppose to be a gig, not a full time Just Over Broke, what I mean by limit is 10 trips a day, or 5 hours a day. Whatever comes 1st. But like I said, that's not gonna happen!!!
 
Even working just a few hours a day, it still is work. Time limiting to ensure gigs just gets people into the situation where they have three jobs, none of which want to hire full time out of fear of paying for benefits. People can still end up cobbling together three gigs to be just over broke. Getting paid per hour enough to make an actual living is not too much to ask. The Dynamex case is a step in that direction.
 

Sam D

Well-Known Member
I'd be out, that's for sure. Part of me feels a bit bad for Uber/Lyft, like the tiniest of violins playing the shortest note ever, because I don't think this was ever the intention. I'm not going to knock those of you that do this to keep the lights on, you have your reasons and I'm not judging anyone, but I don't think the intention was ever for rideshare to be the primary source of income for anyone. In many ways, much of this fuss isn't even U/L's fault, but another symptom of whatever name historians give to the current economic structure that's masquerading as capitalism.

If I remember right uber was all about car pooling and making extra money on your way to work ... or a movie ... or whatever location during your travels and this was to cut down traffic and emissions ... and I saw ride shares lanes all fresh ... that’s what I remember the commercials and talk about ... set up car pools ... make extra money on your way to work ... the future ... cleaner environment

Was always like yeah ... I usually don’t feel like picking up my bar buddies on the way to work let alone strangers fast forward to today and ... look at me now lmao
 

Sam D

Well-Known Member
There is a classic video of a driver getting into an arguement with Travis. The driver was upset because originally Uber was strictly a black car service that competed with limo companies.

Ahhh right. I forgotten about that video.

Travis got his own personal driver after that day lolz
 

EddieG

Well-Known Member
Even working just a few hours a day, it still is work. Time limiting to ensure gigs just gets people into the situation where they have three jobs, none of which want to hire full time out of fear of paying for benefits. People can still end up cobbling together three gigs to be just over broke. Getting paid per hour enough to make an actual living is not too much to ask. The Dynamex case is a step in that direction.
So what is your per hour magic number to make an actual living? Why do you think you are so special that you should be paid above market rate for your skills? Do you pay more than the market rate for a gallon of gas or a gallon of milk? Do you shop around before you spend your dollars? Why should business owner be any different? Because they had the wherewithal to start a business, take a ton of risk, put some skin in the game and became successful while you sat on the sidelines and watched and now demand you get paid more than your worth because someone else has some cash you don't. Want to improve your income level? Improve your skillset or start a business of your own.
 
Top