Discussion in 'Advice' started by dryverjohn, Jan 4, 2019.
What if they Are only here for the tax deductions and star trek fans?
You under-estimate my ability to argue. But i am curious, who is violating the TOS, and how? I thought we were talking about this really bad idea of reporting drivers as intoxicated just to get them deactivated?
Lol, no. I was talking about the reporting fellow drivers that were picking up minors. The false reporting for being drunk, is complete BS. The reporting driver (and pax as well that make the false claims) need to be deactivated at the very least for doing that. Not sure where we crossed meanings, but if it was on me....I apologize.
All good. Uber on
“But something happened this week”.
I think it’s going on in allot of areas. Now seeing the same thing in Fort Worth. My guess in Fort Worth it is related to all of the Federal employees that are on furlough, but also the teachers who are driving until school restarts. There seems to be three times as many drivers now since mid December.
As far as reducing the number of drivers, all the ride share companies have to do is follow the Amazon Flex practice of soft blocking drivers. Amazon usually does not remove drivers outright, but stops giving drivers anything more than occasional work after the driver has been driving for over a year for them. I know it doesn’t make sense, but that’s what Big A does. I don’t think the RS companies want to get rid of drivers.
Legit way to accomplish this would be to have local legislators set limitations on Uber for each class of service in areas.
They do that in NYC.....ask a NY cabbie if that is working. Uber and Lyft NEED to hire people to police their own drivers. Call them Driver Team Leads or whatever. Give them the “God” version of the app, and let them drive around and assure drivers are in compliance. When found not to be, immediately deactivate them, and then let corporate follow up if need be. Naturally, this will never happen, as Uber and Lyft know that drivers break the rules, some all day. This benefits them as it increases income, while they sit fully protected by saying the driver is in violation of the TOS....so don’t blame us, blame the driver. You can be 100% assured when one of these idiots picks up a child with no seat, or a 15yo HS kid, and then gets in a wreck......you will not be covered by ANYTHING, not insurance, not legal representation....nothing. Uber/Lyft will 100% hang you out to dry....and rightfully so. If you can’t afford tires, or brakes for your vehicle....you’re really going to have an issue with a $350/hr (minimum) Attorney after you killed someone.
So you're saying that...
You have NEVER had...
An Uber ride along...???
If you’re asking me, no. Never. Nor would I.
You won't know until they exit the car...
And even then it's not for sure...
Cause they ride incognito...8>)
Yea...I use to drink too. It’s cool.
To get get my fellow drivers off the road I would use a valve stem core tool. Doesn't damage the car but it's tires can't hold air until the driver can get a new valve core.
Uber/Lyft make it against TOS (Lyft says at least one rider must be 18 or over, Uber is more strict, saying the 18 or older ACCOUNT HOLDER be taking the ride with the minor), not because of the usual auto insurance issues, but OTHER liability issues...
Transporting a minor across state lines.
Transporting a minor to meet up with the 55-year-old they met on the internet and think is 17.
Transporting a minor that is running away from home.
Transporting a minor who is making a drug run.
U/L make it against policy so that all of the responsibility stays firmly in the hands of the adult account holder (Uber more efficiently than Lyft). If the driver adheres to the policy, s/he is safe, as well.
If s/he doesn't, then Uber is covered, and it's up to the driver, should something go sideways, to put out the money for the good defense attorney, and pay off any judgement against him/her.
Almost any time a ride is given to a minor, it will be fine. Nothing is going to happen. But if it doooooooes.... it's your butt swingin' in the wind. You have absolutely no safety net (unless you're driving Black and carrying your own full commercial policy, not just rideshare endorsement).
It's all good til it ain't.
Use road spikes across common rideshare areas.
I don't know if it's come to Miami, but in many markets, including here is DC, uber and lyft's new pay cut punishes drivers who drive smarter.
I am not about to wage a ware against U/L or their lawyers.
What do you think would happen if CNBC or 60 minutes scrolled a headline that Uber/Lyft is skirting the law with ambiguous language in the name of profits? If collectively, drivers let passenger know and somehow the press finds out, what is the potential for an IPO stock adjustment. I would like to see Uber and Lyft fail, that is not going to happen. What if their partners, the ones that didn't get a Christmas bonus or stock options, were to let it be known that they are exploiting underage passengers? Fire me, deactivate me, whistle blower protection would probably still extend to an IC. Don't know on that one, but don't really care. This is about getting back at the companies that pays you less and less every year. Simultaneously raising their fares and keeping a larger %. All of this equally applies to Lyft, they are just small potatoes in comparison to Uber. They just copy what they do anyway.
Back to the original question........
If U/L REALLY wanted to "thin the herd", the answers are easy.
Not a damn thing.......why?.......because rideshare companies are looked at by the general public as hiring a bunch of foreigners who can't read or write employed because they have no skills except being able to drive, sometimes illegally. Come on John you are smarter then that, do you HONESTLY think the public cares about anything BAD U/L may do? All the general public does is laugh at the NEGATIVE or INSULTING press both U/L and their drivers get.
You are spot on. The key is to pressure the State to go after them. Here in NJ, I assure you the AG wasn’t aware of many of the shady practices that they engage in. The ONLY way they change anything, is when a judge compels them too. That’s why drivers are deactivated instantly when accused of substance abuse, or service animal issues. These were all parts of different lawsuits that the companies lost, and as a way to mitigate the fines, they then had to submit “correction action plans” to the State.
If your complaint is legit, and you bring it to the Attorney General of your State....I assure you they’ll look at it, as those fines go right to the State’s coffers.
They’re not looked at that way. That’s EXACTLY what they do. Big difference between reality and perception. In this instance, they are one in the same.
Tell them that they need the $1000 Uber deductible on hand as well as the $2500 Lyft detuctible on hand as well. If you don’t have $3500 saved up then they shouldn’t be driving.
This is just hypothetical forum talk. Nothing is going to happen. But, imagine if we could somehow affect their IPO offering. That more than anything in the world would get them to take notice. How do we do it? I don't know, but I think the minor issue is a good starting point for some national bad press. Send that and $1M, to Pelosi and she might even talk about it for 4 seconds.
Separate names with a comma.