NYC passes minimum pay wage for Uber and Lyft drivers

[TwoFiddyMile]

Ugh. You guys are hopeless. The article states that state regulators are working with Uber to assess rates that are in line with a $17.22 wage.

It could be done several ways but it looks like the method of choice is more likely to be some form of fare normalization or price fixing.

We'll see what happens but I'm highly reluctant to speculate or trust a bunch of Uber drivers who have shown a profound inability to do maths

Or some of us have been running cab companies for decades.
I had a limo interview last year. They W2 so are obligated to pay minimum wage if the tips don't reach minimum.
There are many systems within IC driving.
NYC has passed legislation which states a full time TNC driver must make $17.22 after expenses. The onus is now on Uber/Lyft to pay them at least this amount, and 1099K them for it.

Stop assuming everyone here is beneath your level of achievement.

 

[Rick N.]

As I said in another thread, New York City Uber drivers are now employs. Uber is required to pay them $17.22 per hour, therefore a driver will be expected to take every single ping.
Expect massive deactivation.

That just did what they have been doing in other states, lowering distance rates while increasing time rates, TLC sold us out

 

[Jay Dean]

Uber pool will be victorious due to new rates and each pax will have a 50lb service dog to fit in a Ford Focus lol

 

[Rushmanyyz]

Or some of us have been running cab companies for decades.
I had a limo interview last year. They W2 so are obligated to pay minimum wage if the tips don't reach minimum.
There are many systems within IC driving.
NYC has passed legislation which states a full time TNC driver must make $17.22 after expenses. The onus is now on Uber/Lyft to pay them at least this amount, and 1099K them for it.

Stop assuming everyone here is beneath your level of achievement.

There's a bunch of ways they can do this. I specifically chose not to speculate because I'm aware of other potential schemes that they could use, even though we aren't even given a hint (beyond the price restructuring that I already brought up).

Gig apps, like Uber, won't work under an hourly scheme. They could work on a commission basis but I actually don't think that's necessary. Uber's been running some interesting quest models and I think that some of them could well work to get the numbers where they need to be. You still might need a price rise in some market and there really needs to be a limit on the number of drivers they can hire but it's still doable.

The rideshare market, like all industries, needs regulation. Once you get something sensible there, it'll morph into whatever it needs to to survive.

In reality, I don't care one bit. It's just a pondering, for me. Seems you take it pretty personally though. Hope it meets your expectations, even though, you know, you think your years of running taxi companies gives you insight into how global markets work. Funny that.

 

[TwoFiddyMile]

There's a bunch of ways they can do this. I specifically chose not to speculate because I'm aware of other potential schemes that they could use, even though we aren't even given a hint (beyond the price restructuring that I already brought up).

Gig apps, like Uber, won't work under an hourly scheme. They could work on a commission basis but I actually don't think that's necessary. Uber's been running some interesting quest models and I think that some of them could well work to get the numbers where they need to be. You still might need a price rise in some market and there really needs to be a limit on the number of drivers they can hire but it's still doable.

The rideshare market, like all industries, needs regulation. Once you get something sensible there, it'll morph into whatever it needs to to survive.

In reality, I don't care one bit. It's just a pondering, for me. Seems you take it pretty personally though. Hope it meets your expectations, even though, you know, you think your years of running taxi companies gives you insight into how global markets work. Funny that.

no I don't have full insight on a global market. I will say however that my cab and livery companies ran at a profit. None of the TNC companies do.

 

[Another Uber Driver]

Uber replied to the New York TLC action with a pack of lies, a bucket of dupe and a load of spin.

"Uber supports efforts to ensure that....drivers in New York City....are able to make a living wage...."-LIE. If Uber truly supported that, the pay cuts, be they blatant or veiled never would have happened.

"...higher than necessary fare increases..."-Spin. It costs money to deliver a service. In the capitalist system under which this country operates, that cost is paid by the consumer. In addition, the consumer must pay an amount sufficient to allow the provider to turn a reasonable profit. Until UberX appeared, taxi driving was a middle class occupation. Uber has sought to reduce it to a poverty level occupation. Keep in mind that an UberX driver ain't nothin' but no unlicenced, illegal, under-insured, under-informed, ill-equipped, cut rate, discount tack-see driver". There is a reason why cab rates are what they are. It has little, if anything, to do with Big Taxi, which, in this market at least, does not apply. The rates are what they are because it costs money to equip keep up a vehicle, pay for licences, pay for supplies and turn a decent profit.

Consider this: I have rubber floors and vinyl covered seats in my taxi. This makes it easier to keep it clean: vacuum after dogs and people who sneak eat in the car; spray and wipe after people who sneak eat in the car, wipe up after people who track mud in the car; clean up after a ralpher. It costs money to have these things put into your car. Cab rates are sufficient to pay for this. TNC rates, AIN'T, which is why my TNC car is not so equipped.

"....missing an opportunity to...reduce congestion in Manhattan's central business district..."-DUPE. There have been studies that have proved that the proliferation of the TNCs has contributed to increased congestion. When the D.C. City Council imposed that new tax on the TNCs, Evans cited the increased congestion. There is at least one California study that asserts the same. My experience dictates increased congestion. This is one reason, out of a few, why New York capped the taxicabs in the 1930s.

"The TLC rules do not take into account incentives or bonuses......"-Spin. I will trade bonuses and incentives for reliable revenue streams. In addition, Uber Taxi was offering incentives and bonuses to cab drivers before the launch of UberX. Uber has no problem paying bonuses and incentives at any level. Finally, these bonuses and incentives on the X level amount to subsidising contractors. That is a textbook illustration of unfair competition.

"In addition, the rules miss an opportunity to.... deal with congestion"-It was DUPE when Uber asserted this the first time, why is it suddenly NOT dupe? Uber wants congestion alleviated? Good: it, VIA and Lyft can shut down to-morrow and not be replaced.

Finally, Uber wants to hold "bases" accountable for "keeping cars full with paying passengers".-Spin and DUPE combined. They want to hold the cab bases responsible for the cab drivers not hauling the customers that the TNCs took from them, due to the TNCs' being permitted to compete unfairly. This will allow them to drive the cab bases out of business and eliminate the competition: DUPE. Uber tries to spin it by asserting that it will reduce congestion, something for which it offers no proof.

Spin, DUPE and LIES: this is just what we have come to expect from Uber.

 

[Disgusted Driver]

I think this is going to be very interesting to see how they implement and how drivers attempt to game the system.

I would think that the following things will have to change:

1. Acceptance rate: They will have to set a high acceptance rate otherwise drivers will log on and not accept any calls.
2. They will have to limit when you can log in to avoid overcapacity. Otherwise all drivers will log in at slow times to get most money for least work.
3. Would they need to limit hours online to 40 to avoid paying overtime?
4. They will need to start looking out for abuses like waiting forever for pax to come instead of noshowing after 5 and not ending trip immediately upon arrival
5. Need to consider drivers hiding, i.e. trying to find a dead zone

I'm sure there will be other issues and tweaking that needs to be done. I'll be curious to see how it works and hope for the best for our brothers and sisters in NYC.

 

[vtcomics]

Or some of us have been running cab companies for decades.
I had a limo interview last year. They W2 so are obligated to pay minimum wage if the tips don't reach minimum.
There are many systems within IC driving.
NYC has passed legislation which states a full time TNC driver must make $17.22 after expenses. The onus is now on Uber/Lyft to pay them at least this amount, and 1099K them for it.

Stop assuming everyone here is beneath your level of achievement.

LMFAO!

 

[KevinH]

The increase in pay seems to be just a bit short of a 50% increase based on estimated expenses. But the TLC estimates that the increase can be handled by a fare increase of between 3% & 5%! I can't figure how that will work.
Here is the article I read:
https://www.pymnts.com/news/ridesharing/2018/new-york-city-ride-hailing-minimum-wage/

 

[Disgusted Driver]

The increase in pay seems to be just a bit short of a 50% increase based on estimated expenses. But the TLC estimates that the increase can be handled by a fare increase of between 3% & 5%! I can't figure how that will work.
Here is the article I read:
https://www.pymnts.com/news/ridesharing/2018/new-york-city-ride-hailing-minimum-wage/

Well, they can stop lying for starters. From what I've read they don't give incentives for driving outside Manhattan. If it's busy and they start limiting the number of drivers at slow times, they will get better utilization rates, drivers might actually make more than the minimum and have fewer dead miles. Having an unlimited number of drivers was part of the problem.

If they allow surge to function properly, they wouldn't need incentives.

If they keep drivers busy with 2-3 trips per hour then there shouldn't be a need for a fare hike and guess what, instead of taking extra money from passengers as part of up front fees, they can go back to an honest game of 20-25% fee with balance to driver.

 

[Irishjohn831]

Uber insisted on putting a kabbillion drivers out on the street to fight for scraps because no matter what, they were paid their share.

Now you have way too much supply, tons of drivers under earning because of the high supply vs. demand.

Even pimps aren’t dumb enough to put more and more hoes out on the street so they earn more.

 

[vtcomics]

Even pimps aren’t dumb enough to put more and more hoes out on the street so they earn more.

ROFFLMFAO!

 

[Disgusted Driver]

Uber insisted on putting a kabbillion drivers out on the street to fight for scraps because no matter what, they were paid their share.

Now you have way too much supply, tons of drivers under earning because of the high supply vs. demand.

Even pimps aren’t dumb enough to put more and more hoes out on the street so they earn more.

But you are forgetting that more "workers" = higher number of tricks per "worker" or something like that.
Corollary to more drivers out there = less congestion on the roads.
Based on the immutable law of "lower fares = higher earnings".

 

[Karen Stein]

For all the evil things said about Uber - if you hate Uber, you'll really love it when the government steps in and "helps" out!

Really! How many times need we apply the government model to learn those good intentions pave a road to Hell? How many Venezuela's and Ethiopias need we destroy?

The very secret to the success of Uber, the very reason customers love us and hate taxis is the taxi/government model. "Serving the public good" is but cynical kant dispensed by self-appointed Caesars.

Free markets work every time they're tried.

The irony is that Uber would not be possible without the mileage deduction. "Subsidy" would be a better term. That's what makes our pay tax free.

$17 AFTER expenses? What expenses? Anyone care to lay out yesterday's balance sheet and explain exactly HOW they think income will be calculated?

Beware of unintended consequences. One such is sure to be a severe limiting of what cars are acceptable. As in: only 7-10 year old, low mileage, 35+ mpg cars need apply. Only female, non-smoking drivers 25-40 years old welcome. All in the name of lowering expenses (which will equal lower payouts for Uber).

Plus, look for the taxman to deny us treatment as "companies." We'll have to pay tax on EVERY dollar we're paid. That pay guarantee will easily become the most expensive gift ever.

Final result? The end of ride share. Exactly what the taxi folks want.

 

[BillC]

I think this is going to be very interesting to see how they implement and how drivers attempt to game the system.

I would think that the following things will have to change:

1. Acceptance rate: They will have to set a high acceptance rate otherwise drivers will log on and not accept any calls.
2. They will have to limit when you can log in to avoid overcapacity. Otherwise all drivers will log in at slow times to get most money for least work.
3. Would they need to limit hours online to 40 to avoid paying overtime?
4. They will need to start looking out for abuses like waiting forever for pax to come instead of noshowing after 5 and not ending trip immediately upon arrival
5. Need to consider drivers hiding, i.e. trying to find a dead zone

I'm sure there will be other issues and tweaking that needs to be done. I'll be curious to see how it works and hope for the best for our brothers and sisters in NYC.

1) Acceptance rate? This presumes employees will still be allowed to reject a ride for any reason. I fully expect Uber to remove the ability of employees to pick and choose rides. Can cabbies reject a ride?
2) As an employee, you'll be subject to set shift times like any other employee at any other company. You going online will be your timecard punch. If you're late or you log out before your shift ends? Expect an ass chewing from your manager/supervisor. Say good bye to working when you want, as little or as much as you want (up to 12 hours), and not having to ask for PTO if you can't or don't want to work.
3) I expect they'll limit everyone to 36 hours per week to get under Obamacare regs.
4) I wouldn't be surprised if they remove the driver's ability to cancel a trip as well. If the driver is making $17.22/hr no matter what? It doesn't affect him negatively if he has to sit and wait 10-15 minutes for the pax to show up. He's making money driving or sitting. If Uber implements a "cancel after X minutes for no-show" policy, I fully expect they'll implement it to protect them, not the driver. It may vary the no-show cancel time based on the fare of the trip. 3 mile trip? Cancel after 5 minutes. 30 mile trip with whatever surge may happen to be running at the time? More revenue for Uber, more leeway to the customer might be allowed.
5) If Uber removes the ability for a driver to reject a ride, this really wouldn't matter. If you have to take what Uber sends you, you would be stupid to leave the busy areas and get stuck driving 10-20 miles to pick up the pax you can no longer refuse.

If Uber implements employment instead of IC status nationwide, the day it hits Mpls is the last day I drive for them. Of course, you can bet SEIU is just licking their chops hoping they can convince the NYC TNC employees to unionize. Yet another thing that would instantly make me quit driving for them.

 

[Irishjohn831]

But you are forgetting that more "workers" = higher number of tricks per "worker" or something like that.
Corollary to more drivers out there = less congestion on the roads.
Based on the immutable law of "lower fares = higher earnings".

Sounds great until Uber’s last pay restructure was finally reported in the news as a way to screw drivers, and an an analysis on just how little drivers make before the restructure.

Now it’s ok, your not paying drivers enough.

Uber just kept increasing number of drivers on the street, even less money made as supply outweighs demand.

Now all those drivers they kept putting on the street should all get minimum wage, according to the tlc.

Had they capped drivers and maintained fair rates, they would have not made their greed so apparent and obvious.

Nothing better for a company looking to go public conducts business in a way that the schiestiest sweatshop runners would blush.

 

[UBERPROcolorado]

As I said in another thread, New York City Uber drivers are now employs. Uber is required to pay them $17.22 per hour, therefore a driver will be expected to take every single ping.
Expect massive deactivation.

The key is that the minimum hourly figure is AFTER expenses!!! Gas...etc!!!

So taking every trip given would be okay.

I cant wait to watch this spread across the nation. Uber will either die or follow the rules.

 

[Mista T]

For all the evil things said about Uber - if you hate Uber, you'll really love it when the government steps in and "helps" out!

Really! How many times need we apply the government model to learn those good intentions pave a road to Hell? How many Venezuela's and Ethiopias need we destroy?

The very secret to the success of Uber, the very reason customers love us and hate taxis is the taxi/government model. "Serving the public good" is but cynical kant dispensed by self-appointed Caesars.

Free markets work every time they're tried.

The irony is that Uber would not be possible without the mileage deduction. "Subsidy" would be a better term. That's what makes our pay tax free.

$17 AFTER expenses? What expenses? Anyone care to lay out yesterday's balance sheet and explain exactly HOW they think income will be calculated?

Beware of unintended consequences. One such is sure to be a severe limiting of what cars are acceptable. As in: only 7-10 year old, low mileage, 35+ mpg cars need apply. Only female, non-smoking drivers 25-40 years old welcome. All in the name of lowering expenses (which will equal lower payouts for Uber).

Plus, look for the taxman to deny us treatment as "companies." We'll have to pay tax on EVERY dollar we're paid. That pay guarantee will easily become the most expensive gift ever.

Final result? The end of ride share. Exactly what the taxi folks want.

I can't tell if you are an Uber employee pretending to be a driver, or if your rose colored glasses are so thick that you truly cannot see the rotten things that Uber does.

If you are a part timer and you don't really need the Uber income, I am happy for you.

Do you realize that there are about a MILLION people in the US alone that depend on Uber/Lyft for survival?

Could they get different jobs? Sure, but they wouldn't be much better. The better option is to fight for rights with the job they have.

Uber and Lyft are PREDATORY. History has proven that predatory companies and individuals will continue unless stopped by force.

Do you really think a lack of regulation is for the better?

Maybe you should go drive in Mumbai for a few weeks, I hear they are having a great time with Uber over there. Strikes, protests, occasional violence and marches... the goal? To force the government to intervene, since Uber and Ola have repeatedly broken promises and cut pay to drivers. Why don't you just go over there and tell those 60,000 drivers that they should give up the stupid idea of regulation and just go get another job if they don't like how things are...

 

[njn]

Where do they come up with this stuff?

"The average cost for a driver to license, register, and operate a 2017 Toyota Camry is at least $400 per week, adding up to over $20,000 per year."

http://www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/downloads/pdf/driver_income_rules_11_29_2018.pdf

 

[Pusher]

Uber insisted on putting a kabbillion drivers out on the street to fight for scraps because no matter what, they were paid their share.

Now you have way too much supply, tons of drivers under earning because of the high supply vs. demand.

Even pimps aren’t dumb enough to put more and more hoes out on the street so they earn more.

That last line should be the featured post of this thread

For all the evil things said about Uber - if you hate Uber, you'll really love it when the government steps in and "helps" out!

Really! How many times need we apply the government model to learn those good intentions pave a road to Hell? How many Venezuela's and Ethiopias need we destroy?

The very secret to the success of Uber, the very reason customers love us and hate taxis is the taxi/government model. "Serving the public good" is but cynical kant dispensed by self-appointed Caesars.

Free markets work every time they're tried.

The irony is that Uber would not be possible without the mileage deduction. "Subsidy" would be a better term. That's what makes our pay tax free.

$17 AFTER expenses? What expenses? Anyone care to lay out yesterday's balance sheet and explain exactly HOW they think income will be calculated?

Beware of unintended consequences. One such is sure to be a severe limiting of what cars are acceptable. As in: only 7-10 year old, low mileage, 35+ mpg cars need apply. Only female, non-smoking drivers 25-40 years old welcome. All in the name of lowering expenses (which will equal lower payouts for Uber).

Plus, look for the taxman to deny us treatment as "companies." We'll have to pay tax on EVERY dollar we're paid. That pay guarantee will easily become the most expensive gift ever.

Final result? The end of ride share. Exactly what the taxi folks want.

Karen have you ever heard of owner operators in the trucking industry? They are considered companies, and yes they have to pay taxes and yes they still get deductions and yes they are regulated...

Trying to compare regulations to the socialism disaster that took place in Venezuela is even a stretch for you.