• 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

UBER TO GIVE A RAISE TO CALIFORNIA DRIVERS

Null

Well-Known Member
Whatever they do, I don't want to be an employee. I want to be that independent contractor for tax reasons.

They can even lower the rates to keep me driving LOL.
No, the math doesn't work out to favor IC over employee. Employers are required to reimburse employees for all costs suffered in the course of employment. This means EVERY expense must be reimbursed. The best part about this is reimbursement is not taxable, even if it's beyond the actual expense. So, if they reimbursed .56/mi (IRS rate) you get to pocket the net difference without tax basis. So, this factor is strongly in favor over employment over tax benefits.

On top of that you'd have workers comp, benefits, etc. However, they could also implement a wage ceiling. Though, with the transition to flat surge they basically already have.

Basically, the mileage deduction isn't worth lack of employment status. A .56/mi deduction has actual cash value of about .11/mi (20% estimated tax rate). However, a .56/mi untaxed reimbursement is worth an actual cash value of .56 - [Actual variable operating cost].

Obviously you'd need to examine this in the totality, but mileage rate STRONGLY favors employment.
 

Transportador

Well-Known Member
No, what I need is the ability to do this as a side gig. I'm not calculating like it's a full time job. I want to lose money on paper. I need to be paid on a 1099. What I save in taxes is what I "earn". I don't need benefits, got that with my full time real job already. Hell, I drive Uber on my paid days off. You guys don't get it.

Also, if they made you employees, guess what? How many employers can you have at the same time now? You won't be able to work for both Uber and Lyft, plus do Amazon and Postmates. Do you think Uber will let you drive on Lyft and vice versa? You don't think as an employer that they won't limit your pay? You will be limited to make freaking peanuts. People have no clue!

If we were made into employees, U/L will lose 3/4 of the drivers. The rest of you full timer will be just like the taxi drivers before. Are you ready for that? Have you ever watched the show Taxis on TV. You will be a miserable lot. God help you.

Wanting U/L drivers to be treated as employees is like wanting real estate agents to be turned into employees. Forget about high commissions. Go sell that $3 Million dollar house, I'll pay you $15 an hour to do it. Oh and here, drive the beat up smelly Prius company car to show houses. WTF.
 
Last edited:

Karen carpenter

Active Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #9
If the companies had paid a bit more attention to the drivers' welfare then we would not be having this conversation. Instead of using some of the windfall the companies gain by operating in a legal gray area (not having the meet the standards of cab companies) to benefit drivers, they have scraped all the gains for themselves. At the end of the day predatory behavior leads to regulation. I am concerned about the long-term viability of driver pay and proifitability. So far neither looks promising.
 

Transportador

Well-Known Member
I completely agree that they have been ripping us drivers off. They should fix the pay for sure. But drivers have been suing U and L to be made into employees with benefits. That to me is the wrong path! And they started suing years ago when the pay rate and surge and bonus were way bigger than today!

Like all good things in this world, the greedy bastards and the vulture lawyers will screw it all up for everybody.
 

Null

Well-Known Member
I completely agree that they have been ripping us drivers off. They should fix the pay for sure. But drivers have been suing U and L to be made into employees with benefits. That to me is the wrong path! And they started suing years ago when the pay rate and surge and bonus were way bigger than today!

Like all good things in this world, the greedy bastards and the vulture lawyers will screw it all up for everybody.
Probably, but as long as I get my cut of Uber's carcass I don't care. They went out of their way to burn the good will candle at both ends for me.
 

Null

Well-Known Member
No, what I need is the ability to do this as a side gig. I'm not calculating like it's a full time job. I want to lose money on paper. I need to be paid on a 1099. What I save in taxes is what I "earn". I don't need benefits, got that with my full time real job already. Hell, I drive Uber on my paid days off. You guys don't get it.

Also, if they made you employees, guess what? How many employers can you have at the same time now? You won't be able to work for both Uber and Lyft, plus do Amazon and Postmates. Do you think Uber will let you drive on Lyft and vice versa? You don't think as an employer that they won't limit your pay? You will be limited to make freaking peanuts. People have no clue!

If we were made into employees, U/L will lose 3/4 of the drivers. The rest of you full timer will be just like the taxi drivers before. Are you ready for that? Have you ever watched the show Taxis on TV. You will be a miserable lot. God help you.

Wanting U/L drivers to be treated as employees is like wanting real estate agents to be turned into employees. Forget about high commissions. Go sell that $3 Million dollar house, I'll pay you $15 an hour to do it. Oh and here, drive the beat up smelly Prius company car to show houses. WTF.
Ever met a bartender? Quite a few of them work for several bars of different ownership. Working for a competitor in the same space isn't always inherently problematic. I'm in IT, I've had IT side work while working for an employer. They also knew and it wasn't considered a conflict of interest.

There'd be no real financial interest for U/L to fire people for working for both. U/L want drivers to drive passengers, limiting the pool of available workers doesn't serve their interests.

Primarily I'd be interested in reclassifcation for retroactive purposes. That is to say, have U/L backpay us for everything we should have received as employees since we started driving as a lump sum. I'm less interested in employment as a long term going forward plan since they'll be able to change the dynamic.

There's nothing about employment that would preclude TNC from being a part time, or on-demand kind of work. There are numerous employees out there that work when they want to.

Real estate and TNC aren't remotely comparable for a litany of reasons.
 

grayrider

Member
They couldn't pay me enough to be an employee......just think, having to except EVERY request, no matter the rating, having set hours (part time of cource, to avoid having to provide benifits) and all for minimum wage.
Thanks but no thanks.
 

Paul Vincent

Well-Known Member
As I read it Ubers proposal would be at least minimum wage(after expenses) from the time you accept the ride untill the time you drop off the passenger. Finally get paid for those long pickups? That is part of their proposal to keep us independent contractors.
 

Transportador

Well-Known Member
I'm good with anything they propose to keep us as contractors.

The route to make us employees is a huge trouble for many drivers as well as will destroy Uber/Lyft/Amazon Flex,Roadie,Postmate etc. Just dealing with benefits such as insurance, sick pay for the huge numbers of employees, most don't know how many hours and when per week they work is a freaking nightmare and huge overhead. I don't want the gig economy destroyed.
 

Null

Well-Known Member
I'm good with anything they propose to keep us as contractors.

The route to make us employees is a huge trouble for many drivers as well as will destroy Uber/Lyft/Amazon Flex,Roadie,Postmate etc. Just dealing with benefits such as insurance, sick pay for the huge numbers of employees, most don't know how many hours and when per week they work is a freaking nightmare and huge overhead. I don't want the gig economy destroyed.
The gig economy largely operates unlawfully.

Regardless of how you think things ought to be, the current legal environment doesn't allow for U/L to operate as it does with "contractors." U/L know this, this is why every IC related case has been settled and not decided. This is why they're trying so hard to get an exception to the proposed law.

U/L both essentially admitted as much in their SEC filings prior to going public.

I'm the ultimate libertarian, so I think people should be free to form whatever contracts they like, free from government intervention. However, that doesn't give me free reign to simply ignore laws I find disadvantageous or superfluous. There are consequences when you're caught.

U/L have both operated since inception under the premise of asking forgiveness not permission.

If you want to remain a contractor, go for it. Advocate for changes to the legal paradigm. However, don't let Uber and Lyft off the hook retroactively.

Besides, think of it this way. When has anything U/L wanted ever been good for drivers? The only policy they've advocated for that was mutually beneficial was the single business permit issue.

Just about every other example is U/L shafting drivers and pax.
 

Transportador

Well-Known Member
The gig economy largely operates unlawfully.

Regardless of how you think things ought to be, the current legal environment doesn't allow for U/L to operate as it does with "contractors." U/L know this, this is why every IC related case has been settled and not decided. This is why they're trying so hard to get an exception to the proposed law.

U/L both essentially admitted as much in their SEC filings prior to going public.

I'm the ultimate libertarian, so I think people should be free to form whatever contracts they like, free from government intervention. However, that doesn't give me free reign to simply ignore laws I find disadvantageous or superfluous. There are consequences when you're caught.

U/L have both operated since inception under the premise of asking forgiveness not permission.

If you want to remain a contractor, go for it. Advocate for changes to the legal paradigm. However, don't let Uber and Lyft off the hook retroactively.

Besides, think of it this way. When has anything U/L wanted ever been good for drivers? The only policy they've advocated for that was mutually beneficial was the single business permit issue.

Just about every other example is U/L shafting drivers and pax.
I hear you. What you say about U/L is absolutely true. I like operating in the grey, benefiting from reduction in income tax due to the write offs. I like shafting the IRS as much as I can since I'm in the upper middle class earnings. I'm tired of paying a lot in taxes to cover for the poor people. I'm neither a republican nor a democrat. I'm in my own party "The royally shafted". As long as I have an opportunity to earn extra money on top of my salary, while being able to deduct mileage, phone, car loan interests I'm good. And of course it is paramount that the side gig does not interfere with my main job in any way. Flying below the radar in the grey is where I want to be.

I don't give a crap about U/L having to operate legally. I don't count on labor laws in the US to be as good as those in Germany for example. The US is completely in favor of free enterprise capitalism. It is the single only developed country in the world with zero mandatory vacation days for any worker. Even if U/L operated according to laws, what good is that?

I drive Uber/Lyft/Amazon Flex as a business person. The rest of you want to drive as if you are an employee of a defunct taxi industry.

This debate has been going on forever since U/L started. On one side are the full time drivers (or those who think that way). On the other side are the part time drivers who have good or even great full time job. Maybe there should be two separate categories of drivers: "Uber employee drivers". and "Uber driver contractors" with different pay structures. The contractors are free to roam, while the employees have to adhere to schedules, uniforms, income reporting with tax withholding to the IRS. The contractors can write off all kind of craps, the employees can NOT.

Amazon uses both employees and contractor drivers to make deliveries.

So that begs this questions:

Why don't U/L drivers who want to be treated as employees just go to work at McDonalds or Walmart? They are way better "employers" than U/L would ever ever be.
 

William Fenton

Well-Known Member
We all knew the structure when we started driving so we can't complain about the work conditions. What U/L have done that we need legal protection from is lowering the rates we get. Dropping the per milage rates is not fair to us. We have no recourse when they change the rates, stop bonus programs and drop surges.
I don't want to be an employee but I don't want to be at the mercy of the company shareholders.
 
Top