Uber Is Locking Out NYC Drivers Mid-Shift To Lower Minimum Pay (yahoo.com) 131
An anonymous reader shares a report: Uber has begun locking New York City drivers out of its app during periods of low demand in an attempt to fight a minimum wage rule, and Lyft is threatening to do the same. As a result, some drivers say their wages have fallen by as much as 50%. At the heart of the move, say the two companies, is a six-year-old pay rule in New York that, among other things, requires firms like Uber and Lyft to pay drivers for the idle time they rack up between rides. The lockouts, which began last month, are aimed at limiting how much non-passenger time drivers are able to log and be paid for. Drivers, meanwhile, say they need to work longer hours to earn the same amount as before.
Ridesharing would be great, if... (Score:2)
...the software was open source and the drivers got ALL of the money
It sucks when it's a publicly traded company that needs to make a fat profit
Re: Ridesharing would be great, if... (Score:5, Insightful)
Who is stopping you from writing such marvelous software?
Re: Ridesharing would be great, if... (Score:4, Insightful)
Money.
Expects people to work for free, while also paying livable wage, while also supporting the small guy by taking opportunity away because they know better.
Filed under: "There ought to be a Law"
Also filed under: "Unintended consequences"
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, I certainly will be back to dowmod you for the troll you are, regardless of your whiny sig.
Re: Ridesharing would be great, if... (Score:5, Informative)
Who is stopping you from writing such marvelous software?
It already exists.
https://libretaxi.org/ [libretaxi.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I just read their page, and it goes *too* far.
If I'm gong to get in a stranger's car, I want that person *seriously* screened [insert your favorite serial killer hitchhiker joke here].
There *are* costs involved operations.
I've been toying with the idea of a driver co-op to replace these services, but I'm not going to fund it or volunteer, as I'd never want to be the driver!
Re: (Score:2)
Who is stopping you from writing such marvelous software?
Copyright, patent, and trademark law, and a million health & safety regulations that will block you while not effecting Uber/Lyft in the least
Re: (Score:3)
It wouldn't last a year. When something goes bad, whether that's a car accident, or an assault, there wouldn't be anyone to sue. With no one to be liable, or collect taxes from, governments would shut it down, and we'd go back to cabs and medallions.
Re: (Score:2)
Sue the driver - Uber already disclaim any liability for what thier drivers do
If you want an open source solution ... (Score:2)
Re:Ridesharing would be great, if the software was open source and the drivers got ALL of the money
If ride share drivers want an open source solution then the ride share drivers should build one themselves or pay software developers to create one. That's how open source works.
And no the drivers won't get all the money, they need to buy software maintenance too unless they are doing the development themselves.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:If you want an open source solution ... (Score:4)
Yes you could, you could pay a subscription fee to keep the service running, have your own eftpos machine, or insist on cash. Hire an accountant.
Sure all those things would be a someone else taking a proportion, but that's how it has always worked, no man is an island. There is however no need for someone to be taking a cut of every ride you make, or controlling when you are allowed to work. If you don't like paying the subscription for maintaining the app it could be distributed, run your own. That would also make a real contractor not just a contractor in name.
Re: (Score:2)
The entity being some mix of non profit co-op is likely the only way you'd see the entity being less greedy. I'm skeptical that Uber drivers could pull off creating such an entity.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, in suck an org you would think drivers would have some administrative control, so that operations keep their focus on serving drivers.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes you could, you could pay a subscription fee to keep the service running, have your own eftpos machine, or insist on cash. Hire an accountant.
So... a taxi then. Let's be honest, calling it "ride-sharing" was a con from the very start.
Re: (Score:3)
So... a taxi then. Let's be honest, calling it "ride-sharing" was a con from the very start.
Absolutely this. Has the need to pretend fallen away somehow? Do the people who make the rules no longer care that it would be breaking the law if it were a taxi service rather than just two buddies sharing a ride? I couldn't believe they could get away with it in the first place, even when the companies were at pains to point out the riding and sharing part of the ride share... and yet now it just seems like everyone has just accepted that Uber is a taxi company. IMHO Uber et al should have to abide by the rules that cities set up to manage taxis. And do it now. Don't wait until there are no "real" taxi companies left, as people will complain that enforcing the rules has left them with no way to get around. If Uber want to operate a taxi, they can buy a medallion. Go for it, you can even "transfer" it from driver to driver as they make a pick-up. But you'll have to pay your drivers a proper wage, give them paid holidays and all the other stuff that this disgusting "gig economy" takes away.
Re: (Score:2)
As a ride-share it was all fine and good -- if I am going downtown, take someone w/me. Win/win, less cars on the road etc. The point at which it allowed people to do multiple fares in a row (because really, few people are organically making trips into the city and back multiple times a day) that it became a 'job' instead of 'ride-share'.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think there is any "open source" solution to this issue.
The drivers organize and chip in for development and operations. They create some parent org, it can be a public benefits corp so that its main function is to serve drivers not make money. The source code is shared so drivers can fork it if a particular org that they had created is no longer serving them well and they need to create a new one.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think there is any "open source" solution to this issue.
The drivers organize and chip in for development and operations. They create some parent org, it can be a public benefits corp so that its main function is to serve drivers not make money. The source code is shared so drivers can fork it if a particular org that they had created is no longer serving them well and they need to create a new one.
Yeah, in an ideal world, it would be a not-for-profit LLC (pass-through) or similar. There's no particular market benefit from a company making a profit off of this sort of service, IMO.
open source taxi should follow the taxi laws at le (Score:3)
open source taxi should follow the taxi laws at least.
uber acts like an taxi but does not follow the laws covering taxis.
Re: (Score:3)
The app works amazingly, the drivers are there on time, and 99% of the time I find them to be quite friendly, clean and the cars are in good running condition both inside and out.
I've yet to have the same experience in a "real" taxi.
The price has been better for the customer too!
Re: (Score:3)
I don't use Uber, and I seldom use taxis, but the last few times I used a taxi, I had decent service. The times I'm thinking of were in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada and in Pensacola, FL. Taxis were on-time and clean, and the drivers were pleasant.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: open source taxi should follow the taxi laws a (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The price has been better for the customer too!
Sure, until there's no competition left or the shareholders decide it's time to claw back all the billions that have been lost so far keeping these "ride share" companies operating...
Re: (Score:2)
Is every driver going to have their own website or app? Are they going to pay someone to do that for them? How is this going to work for the consumer? Are they supposed to download and cycle through 100 different apps they've collected for all the independent drivers they've come across? Hmmm I guess it would make the most sense to centr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Ridesharing would be great, if... (Score:2)
Which would in turn be nice if big city pols weren't in with the taxi cartel, and would ban it anyway.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely all of this ^^^.
The gig economy is simply companies making money off the arbitration between what a job should pay and what the lowest price is that someone will work for . Sure, as consumers we can say this is a good thing, but from a societal point of view it's awful, taking advantage of poverty and putting money from the workers' pockets into the lord of the manor's again. It's like going back to the class system in operation 400 years ago. It's insidious and we need to find away to ween ours
Re: Ridesharing would be great, if... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
London had a problem with unlicensed taxis for years. Come out of a London club at whatever time in the morning and you'll get approached by unlicensed taxi drivers offering a lift. The problem being that the cars weren't insured, the drivers weren't checked for criminal records and so on... and a high number of rapes (and even a murder, I seem to remember) as well as injuries from uninsured crashes led to a very public campaign NOT to get into an unlicensed taxi.
And then they let Uber come in and do almost
Re: Ridesharing would be great, if... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Proof Uber is not a tech company (Score:5, Insightful)
Your solution has same vulnerability (Score:2)
A tech company would be able to predict their demand curves more than 5 minutes in advance and proffer schedules for acceptance by drivers.
The tech is designed to be self adjusting. That as demand decreases supply will decrease as drivers find rind sharing not worth it at the moment, too much competition.
You are merely offering a different self adjusting system that requires drivers to opt out of the pool. Your scheme is equally vulnerable to the gov't intervention going on here.
Retail Experience (Score:2)
I had a retail business.
If I tried to NOT pay my staff when we had no customers, I surely would have run into problems with the govt agency that governs such things.
That said, fuck Uber and Lyft drivers. If you want to drive a car and ferry passengers around, go work for a taxi company.
Re:Retail Experience (Score:5, Insightful)
Uber and Lyft have become taxi companies but without any of the regulations associated with them. They started out as "ride sharing" and morphed into an upscale jitney.
Re:Retail Experience (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Uber and Lyft have become taxi companies but without any of the regulations associated with them.
Oh no!
I was wondering why the world had ended, the hens had stopped laying, and so on.
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't you a member of the party of law and order?
Re: (Score:1)
Kind of my point.
They want the benefits of being taxi employees without working for an actual taxi company.
They were never ridesharing (Score:2)
Uber at the very Genesis of their company had a specialized computer program that detected when the police tried to shut down their illegal taxi service because it was always an illegal taxi service.
If it's one thing Americans will al
Re: (Score:3)
^^ This is worth keeping in mind. Uber and Lyft are bad actors when it comes to flaunting the law and doing everything they can to avoid regulatory requirements.
its not like any significant number of these drivers has a chauffeur license. They are also cheating. Further as a customer you and I are FULLY aware of this fact; so even if can't be in the strictest legal terms an accomplices or part of a conspiracy - ethically we know perfectly well we are contributing.
When comes to this entire 'ride-sharing, b
Re: (Score:2)
Ethically and legally are orthogonal concepts.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would I need a license to give someone a ride?
Are you accepting money for the ride?
Re:Retail Experience (Score:4, Interesting)
To give someone a ride? Of course not. To CHARGE someone for a ride, then yes. It is no different than not needing an inspection to cook dinner for your friends, but if you open a restaurant then yes, you need to be inspected.
Re: (Score:2)
I've taken plenty of Uber rides, and I couldn't give 2 shits whether the driver was licensed.
Re: (Score:2)
You might care if the car you're in gets into an accident, you need thousands of dollars of healthcare, and THEN you find out that the driver's insurance has been voided because 'reasons'.
Part of licensing is the attendant regulation, things like valid insurance.
Re: (Score:2)
"What States Do Not Require Vehicle Inspections? There are only 13 states that have no safety, emissions, or VIN inspections required by law. These states include Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Florida, Washington, and Wyoming."
https://goodcar.com/car-owners... [goodcar.com]
Next year, Texas will join the list.
Re: (Score:2)
"What States Do Not Require Vehicle Inspections? There are only 13 states that have no safety, emissions, or VIN inspections required by law. These states include Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Florida, Washington, and Wyoming."
https://goodcar.com/car-owners [goodcar.com]...
Next year, Texas will join the list.
I expect this trend will continue as there is no evidence of efficacy.
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao... [gao.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Because most likely you already do! Its going to be a state by state thing but I am pretty sure most states require you to have some sort of additional license or at least an endorsement to your basic license if you are transporting people as a business or as part of business. This NY we are talking about - without going to look its almost certainly the case.
Now many sates like my state, the law is pretty easy to comply with. You probably don't need a 'commercial license' unless you are transporting more t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I could ask what the point is of limiting the number of taxi medallions etc, when we know perfectly well that people want to automobile rides, and that they will get them. If anything it will mean more cars in town because people will bring their own and park it some place.
I don't have to agree with every law to think that they ought to be followed. We live in a democracy and a society right? What do think what does mean for that when anyone is free to say 'the rules don't make sense to me so f'em!"
I think
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you allow your employees to show up whenever the want and leave whenever they want and get paid regardless of if you knew there would be no work for them to do?
More likely you scheduled them and, if they didn't show up on time reliably or left (esp. without advance notice) in the middle of their assigned shift very often, you fired them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>If I tried to NOT pay my staff when we had no customers,
>I surely would have run into problems with the govt agency
>that governs such things.
I suspect that you also were able to schedule your employees for when you wanted them, rather than being obliged to pay them whenever and as long as they simply showed up . . .
Add a 4 hour minimum shift rule (Score:2)
This consequence in and of itself isn't all that bad, you really don't want a lot of people sitting around in their cars. It just has the unintended consequence of shifts being cut into confetti ... add minimum shift lengths.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You say that like it's a bad thing. If the only way to be profitable is to operate to the detriment of everyone else, then why should the rest of us allow it?
Re: (Score:3)
What you're proposing, driving them out of business, hurts both these drivers and their customers.
Re: (Score:2)
This is absurdly reductionist. You're essentially claiming that any time any two people agree to do something it's OK because they agreed to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you close down an employer with sub minimum wage employment, then the workers and employer will both immediately be worse off. That doesn't mean society should allow starvation wages.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is always the argument about the minimum wage. Turns out reality is different.
Also having people on starvation level wages driving on public roads i a really fucking terrible idea, because when people have a choice between eating and breaking all he safety related laws, they choose the former. So no, Uber can pay properly or fuck off.
Re: (Score:2)
It definitely can happen; here's the CBO [cbo.gov]:
Findings in the research literature about how changes in the federal minimum wage affect employment vary widely. Many studies have found such changes have little or no effect, but many others have found that increases in minimum wages lead to substantial reductions in employment.
Most [uber.com] Uber drivers do it as a 2nd job, in their spare time; that's nonsense about people driving all day while starving. The original article was actually about Uber preventing people from driving, not making them drive long hours. And have you heard of snacking?
Time for a second job ... (Score:3)
Uber has begun locking New York City drivers out of its app during periods of low demand in an attempt to fight a minimum wage rule, and Lyft is threatening to do the same.
Sounds like Uber drivers need to get a part-time job at Lyft and vice versa to work during their locked-out time ...
Re: (Score:2)
Uber has begun locking New York City drivers out of its app during periods of low demand in an attempt to fight a minimum wage rule, and Lyft is threatening to do the same.
Sounds like Uber drivers need to get a part-time job at Lyft and vice versa to work during their locked-out time ...
What percentage of drivers don't do this already?
I don't live anywhere near NYC, but every Uber car has a Lyft light as well, and vice versa.
what the airport queuing line? (Score:2)
Lot's of big airports make the taxis wait in an que. Now is uber trying to make that wait time be unpaid but drivers can't just take other rides while in the airport wait line right?
this is both right and wrong (Score:2)
Firstly, you should reduce labor expendatures during slow times in basically all businesses. This is standard and expected behavior so 'nothing wrong' with limiting the number of idle drivers at any given time.
Second, these are employees, it's time to get over this 'independant contractor' loophole or writing special rules to accomodate this loophole.
Crazy Idea (Score:2)
If only there was a reasonable established competitor that knew how to do business in the taking people places business. If only New York was a big enough market for such services. Man...if a guy could come up with that idea...
Hey ride share guys ... if it doesn't work ... you find another thing to do.
Re:Progressive policies hurt lower income people m (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. This shows that Uber and Lyft are the employers of these people, not a contracting company. They've now opened themselves up to another series of lawsuits.
This is no different than a store or restaurant sending people home when things are slow. They are dictating that person's schedule as the employer.
Drivers decide if they're available to drive (Score:4, Interesting)
This is no different than a store or restaurant sending people home when things are slow. They are dictating that person's schedule as the employer.
In the restaurant example, the employees showed up because they were scheduled to work, then sent home.
A more apt example to a babysitter (a contractor) showing up at your house in the middle of a school day expecting to be paid to babysit your kids. Drivers decide if they're available to drive; the ridesharing company decides if there is sufficient customer demand for the available drivers.
Re: (Score:2)
No it is more like you telling the baby sitter that you will be home at 10pm, forcing her to cancel another job that started at 8, then showing up at 8 and expecting to not have to pay until 10.
Really no analogy is good because this appears to be more closely related to weirdness in the way the "busy waiting" rate is computed by the city regulator. And because these two companies do nearly everything in bad faith, it is hard to figure out if there is something that needs to be adjusted or if they are just
Re: (Score:2)
It's like showing up to work at a restaurant when you aren't scheduled and you know you won't be needed so you can just go hang
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the whole point of Uber was that they specifically did NOT schedule you to work, you just logged in whenever. If they are going to engage in behavior like this, they need to set minimum work schedules. It would probably be quite complex, like running an actual business with a workforce instead of just being "an app". In other words, the end of Uber.
Honestly, though, this kind of thing sounds like every manager's dream come true. Imagine if your employer only paid you for the exact time you were "w
No I'm more apt example (Score:2)
Oh and if you find out that the babysitter is leaving the babysit other kids while your kids are occupied with the TV
Re: (Score:2)
Your example is flawed. It would be like if the babysitter is asked to cover an evening, but with a series of 10 minute unpaid gaps where the parents are between activities and able to look after their own kids. The babysitter can't use those 10 minutes to do anything productive themselves, as they need to be ready to take over again as soon as the parents move on to the next thing.
It's unreasonable and any decent employment law would recognize that.
Re: (Score:1)
The problem is BOTH THINGS asre true.
Uber and Lyft are the employers.
They're just employing a lot of economic illiterates, exacerbating things.
Re: (Score:2)
This is no different than a store or restaurant sending people home when things are slow. They are dictating that person's schedule as the employer.
It used to be commonplace all over the country to treat nurses and hospital ancillary staff this way. Maybe it still is. It doesn't affect doctors because they do independent billing as 1099s. But I remember when I was working as ancillary staff in a hospital it would be commonplace to have me scheduled for a shift at 0700. If I didn't come in, all hell would break loose and I'd be fired. But they routinely didn't bother to call me at 0500 to "cancel" my shift and I'd show up and they'd send me home without
Re: (Score:3)
This doesn't open them up to a lawsuit. New York made them an employer and as you put it "They are dictating that person's schedule as the employer."
Re: (Score:2)
Wasn't there a case of a restaurant not paying staff when there were no customers? Some fast food place IIRC.
I can't find the story now but I think they got into legal trouble over it.
Re: (Score:3)
The legislation was written in accordance with companies acting in good faith.
This means we have to pay people in accordance with the law?
*monocle falls out*
Re: (Score:3)
Isn't it weird how the biggest debts and deficits in both the US and Canada came about under Conservative/Republican administrations. Conservatives aren't just economically illiterate, they're proudly ignorant to boot.
Why are politicians not held accountable? (Score:2)
Why do voters keep voting for good intentions rather than performance? Throw out the politicians who can't fix things, who offer nothing more than symbolic displays of virtue.
Political careers need to be Darwinian in the sense of accomplishing positive tangible things.
Re: (Score:3)
Why are politicians not held accountable? You write legislation, it has horrendous side effects, ie its a failure, how are you not thrown out during the next election? Why do voters keep voting for good intentions rather than performance? Throw out the politicians who can't fix things, who offer nothing more than symbolic displays of virtue. Political careers need to be Darwinian in the sense of accomplishing positive tangible things.
Most voters have short-term memory; they tend to forget what happened 6 months or longer ago unless the incident is either: (a) quite tragic; or, (b) constantly trumpeted by lame-stream media outlets.
The pols capitalize on this short-term memory effect to focus their campaigns on the current "public pain points", make "feel good" promises, and get some legislation passed or project started that "looks good" but actually does little to nothing.
In other words, as a voter, if you don't pay close attention to w
Re: (Score:2)
Compared to traditional taxi companies... (Score:2)
Do traditional taxi drivers get paid when they don't have a fare?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Do traditional taxi drivers get paid when they don't have a fare?
Maybe.
If they are an employee then yes. They get an hourly wage whether they are driving a fare or not.
In high-demand places like NYC, it is common for the drivers to rent the car (and the corresponding taxi medallion) for an upfront fee. They get dispatch service as part of the rental, and rates are controlled by the NYC TLC (government regulation). They are otherwise independent. They can work or not -and they keep what they collect (minus taxes on reported fares -which is why many offer to run off-me
Re: (Score:2)
To justify not having to pay people. This would amount to what, 30 minutes of the the CEO's salary? How will these companies ever survive?
I despite Uber and a lot of their business practices, but the drivers know what they signed up for.
Uber has to compete for drivers with Lyft, traditional taxi companies, and things like delivery services. If they squeeze the drivers too hard the drivers will go elsewhere. But the minimum wage thing doesn't increase total compensation, it just means that some of it is payed out in minimum wage instead of other mechanisms. And more Uber's are idling on the road without any passengers to drive around.
There's p
Re: (Score:2)