California ruling on ride share

[TSwizzle]

California courts are determined to drive more people into poverty. Following a court ruling that Uber and Lyft treat ride share drivers as employees, Uber mulls over shutting their operation down in CA;

Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle on Wednesday on MSNBC. “If the court doesn’t reconsider, then in California, it’s hard to believe we’ll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly,” Khosrowshahi said. Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.

NBCl

On the one hand, I will be ok with Uber/Lyft stopping operations as there should be fewer cars on the road but it does take away opportunities for the casual worker who wants to make a few extra bucks on the weekends etc.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

California courts are determined to drive more people into poverty.

Yes, the problem in California is that if they don't allow a company to treat the people that generate their revenue as not employees, then a company like Uber won't be able to make money (never have, never been close) because they'd have to actually provide a benefit for generating "revenue" like money. Uber and Lyft are attempting to abuse the system, so that they don't have to pay into the same systems most other corporations need to, like unemployment, health care, etc... And even when doing that, they couldn't make money.

On the one hand, I will be ok with Uber/Lyft stopping operations as there should be fewer cars on the road but it does take away opportunities for the casual worker who wants to make a few extra bucks on the weekends etc.

Yes, because America is winning because the Average Joe needs to be a taxi cab on the weekend, using their own vehicle!, for more money to make ends meet.

 

[TSwizzle]

Yes, the problem in California is that if they don't allow a company to treat the people that generate their revenue as not employees, then a company like Uber won't be able to make money (never have, never been close) because they'd have to actually provide a benefit for generating "revenue" like money. Uber and Lyft are attempting to abuse the system, so that they don't have to pay into the same systems most other corporations need to, like unemployment, health care, etc... And even when doing that, they couldn't make money.

It depends on how you look at it and I look at it as Uber/Lyft are not employers of drivers. They are a technology service company. I don't care for these companies either but they are not in the transportation business.

Yes, because America is winning because the Average Joe needs to be a taxi cab on the weekend, using their own vehicle!, for more money to make ends meet.

Uber/Lyft is not set up to provide full time employment for anyone. It's a useful avenue to get some extra cash for students etc that want to save money for a vacation or whatever. That some people try to make a living out of it is pretty stupid in itself because you can't really, I don't think.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yes, the problem in California is that if they don't allow a company to treat the people that generate their revenue as not employees, then a company like Uber won't be able to make money (never have, never been close) because they'd have to actually provide a benefit for generating "revenue" like money. Uber and Lyft are attempting to abuse the system, so that they don't have to pay into the same systems most other corporations need to, like unemployment, health care, etc... And even when doing that, they couldn't make money.

It depends on how you look at it and I look at it as Uber/Lyft are not employers of drivers. They are a technology service company. I don't care for these companies either but they are not in the transportation business.

Actually they are. They just provide almost no services in it. It is a remarkable gig.

- Provide drivers, but barely reimbursement them
- Have the drivers provide their own vehicles

All Uber does is provide the front-end, but takes over 50%. What is left is about $11.50 an hour, includes everything (wear on car, gasoline, maintenance, labor) in what they get from Uber. Heck! I get roughly $35 an hour alone to drive in expense money for using my car!

And then of that $11.50 we need to account for gas which is probably $3 to $4 and then complete FICA take, as Uber provides nothing.

So, in the end, you are making, literally "a few extra bucks" an hour.

That is a great gig and what is wrong with America, because we allow this shit.

Uber provides only the front end for the transaction yet takes over half the money raised from the fare.

Yes, because America is winning because the Average Joe needs to be a taxi cab on the weekend, using their own vehicle!, for more money to make ends meet.

Uber/Lyft is not set up to provide full time employment for anyone. It's a useful avenue to get some extra cash for students etc that want to save money for a vacation or whatever. That some people try to make a living out of it is pretty stupid in itself because you can't really, I don't think.

And indeed, Uber/Lyft have managed to create a third class of employee. And if that type of system is to exist, the Government needs to figure out how to regulate it, because right now the system is set up as "indentured servitude".

At the very least, Uber/Lyft owe half the FICA payment and their take should be based on a reduced percentage of the fare which has already taken into account gas/wear and tear/etc..., among other things. That'll likely make Uber/Lyft not profitable... but when taking in the fact that they have never made a profit, one shouldn't be surprised.

 

[TSwizzle]

Actually they are. They just provide almost no services in it. It is a remarkable gig. {snip the bleeding obvious}

No argument from me that the drivers don't get a good deal but that's the way this thing works.

And indeed, Uber/Lyft have managed to create a third class of employee.

Not really, Uber drivers are not employees, they are just people with cars willing to make a few bucks by ferrying people across town a few times a day. If people are trying to make a living out of it, they are being silly.

And if that type of system is to exist, the Government needs to figure out how to regulate it, because right now the system is set up as "indentured servitude".

Strangely, drivers readily agree to it, there are plenty drivers that are ok with the arrangement. The people that don't like it are the ones that think it's a full time job.

At the very least, Uber/Lyft owe half the FICA payment and their take should be based on a reduced percentage of the fare which has already taken into account gas/wear and tear/etc..., among other things. That'll likely make Uber/Lyft not profitable... but when taking in the fact that they have never made a profit, one shouldn't be surprised.

Perhaps regulation should be on what cut of the fare Uber can take. But in any event, I don't think Uber will ever be profitable until they get driver-less cars which will open up a whole other can of worms.

 

[ZiprHead]

How Much Do Uber And Lyft Drivers Make

 

[Trausti]

The tyranny of the do-gooders.

 

[Politesse]

California courts are determined to drive more people into poverty. Following a court ruling that Uber and Lyft treat ride share drivers as employees, Uber mulls over shutting their operation down in CA;

Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle on Wednesday on MSNBC. “If the court doesn’t reconsider, then in California, it’s hard to believe we’ll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly,” Khosrowshahi said. Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.

NBCl

On the one hand, I will be ok with Uber/Lyft stopping operations as there should be fewer cars on the road but it does take away opportunities for the casual worker who wants to make a few extra bucks on the weekends etc.

Uber tries to cheat to get rich. California says no. Uber threatens to nuke their own operation as revenge, rather than just obey the law.

Therefore California bad?

I think not. Uber bad. Uber very bad.

 

[TSwizzle]

Uber tries to cheat to get rich.

I'm not seeing where Uber are cheating. Nor am I seeing how they are getting rich considering they don't make a profit and probably won't for quite a while, if ever.

California says no. Uber threatens to nuke their own operation as revenge, rather than just obey the law.

Therefore California bad?

I think CA is going about it the wrong way. There are plenty people who like and rely on this type of work who will no longer be able to bring in extra cash. As far as nuke-ing their operation in revenge ? I don't think it's out of revenge, it's an economic reality that Uber will likely not be able to function when the prices go up.

I think not. Uber bad. Uber very bad.

Well, I don't disagree there.

 

[Politesse]

Nor am I seeing how they are getting rich considering they don't make a profit and probably won't for quite a while, if ever.

I said trying. Or do you imagine they are some sort of charity?

And by the contrivance of pretending their employees are not employees, they are trying to avoid both taxation and benefits. This isn't new, American businesses and industries have been playing variations on this theme for centuries. What, these workers over there? No, no, those aren't "employees", they're indentured servants/slaves/apprentices/in a prison work exchange/unpaid interns/student workers/independent contractors, etc. It's the same skeevy game every time, it usually ends the same way eventually, and no, it doesn't usually result in profitability. But that won't stop people from inventing new schemes to get rich the easy way on into the decades to come. Part of the role of a government is to police economic systems and ferret out such abuses when they occur.

 

[Elixir]

The tyranny of the do-gooders.

I know, right? And while us entrepreneurs have to suffer, it gets more and more difficult to find do-gooders to mow our lawns.

 

[ZiprHead]

I'm not seeing where Uber are cheating. Nor am I seeing how they are getting rich considering they don't make a profit and probably won't for quite a while, if ever.



I think CA is going about it the wrong way. There are plenty people who like and rely on this type of work who will no longer be able to bring in extra cash. As far as nuke-ing their operation in revenge ? I don't think it's out of revenge, it's an economic reality that Uber will likely not be able to function when the prices go up.

I think not. Uber bad. Uber very bad.

Well, I don't disagree there.

Could this be a big reason Uber doesn't make a profit?

Uber co-founder buys record-breaking LA mansion for $72.5m as drivers fight for wages

 

[TSwizzle]

Could this be a big reason Uber doesn't make a profit?

Uber co-founder buys record-breaking LA mansion for $72.5m as drivers fight for wages

View attachment 28922

I don’t think so. The house in the picture was Aaron Spelling’s house. I pass it most days. Just around the corner from the Playboy mansion.

 

[Bronzeage]

I've got a deal for you. I want to borrow your car, but I need you to drive it for me. I'll give you the address where to pick up someone and take them where they want to go. I'll chip in for gas, but I decide how much.

It seems like a good deal for you, if you don't think about it too much. I'm losing my ass on this, but I can't figure out why.

The laws of economics are like the law of gravity. You can keep something in the air for a while, but eventually it's going to hit the ground. An Uber driver makes a capital investment in the Uber corporation, which is the economic value of their car. This value decreases with use, but the return to the driver is always less. What we have here is an elaborate sort of stock fraud.

If ride sharing were a viable business model, Uber could buy a fleet of cars and hire an army of drivers. The same goes for Domino's Pizza deliveries.

 

[TV and credit cards]

It’s only when they start running into repair bills in the thousands of dollars will they realize their error. By now it’s too late. The one thing they need to gain and maintain employment is reliable transportation. Now that transportation is not so reliable. It’s been beat up and worn out by bad roads and stop and go traffic. All this and perhaps still a couple years left on the loan.
This is nothing more than people being taken advantage of. Uber is operating a business model with no concern for its workers. It is the worst abuses of capitalism. It deserves to fail.
But fear not. People will still need to get from point A to point B. Something will fill the void. Hopefully something by someone where their moral code does not take a backseat to money. There will be jobs. And the people they did cheer.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I've got a deal for you. I want to borrow your car, but I need you to drive it for me. I'll give you the address where to pick up someone and take them where they want to go. I'll chip in for gas, but I decide how much.

It seems like a good deal for you, if you don't think about it too much. I'm losing my ass on this, but I can't figure out why.

The laws of economics are like the law of gravity. You can keep something in the air for a while, but eventually it's going to hit the ground. An Uber driver makes a capital investment in the Uber corporation, which is the economic value of their car. This value decreases with use, but the return to the driver is always less. What we have here is an elaborate sort of stock fraud.

If ride sharing were a viable business model, Uber could buy a fleet of cars and hire an army of drivers. The same goes for Domino's Pizza deliveries.

It's fine. As long as people are desperate enough to make money, it is totally legit. It is amazing what can be justified by some people. Also why that low minimum wage helps propel scams like this.

 

[SimpleDon]

California courts are determined to drive more people into poverty. Following a court ruling that Uber and Lyft treat ride share drivers as employees, Uber mulls over shutting their operation down in CA;

Uber would likely shut down temporarily for several months if a court does not overturn a recent ruling requiring it to classify its drivers as full-time employees, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said in an interview with Stephanie Ruhle on Wednesday on MSNBC. “If the court doesn’t reconsider, then in California, it’s hard to believe we’ll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly,” Khosrowshahi said. Uber and rival Lyft both have about a week left to appeal a preliminary injunction granted by a California judge on Monday that will prohibit the companies from continuing to classify their drivers as independent workers. Following the order will require Uber and Lyft to provide benefits and unemployment insurance for workers.

NBCl

On the one hand, I will be ok with Uber/Lyft stopping operations as there should be fewer cars on the road but it does take away opportunities for the casual worker who wants to make a few extra bucks on the weekends etc.

The laws on the books about contractors and especially individual contract workers seem to be more about evading the responsibilities that we place on employers than they are about protecting workers. A good example of this is the massive loophole that allows employers to legally employ illegal immigrants, by classifying them as contract workers.

 

[TSwizzle]

The laws on the books about contractors and especially individual contract workers seem to be more about evading the responsibilities that we place on employers than they are about protecting workers.

The problem for California and Uber (and Lyft etc) is defining whether Uber are employers of the drivers or not. I can see where Uber are coming from, they are not really a transportation company. Uber is a technology company that provides a platform for "ride sharing". They are being forced to hire thousands of drivers that they don't want and don't actually have jobs for. There is no living to made being a driver for Uber so they will likely shut down operations in California. Uber is a sham but it does provide some additional income for those who want to earn a bit of extra cash now and again.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The laws on the books about contractors and especially individual contract workers seem to be more about evading the responsibilities that we place on employers than they are about protecting workers.

The problem for California and Uber (and Lyft etc) is defining whether Uber are employers of the drivers or not.

I suppose we can call Uber the drivers' pimp.

I can see where Uber are coming from, they are not really a transportation company.

Yes, they are, they merely don't have cars. They pay other people poorly to use their own cars.

I get the Gig argument. And the Gig companies need to pay into the same system other companies do. Luckily our Government is saturated with Dinosaurs and ready manage this change.

 

[TSwizzle]

I suppose we can call Uber the drivers' pimp.

I can see where Uber are coming from, they are not really a transportation company.

Yes, they are, they merely don't have cars.

Well, without the cars, I think it's fair to say they aren't really a transportation company. Or an airline I suppose.

They pay other people poorly to use their own cars.

I agree and I don't understand why people think it's a job. It's not possible to make Uber give people jobs they don't have. They are more akin to Tinder, just hooking people up. Those that need a ride across town with those people that have a vehicle and are willing to do it for a fee.

I get the Gig argument. And the Gig companies need to pay into the same system other companies do.

I don't think that is applicable across the board. Particularly to the casual Uber driver.