4 ms·

Uber is revoking CA drivers ability to set prices and preview destinations

22 points by donsupreme 6y ago

seibelj 6y ago
Uber drivers have access to a car, have a driver’s license and are presumably citizens, pass a background check, and maintain a high enough rating to continue to drive, so their social skills can’t be terrible. The minimum wage in SF is 15.50 and in LA is 15. My question is, if Uber is such a terrible exploitive company to work for, why do they have a critical mass of drivers? They could also drive for restaurants. I was a Dominos delivery driver in a past life and made kind of incredible money for the job (tips). My logical mind tells me that drivers continue to work for Uber because it is more profitable than alternatives, despite what the endless barrage of negative press drills out.
- CHY872 6y ago
  Because someone convinced them to lease or buy on finance a brand new Prius and they need to make payments? That’s where I suspect the exploitation comes in - not the actual Uber usage, but the financial decisions required to get started (eg drive late model car). Vs other apps, they’re all the same give or take a few months.
  - perryizgr8 6y ago
    Can't they just sell the car? It will be a bit if a loss but certainly better than ongoing loss and suffering?
  - okareaman 6y ago
    Not many new drivers have new cars. I don't know how many of them are leasing cars. I've never heard any complaints on any driver groups about being forced to drive to pay off the car.
  - 908B64B197 6y ago
    The thing is, there's Kelley's Blue Book. A driver can know any day how much his car is worth and figure out the net profits from selling it and not Ubering anymore. There's a paternalistic view of drivers (often non-white and immigrants) as too stupid to know their costs. But really most drivers wouldn't drive if they didn't earn money.
- okareaman 6y ago
  Most of the other jobs require the driver to get out of the car, which can be a pain if parking is limited and you have to walk into a building a find where to pickup. Staying in the driver's seat is preferable to me.
- lacker 6y ago
  Uber is also good if you have a 25 hour a week job which pays better than Uber but you need to get some extra money and those 25 hours come at unpredictable times
okareaman 6y ago
I drove for Lyft and Uber before the pandemic as a retirement job and had lots of fun. I quit during the pandemic and since I've been vaccinated I've been taking Lyft and Uber. It's no longer fun. Masks inhibit conversation. Drivers don't talk anymore and neither do I. Lyft and Uber are just taxi companies at this point. I'm not surprised Uber took away the ability to see destination before accepting rides. Lyft never offered it. Drivers are going to do what they can to maximize earnings, which doesn't always serve the customer. At least they didn't have to become employees and be told when and where to drive. If Lyft and Uber continue to be short drivers they'll have to figure out some other way to incentivizes drivers without affecting customer service.
tschwimmer 6y ago
Perhaps I hold an unpopular or uncharitable opinion but I'm in favor of this. I recently had a horrendous experience with Uber when returning to SFO. Usually a ride from the airport to my home is in the neighborhood of $40. I requested a ride at that estimated price. After a minute or two of waiting, I was presented with a modal that said a driver was willing to take me home for $80. I rejected it, figuring that it was a probably a fluke or an outlier. However, the moment I dismissed the prompt the app flashed another one with a similar offer. I ended up having to constantly dismiss those prompts for over 30 minutes in order to eventually get a ride. In addition to being a miserable user experience, it seems like setting prices allows drivers the option to discriminate as to where they want to take rides, bringing us back to the level of service of taxis where it was common for drivers to refuse rides based on destination. I'm sympathetic to the situation that drivers are in. It's an extremely difficult and often unrewarding job. But the way driver price setting has been implemented so far feels like a big step backwards, at least in terms of rider experience.
- gamblor956 6y ago
  I've never been refused by a taxi at the airport. Generally, in CA, a taxi that refuses to drive a passenger from the airport is violating the terms of their airport medallion/license and will be removed from the lineup if the airport taxi office receives complaints.
  - jsilence 6y ago
    But isn't this the invisible hand of the market?
    - gamblor956 6y ago
      No, it's the visible hand of regulation. The airports set the requirements that taxis receiving medallions to pick up passengers from their terminals may not reject passengers based on destination. The flipside is that trips originating from the airport are subject to fixed minimum charges (or fixed mileage rates) that taxis wouldn't get for pickups from other locations.

22 points by donsupreme 6y ago

Uber drivers have access to a car, have a driver’s license and are presumably citizens, pass a background check, and maintain a high enough rating to continue to drive, so their social skills can’t be terrible. The minimum wage in SF is 15.50 and in LA is 15. My question is, if Uber is such a terrible exploitive company to work for, why do they have a critical mass of drivers? They could also drive for restaurants. I was a Dominos delivery driver in a past life and made kind of incredible money for the job (tips). My logical mind tells me that drivers continue to work for Uber because it is more profitable than alternatives, despite what the endless barrage of negative press drills out.

CHY872 6y ago
Because someone convinced them to lease or buy on finance a brand new Prius and they need to make payments? That’s where I suspect the exploitation comes in - not the actual Uber usage, but the financial decisions required to get started (eg drive late model car). Vs other apps, they’re all the same give or take a few months.
- perryizgr8 6y ago
  Can't they just sell the car? It will be a bit if a loss but certainly better than ongoing loss and suffering?
- okareaman 6y ago
  Not many new drivers have new cars. I don't know how many of them are leasing cars. I've never heard any complaints on any driver groups about being forced to drive to pay off the car.
- 908B64B197 6y ago
  The thing is, there's Kelley's Blue Book. A driver can know any day how much his car is worth and figure out the net profits from selling it and not Ubering anymore. There's a paternalistic view of drivers (often non-white and immigrants) as too stupid to know their costs. But really most drivers wouldn't drive if they didn't earn money.
okareaman 6y ago
Most of the other jobs require the driver to get out of the car, which can be a pain if parking is limited and you have to walk into a building a find where to pickup. Staying in the driver's seat is preferable to me.
lacker 6y ago
Uber is also good if you have a 25 hour a week job which pays better than Uber but you need to get some extra money and those 25 hours come at unpredictable times

okareaman 6y ago

I drove for Lyft and Uber before the pandemic as a retirement job and had lots of fun. I quit during the pandemic and since I've been vaccinated I've been taking Lyft and Uber. It's no longer fun. Masks inhibit conversation. Drivers don't talk anymore and neither do I. Lyft and Uber are just taxi companies at this point. I'm not surprised Uber took away the ability to see destination before accepting rides. Lyft never offered it. Drivers are going to do what they can to maximize earnings, which doesn't always serve the customer. At least they didn't have to become employees and be told when and where to drive. If Lyft and Uber continue to be short drivers they'll have to figure out some other way to incentivizes drivers without affecting customer service.

tschwimmer 6y ago

Perhaps I hold an unpopular or uncharitable opinion but I'm in favor of this. I recently had a horrendous experience with Uber when returning to SFO. Usually a ride from the airport to my home is in the neighborhood of $40. I requested a ride at that estimated price. After a minute or two of waiting, I was presented with a modal that said a driver was willing to take me home for $80. I rejected it, figuring that it was a probably a fluke or an outlier. However, the moment I dismissed the prompt the app flashed another one with a similar offer. I ended up having to constantly dismiss those prompts for over 30 minutes in order to eventually get a ride. In addition to being a miserable user experience, it seems like setting prices allows drivers the option to discriminate as to where they want to take rides, bringing us back to the level of service of taxis where it was common for drivers to refuse rides based on destination. I'm sympathetic to the situation that drivers are in. It's an extremely difficult and often unrewarding job. But the way driver price setting has been implemented so far feels like a big step backwards, at least in terms of rider experience.

gamblor956 6y ago
I've never been refused by a taxi at the airport. Generally, in CA, a taxi that refuses to drive a passenger from the airport is violating the terms of their airport medallion/license and will be removed from the lineup if the airport taxi office receives complaints.
- jsilence 6y ago
  But isn't this the invisible hand of the market?
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    No, it's the visible hand of regulation. The airports set the requirements that taxis receiving medallions to pick up passengers from their terminals may not reject passengers based on destination. The flipside is that trips originating from the airport are subject to fixed minimum charges (or fixed mileage rates) that taxis wouldn't get for pickups from other locations.