4 ms·

I restarted driving in the Chicago area and I’m averaging $45/hr. I’d prefer an article that showed systemic driver responses. Not anecdotal interviews. There

I restarted driving in the Chicago area and I’m averaging $45/hr. I’d prefer an article that showed systemic driver responses. Not anecdotal interviews. There is no way I’ll believe most drivers want to be employees. Again. If you don’t like driving rideshare, then get a different job. It’s not Uber’s responsibility to provide FT or benefits. These complaints suggest they’re pro labor, but Uber is not a traditional employer. There is no law that says every business has to provide an employer/employee relationship. If drivers don’t return to Uber, that will be the free market reset that forces Uber to adapt. If drivers take the sign up bonus and stop driving, Uber will have to adapt to that as well. Let the market decide.

donsupreme 5y ago
Maybe you can look at the first word in that title, it says California and earning under prop 22. So yea not Chicago.
- EduardoBautista 5y ago
  The comment you are replying to easily applies to drivers in other large cities in the USA.
gugagore 5y ago
> It’s not Uber’s responsibility to provide FT or benefits. > Let the market decide. I just want to spell out that these are political stances, and not universal truths. An alternative political stance is that multiple factors conspire such that "get a different job" is for many people not a viable strategy. The situation under which a worker feels that their only viable strategy is working for Uber is beneficial to Uber. Is it Uber's responsibility to ensure that there are multiple viable job strategies for people? No, not exactly. That's the responsibility of the government. We can't expect an entity to act against its own interests.
- tom-_- 5y ago
  It can be a political stance, but that's for the commenter to decide, not you. It is a legal truth. Uber is not legally responsible for providing FT or benefits period. You can argue they should be but as you pointed out, regulation is the responsibility of the government, not Uber.
  - gugagore 5y ago
    The conversation around Prop 22 is (was) about deciding laws. I don't find it useful to invoke a notion of "legal truth", since it feels circular.
jjulius 5y ago
>I’d prefer an article that showed systemic driver responses. Not anecdotal interviews. Okay, well then how about we look at-... >There is no way I’ll believe most drivers want to be employees. ... oh.
- ChicagoDave 5y ago
  I’m not the one writing articles in The Guardian about disaffected drivers. Where is the evidence? Interviewing a few drivers is not evidence.
  - jjulius 5y ago
    Please re-read my post and you'll see that I wasn't defending the article. In point of fact, I merely highlighted the fact that you said this article's evidence doesn't hold up, and then immediately said, "There is no way I’ll believe most drivers want to be employees." That sounds like you would refuse to believe any other data, always and forever, if it contradicted your personal belief. Before anyone else might be able to chime in with other sources that may be more concrete, you have shut that down entirely. Your mind's made up, and that is that.
    - ChicagoDave 5y ago
      I actually have evidence on my side. The Uber driver surveys conducted by an independent firm state that near 70% of ride share drivers prefer to remain independent. If a survey comes out that contradicts that, I'd have to review my stance, but for now, I'm skeptical.
      - jjulius 5y ago
        >If a survey comes out that contradicts that, I'd have to review my stance, but for now, I'm skeptical. Right on. That's all I was getting at. :)
gnicholas 5y ago
> I’m averaging $45/hr. Out of curiosity, how much do you spend on gas per hour? What are the other big expenses to cover? I'm thinking wear/tear, additional insurance, additional car washes, but having never driven I don't know.
- ChicagoDave 5y ago
  I usually use up about 200 miles. In my car, that's 7.5 gallons at $3 is roughly $23 out of making about $200-$300. Insurance over 6 months is an additional $100, so roughly $17/month. Uber provides discounts on oil changes and tires. Wear and tear on my car is hard to quantify, but one caveat is that I work from home for my regular IT job, so I no longer have commuting expenses. It's close to a wash in wear and tear because I only drive Uber on weekends. Taxes are taxes. Gotta pay them no matter what.

donsupreme 5y ago

Maybe you can look at the first word in that title, it says California and earning under prop 22. So yea not Chicago.

EduardoBautista 5y ago
The comment you are replying to easily applies to drivers in other large cities in the USA.

gugagore 5y ago

> It’s not Uber’s responsibility to provide FT or benefits. > Let the market decide. I just want to spell out that these are political stances, and not universal truths. An alternative political stance is that multiple factors conspire such that "get a different job" is for many people not a viable strategy. The situation under which a worker feels that their only viable strategy is working for Uber is beneficial to Uber. Is it Uber's responsibility to ensure that there are multiple viable job strategies for people? No, not exactly. That's the responsibility of the government. We can't expect an entity to act against its own interests.

tom-_- 5y ago
It can be a political stance, but that's for the commenter to decide, not you. It is a legal truth. Uber is not legally responsible for providing FT or benefits period. You can argue they should be but as you pointed out, regulation is the responsibility of the government, not Uber.
- gugagore 5y ago
  The conversation around Prop 22 is (was) about deciding laws. I don't find it useful to invoke a notion of "legal truth", since it feels circular.

jjulius 5y ago

>I’d prefer an article that showed systemic driver responses. Not anecdotal interviews. Okay, well then how about we look at-... >There is no way I’ll believe most drivers want to be employees. ... oh.

ChicagoDave 5y ago
I’m not the one writing articles in The Guardian about disaffected drivers. Where is the evidence? Interviewing a few drivers is not evidence.
- jjulius 5y ago
  Please re-read my post and you'll see that I wasn't defending the article. In point of fact, I merely highlighted the fact that you said this article's evidence doesn't hold up, and then immediately said, "There is no way I’ll believe most drivers want to be employees." That sounds like you would refuse to believe any other data, always and forever, if it contradicted your personal belief. Before anyone else might be able to chime in with other sources that may be more concrete, you have shut that down entirely. Your mind's made up, and that is that.
  - ChicagoDave 5y ago
    I actually have evidence on my side. The Uber driver surveys conducted by an independent firm state that near 70% of ride share drivers prefer to remain independent. If a survey comes out that contradicts that, I'd have to review my stance, but for now, I'm skeptical.
    - jjulius 5y ago
      >If a survey comes out that contradicts that, I'd have to review my stance, but for now, I'm skeptical. Right on. That's all I was getting at. :)

gnicholas 5y ago

> I’m averaging $45/hr. Out of curiosity, how much do you spend on gas per hour? What are the other big expenses to cover? I'm thinking wear/tear, additional insurance, additional car washes, but having never driven I don't know.

ChicagoDave 5y ago
I usually use up about 200 miles. In my car, that's 7.5 gallons at $3 is roughly $23 out of making about $200-$300. Insurance over 6 months is an additional $100, so roughly $17/month. Uber provides discounts on oil changes and tires. Wear and tear on my car is hard to quantify, but one caveat is that I work from home for my regular IT job, so I no longer have commuting expenses. It's close to a wash in wear and tear because I only drive Uber on weekends. Taxes are taxes. Gotta pay them no matter what.