Uber Is Treating Its Drivers As Sweated Labor, Says Report (theguardian.com)

Uber treats its drivers as Victorian-style "sweated labor", with some taking home less than the minimum wage, according to a report into its working conditions based on the testimony of dozens of drivers. From a report on The Guardian: Drivers at the taxi-hailing app company reported feeling forced to work extremely long hours, sometimes more than 70 a week, just to make a basic living, said Frank Field, the Labor MP and chair of the work and pensions committee. Field received testimony from 83 drivers who said they often took home significantly less than the "national living wage" after paying their running costs. The report says they described conditions that matched the Victorian definition of sweated labor: "when earnings were barely sufficient to sustain existence, hours of labor were such as to make lives of workers periods of ceaseless toil; and conditions were injurious to the health of workers and dangerous to the public."

Comments

"Feel forced?"

[aldousd666]

Nobody is forcing anyone to drive for Uber. Quit if you don't like it. Holy crap there's someone willing to pay you to drive your own car. If that's not your bag, fine. But go somewhere else to complain about it.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[harrkev]

Next step: pay Uber drivers more, so Uber has to charge more.

Eventual outcome: Uber costs just as much as a taxi, so you might as well call a taxi in the first place.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[jwymanm]

Tell me about it. If it doesn't work as a full time job so what? Pay your car loan only then. What the hell is wrong with people that think everything should just work perfectly for them? You sit in a car and push a frigging pedal. Yes it hurts your car and the costs can be greater than the reward part of the time. Obviously there is an agenda to crowd source anger against uber/lyft etc going on right now. Not sure if the drivers are getting caught up in it (since you can't rely on most "news" anymore), the cause of it, or victims of it (cab companies?). News at 11: Lemonade stand doesn't pay children back for their child slave labor.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Anonymous Coward]

Step 1: Create system where I make money doing nothing, we will call this being a platform
Step 2: Force existing systems to work for me by under cutting prices and providing a better way to interact
Step 3: Profit

Shit, Uber makes profit by undercutting cabs who already did not make much money... You can tell people not to drive for them, but when you see the lease terms uber demands (weekly payments, taken directly from your take, you dont pay we take the car) then you see that they are required to drive, and drive long hours if riders are minimal.

This is a firm that has a master plan of shifting as much as it can on to other people so its 30% cut can be 90% profit. So far its working because people with no job will work any job in a world where unskilled labor is not worth much (driving is definitely on the unskilled labor side here) There are simply not many other jobs out there for a subset of people.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Jzanu]

Step 1: Create system where I make money doing nothing, we will call this being a platform Step 2: Force existing systems to work for me by under cutting prices and providing a better way to interact Step 3: Profit

Shit, Uber makes profit by undercutting cabs who already did not make much money... You can tell people not to drive for them, but when you see the lease terms uber demands (weekly payments, taken directly from your take, you dont pay we take the car) then you see that they are required to drive, and drive long hours if riders are minimal.

This is a firm that has a master plan of shifting as much as it can on to other people so its 30% cut can be 90% profit. So far its working because people with no job will work any job in a world where unskilled labor is not worth much (driving is definitely on the unskilled labor side here) There are simply not many other jobs out there for a subset of people.

Uber's real business (see bottom of page) model is incentivizing wage-slavery with poverty wages and binding contract enforcement - it is just the vehicular version of the company town.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Archangel Michael]

It isn't anywhere close to being a "company town". They aren't requiring you to buy Shell gas, take your car to JiffyLube, tires by Toyo ....

GAWD STOP THE HYPERBOLE!

Next thing your gonna say is Uber is Racist and Sexist.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Anonymous Coward]

Honestly cost isn't why I use Uber over a taxi service. It is just much easier to get one and to know they will show up when you need them. In my experience taxi's are neither quick to come, nor reliable.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[ClickOnThis]

It seems clear that Uber's long-term plan is to get rid of the drivers entirely. Self-driving cars are in our near future. Having humans drive them for now is a plan to achieve mindshare while they wait.

I wouldn't be surprised if Uber aims to become the Amazon of transportation.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

The real problem is that the economy is so desperate that people feel that they have to work in the conditions that Uber presents them with. I can't really blame Uber for treating people like crap, because corporations are soulless entities that try to make as much money as they can. But in a good economy the conditions have to be better in order to attract employees.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Would you eat at an unregulated restaurant if it meant you had a chance of getting food poisoning every time you ate there? No one sat down and said they wantd to make taxis more expensive 'just because'. There are reasons for that extra cost that protect the public over time (both customers and non-customers). By taking the cheaper price, you are making things a little worse for the entire population of the city you live in.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

I find it kind of funny that people are cheering for Uber as fighting against the 'corrupt' cab companies but all we're ending up for is a monopoly with one company. How good can things possibly be once that happens?

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Anonymous Coward]

But, but, the invisible hand will quickly solve that problem after a few hundred people die from eating at that restaurant. Why do you hate America?

Re:"Feel forced?"

[matbury]

Taxi drivers also have regulated hours. Being tired is as impairing and dangerous as being drunk. Would you hail a cab if you knew the driver was drunk? If he's been working double the recommended hours a week, like an Uber driver, he's likely to be severely impaired and very likely to have an accident.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[matbury]

Nobody is forcing anyone to drive for Uber. Quit if you don't like it. Holy crap there's someone willing to pay you to drive your own car. If that's not your bag, fine. But go somewhere else to complain about it.

Yes, and all those stupid poor people and their children in Victorian England who worked punishingly long hours. Why didn't they just stop?!

Re:"Feel forced?"

[reboot246]

I thought being a driver for Uber was something people did part-time for extra money. I didn't know people were trying to do it full-time to make a living. The way they advertise for drivers would lead one to believe it's for making money in your spare time.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Patent Lover]

The thing is that, in the U.S., there are vast swaths of the country where there is no taxi service, or none within an hour. Uber can be handy at times even if it's at a taxi price.

Re: "Feel forced?"

[ClickOnThis]

Again, car rental firms already have this one tied up. If you're investing in Uber expecting this outcome, you're likely a sucker.

Car-rental firms don't have the smartphone-driven hailing infrastructure that Uber has. I can see car-rental companies becoming "fuilfillment partners" with Uber, again in analogy with Amazon and other retailers.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Food trucks still have to have safety inspections, stainless steel surfaces, adequate cooling, etc. Unless you live in a poor region of a country like India, which is where the US is headed it seems.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[NormalVisual]

It seems clear that Uber's long-term plan is to get rid of the drivers entirely. Self-driving cars are in our near future. Having humans drive them for now is a plan to achieve mindshare while they wait.

Getting rid of the drivers means they can't really externalize the cost of the car like they do now, especially fuel and maintenance. I would not be surprised in the least to see their fares go up substantially if this happens.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[SvnLyrBrto]

And I'll still choose Uber over a Cab at, or even above, taxi prices. I've been using them since they called themselves "Ubercab", only offered the town car service, were only available in San Francisco, and were, yes, more expensive than a taxi.

Why? Because Uber drivers show up where and when they are dispatched. They will pick you up in the avenues (The Sunset and Richmond districts.), and don't throw a hissy fit when you need to be driven out there. They don't play the "my credit card reader is broken, cash only" scam. And their cars are clean, well-maintained, and don't stink of smoke, vomit or pee. None of the same is true of cabbies.

The only reason Uber, Lyft, and the like were able to catch on is because the legacy taxi companies offer an appallingly dismal service. They made their bed. Now they can lie in it. And I'll go on using the superior service; even if the price goes back up to what it was before they introduced UberX.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[vel-ex-tech]

We need more STEM graduates! We need more women programmers! Who gives a fucking shit if all the work they can find is McDonald's?! We need more STEM graduates! If they can't find a job, they should starve!

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Anonymous Coward]

This is slashdot. No one here is a fucking idiot.

A virgin idiot, on the other hand...

Re:"Feel forced?"

[ClickOnThis]

It seems clear that Uber's long-term plan is to get rid of the drivers entirely. Self-driving cars are in our near future. Having humans drive them for now is a plan to achieve mindshare while they wait.

Getting rid of the drivers means they can't really externalize the cost of the car like they do now, especially fuel and maintenance. I would not be surprised in the least to see their fares go up substantially if this happens.

Who says Uber needs to own the cars? They can rent them from their owners or from car-rental companies.

Imagine taking your car to work and then instead of parking it, letting Uber "rent" it until you go home.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[ShanghaiBill]

Would you eat at an unregulated restaurant if it meant you had a chance of getting food poisoning every time you ate there?

False analogy. We regulate restaurants because unregulated restaurants had a track record of making people sick. Health inspections of restaurants are designed to insure they are clean and healthy. The are NOT designed to restrict entry and limit competition. Comparing restaurant health inspections to the taxi medallion racket is absurd.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[JWW]

Better they work at McDonalds than driver for Uber....

Re:"Feel forced?"

[edtice1559]

No but they're forcing honest taxi drivers out of business. You can't say "just don't drive for Uber" because the drivers have little negotiating power. One of the primary purposes of government is to protect those in weak negotiating positions.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[hackwrench]

There are reasons for that extra cost that are intended to protect the public over time (both customers and non-customers).

The comment you are replying to doesn't appear to think those protections are manifesting themselves. If you are taking the same chance whether the restaurant is regulated or unregulated, or worse, there's more of a chance at the restaurant that is supposedly obeying the regulations, those regulations aren't worth anything.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

But in this case, the public gets clear benefits from taxi regulations. The drivers are vetted, the cars are fitted with safety equipment, there aren't too many of them on the road, they can be contracted to be waiting where people need them like at hotels and airports, and all people in a city get served equally no matter what area they live in or what kind of physical disability they have.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

And unregulated taxis weren't safe, and there too many of them on the road to the point that it was causing accidents. Furthermore, there was no way to force them to accommodate people who lived in less profitable areas of a city or to serve people with disabilities. What's your point? If regulation wasn't required then it wouldn't be there.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[evilviper]

No one sat down and said they wantd to make taxis more expensive 'just because'. There are reasons for that extra cost that protect the public

There's certainly some of that, but all too much of it is rent-seeking, lack of modern technology, and hanging onto depreciated business models.

The insane price of NYC taxi medallions for example. Technology allowing drivers to rate passengers, therefore allowing expensive trouble passengers to be left without a lift. Technology allowing passengers to get prices and comparison shop rather than being locked-in to the rates of whichever taxi pulls up, and depending on the route they take. Better utilization by telling drivers where passengers are. Technology that forces passengers to pay without cab drivers needing to tackle cheats. etc.

I have no love for Uber / Lyft abusing their employees, skirting innumerable laws, and throwing money around to try and get themselves exemptions, but it's easy to make the case that the traditional taxi system was incredibly inefficient and rather corrupt, for no good reason.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[ShanghaiBill]

And unregulated taxis weren't safe

Can you provide a citation for evidence that the medallion racket made taxis safer?

If regulation wasn't required then it wouldn't be there.

So all regulations are obviously required? Do you really believe that there has never been an unnecessary regulation, imposed for, say, rent-seeking cronyism, rather than the public interest?

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

I'd rather protect a corrupt industry in need of some moderation that employs thousands of people and from which I get some benefits, rather then protect a single corrupt company that employs almost no one and cares about benefiting no one but themselves.

Re: "Feel forced?"

[Motherfucking Shit]

Do you know how much gross shit you consume under the guise of an "A" rated restaurant?

I do, and that stuff happens even with the threat of a health inspector randomly showing up at any time. Imagine the shit that would go on if the regulations disappeared.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[ShanghaiBill]

I'd rather protect a corrupt industry

False dilemma. Neither should be "protected". Both should be allowed to compete.

employs thousands of people

Many people use Uber regularly that rarely or never used taxis. So total employment goes up with Uber-like services.

rather then protect a single corrupt company

It is not a "single company". There is Uber, but also Lyft, and a few other smaller companies competing. There is little to stop additional companies from entering the market. I am mostly a Lyft user, but would be happy to switch to save $1 on a ride.

cares about benefiting no one but themselves.

How is that any different from any other company?

Re:"Feel forced?"

[spitzig]

It's not an invisible hand. The riders rate the drivers. The drivers have to maintain a 4.6/5.0 rating. The most common reason for negative ratings is lack of local knowledge. There are other things that get them instantly deactivated, like sexual harassment.

I've recently started driving for Uber part-time.

I've wondered about the professional nature of taxis, though. Ubers and taxis have both had good knowledge of the roads in my experience. Both treat me well. Taxis often seem to smell bad, and Ubers have not. Ubers seem to arrive at my location to pick me up faster. I've had limited experience riding in either, though.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[evilviper]

Except it isn't a zero-sum game. It's the public at large that really gets screwed over by your "protecting" the corrupt industry and their employees, in this case.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[ShanghaiBill]

The thing is that, in the U.S., there are vast swaths of the country where there is no taxi service

There are far more places without Uber and Lyft. Even small cities have taxis. Uber and Lyft mostly serve cities of 100k or more. I am unaware of anyplace that has Uber or Lyft but does not have taxis.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[ShanghaiBill]

If he's been working double the recommended hours a week, like an Uber driver, ...

For most Uber drivers, driving is not their main job. They do it part time for 3-4 hours per day to earn extra money. Taxi drivers are under greater pressure to work more hours because many of them went deep in debt to buy their medallion, or took out loans using the medallion as collateral back when medallions were worth far more than they are today.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

How does the public at large get screwed? Anyone in a city can order a taxi and they know what they are getting. With an Uber you may get one you may not, they may be surge pricing they may not. If you are physically disabled and require a special vehicle you are screwed. If you don't have a smartphone you are screwed. When I have caught a taxi I walk to the nearest hotel and there are always several outside.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[drinkypoo]

Would you eat at an unregulated restaurant if it meant you had a chance of getting food poisoning every time you ate there? No one sat down and said they wantd to make taxis more expensive 'just because'. There are reasons for that extra cost that protect the public over time (both customers and non-customers).

Those reasons are all bullshit. Half of the taxis I have been in were falling apart, usually in ways that actually made them unsafe. I know two women who have been raped by taxi drivers. Taxis already refuse to pick up fares in bad neighborhoods, or just never bother to show up. (And if you tell dispatch where you're going, and it's a bad neighborhood, they will also frequently just never show up.) Taxis are shit and the excuses for taxi licensing are shit. If you want Uber to be as safe as a taxi, you're going to have to make it substantially less safe than it is today.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[aldousd666]

I disagree that that is a purpose of government. Sorry.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[delt0r]

The main reason taxis are expensive is local monopolies. Typically the local government has a hand in the pie. It certainly has nothing to do with ensuring good taxi service, that is for sure. The expensive taxis here (about 2-3x as much as uber) provide a all round far worse service. In EVERY single respect.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[delt0r]

Uber in all the cites i have lived in follow all the rules taxis need to follow. Same passenger licence requirement, same background checks. But are still 3x cheaper. So.. all this regulation is.. what are you talking about?

Re:"Feel forced?"

[delt0r]

What the crap dude. Uber here, and the other 4 cites i have lived in follow the *same rules in terms of licence requirements and background checks* as taxis do.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[MrL0G1C]

Wrong. Very wrong.

Jobs don't grow on trees, if you voluntarily quit your job then the benefits system can decide not to give you any money for 6 months.

So how are you going to eat? That is pretty much being forced to work in your current job.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[phantomfive]

Would you eat at an unregulated restaurant if it meant you had a chance of getting food poisoning every time you ate there?

I literally feel more concerned about food poisoning in a typical taxi than a typical Uber. Add to it that Uber drivers never try to rip you off by driving a longer route. And then there's the biggest issue: Uber drivers are actually willing to come pick me up, but taxi drivers are not.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[davester666]

For those places, Uber will charge 10x what a taxi costs in a big city, but still pay the drivers jack.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[serviscope_minor]

Next thing your gonna say is Uber is Racist and Sexist.

This seems to be the current line of arguing popular with many here:

Drag racism and sexism into something irrelevant. GET OUTRAGED ABOUT IT!

Re:"Feel forced?"

[thegarbz]

Would you eat at an unregulated restaurant if it meant you had a chance of getting food poisoning every time you ate there?

I do that constantly. The great thing about unregulated is that it doesn't give someone unrestricted power to fuck someone over. Reputation spreads faster than any regulation and there are many places that have been nicely regulated and still manage to

a) cause food poisoning.
b) go out of business as a result.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[thegarbz]

Exactly! I don't use Uber myself, but I stay clear of taxi companies in favour of limo services instead. They are priced similarly. I can pay upfront and online so there's no guessing game as to whether my taxi will accept credit card or cash. Since it's pre-paid there's no need to worry about them taking you a more expensive "scenic" route. I get text messages when the cab is about to arrive, and when it's here. They don't just show up wait a minute declare it a lost fair and drive off.

I remember a long time ago before Uber I was out drinking and I said "Fuck it, I'll walk home it's only 8km", because I didn't want to fight for crappy taxi.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Hognoxious]

hanging onto depreciated business models

Straight line or declining balance?

Re:"Feel forced?"

[ixidor]

They don't just show up wait a minute declare it a lost fair and drive off. except,they changed it awhile back. drivers have to sit and wait 10 minutes ( i usually wait 11 because 9 min 50 seconds does not count) to be paid. if uber sends the default "driver is here" text, i text you and try to call you with no response after 3 minutes its 99% going to be a waste of my time. so yes we will show up. we will try to contact you. and we will wait, unless its a busy night, and fell better of just dumping for chance at next fare. but even then you were not out waiting. just call another uber.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Hognoxious]

OK genius, how do they fail in the first place?

Re: "Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

The problem is that the average American is so distrustful of the government that they will blatantly do things that are bad for everyone such as allow companies like Uber in. I hope we realize this and stop it before we are like India and they are like us.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

They don't follow the same restrictions where am from. Here the cars have protection shields for the drivers and emergency strobes on top of the car. Also all drivers have to be fingerprinted and carry commercial insurance.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Where I live, taxi's have to:
- provide protection shields for the drivers
- Provide an emergency 911 strobe on the top of the car
- fingerprint the drivers with full police check
- have commercial insurance
- Have at least one taxi outside all major hotels
- Have at least x taxis outside the airport
- Have taxis equipped for the physically disabled

My apologies if I Uber actually does all this and I did not realize it.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Taxis don't do that in my city, maybe they do that in yours.. If that is the case then complain to your government about enforcing taxi pickups. Don't patronize a company that is just bad for everyone.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

The whole point of regulation is so that businesses can't fuck you over. Without regulation how would you know whether the building you reside in is safe or not?

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

a) cause food poisoning. b) go out of business as a result.

In real life things don't work that way but it's cute that you think things do. Businesses will make thousands of dollars, give people food poisoning, and then just bounce back under another name. It happens in other industries all the time. Look at the whole Theranos fiasco. These days it is very easy to be too big to fail.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

In this case taxi companies are clearly paying their drivers more and treating them better. When making a decision like this, I look solely at how the people with the least bargaining power get treated, and taxis are clearly ahead of Uber in that regard.

Re: "Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Still it is better than not having inspectors at all. Would those restaurants EVER have cleaned up? Would they even have been concerned about rats in the food storage? Without regulation it can *always* be far worse.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

None of the vetting Uber does will dissuade a driver from harming a passenger after the vetting is done. It's not like having your fingerprints registered.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

I'm not just talking about medallions. I'm talking about things like mandatory driver shields and strobes to signal an emergency situation. Uber drivers don't even make enough to modify their cars in that way.l

Re: "Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Uber can't be fully regulated where you live. To my knowledge they have refused to allow fingerprinting of drivers everywhere. Shitty restaurants with poor ratings are FULL ALL THE TIME. Seriously, wake up.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Xyrus]

Nobody is forcing anyone to drive for Uber. Quit if you don't like it. Holy crap there's someone willing to pay you to drive your own car. If that's not your bag, fine. But go somewhere else to complain about it.

It seems you're just as gullible as the rest of the population. Uber doesn't pay the drivers.

The way it works is the rider pays the fee, Uber takes a (significant) percentage, and the driver gets the rest. There is no paycheck. There is no W-2. There are no payroll taxes or anything else. Uber's model is matching drivers and people, and for that service they collect a percentage of the fee. But they do not pay the drivers.

Of course, for people who don't know any better they think all that money is free and clear. They learn the hard way at tax time that it isn't.

But wait! It gets worse!

Uber takes advantage of the naive and ignorant by promoting how much money you can make, but then hides the tremendous amount of depreciation that happens on your vehicle. Unless you own your car outright, what you're really doing is cashing in the equity of your car. Now that may not sound so bad, until you actually do the math and find out your car is depreciating faster than the amount you make in fares. Then there's the insurance, miscellaneous expenses, etc.

It's your standard churn and burn. It usually takes people a year to figure out they've be screwed, though some figure it out sooner. In some markets you might be able to pull in a profit if you're lucky, or if you do the dangerous and costly areas/times. But you actually make more and with much better benefits working at wal-mart.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[kenh]

The thing is, the article is about UK Uber drivers - not US drivers.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[jshackney]

That explains the unique taxi smell.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[ewhenn]

Yeah, no thanks on renting my car. I keep it extremely clean inside and out. The last thing I want is some company sending it all over who knows where so I can collect a pittance and they can walk away with all of the profit while devaluing my asset (car) through usage. Anyone who does that is a sucker.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[edtice1559]

Than what is the purpose of government?

Re:"Feel forced?"

[kenh]

Yes, and all those stupid poor people and their children in Victorian England who worked punishingly long hours. Why didn't they just stop?!

We aren't talking about working children in Victorian England, we're talking about adults in modern England with enough resources to secure their own car and insurance... Is it your contention that the only option an adult with a car in England today is either drive for Uber or die? I don't think the English economy is that bad...

Re:"Feel forced?"

[kenh]

You can't say "just don't drive for Uber" because the drivers have little negotiating power.

Sure, they lack negotiating power but they do have choice - Uber is not the only employer, and if there is no employer there is public assistance.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[jshackney]

New York City: Had a cab ride from LGA to TEB. I told the guy before I got in that I could only pay with credit card. He agrees. We get to Teterboro and suddenly the card reader doesn't work and he wants me to pay in cash. Oh, and my $180 cab is now $250. After a bit of back and forth, he goes out, lifts the hood and appears to do something. The card reader is suddenly fixed. We use a car service in NYC now.

Bedford, MA and San Jose, CA: Taxis just don't arrive when called, or can't seem to make it in a reasonable amount of time. By reasonable, I mean Uber/Lyft can usually arrive within 10 minutes. Cabs, if they show up, usually take 45-60 minutes.

Goshen, IN: Told by the airport not to bother with taxis. They don't show up.

My home town: A taxi ride to the airport (8 miles) is around $70. Uber is $20.

Forgot where in Texas: A rickety yellow cab minivan shows up that absolutely reeks of curry. One of the most nauseating 15 minute taxi rides I've ever taken.

Southeast FL: Taxi driver didn't speak a lick of English. Had to pull up my destination on my phone and show it to him.

Southwest FL: Taxis are rickety claptraps that sound and feel like they're falling apart. One I was in recently clearly had a problem with its engine mounts (I've had the same problem with my last two cars and it was instantly recognizable). If stuff like that isn't getting fixed, what else isn't getting fixed.

Almost every taxi experience is an adventure.

This is just a miniscule sample of my cab experiences over the years. I'm not a super huge fan of Uber/Lyft, but damn! There's a huge hole they're filling and the cab companies really need to step up their game and demonstrate they have some value. Or just find a way to co-exist. I don't really care. However, right now they are doing an excellent job of driving their customers to their competition.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[evilviper]

Anyone in a city can order a taxi and they know what they are getting. With an Uber you may get one you may not, they may be surge pricing they may not.

Before you hail an Uber or Lyft, you know exactly how much the fare will be. Try telling me, before you step into a taxi, the exact price. In fact there are many areas where taxis bill based on "zones", and many people get screwed by the higher prices, when they could have walked a block and saved a lot of cash, but of course, they didn't know, and taxi companies don't want them to know.

When I have caught a taxi I walk to the nearest hotel and there are always several outside.

You need to get out of your bubble once in a while. In many places, you couldn't find a taxi if your life depended on it.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[thegarbz]

You're talking about regulation in the general sense. I'm talking about regulation in a specific sense.

Regulations on buildings are critical as the damage opportunity is incredibly high.
Regulations on food places, well we get by just fine, but this is something the market itself can and does fix too. Place with food regulations still have food poisoning, places without doesn't have massive portions of the population die off either.
Regulations on restricting an individual contract between someone engaging in voluntary in casual one off contracts are just stupid. They are either priced accordingly or are not. If your employment is casual and transient the market sorts that out too.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[thegarbz]

It's cute that I can use my eyes? It's cute that I had no problems eating in some tiny Indian or Chinese shithole but got food poisoning and spent 3 days off work at a sushi shop in Brisbane which proudly displayed their 4.5 star government rating? Is it cute that they were out of business 3 days later because the Courier Mail ran a big article about 15 people getting food poisoning there?

Businesses will make thousands of dollars, give people food poisoning, and then just bounce back under another name.

Restaurants are not venture capitalists. Restaurants do not make many thousands of dollars after costs to make what you are proposing a viable business opportunity. Shutting down and restarting a physical store costs many 10s if not 100s of thousands of dollars.

Look at the whole Theranos fiasco. These days it is very easy to be too big to fail.

And what happens in a medical high tech startup is related to general run of the mill businesses how?

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Regulations on buildings help to ensure their buildings are safe. Yes, there are exceptions to the rule but at least it is under control.
Regulations on food places help to ensure the food is safe. Yes, there are exceptions to the rule but at least it is under control.
Regulations on drugs help to ensure the drugs are safe. Yes, there are exceptions to the rule but at least it is under control.
Regulations on flight help to ensure the flight is safe. Yes, there are exceptions to the rule but at least it is under control.
Regulations to taxis help to ensure the ride is safe. Yes, there are exceptions to the rule but at least it is under control.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

I'm not saying regulations are perfect. I am saying that things would be far worse without them. I wasn't really talking about the kind of restaurant where one guy invests his life savings and opens a standalone place. Most restaurants are part of a large chain with lots of money and run by vastly under trained and under paid people.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Beezlebub33]

In this case taxi companies are clearly paying their drivers more and treating them better. When making a decision like this, I look solely at how the people with the least bargaining power get treated, and taxis are clearly ahead of Uber in that regard.

Clearly paying more? Where? I haven't seen evidence of this generally. What I have seen is that it depends greatly upon the cost of medallions, the presence or absence of competition, local regulations, etc. I have not seen that taxi drivers have any more bargaining power than uber drivers. at least Uber drivers can do Lyft or one of the other services at the drop of a hat.

Re: "Feel forced?"

[Beezlebub33]

I haven't seen evidence that Uber is bad for everyone. Having been in places (NYC, boston, Orlando, New Orleans) that have significant Uber and taxi services, the uber service is cheaper and easier. So, certainly better for me. Talking to the uber and taxi drivers, the uber drivers are considerably happier doing what they are doing. Taxi drivers hate uber drivers, that's true, but they also hate the companies that they are working for and hate the medallion fees they have to pay.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

So you're saying most Ubers are people who are tired from working all day and then trying to make it through their second job. That kind of adds to the whole point about fatigue.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Beezlebub33]

So, it doesn't work for you. What if you were paid a reasonable amount? what if you could set it so that only riders with 4.9/5.0 for cleanliness could ride in it? Either the business model is going to work (using other people's cars) or not, and that depends on the flexiblity / price / benefits. And if it doesn't work with Uber, the try Lyft, or one of the other competitors that is going to pop up.

Re: "Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Yes, better for you. That's the problem, that's all that matters any more for way to many people. Once enough people only care about themselves, society crumbles.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Once figuring in expenses, many Uber drivers make under minimum wage. Taxi drivers on the other hand are protected by minimum wage legislation.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[phantomfive]

Don't patronize a company that is just bad for everyone.

They're not bad for everyone. Everyone I know who uses Uber likes them, and everyone I know who drives for Uber is happy to work for them.

Clearly you are an exception to my experience, but I kind of doubt you use taxis very often either.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[thegarbz]

Regulations on buildings help to ensure their buildings are safe. Yes

And are required because market forces can't take care of it and the risks are high.

Regulations on food places help to ensure the food is safe. Yes

And are not required because market forces take care of this.

Regulations on drugs help to ensure the drugs are safe. Yes

And are required because market forces can't take care of it and the risks are high.

Regulations on flight help to ensure the flight is safe. Yes

Nope regulations here are primarily concerned with ensuring interoperability so pilots around the world operate by the same rules. This is impossible for market forces to take care of.

Regulations to taxis help to ensure the ride is safe.

I LOLed. I LOLed so very much at this. I'm still LOLing now as I keep typing it. Regulations here have zero to do with safety and are primarily lobbied for by the taxis themselves to protect their industry. One could argue regulations to taxis help ensure that people are treated equally and fairly, and that is where all benefit to anyone other than the taxi companies themselves stop.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[esonik]

The magnitude of funding Uber receives is an indicator how "good" it can become.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[thegarbz]

Most restaurants are part of a large chain

Most restaurants are definitely not part of a large chain, they are actually the minority.
Many restaurants are a part of a large chain, and most of these are franchised meaning there is still a massive outlay to opening / moving them. This also creates a form of self regulation when a restaurant not only has to appease governments, but also the franchiser.

Again your example applies to very few places and like taxis is a great example of something that could effectively be handled by market forces.
Unlike taxis though at least these regulations benefit the customers.

Re: "Feel forced?"

[delt0r]

Your a god dam taxi driver aren't you. No uber is good for a lot of people. Really a lot. It is a good, clean, safe and reliable service and it save people money. What is not good for is *you*. Cus you can't charge 3x more than the market will allow.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[delt0r]

We have already established your a taxi driver that doesn't like the fact you can't over charge and extort your passengers anymore.What is your restriction? having to get a medallion? Ticked off because your in one of the groups that has been buying up all the medallions in NY city then extorting both drivers and passengers? And in many places i have been many of the taxis *are* uber drivers.

But you don't want it to be better for us do you. You want all our fucking money. Well eat shit and die. This certainly has nothing to do with what is good for the public.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[delt0r]

It follows *ALL* taxi regulations in Berlin, Zurich, Vienna (taxis are soo regulated there, normal taxis are still in fact cheaper than Uber), Lausanne, Geneva. Your clearly just trolling cus you want us (passengers) to be paying a *lot* more, which is bad for a *lot* of people.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Aereus]

That still doesn't answer to why the taxi will sometimes not show up and not inform you. Its my understanding that with Uber you at least get a notice that the fare has been cancelled.

Re: "Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

NO I'm not a cab driver. I just appreciate a person trying to make a living.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

If by "good for everyone" you mean the service they provide, then you can't see the forest for the trees. Enjoy the ride to the bottom.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Then why are taxis forced to implement safety and accessibility measures? You think it is just busy work so that no one figures out that the big bad taxi companies just want to take your money?

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Again, not a taxi driver. I don't even know any taxi drivers. You have clearly lost it.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[phantomfive]

Yeah, I straight-up disagree with you on this topic. We're on opposite sides here, in full disagreement. I completely oppose you, and you do likewise. Sorry about that.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[thegarbz]

Then why are taxis forced to implement safety and accessibility measures?

Where? For all the taxi regulations in the vast majority of the west, there's zero additional safety with a taxi driver than there is elsewhere.

Hell for many countries the one thing you get with taxis is a guarantee that someone learnt to drive in a country with far more lax road rules. Background checks and shit like that does not improve safety. People don't go around randomly raping and killing each other, and if someone has had a prior conviction and is out to roam the streets then by definition he has done his time and is fine to be back with the world.

So what safety measures are you talking about?
Is it that you think someone ought to not be allowed to conduct business with you simply because a car is involved?
Is it that a person who's car which is otherwise okay to drive is suddenly not okay to drive because you are a passenger?
Or is it a personality thing?

Safety is one of the things I feel least especially in many countries where instead of normal people paying attention to the road I instead have some guy who got his license converted, which was probably originally given to him without a test, in a country with different road rules, all the while arguing with their GPS, and tapping away on some car computer surrounded by phones cables and god knows what other distracting shit in his cabin.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

Where I come from, taxis have to have things like stab shields for the driver and call 911 strobes on the top of the car. It has to be all part of regulation because it costs money to modify a car in this way so you have to ensure everyone Part of the point of regulations is that they are used as a mechanism to proactively deal with problems. It sounds like in a lot of districts government hasn't really done their job in that regard. The answer is to demand that the government do a better job.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[matbury]

Certificate of Public Necessity and Convenience (AKA "taxi medallion") systems exist only in certain cities of the USA. You're comparing a global corporation to a limited number of terrible case scenarios to justify their mistreatment of their employees, AKA, "At least we're not as bad as them."

Re:"Feel forced?"

[aldousd666]

To ensure the national defense, to enforce individual property rights, and prevent violent crime. Also, to enforce contracts between private entities in the courts.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[edtice1559]

But this would be a government of the powerful and for the powerful. And if the least powerful had any sense they would band together and rise up in armed conflict in order to establish a government that is fairer. If we allow this at a small scale (unions, labor laws), we (as a society) are able to avoid it at a large scale. Implicit in your version is that those who are less well-off accept their lot in life or try to change it by emulating those who are more powerful and therefore superior. Human nature doesn't work that way, though. I think it's a recipe for disaster if government only does those things.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[dcw3]

"you need to know that the people driving taxis aren't, for example, serial rapists or armed robbers"

Bullshit. Once they've done their time, there's nothing stopping them from becoming a taxi driver.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[dcw3]

Can you tell us how taxi drivers are vetted? I mean outstanding warrants and a credit check? Do they give a shit if they're a convicted felon who's done his time?...I'm doubtful.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[dcw3]

"So people using Uber does not raise employment"

Um, those drivers are still presumably paying taxes, and showing up as employed. So, yes, it does. I hooked my mother up with Uber in suburban Detroit, where it's next to impossible to get a taxi. Not only that, she's disabled, and wouldn't be able to get into most taxis. With Uber, she can specify the type of vehicle she wants. Show me a taxi service that does that.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[dcw3]

The thing is that, in the U.S., there are vast swaths of the country where there is no taxi service, or none within an hour. Uber can be handy at times even if it's at a taxi price.

Those places have no Uber cars either.

Wrong. Just don't post if you don't know WTF you're talking about.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[dcw3]

Suburban Detroit. My mom lives about 15 miles outside of the city. I've never once seen a taxi in her town. She can get an Uber nearly any time of day.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

It is part of regulation here that there be a certain number of taxis that are designed for physically disabled. It amazes me so many places don't enforce that as part of regulation, since that is kind of the point. Probably because Americans don't like government 'meddling' and therefore resist any kind of enforcement.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[fluffernutter]

They have to register their fingerprints with the local police service, so yeah they do.

Re:"Feel forced?"

[Coren22]

Around here (Maryland), a political type changed the building regulations to force everyone to flip electrical outlets upside down. That was at least one unnecessary regulation.

Don't worry

[FunkSoulBrother]

The Slashdot alt-right crew (really 75% of the commenting userbase that has aged into that lovely target demographic) will be here in no time to tell you about how this job, like fast food or retail, isn't deserving of a living wage and only exists for 18 year old suburban kids to make pocket money off of.

And to (lol) pay their way through college with (STEM majors only deserving of a living, of course).

Re:Don't worry

[FunkSoulBrother]

ROFL I took a couple minutes to edit my post and was proven right at least twice already by the time I clicked 'Submit'.

Re:Don't worry

[quax]

Sad but true.

The US is going to be so screwed when more and more of the blue collar jobs inevitably disappear.

Re: Don't worry

[ArmoredDragon]

Or, you know, people could just get paid what somebody thinks their labor is worth.

For example, would you want to pay somebody $30 an hour just to empty all of the trash cans where you work?

Re:Don't worry

[Altus]

I'm not so sure its about aging... I think its mostly that anyone else has given up on this place and moved on... arguing with Alt right or hyper libertarian or whatever the flavor of the month zealots are, its exhausting... and this place isn't important enough anymore to make it worth defending from idiots with poorly formed world views who can't see past the end of their own noses.

There are a few old timers still around... like me they tend to post less an less and just ignore the cesspool that this place has become out of a sense of nostalgia.

Re: Don't worry

[FunkSoulBrother]

Or, you know, people could just get paid what somebody thinks their labor is worth.

For example, would you want to pay somebody $30 an hour just to empty all of the trash cans where you work?

$15 would be a good start, indexed to inflation. ;-)

Those fighting for it would do well to mark 2016 and demand whatever $15 in 2016 dollars is each year this gets dragged out. Otherwise they are only going to get the equivalent of $10.75 by the time it passes, which will dwindle away every year re-creating the same problem for the next generation.

Re: Don't worry

[jlowery]

I would like people who work hard not to starve in the process.

Re:Don't worry

[mnelson]

I agree. I normally don't bother with the comments anymore and just use the articles as pointers to information I *might* be interested in. Just can't break the habit of coming back though. Fingers have /. programmed into them :)

Re:Don't worry

[FunkSoulBrother]

So any source of income must guarantee a living wage?

If you spend *seventy* hours a week doing it, then yeah it better damn well have.

Re: Don't worry

[jlowery]

The key is to run a business that is profitable enough to pay its workers a wage sufficient to cover food and medical and housing. Otherwise, my tax money does it and those dollars essentially make the business owner a welfare recipient by enabling him to be artificially enriched.

If your business doesn't sell a product people are willing to spend enough for you pay your workers a living wage, then your business should go bankrupt. I'm not paying for your beach house.

Re:Don't worry

[Jzanu]

Uber's business model makes them wage slaves through subsidiaries. When you are poor the ability to lease a car and drive to pay for it is extremely tempting, but when ridership falls lease is due and listing fee is charged regardless. That makes it into less a job and more wage-slavery.

Re: Don't worry

[Archangel Michael]

Real Minimum Wage is 0. What you're asking for is a barrier to entry of $15.

Re:Don't worry

[FunkSoulBrother]

You guys are embarassing my old-school Slashdot cred with your user numbers.

But I stand by my point somewhat. I mean considering I made this account when I was 18 in 1999, unless you were 10 year old Slashdot wunderkids, we're all getting into old-man (or woman) territory.

And there were plenty of 30-50 year old brilliant engineers and developers posting here at that time who are in prime FYGM political territory at this point.

Re:Don't worry

[LordKronos]

I would say it's more like: Congratulations! You thought you could undercut the professional taxi industry like a Chinese laborer. Well guess what....you're getting paid like a Chinese laborer. What, did you think you could have your cake and eat it too?

Re:Don't worry

[roman_mir]

This has nothing to do with 'deserving', the point is that nobody at all is forcing anybody to drive for Uber.

I run a company of my own, at times I made not simply less than minimum wage would be, but in a number of cases I was paying people who work for me out of pocket, as in I was losing money, not making it. *Nobody* forced me to do this, it's a private personal decision.

Re:Don't worry

[washort]

When weren't comments here a cesspool? It's part of the charm.

Re:Don't worry

[caseih]

I'm not right-wing at all, but I was wondering what all the hubbub was about here. As far as I know, Uber didn't even exist just a few years ago. Furthermore they billed themselves as a "ride-sharing" company, which to mean means you'd be a lunatic to quit your day job and drive for uber full time. Presumably those driving for uber did something else not so long ago for their primary income.

But if your sentiment is that Uber should be treated as any other taxi company, I agree with you there. And stories like this drive home the fact that Uber really is a taxi company but it wants to play by its own rules because Internet.

Maybe if Uber drivers knew about the taxi industry they'd be more realistic about their expectations.
e
I've talked to taxi drivers all over the world and the vast majority of them work many many hours each week, often 60-80 hours, to provide for their families. It's very hard work. And in several countries I've visited, taxis are owned, operated, and maintained by the driver but all fares go through the taxi company which takes its cut. In Israel, it's sometimes best to negotiate a fare when you get in the taxi, since if it goes on the meter, the driver doesn't get as much of the fare, and I'd rather he get a good fair share of it.

Re: Don't worry

[MightyMartian]

If raising the minimum wage to $15 speeds up automation, all it has done has hastened the end of these jobs. They were doomed, and likely doomed soon.

Re: Don't worry

[MightyMartian]

Exactly right. Far too many businesses, including big monster corporations like Walmart, essentially rely upon taxpayer-funded social safety nets to basically be their benefit and wage fallback system. They may claim they're paying what the market will bear, but what they're really doing is underwriting their own profits at the expense of taxpayers.

Re:Don't worry

[MightyMartian]

And if the job can't, then that business isn't viable and should be shut down.

Re: Don't worry

[fluffernutter]

Then real American society is mostly starving on the street. Have fun with that.

Re:Don't worry

[fluffernutter]

40 hours should be a living wage. 70 hours should be living wage plus a boat.... or something.

Re:Don't worry

[Sartr]

Everyone is a stupid zealot that's not worth our time. Except for us super geniuses, that is. Let's all go virtue signal how superior we are to those dumb cretinous 'others'. Oh wait, you beat me to it.

Re:Don't worry

[MightyMartian]

It will certainly be screwed if it keeps allowing corporate interests to arguing away the taxes they should be paying.

I'm genuinely concerned that events like Brexit and the Trump victory are the opening shots in some sort of modern day French revolution. The aristocrats of our age are as detached from reality as the French aristocrats were, and as unwilling to accept the responsibilities that come with vast accrual of wealth. They are creating a dangerously unstable situation, and when the Trumps of the world prove as incapable or unwilling to rebalance economic and social issues, then we may be facing a far less savory group of revolutionaries. And, as the French Revolution so ably demonstrated, even wealth isnt an absolute shield.

Re: Don't worry

[MightyMartian]

A libertarianism and its "freedom to starve".

Re: Don't worry

[ArmoredDragon]

You're way overthinking this as most of your expenses likely aren't even relevant to somebody on minimum wage.

Chances are you're dragging around a lot of crap that doesn't exactly need to be moved. If I was on minimum wage, I'd just sell all of my furniture on craigslist or in a yard sale, and then after moving go down to goodwill and buy new stuff for roughly the same price. Everything else can likely just be packed into the trunk of whatever car you're traveling to your new place in.

If your job is minimum wage, what possible expenses can be involved in actually finding a new job in your new location? And furthermore, what time is involved beyond just a few days? Finding minimum wage jobs is dead simple unless you're a total moron. Hell, just find the closest bar and they'll probably need somebody to wash dishes.

As for a deposit, not every place wants a deposit. Roommate situations almost never ask for one, and some apartments don't ask for one either, while others might ask for a really cheap deposit. The place I live in now just asked for $50 for a credit check and a choice of either $100 non-refundable deposit or a $500 refundable deposit, and gave the first month's rent free.

Re:Don't worry

[quax]

The anti-establishment mood certainly feels dark enough.

Revolutions are rarely pretty neither for those revolting nor those on the top.

Re:Don't worry

[drinkypoo]

So any source of income must guarantee a living wage?

Yes. Anything less is some percentage slavery, as defined as the percentage by which it falls short of providing a living wage. This problem can be solved by eliminating tax loopholes and cutting the defense budget, then using the money to implement minimum guaranteed income. We will also have to shitcan the ACA and implement a national single-payer health care scheme from which the wealthy can not simply opt out by having a superior plan. (They're free to buy more health care, but not to not pay their share of national health.) Under such a system, employers would never have to pay for employees' health care, nor would they have to pay a minimum wage. They would be free to pay any amount someone was willing to receive to do the job, or even charge someone to do the work for personal fulfillment or educational purposes.

If you have an alternate proposal which does not amount to slavery, I'm interested.

Re:Don't worry

[MightyMartian]

Ask yourself the same question, Mr. right winger.

Re:Don't worry

[Actually, I do RTFA]

I wouldn't mind arguing with the hyper-libertarians, if they bothered actually defending a position as opposed to asserting it as self evident over and over. It's interesting sometimes to here different points of view.

Re:Don't worry

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Presumably those driving for uber did something else not so long ago for their primary income.

Most of the drivers I've talked to were unemployed before they started driving for Uber.

Re:Don't worry

[serviscope_minor]

Found a good replacement yet?

You can still get good conversations here, but it seems to be related to the time of day. If a story comes up at the wrong time, it gets invaded by alt-right nut jobs and the thread dies under screams of "SJW", "sexism", "racism", blaming Hillary and other forms of blatant stupidity, along with aggressive downmodding of any voice of reason.

At other times, the conversation is much more civil.

Re:Don't worry

[palesius]

Jeez, practically 3 digits, you have been here a long time :)

Re: Don't worry

[kenh]

Or, you know, people could just get paid what somebody thinks their labor is worth.

For example, would you want to pay somebody $30 an hour just to empty all of the trash cans where you work?

$15 would be a good start, indexed to inflation. ;-)

Those fighting for it would do well to mark 2016 and demand whatever $15 in 2016 dollars is each year this gets dragged out. Otherwise they are only going to get the equivalent of $10.75 by the time it passes, which will dwindle away every year re-creating the same problem for the next generation.

By insisting that all jobs pay at a minimum of $15/hr, you are pricing teens out of their first jobs. Paying $15/hr puts a worker at $30K/yr for a (traditional) full-time job, ($22,500 under the PPACA re-definition of "full-time" to 30 hrs/week).

Re: Don't worry

[Beezlebub33]

No, the jobs of bank tellers has dropped dramatically with the rise of the ATM. The number of cashiers in grocery stores / Home Depot has already started dropping due to self-checkout. The price of automation continues to drop, and so if a job can be automated it will. If the minimum wage is $15, it will be replaced sooner than if the wage is $10, but the only difference is just a little more time. Sure, there will still be the occasional bank teller, cashier, just as there is currently the occasional farmer and factory worker, but the number of jobs available will be small compared to now.

Re:Don't worry

[Uberbah]

Slashdot's not alt-right

Only if you've found some magical filter that hides all posts from gun nuts, Randians, nativists and American Exceptionalists. How often do you load a 400 comment story and wonder why you don't see any posts?

, it's brogessive

Sexism and wankery.

Re: Don't worry

[fluffernutter]

Yes.. because they're going to need one checkout repair person per register like they need one person to control the register today.

Re:Don't worry

[Uberbah]

Ok mister alt-left communist sympothiser tell us why a job that will soon be automated is 'deserving' of a 'living wage'. I'm dying to hear an explanation that doesn't involve 'because its the right thing to do'.

And when it's your industry made obsolete and you can't find another job, are you going to go dig your own grave and quietly lie in it - or did you not think that talking point through before vomiting it onto your keyboard?

Re:Don't worry

[Uberbah]

the point is that nobody at all is forcing anybody to drive for Uber

Except that point is facile in a country where having a job is considered a responsibility, not a choice. If you run into Joe Somebody and driving for Uber is the difference between him having a roof over his head or having to live on public assistance - you'll tell him to stop whining and drive for Uber.

Re: Don't worry

[Uberbah]

ope, we've been here before. Most people would rather leave their trash and shit in the street, or dump it secretly rather than pay anything substantial to have it removed.

Randian whackjobs, maybe, but those are a decided minority. But there's one little side effect to taking the majority of wealth created and funneling it not into the hands of the idle rich, but people who work for a living - they wont complain at paying another $5 a month so their garbageman doesn't need food stamps to feed his family.

Re: Don't worry

[Uberbah]

That'll play out well in rural Appalachia... seriously, if you want to do a higher MW in high-cost areas, feel free to pass it at the local level, but you're talking about economic suicide for rural areas.

Nonsense. Increasing the the minimum wage would be a huge boost to Appalachia, as people who have more money to spend in the local economy. Which.....boosts the local economy.

Re:Don't worry

[roman_mir]

You are only responsible to yourself (and possibly your family), you don't have to work if you don't want to, but you cannot demand that others work for you and pay for you, feed you, cloth you, shelter you, treat your diseases, educate you, etc.

So it is a choice, you can choose to work or not to work, you can choose to eat or not to eat. How is that a 'country' situation? It's a UNIVERSE situation.

Again, if Uber is the *difference* between Joe Somebody earning money or not earning money, then attacking the *ONLY* company that Joe is apparently capable of finding a work at is ridiculous and economically suicidal.

Re: Don't worry

[jedZ]

Ok, but there are far more ATMs vs. actual bank branches. Perhaps the number of tellers in bank branches has gone down, but I'll bet the number of people maintaining / servicing ATMs (drivers, security guards in the armored truck industry) has gone up. These aren't even higher-skilled jobs.

Re:Don't worry

[Uberbah]

You are only responsible to yourself (and possibly your family), you don't have to work if you don't want to, but you cannot demand that others work for you and pay for you, feed you, cloth you, shelter you, treat your diseases, educate you, etc.

And your Ranidan hand waiving has changed....nothing. Having a job to avoid destitution is treated as a responsibility, not a choice. Which means if the only available job is driving for Uber....you'll expect people to drive for Uber.

Again, if Uber is the *difference* between Joe Somebody earning money or not earning money, then attacking the *ONLY* company that Joe is apparently capable of finding a work at is ridiculous and economically suicidal.

If you want to keep restating my point with different words, knock yourself out.

Typical Silicon Valley Startup.

[Ungrounded Lightning]

Drivers at the taxi-hailing app company reported feeling forced to work extremely long hours, sometimes more than 70 a week, just to make a basic living ...

Sounds like a typical Silicon Valley startup to me.

Re:Typical Silicon Valley Startup.

[ewhenn]

Yeah, except without any of the reward. These drivers aren't getting stock or any type of company ownership. Typically in a startup you are working a large amount of hours at low pay with the hope that your product takes off or you get acquired so your personal share of the company gains a massive amount of worth and then you cash out. In this case there is no hope of a cash out for these people. Now I do blame them for not having the foresight to see this, but ultimately it is different for them that a typical startup.

Eat Cake! [Re:The joy of contracting: don't do it

[Tablizer]

If you don't want to be a wage slave, don't be a wage slave; do something else.

Are you by chance related to Marie Antoinette?

Re:The joy of contracting: don't do it

[Jzanu]

Except when Uber is leasing the car through subsidiary, and demanding monthly payments on listing/ability to be a driver due regardless of ridership.

Says a man or woman

[rsilvergun]

who's never had a rent check bounce. Or never had to pay out of pocket to fix a kid's broken arm. Or been born in a rust belt town when the last factory just left and/or automated.

That's the essence of modern American Slavery. Nobody's _ever_ forcing you. You're completely free to starve to death and die in the streets. It's why the South abandoned real slavery. Wage Slavery is ever so much more cost effective.

Re:Says a man or woman

[harrkev]

It is called "supply and demand." If you open up a lemonade shop on the street corner, nobody is obligated to buy your lemonade if you charge $20 for one cup! That is how a free-market works. If you want to buy a computer, you and the seller reach an agreement on what it is worth. If you don't want to pay as much, you just don't buy the damn thing, and have the choice to go shopping elsewhere.

Same thing for labor. If your time isn't worth what Uber wants to pay, don't work there! Fined somebody who thinks that your labor is worth more. If enough people stop working for Uber and they can't find anybody willing to work for what they pay, they will be forced to pay more or go out of business. That is how it works.

If you really want to give rides and make more, you can always drive a taxi.

Re:Says a man or woman

[Kohath]

Apparently Uber is the only hope these people have -- it's their savior. Otherwise they'd starve and die.

Re:Says a man or woman

[Solandri]

Wage slavery is never cost effective except for the slave owner. That's what makes it an unstable system which can only be perpetuated by government collusion, or lack of willpower by the employees to break out of slavery. e.g. Detroit used to have slave-level wages. Henry Ford decided to set up shop there and paid his factory workers much more than the prevailing wage. He accidentally discovered that when he paid people a fair wage, not only did their productivity increase, but they used those wages to buy the very product they were helping build. The resulting feedback loop multiplied his company's revenue and turned the Ford Motor Company into the behemoth it is today. No longer were cars affordable only to the privileged elite; the average middle class worker (by Ford factory standards) could afford to buy one.

If the only options you see are being a wage slave or starving to death, then you haven't really tried. A location where the people are being paid slave wages or starving is ripe for a new company to set up shop and hire willing employees for less than they'd have to pay at well-established locations. As more of these people become employed and spend their wages on local merchants, the economy picks up. There are fewer unemployed, resulting in wages increasing. This is how the market equalizes geographic wage inequality. If this isn't happening, then there are fundamental problems with the region not caused by slave wages. Maybe the location is too far from markets, or the highway/railroad access is poor, or people just don't want to live in that location. Unless the government is intentionally keeping business out, low wages are a symptom not a cause.

And yes I've had a rent check bounce. A rent check a tenant gave me. I was stupid and deposited it directly into our payroll bank account since it almost exactly topped off the amount we needed to make payroll. Normally I transfer the payroll money from our primary checking account, but I was lazy and decided to save a little work by depositing the checks directly into payroll. As a result I got charged a bounced check fee, but more importantly a bunch of my employees' paychecks bounced, causing more bounced check fees for both them and myself. The whole thing was a disaster. I called in each employee who was affected, apologized to them in person, and told them to bring in their bank statement so I could reimburse their bounced check fee (or fees if they then wrote checks which bounced). The ones who needed the money immediately, I paid in cash out of my own pocket. All told it was over $1300 in bank fees incurred because I was stupid/lazy, and because the person who wrote the first check did so knowing he didn't have enough money to cover it but thought it would be easier turning his problem into my problem.

It's cliche, but it's true. Your employees are your most valuable asset. A good business will do everything it can to protect them and to retain them. A business which pays slave wages is just ripe to be squeezed out by a business which will pay better (fair) wages. The only way a slave wage business can stay in business is if the government is blocking competing businesses, or if people like you have so discouraged others with your gloom and doom hopeless corporate feudalism talk that they don't even bother trying to start up their own business to compete.

Re:Says a man or woman

[Dorianny]

GAWD!!!

You're completely free to starve to death and die in the streets.

STOP IT. nobody is dying because they can't drive for Uber. The real wage slavery is caused by government taking up to 50% of your earnings as a baron of the land, you stupid serf.

Taxes are what allows the government to pay for things like Infrastructure and Education. There is a reason why Corporations only move their assets to Tax Heaven countries and not the business, they are underdeveloped and unable to support businesses.

Re:Says a man or woman

[Anonymous Coward]

Finally, somebody who understands how the free market works. I agree 100%.

10 years ago Uber did not exist. They did not pay anyone shitty wages at that time. (They didn't exist). Nobody was being paid a shitty wage to drive for Uber (Uber did not exist). Nobody starved by driving for Uber (Uber did not exist).

  If they keep paying shitty wages, they'll go back to not existing. You can't labor at a loss for long. Eventually you have to find an employer that will pay you an acceptable wage. The government needs to play ZERO role in this. The market can and WILL solve this issue, all by itself. As long as Uber does not show up at your house, pull a gun on you, and FORCE you to drive for them, the government has no place to get involved.

I'd argue that Lyft is in a prime place to hire away Uber drivers by paying a better wage. Whomever pays the most is going to get the most / best employees.

Re:Says a man or woman

[rtb61]

Utter bullshit, proof right here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and of course the infamous https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Complete total utter bullshit to claim supply and demand. Workers in demand threatening increase in wages, oh no fuck that says the man, bring in temporary immigrants and crush the unions. So uber will just say they can not find trained workers to drive for them and they need temporary immigrant labour and they pay the lobbyists to pay the politician to get the laws they want to cripple the wage claims of their workers, it's the bullshit American way.

Re:Says a man or woman

[Attila Dimedici]

The south did not "abandon real slavery". It was taken from them after they lost a war.

However, the evidence suggests that paid workers are more productive than slaves. For that matter, fairly compensated workers out produce even "wage slaves". Companies which employ people who can better themselves by doing a better job, even if that means they leave the company and move on, produce more profit for their owners than companies which bind their employees to the company and give them no chance to improve their lot (either by advancing in the company or by acquiring skills which allow them to leave the company and become self-employed).

Re:Says a man or woman

[Attila Dimedici]

Supply and demand DOES apply to the labor force. Since tech labor salaries are not rising rapidly it is clear that those who say it is in short supply are LYING (or misinformed, we must remember that not every one who says something that is demonstrably wrong is evil, some of them are just stupid).

Re:Says a man or woman

[Anonymous Coward]

... when he paid people a fair wage, not only did their productivity increase, but they used those wages to buy the very product ...

It might be a chicken and egg situation: A moving assembly line increased productivity while simultaneously demanding more employee effort: The higher wages were both compensation for the shittier working conditions and a reward for the higher productivity.

... pays slave wages is just ripe to be squeezed out by a business which will pay better (fair) wages ...

Unfortunately other industries, such as mining, had transferred costs onto employees for centuries (isolated living, pollution, injury and death) so they fought very long and violently to keep it that way. Also, mechanization was under-utilized at the time and paying better wages to all those labourers would make the businesses un-competitive.

Thanks to Ford, many businesses wanted to pay higher wages: That was soon discouraged by shareholders who demanded that businesses pay only the 'going rate' for employees. We've seen that wages did not keep pace with productivity and the extra money went into bonuses for C-level employees and 'wealth creators', not more factories and jobs.

The exception was the 1970s when increasing unionization meant employees could demand better wages. To offset the increased costs, businesses demanded reduced competition, in the form of import quotas and tariffs. The result of a near monopoly in manufacturing was wages rising while productivity decreased. That led to decreased exports, increased cost of living and a roll-back of protectionist laws.

It's easy to see what should happen, making it happen is difficult because there is so much interference when linking wages to productivity.

Re:Says a man or woman

[MrL0G1C]

Wrong again, people have literally died in the UK after not being able to get benefits. THEY DID DIE because they weren't getting a wage and you can't just demand a job it doesn't work that way and you know it so why the bullshit?

Re:Says a man or woman

[MrL0G1C]

For example:
Thousands have died after being found fit for work, DWP figures show | Society | The Guardian

Re:Says a man or woman

[Actually, I do RTFA]

! Fined somebody who thinks that your labor is worth more

What about people whose labor is not worth more. Are they supposed to starve?

If you say yes, what happens when, like most people would, they decide to use violence to take the food they need.

Re:Says a man or woman

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Up to 50% is some major BS. Because, frankly, you're not close to dying of starvation at the 50% mark. People close to starving pay 15.3% in taxes (at least in the US), and then usually get government assistance for rent, food, etc..

Re:Says a man or woman

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Well, if you can't afford to pay the rent . . . maybe you shouldn't be renting anything?... Your mom's basement is probably looking like not such a bad living option now.

By and large, most people who cannot afford rent have the options of "sometimes afford rent" and "live in street", not "stay with relatives in their copious free space."

Folks who can't provide for their children . . . shouldn't be having children. ... Providing for proper health care for child should be your absolutely highest priority.

A lot of those people want to provide healthcare for their kids by having the government take over payment of health services.

Cut your cable TV, downgrade your Internet link, no more Netflix, no expensive nail jobs for the women folk, switch to really awful tasting light beer . . . you'll drink less of it. But please take care of your children

The cost of Netflix is $10/mo. That's a significant amount of money to someone close to the poverty line, but it's not going to cover a broken arm. At least, not in less than 3 years.

Also, frankly, you totally misinterpreted the "broken arm" point. It's a huge unexpected expense. Vaccinations/checkups are expected.

Going on, with your move/improve your life spiel, well, those things cost money. How are you going to move to the city if you are, to use your idea of how to survive, unable to pay rent and living in your mom's basement? What money are you going to use if the factory you worked at just closed, causing your house to go underwater, and you've been living paycheck to paycheck? What if you have some savings, but also kids. Can you expose them to the risk of trying to revamp your life?

I'd really like to watch you try to pull yourself out of one of these situations - I doubt you could.

Re:Says a man or woman

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Wage slavery is never cost effective except for the slave owner. That's what makes it an unstable system which can only be perpetuated by government collusion, or lack of willpower by the employees to break out of slavery. e.g. Detroit used to have slave-level wages. Henry Ford decided to set up shop there and paid his factory workers much more than the prevailing wage. He accidentally discovered that when he paid people a fair wage, not only did their productivity increase, but they used those wages to buy the very product they were helping build. The resulting feedback loop multiplied his company's revenue and turned the Ford Motor Company into the behemoth it is today

Customers weren't his limiting factor, driving down construction cost was. While I'd imagine his employees bought Fords, there were 300k+ Fords sold the year he raised wages. Even if every employee wanted one, they didn't contribute anywhere near that increase. And they grew in sales year over year, without increasing their workforce as the customer base. Heck, the feedback loop you described doesn't even make theoretical sense - even if labor got paid exclusively in Model Ts, it still wouldn't make sense as a growth strategy.

The fact that he was a pioneer of the assembly line is what enabled him to pump out tons of cars. Which is what made them the behemoth they are today. And what made the employees more productive was the assembly line. The increase in payroll was because no one cared if they got fired - the economy was good enough they could get the same wages at a new job the next day. It was to reduce turnover

A business which pays slave wages is just ripe to be squeezed out by a business which will pay better (fair) wages.

Citation needed. With the exception of the Ford story (which is subject to a lot of discussion, see above), there don't seem to be any. Fast Food pays minimum wage and isn't being taken over by "fair wage" alternatives. A lot of companies build plants/whathaveyou where the wages are min. wage, and then leave if they start rising.

Re:Says a man or woman

[Dorianny]

things like Infrastructure and Education. There is a reason why Corporations only move their assets to Tax Heaven countries

A very simple yet effective way to detect half-educated retards spewing retarded bullshit is to check for abnormal capitalization in common nouns. Congratulations, you qualified!

Obviously the use of the word "retarded" several times in a sentence conveys your great intelligence and outstanding education and completely makes up for a lack of a counterargument

Re:Says a man or woman

[thegarbz]

Or never had to pay out of pocket to fix a kid's broken arm.

WTF is that a thing?

Re:Says a man or woman

[serviscope_minor]

or lack of willpower by the employees to break out of slavery

Ah, it's the slaves fault that they're slaves, then.

If the only options you see are being a wage slave or starving to death, then you haven't really tried. A location where the people are being paid slave wages or starving is ripe for a new company to set up shop and hire willing employees for less than they'd have to pay at well-established locations.

Ah yes, it's so easy to set up a company when you're a wage slave and have no spare resources with which to set up the company. If you don't you just lack the willpower to starve to death for a few months or years before your company takes off.

Oh and if you don't have a head for business, you deserve to be a wage slave because fuck you that's why.

A business which pays slave wages is just ripe to be squeezed out by a business which will pay better (fair) wages.

Oh yes, that's precisely how things worked in Victorian England.

You know, or not.that they don't even bother trying to start up their own business to compete.

Starting a business is the highest form of intellect and worth. If you can't, then die in filth, scum. You deserve worse!

Re:Says a man or woman

[kenh]

That's the essence of modern American Slavery. Nobody's _ever_ forcing you. You're completely free to starve to death and die in the streets

Or, you could take responsibility for your life and MOVE.

Re:Says a man or woman

[kenh]

So uber will just say they can not find trained workers to drive for them and they need temporary immigrant labour and they pay the lobbyists to pay the politician to get the laws they want to cripple the wage claims of their workers, it's the bullshit American way.

Or, they could simply remove the driver from the equation and go with self-driving cars - but they'd never do that, would they?

Re:Says a man or woman

[Uberbah]

A very simple yet effective way to detect half-educated retards spewing retarded bullshit is to check for abnormal capitalization in common nouns. Congratulations, you qualified!

That's nice - now where's your counter-argument to what he actually said? Otherwise all you have is an ad hom with high amounts of spittle - which means the only 'retarded bullshit spewer' is you.

Re:Says a man or woman

[Uberbah]

The real wage slavery is caused by government taking up to 50% of your earnings as a baron of the land, you stupid serf.

Ah, Randians....the most obnoxiously shortsighted, self-centered, entitled pricks on the planet.

Civilization costs money. Don't like having to pay your share of the cost - GTFO and move to the Libertarian Paradise. Remember to enjoy your cholera.

Re:Says a man or woman

[fluffernutter]

Moving has a large financial and social cost that most cannot afford. For the ones that can move and get a good job, there are still costs that cannot be recovered from, such as not having family around to take care of the kids if mom and dad have to work lots of OT, etc.

Re:Says a man or woman

[fluffernutter]

Moving away from family support has a cost. it's a pretty big gamble whether a move will pay off or not. Just in the fact that your extended family isn't around to help with things any more.

Re:Says a man or woman

[Areyoukiddingme]

Supply and demand DOES apply to the labor force. Since tech labor salaries are not rising rapidly it is clear that those who say it is in short supply are LYING.

While this is true, there is an additional confounding factor. $100,000 is a magic number to management. Employees are not supposed to make more than that. That's for management. Not plebes. It has taken the pressure of an actual historical tech labor shortage to get salaries to push through that glass ceiling and there is still tremendous resistance, or Silicon Valley salaries would be 65% higher than they are, to match the cost of living ratio of the Midwest.

That's not to say that tech labor shortage is still extant. It isn't, or as you say, salaries would have continued rising, all numerology to the contrary.

Re: Says a man or woman

[Archangel Michael]

I am a Libertarian. I have plenty of "left wing" views on "rights" people have. I support Liberty for everyone, equally.

Re:Says a man or woman

[Archangel Michael]

Taxes for Infrastructure and Education pale in comparison to Social Welfare programs. If only our Gasoline Taxes went to the the roads, we'd have great roads and mass transit. Too bad we don't actually fund infrastructure that way. And education is always cut first, when it is time to spend money on boondoggle government programs. If we only had a prioritized budget system ;)

Wait what?

[wardrich86]

I thought the whole point of Uber was to pick up some extra money on the side? I didn't think it was designed to be treated like a full-time job.

Re:Wait what?

[Jzanu]

Uber profits from making it into one.

Re:Wait what?

[gurps_npc]

Irrelevant. That's kind of like saying "Yes, I am breaking the law, but I was only borrowing, not stealing it. I fully intend to give the bread back after I eat it." It's still illegal, and making that argument makes you look like an fascist claiming its not a 'real job', it's just something I pay them for working for me.

There is no "I don't expect my employees to earn a living from the amount I pay them" exception. There are exceptions for family, charity, and internships (and a few stupid ones for farm work). That's about it. None of those apply.

Re:Wait what?

[Sartr]

>There is no "I don't expect my employees to earn a living from the amount I pay them" exception. So a 15 year old making fries at McDonalds over the summer must be paid as if he's singularly supporting a family of 5. Got it.

Re:Wait what?

[gurps_npc]

How to look stupid - take a readonable comment, totally exagerate it so that it no long makes sense and then pretend that's what your opponent said.

How to look smart: Take the actual words and apply them.

So a 15 year old making fries at McDonald over the summer must still be paid the MINIMUM WAGE.

Which is exactly what I said. But you don't care about what I said, you just care about whether your own fascist ideas can be used to insult other people.

Hopefully the Kremlin pays you more for your trolling than an Uber driver gets.

You're kinda trolling

[rsilvergun]

but my God, you make a good point in all that. I'd been noticing how far right /. had moved and wondering why for some time. It hadn't occurred to me that they'd just aged into right wing politics like their parents from the 60s did... Hows that saying go? Everything old is new again...

Re:You're kinda trolling

[MightyMartian]

The problem being that modern conservatism has evolved into a reality-denying screed that is purely short term reactionaryism.

Re:You're kinda trolling

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Perhaps you've heard the saying that a 20 year old conservative has no heart, but a 40 year old liberal has no head?

Spoken by a politician who needed to justify switching parties for political gain.

But in modern America, old people definitely benefit far more from government handouts than young people.

Re:You're kinda trolling

[Rob Riggs]

I think if you look at the user IDs of the shit-posting alt-right accounts, you will find they are mostly new accounts. There are a few that have been around for a long time, but they didn't "age" into being dicks. They always were.

Why not?

[JBMcB]

Why not $30? Heck, why not $50? More is better, no? Don't you want workers to be well paid?

Re:Why not?

[dbarclay10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

Dick.

Re:Why not?

[Carewolf]

Why not $30? Heck, why not $50? More is better, no? Don't you want workers to be well paid?

Because the higher it is, the stronger the negative consequences are. A minimum wage should be a minimum (it is IN the name), it should just be high enough to do its job, which is to ensure people can actually live off the wage.

Au contre mon cheri

[rsilvergun]

they realized the exact opposite. Pity you didn't. Uber controls what the drivers charge, what they drive (minimum standards and all) and punishes them if they don't work when told to (by locking them out of the app for declining low paying rides). That's not a contract gig, that's employment.

Re:Was never meant to be full time...

[mrclevesque]

Part time employees?

Re:Tough shit

[aldousd666]

There's always another option. It might not be a great one. Or the one you want, but there's always another option.

lol no

[whoozwah]

uber is not supposed to be a full time job. If you're driving for them full time you're doing it wrong.

Re:lol no

[HuguesT]

It does make sense because your other full time job provides you with retirement, health and other social benefits. Uber does none of that.

Uber needs a recession

[ghoul]

The Uber business model only works for newly laid off workers who have a nice car with car payments to make. Its not meant to be a fulltime job. The entire gig economy including iOS apps only took off as in 2008 a lot of people lost their jobs but they still had cars, computers and loads of time on their hand. As we closer to full employment people who have a choice have moved away from gigs. Taxi companies are built upon the exploitation of illegal immigrant drivers. Uber as a high visibility company cannot compete with Taxi companies as it cant hire illegal immigrants and pay them sweat wages under the table. At the same time driving a cab will not support a minimum wage so the best thing for Uber would be to go back to being a gig company. Put a hard cap of 10 hours a week on driving for a driver - that will remove the entire pool of drivers expecting to make a living from Uber, stop promoting Uber driving as a full time job and stop giving leases to drivers to buy cars to drive for Uber. Stop trying to grow for growth's sake. Stay at the size of a gig economy company like a temp agency. They have some good software - license it to taxi companies and let them use it for managing their own fleets in a mutli-tenant kind of model.

Re:Uber needs a recession

[Jzanu]

Best post yet, insightful and fascinating - wish I had mod points to give you.

Re:Uber needs a recession

[Antique Geekmeister]

> Stop trying to grow for growth's sake.

If they do this, Lyft and local services will step into the niche they leave empty.

Re:Uber needs a recession

[Dorianny]

The Uber business model only works for newly laid off workers who have a nice car with car payments to make. Its not meant to be a fulltime job. The entire gig economy including iOS apps only took off as in 2008 a lot of people lost their jobs but they still had cars, computers and loads of time on their hand. As we closer to full employment people who have a choice have moved away from gigs. Taxi companies are built upon the exploitation of illegal immigrant drivers. Uber as a high visibility company cannot compete with Taxi companies as it cant hire illegal immigrants and pay them sweat wages under the table. At the same time driving a cab will not support a minimum wage so the best thing for Uber would be to go back to being a gig company. Put a hard cap of 10 hours a week on driving for a driver - that will remove the entire pool of drivers expecting to make a living from Uber, stop promoting Uber driving as a full time job and stop giving leases to drivers to buy cars to drive for Uber. Stop trying to grow for growth's sake. Stay at the size of a gig economy company like a temp agency. They have some good software - license it to taxi companies and let them use it for managing their own fleets in a mutli-tenant kind of model.

19% of Uber drivers are full-time (35 hours per week and more.) and (51%) of Uber drivers work 15 hours a week. Only 12 states issue driving licenses to illegal immigrants, a Taxi company would never hire people without licenses as they wouldn't be covered by insurance and they would be legally liable for any damage the Unlicensed driver does. Do some basic searches before posting something full of inaccuracies and speculation

Re:Uber needs a recession

[Patent Lover]

Actually the immigrant drivers are quite legal. Interesting that they haven't made it to Vegas. Most of the drivers I've met are transplanted Americans from all over the country.

Re:Uber needs a recession

[ghoul]

There are many ways to be illegal - you may be in the country legally but work illegally. Tourists on B1 as well as Students on F1 are entitled to get licenses and drive cars. Many students moonlight as cab drivers. Similarly refugees awaiting work permits moonlight as cab driver. Its one of the few jobs you can do without a US based credential as long as you know how to drive.

Re:Uber needs a recession

[Dorianny]

There are many ways to be illegal - you may be in the country legally but work illegally. Tourists on B1 as well as Students on F1 are entitled to get licenses and drive cars. Many students moonlight as cab drivers. Similarly refugees awaiting work permits moonlight as cab driver. Its one of the few jobs you can do without a US based credential as long as you know how to drive.

While there is more then a million Foreign students in the U.S the vast majority are NOT on scholarships and paying full tuition as a out of state student, which means their families are well off and the last thing they would want to do is moonlight as poorly paid Cab driver. Even in NYC the estimate is that only %20 of cab drivers are working illegally. The occupations that have the most illegal workers (NYC statistics) are Dishwasher (%54) Sewing machine operators (%35), construction/maintenance and cooks (%33 each). Again please do some research before posting

Re:Uber needs a recession

[iamacat]

And it's high time to end this stupidity. Have only one type of "visa" - work visa, meaning that you somehow support yourself and pay for your kids schooling, medical care and so on. Sanctuary cities can apply for visas for their undocumented populations if they want, but then they take full responsibility for supporting them and any damage from crimes they commit.

Then if someone is in the country for a decade, stays of trouble, doesn't try to use welfare, learns English and civics, just offer them and their minor kids citizenship. Chances are they will keep doing what they are doing, which is good for the country. No automatic birth citizenship.

This way we are welcoming as many people to visit and work as we can as long as they are being net benefit. But we are only welcoming people to stay permanently when they have proven themselves.

Re:Uber needs a recession

[ghoul]

Nativists will never agree. 90-95% of the people in the developing world would be able to meet those restrictions. People in the US have no idea how good life here is. People from developing countries will very happily work here and pay taxes and most countries don't even have welfare so these people are not used to living on welfare unlike US citizens.
Though I do agree that students on visas should be allowed to work off campus. Working your way through college is the quintessential American dream.

Re:Uber needs a recession

[Uberbah]

Sanctuary cities

Stop watching Fox and your IQ will go up 30 points within a week.

Then if someone is in the country for a decade, stays of trouble, doesn't try to use welfare, learns English and civics, just offer them and their minor kids citizenship. Chances are they will keep doing what they are doing, which is good for the country. No automatic birth citizenship.

More like....a green card handed to anyone who crosses the Mexican border, no questions asked, with a short path to full citizenship. Very short. Because there isn't a single country south of the border that hasn't been fucked over by the United States. Over and over and over and over and over and over again. Real justice would mean increasing your taxes to pay trillions in restitution to every country from Mexico to Chile, and extraditing every living president and official from the CIA (and it's PR wing, the State Department) to face multiple lifetime sentences in prison.

So STFU and let Jorge cross the border, since his parents were murdered by a Reagan-backed death squad. Let Miguel work at a car wash, as you bankrupted his family farm with NAFTA and then turned his province into a war zone with your war on poor drug users. Margarita fled the U.S. backed junta in Honduras, so let her graduate from a goddamned public high school.

Don't like it - write your congressman to demand that taxes be raised through the stratosphere, and that Obama book a one-way flight from the White House on Jan 20 to a docket in Honduras, just for starters.

Re: Uber needs a recession

[iamacat]

There are no jobs in US for 90% of world population. There are however for the most talented/hardworking ones.

Mixed Metaphors

[JBMcB]

Antoinette's expression is in reference the tyranny of feudalism.

Pretty sure Uber drivers aren't indentured servants, much less serfs. Seeing as how, you know, if you don't want to drive for Uber, you just don't load the app. The Gendarme isn't going to break down your door and drag you to jail.

Re:Mixed Metaphors

[Antique Geekmeister]

It also apparently wasn't Marie Antoinette who said it. She was actually quite sensitive to the distress of the poor, and the beginning of the French Revolution libeled her frequently for being foreign, not for anything she actually did wrong.

She was a fascinating woman, I can quite understand why the French king felt attracted to her.

Re:Mixed Metaphors

[Dorianny]

Antoinette's expression is in reference the tyranny of feudalism.

Pretty sure Uber drivers aren't indentured servants, much less serfs. Seeing as how, you know, if you don't want to drive for Uber, you just don't load the app. The Gendarme isn't going to break down your door and drag you to jail.

The expression "Let them eat cake" shows a complete lack of understanding that the absence of basic food staples was due to poverty rather than a lack of supply. Serfdom was officially abolished in France in 1789 by Antoinette's husband Louis XVI, although this was mostly a formality as there were few if any actual Serfs left in France. Most people were "free peasents" that were paid extremely low wages to work the lands of the King and Nobility FYI: Even thou the expression "Let them eat cake" is commonly attributed to Marie Antoinette there is no record of the phrase ever being said by her

Re:Mixed Metaphors

[Tablizer]

The Gendarme isn't going to break down your door and drag you to jail.

While it's true poverty in the modern USA is better than poverty back then, it's still not pleasant.

The implication I jabbed at is that most Uber drivers had plenty of immediate alternative and better income methods. It struck me as flippant and naive.

Re:Mixed Metaphors

[Antique Geekmeister]

Stopping a revolution is considered loyalty to an existing nation and the country of which she was Queen. The revolution led directly to famine, from destruction of the economy, and genocide during the Reign of Terror. So yes, I'd say that Marie Antoinette's political behavior was "not doing anything wrong".

Re:Mixed Metaphors

[phantomfive]

genocide during the Reign of Terror.

Really? Against who?

Re:Mixed Metaphors

[Antique Geekmeister]

>> genocide during the Reign of Terror.

> Really? Against who?

The Vendee, in a region mostly populated by the Catholics of France. The wholesale slaughter among them was one of the reasons the "Reign of Terror" was known as such. I do note that the genocide was not one-sided, the Verdee were themselves engaging in slaughter of civilians based on religious differences.

Re:Mixed Metaphors

[Uberbah]

Antoinette's expression is in reference the tyranny of feudalism.

Feaudalism == proto-capitalism, so the quote still applies.

Re:Mixed Metaphors

[Uberbah]

The revolution led directly to famine, from destruction of the economy, and genocide during the Reign of Terror. So yes, I'd say that Marie Antoinette's political behavior was "not doing anything wrong".

Whenever it's the rich and the bourgeois taking it up the ass, rather than the poor, the fainting couches are whipped out and hands get chapped from frantic wringing. Doesn't matter if the people's revolution is in France, Russia, or Cuba.

"There were two 'Reigns of Terror', if we could but remember and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passions, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon a thousand persons, the other upon a hundred million; but our shudders are all for the "horrors of the... momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty and heartbreak? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief terror that we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror - that unspeakable bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves."

Mark Twain, writing about the French Revolution,
in A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court

Re:Mixed Metaphors

[Antique Geekmeister]

>> The revolution led directly to famine, from destruction of the economy, and genocide during the Reign of Terror. So yes, I'd say that Marie Antoinette's political behavior was "not doing anything wrong".

> Whenever it's the rich and the bourgeois taking it up the ass, rather than the poor, the fainting couches are whipped out and hands get chapped from frantic

When it's someone like Marie Antoinette, who actually tried to stabilize the country, who are blamed for the atrocities and used as examples of the abuses and are executed for them, it's important to defend them. Blame her for her very _real_ sins, such as her long resistance to badly needed fiscal reforms, not for complete disregard of the poor and of the populace of France that was more founded in propaganda. The "let them eat cake" quote was apparently just such propaganda.

Re:Mixed Metaphors

[ixidor]

except, in a sense some are. there was a push in my city, not long after they first rolled out uber here, sign up drivers, and do a car loan as part of the deal. car payment comes out of driving profits. have to keep driving to pay for the car. now with new lower rates, have to drive longer, take more rides just to break even. at one point it was $1.10 per mile plus time etc... to drive, it was profitable. then they dropped it to $.75/mile. it still feels profitable, mostly due to not taking taxes out right away. after ubers cut, taxes, maintenance, and gas, it works out to like $.50 - $1 for most rides actual profit.

Re:Tough shit

[Archangel Michael]

I actually know people who aren't very bright, who are doing much better economically than people with Master's Degrees, because they don't attach stigmas to certain kinds of work that pay more than burger flipping. It is hard nasty work that doesn't require any skill. When you think certain kinds of work are "beneath you" you're already a wage slave.

Re:Was never meant to be full time...

[Antique Geekmeister]

> I don't think Uber ever meant its drivers to be full time employees.

Uber absolutely does not wish to take on the fiscal and legal responsibilities that full time employees cause for employers.

Re:Tough shit

[MightyMartian]

Even brilliant people can find themselves out of work, and become prey for pretty predatory companies happy to take advantage of them. I've worked in the employment industry for many years and see even some pretty highly skilled people stuck in shit-ass jobs because they can't afford to move.

That is why most jurisdictions have it least some basic level of worker protection, and why no one seriously contemplates turning the industrialized world into a Libertarian fantasy land.

Re:Was never meant to be full time...

[fluffernutter]

I think then the whole problem is that the math on the purchase of the car doesn't work out. They have to work a lot of hours to make anything once the vehicle expenses are taken care of.

Re:Tough shit

[mrclevesque]

I know people who aren't very bright and can't get *any* job no matter how hard they try

That's fine for lemonade

[rsilvergun]

It's a luxury good. It gets a lot iffier when you start talking about health care. And basic housing. And enough access to food that you can't be pressured into effective slavery. Do the folks in China working 16 hour shifts 6 days a week really have a choice?

No market is ever free. Money is power. The one who controls your access to food, water, shelter and health care controls _you_. You can either support democratic socialism, dream of joining the ruling elite (you're on /., so it's safe to say you haven't done that yet) or wallow in the muck while dragging us all down with you. Even if you don't choose one of those 3 options one will be chosen _for_ you.

Re:That's fine for lemonade

[RuffMasterD]

I agree with everything, except the three choices. The default will always be muck. If we don't support democratic socialism, then the ruling elite will choose brutal capitalism for us. If we are not born into the ruling elite, then our chances of joining are barely above zero. That leaves muck. Capitalism needs as many people as possible competing as hard as possible to get out of the muck. That keeps costs low and productivity high.

That's only because we're not there yet

[rsilvergun]

give it 20 years with the current policies and we'll get there. We were there for hundreds, if not thousands of years. The current situation where people aren't constantly being abused everywhere is a blink the the eye (and if you live in large swaths of China or India not what's happening at all). What makes us 1st world countries such a bunch of precious little snowflakes that It Can't Happen Here, huh?

Wow, just... I mean, wow.

[rsilvergun]

Are you seriously that dense? Or do you work for one of those Russian pro trolling sites? If you do see your boss, you need to brush up on your work.

Should a woman who gets beaten by her husband stick around because it's a "good economic move"? If you're answer is yes, then I suppose in that light, yeah, keep driving for Uber without complaint. Just ask your sugar daddy to buy you some nice sunglasses to cover up the bruises.

Re:Wow, just... I mean, wow.

[drinkypoo]

Should a woman who gets beaten by her husband stick around because it's a "good economic move"? If you're answer is yes, then I suppose in that light, yeah, keep driving for Uber without complaint. Just ask your sugar daddy to buy you some nice sunglasses to cover up the bruises.

Your argument does not apply to Uber. It applies to the overall capitalist system without a safety net. If we had for example guaranteed minimum income then people could work for Uber for any amount of money greater than the fuel and maintenance cost on their vehicle and still make money. Further, only the people who really wanted to drive for Uber would do that, so you'd only have highly motivated people who really wanted to drive you around.

By all means, keep railing against Uber, and miss the point completely.

Re:Wow, just... I mean, wow.

[Kohath]

Except it's just a job. It your employer is mean to you, you go find another job. Sure, that might take a few weeks or even a few months, but there's no other reasonable choice.

That's only if it's a genuine problem. If it's a dramatic story used to manipulate people, then you should make it more interesting. How about if Uber is secretly run by vampires?

Re:Wow, just... I mean, wow.

[fluffernutter]

Sure, that might take a few weeks or even a few months

Good thing a person's family can survive without food for that long.

Re:Wow, just... I mean, wow.

[Kohath]

Obviously, you don't quit your current job while looking for a new one. I feel like I should say "obviously" about 20 more times here, because of how you silly people can't seem to make your drama stories match reality at all.

For what it's worth

[rsilvergun]

thanks for posting what you can. We could use more old timers like you.

Car pooling isn't a full-time job!?!?

[raymorris]

You mean to tell me that ride-sharing, aka car pooling, isn't a good full-time job!

Damn, now I'll have to switch jobs. I think my new job will be recycling my cans.

Totally moot...

[Biogoly]

Uber isn't easy as a full-time job, it's really meant to be a part-time "gig"...a little way to make some extra money on the side. Uber is a bit disingenuous in their advertising for drivers ($1000/week, etc.), but you can basically make your own schedule and work whenever, where ever you want...you're an independent contractor. If you can't hack it as a full-time driver, then get a real freaking job. As others have already pointed out, Uber's grand design has driverless cars replacing human drivers as soon as they come online, so if I was an Uber driver I wouldn't count on having that "gig" for too much longer anyway.

So, No?

[JBMcB]

So, you don't have a good argument why the minimum wage shouldn't be $30 an hour?

Why is $15 acceptable but $30 is not?

Re:So, No?

[edtice1559]

http://www.economist.com/blogs... http://livingwage.mit.edu/page... What we try to do is to calculate what amount of money allow somebody to cover the basic necessities. Maybe there is an argument for $30 but it's not "more is better." The argument for a living wage is that if somebody works a 40-60 hour week, they should be able to afford food, clothing, shelter, and medical care. I don't know of any places where $30/hr would be needed for this. But the "more is better" argument is a ridiculous strawman which is why nobody will debate you.

Re:So, No?

[RuffMasterD]

My guess is whatever affords a quality of life better than jail. If I'm cold, hungry, and homeless, I just might decide to mug you at knife point to feed myself. If I get away with it, I win. If I'm caught, I go to jail and get free food, accommodation, clothes, and medical care at the taxpayers expense. I still win. Either way you lose. If I earn enough to make it worth my effort to stay out of jail, then we all win.

Anyway, some people are just not capable of participating in the workforce as productively as the rest of us, through no fault of their own. They were born that way. As a society we can let those people die, or let their family carry the entire burden themselves, again through no fault of their own, or we can all help though some form of social insurance. Letting people die because they are not productive enough seems a bit savage. The other two options cost society about the same, but one concentrates the cost on a few unfortunate families, while the other spreads the cost.

Re:So, No?

[kenh]

What we try to do is to calculate what amount of money allow somebody to cover the basic necessities.

That approach eliminates jobs by insisting that all jobs cover a person's "basic necessities" - and just wait for scope creep when "basic necessities" expands to include not only food, housing, but transportation (car), cable TV, high-speed internet, a smartphone, etc...

pump n dump scam

[TiggertheMad]

They are hemorrhaging billions annually, so eventually they will implode and the problem will solve itself. If they actually manage to achieve their goal of a monopoly on the transportation market, they will just get nuked with the Sherman anti-trust act.

I think they know this, they are just a big pump n dump scam for early investors.

Re:pump n dump scam

[MrL0G1C]

I was under the impression that Uber cabs turns a profit, it certainly should do when they take a 30% cut and do very little beyond supply and app and take the money, customer service from uber is dismal - they don't spend much money on it. Then billions they lose is loss-leading in new countries AFAIK, I expect the share-holders understand that.

" If they actually manage to achieve their goal of a monopoly on the transportation market, they will just get nuked with the Sherman anti-trust act. "

Like Microsoft was?

Re:pump n dump scam

[phantomfive]

They are hemorrhaging billions annually,

I really wonder how they can be losing so much money, considering they take quite a chunk of each fare from drivers. What are they spending it all on?

Re:pump n dump scam

[fluffernutter]

Blowjobs and blow, probably.

Re:pump n dump scam

[jeremyp]

Uber makes a loss of around $2 billion annually. On the average Uber journey, the customer pays about 41% of the true cost. Effectively, your journey is part paid for by the Uber investors.

A series of articles that investigates Uber's finances: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com...

Re:pump n dump scam

[MrL0G1C]

The question is how much of that $2 billion loss is investment into long term company infrastructure and investment into expanding into new markets and how much of if is annual costs. The article doesn't seem to answer that question.

Rigged market

[ezdiy]

A day trader perspective of TFA:

Uber dictates their working patterns once they have logged on, has raised its commission while cutting the rates they can charge, and imposes lockouts from its system if drivers turn down too many jobs.

Translation:

Market exchange dictates the trading hours, imposes ridiculous trading commision fees (15-30%), puts a cap on the ask offers and kicks you out if you don't execute enough trades.

Now, why on earth would sellers stay on a market this shitty? Bandwagon effect. Other competing exchanges don't have the liquidity. Why people use Microsoft products? Bandwagon effect. Once you get something shitty going, it can keep going on its momentum alone.

That the exchange can dictate price levels really is a problem because it creates race-to-the-bottom pressures - negative feedback loop - drivers can't go to competing markets which treat em better, because their cheap labor keeps those alternative companies out of the business (and even if those adopt similiarly shitty business practices, they end up being no better than uber). Thus the accusations of entrapment.

If Uber wants to be merely a clearing house for car hailing settlements that's fine, but people should call it out on their attempts to corner the market in order to keep their first mover monopoly.

Welcome to the business world...

[superdave80]

Those who have taken on debt to finance their vehicles feel trapped and have little choice but to work unsafe hours to service their loans and feed their families, it says.

This is where you learn to figure out what your costs are vs. your revenues, and then see if you make a decent living. Doing so AFTER you've already gone into debt for your business model is always a bad idea. Also, wasn't the point of Uber that you could use your existing car that was just sitting around doing nothing? Why would you finance a vehicle?

Report?

[XSportSeeker]

Why do we need a report for this? This was known from start. Anyone who thought otherwise has to be either blind or completely disconnected with reality. If you got into the service thinking you'd have the same conditions of a regular stable job, you were conned. Get out. Things won't get better. Uber drivers who are putting their livelihoods in stake for the company only have themselves and their ignorance to blame for. I'm sorry, but it's the f*cking true. In this case, I have absolutely no sympathy. Wake up and smell the coffee or something.

Remember people, Uber was never created to replace cabs. It's NOT a "taxi-hailing app". What an idiotic way to call the service. It never was, nor it'll ever be. It was supposed to be ride sharing. The concept was to get a little bit of money to give people rides during your commute or something, it was never designed for people to make a living. The whole thing was built in a way to make the company be as disconnected from people who used it (from both sides) in the first place. It's eBay, it's Craigslist, it's Gazelle.

Uber and all other similar companies will invest all their money to keep this concept as is because they cannot operate otherwise. They might have lost some cases in courts, but the company will always keep fighting to be seen as a service to connect clients and costumers. To think that Uber cares about drivers and passangers worries is dangerous is misguided. They don't care. Moves towards those directions is purely for PR and image purposes, it's not and has never been the core of it. Their only real worry is making the app available without fail for as long as possible.

They cannot operate as a taxi service, because taxi service already exists and it's fundamentally different. It's also not charity, the money has to come from somewhere. If you as a passanger where asking yourself how taxi service can be so much more expensive than Uber, there's your answer.

The original concept has been warped beyond belief, people who hate cabs (or just wanted to pay less for the service) used it as a weapon against traditional taxi service, people who had regulated jobs with basic welfare protections, proper working hours, and minimum wages were displaced, and now there's nothing that can be done. The concept already became too big to go away, Uber has become a company with enough power and wealth to lobby politicians and hire expensive legal teams in courts. And really, it's everyones' fault. Passengers for not thinking how much it costs to keep taxi service up and running, drivers for thinking Uber would offer a proper job replacement in comparison to taxis, Uber for selling itself as something it's not, and Taxi services for not updating and rethinking itself into something that could compete better.

You know what the solution is for the situation Uber created? This apparently forgotten thing called taxi service. It's Uber with proper hours, proper wages, proper regulation. It's nothing people haven't been saying since the whole business first started. And to be perfectly clear, it's not all that much different from comission based jobs.

It's no use whinning, protesting, complaining or making a fuss about it. The basis on how Uber operates depends on it not being treated like a taxi cab company. It's like a freelancer expecting to have all the benefits of a government job or something. It's simply not gonna happen. Ride sharing companies would die before modifying their entire business model. Not because the company is so adamant about it or anything like that, it'd simply be easier. Uber becoming a company that actually hire drivers directly, pay regular wages, and have all the proper welfare guarantees in place is as distance as Apple becoming an open source company designing software and hardware to be modified and built by 3rd parties. It could be done, but it makes no sense.

And in the end, it's not all that much different from your regular food truck thing or something. You work the hours needed, you find the spots that wi

Re:Report?

[fluffernutter]

Ok, I'll be the one to say it this time... How can it be ride sharing if the driver wasn't planning to go to that destination in the first place? You're only sharing a ride if you first plan to go somewhere and then find someone who wants to go the same place.

Re: Restaurant water

[hackwrench]

I drink soda from gas stations and grocery stores just fine. But whenever I drink anything with restaurant water in it, including plain water, I have a negative reaction.

Re:Eat Cake! [Re:The joy of contracting: don't do

[drinkypoo]

Are you by chance related to Marie Antoinette?

Uber wouldn't even exist if the system weren't rigged in favor of the extremely wealthy, which is what results in there not being jobs for the plebes. Don't blame Uber for hiring people for whatever they legally can get work out of them for. Blame the system that permits them to hire people for less, because if it's not Uber, it will simply be someone else.

Sure, you can think Uber is sleazy for it, but it's a waste of time crying about how they're utilizing the letter of the law.

People, Uber is not an employer

[pestilence669]

You can work on your own schedule and for anyone else you want. If that's the convenience you feel entitled to, you're a contractor. You don't get the protection of health benefits or a non-fluctuating wage. If you hate what Uber is doing, you stop doing jobs for them at the rate they'll pay you. It's that simple. You don't get the benefits of working like a contractor, with the expectations of being an employee. ... for driving. Jesus. When people begin to demand higher pay and more benefits for low skilled jobs, they get replaced with robots. It's happened in manufacturing, fast food, banking, etc. It'll happen to drivers too. Very very soon. And good riddance. You have to work 70hrs sitting on your ass driving, yet can pay all of your bills, and still complain about unfair your life is? Fuck you. I can't wait to tell my future robot driver how ungrateful you were. You don't like the pay, get a real fucking job. I'd rather be driven by restless retirees anyway. They're far more interesting and are thrilled at the idea that they can make extra income by driving. No self entitlement.

Re:Entitled with no marketable skills

[Actually, I do RTFA]

It is certainly possible to live on a minimum wage income if you (a) get a roommate and (b) don't have children (you can't afford them). Tens of thousands of college students do it every year.

Living like that when you're young is fine. Telling people incapable of getting a good job they aren't allowed to have children isn't.

For one, they'll have them anyway. For another, it's tantamount to eugenics to say "those people are worthless, they shouldn't breed"

Re:Was never meant to be full time...

[fluffernutter]

Then how can Uber have any say in the type of vehicle they use?

Re:Tough shit

[Uberbah]

There's always another option. It might not be a great one. Or the one you want, but there's always another option.

How so - has your area passed a universal income to go together with universal housing, health care and secondary education? If not, it's a farce to call taking the best job you can find (no matter how shitty) a "choice" when it's really a requirement.

Then QUIT

[p51d007]

Is anyone holding a gun to your head, forcing you to drive for them?

That's an even scarier thought

[rsilvergun]

because I don't know a lot of young alt-righters who are also tech savvy enough to be posting on /.. If it really is mostly new Ids then it's probably professional trolls :(...

It's force nonetheless.

[sethstorm]

Just because it's not your preferred term of force doesn't mean that it isn't force.

Re:It's force nonetheless.

[aldousd666]

Force would be against their will. What people SAY they are willing to do and what they actually do are very different things. If they really didn't think they were getting a benefit equal to or greater than their involvement with Uber, they would quit. That's the difference between force and not force. Whether they like their other options or not, they have options. Anyone who stays working for uber, or any other company for that matter, CHOOSES to. That is the opposite of force.

While that's mostly true

[rsilvergun]

with a safety net Uber couldn't get enough drivers at the wages they're willing to pay. I've take 2 Ubers and 2 Lyfts in my lifetime. 3 were people recently laid off and one was somebody who's job was outsourced to Mumbai and was making significantly less now. Of the 4 only 1 was doing it for 'extra' money (to save for a trip) and at her income level odds were good those 'savings' were going to get eaten up by car maintenance and/or some minor emergency.

Basically Uber only works because folks are desperate. I forget who said it but it's a great point: Uber is a Payday Loan where the interest is wear and tear on your car. And like a Payday Loan it's a bad deal.

Re:While that's mostly true

[drinkypoo]

Basically Uber only works because folks are desperate.

Yep. But folks aren't desperate because of Uber. And folks who are driving for Uber would be even more desperate without it.

What do you do if you get fired?

[rsilvergun]

I've been under the gun for outsourcing multiple times in my life but managed to say ahead. I watch a lot of folks who weren't so fortunate. I also saw the creative ways companies get out of paying unemployment benefits.

Bet you didn't know how that works, right? Do you know why it's called "Unemployment Insurance"? Like any insurance there are premiums, and they're paid by the employer. Did you know employers aren't legally required to pay premiums? The catch is if an employee gets benefits the company pays for them out of pocket (just like any insurance).

If you haven't figured it out, this results in a perverse system where the employer is incentivized to fight tooth and nail to keep the employee from getting those benefits. If you're rocking a college degree you've probably never faced this. For one thing it's not hard to find work, for another those kind of jobs don't usually bother with these tricks. They don't need to, their employees won't be hunting 6 months for a job to replace the meager earnings from their last one. OTOH if you're in any kind of entry level position you'll find out quick just how little actual safety net there is.

Basically, our safety net was replaced by razor wire when nobody was looking. And then there's guys like you who act like it's still there. Pray you never need it and find out otherwise.

Re:What do you do if you get fired?

[Kohath]

Is Uber bad for employing people or for firing people? Make up your mind

Apparently there's nothing anyone could ever do (or not do) to avoid being condemned by you guys.

Why not both?

[rsilvergun]

They can be bad for employing people in usurious contracts while also be bad for using illegal and/or immoral tricks to fire them without giving them access to the safety net they're due.

See, it's complicated like that.

Re:Why not both?

[Kohath]

Can Uber also be secretly run by vampires? These types of dramatic stories deserve a compelling villain -- so heroes like you don't have to save the world from people freely giving each other convenient, modestly-priced car rides.

No one is forcing the Uber drivers to drive, but

[HuguesT]

This has been said before, but from talking to Uber drivers, so far all of them find it harder and harder to actually make a living from Uber. Originally there was a lot of excitement because drivers use Ubering as a way to make extra cash, but now drivers have realized that their car is depreciating faster, that they get tired of it and that they don't put nearly enough money for retirement for this line of work to be worth it in the long run.

Lack of other, different choices == force

[sethstorm]

If their reason for choosing Uber is that they had no other options that were significantly different/better, it's still force.

Re:Lack of other, different choices == force

[aldousd666]

If that was their best option, (per you, they have no other better options,) and you remove Uber from the equation, you've still done them a disservice by taking that OPPORTUNITY to work for Uber away. Afterall, that was their best option. You can't have it both ways. It's either their best opportunity or it isn't.

Re:Tough shit

[aldousd666]

If Uber is the best job they can find, they had better be happy that Uber is there for them to find.

Side Hustle

[in10se]

Uber literally markets their driving jobs as a "side hustle". I've never heard them claim you can make a living doing it.

Ever see the movie Aliens?

[rsilvergun]

I don't know which species is worse. You don't see them killing each other for a share.

Or in case that wasn't blunt enough for you, the real villains are humans. And they're real, very, very real. Saying nonsense like you just did to try and diminish their evil works though. Again, nice straw man. Nice job trying to divert the argument away from the bad stuff Uber's doing and why it's bad. You take debate lessons from Karl Rove or somethin'?