Uber Asks Everyone To Stop Making It The New Tinder (sfgate.com)

Ride-sharers have been using Uber and Lyft "carpool" apps to meet dates -- and now Uber's trying to stop it. An anonymous reader quotes SFGate: This week Uber updated their community guidelines to discourage passengers from using the ride-sharing app as a hook-up opportunity. Some Uber and Lyft riders have been using the car-pooling option as a way to meet or hook up with others. But Uber is not pleased and has advised users to not flirt or touch passengers. "It's OK to chat with other people in the car. But please don't comment on someone's appearance or ask whether they are single," Uber's guidelines state.
Their new policy now specifically states that "Uber has a no sex rule. That's no sexual conduct between drivers and riders, no matter what."

Comments

Independent contractor?

[duckintheface]

One more piece of evidence (if more were needed) to show that the "independent contractor" fantasy is phony. Uber wants to call it's drivers contractors so they don't have to pay minimum wage or offer benefits. But if drivers really were contractors, it would be none of Uber's business if flirtation or consensual sex were on the menu of services offered.

Re:Independent contractor?

[jellomizer]

Having worked as an independent contractor before. I still needed to follow the rules of my customer. In this case the customer is Uber. States when hiring contractors often having rules where the need to disclose their incomes, bonuses if they are a minority...

Re:Independent contractor?

[110010001000]

Bullshit. Contractors have to follow the companies guidelines when they are working, or they get fired. Do you think government contractors go around and are allowed to sexually harass people in the office just because they are contractors?

Re:Independent contractor?

[greenbird]

But if drivers really were contractors, it would be none of Uber's business if flirtation or consensual sex were on the menu of services offered.

Ummm, that's just stupid. They're contractors. There's a contract between the drivers and Uber. Both sides have to agree to and abide by the terms of the contract. Uber sets all kinds of conditions in the contract. Including this condition is no different than condition regulating the type of car or anything else.

In other words your argument is completely fallacious both logically and legally.

Re:Independent contractor?

[Dutch Gun]

I'm currently an independent contractor, and still had to agree to my client's non-disclosure terms, rules of conduct, etc, in order to take on that contract. I'm not saying I agree with Uber's notion of a "independent contractor". I'm just saying that *actual* independent contractors have to sign and adhere to workspace-specific agreements all the time. So, I don't think that's necessarily a useful metric.

Re:Independent contractor?

[MightyMartian]

In some countries, like Canada any kind of contract relationship that looks too much like an employer-employee relationship can be deemed as such, and there have been companies nailed very hard if they're determined to be an employer; particular when it comes to various payroll taxes or violating maximum weekly hours.

Translation

[tomhath]

This week Uber updated their community guidelines to discourage passengers from using the ride-sharing app as a hook-up opportunity.

Along with complete instructions on how it can be done. But you shouldn't follow those instructions. But if you do it will work quite well.

How on earth is this policy enforced?

[SpankiMonki]

Are the drivers expected to turn a hose on the passengers groping each other in the back?

Re:How on earth is this policy enforced?

[Razed By TV]

If Uber wanted to - ask drivers to report problem users, maintain a list of banned phone numbers and stop them from summoning Uber drivers.

I don't think it matters at this point

[rsilvergun]

the courts are pretty well stacked with a pro corporate / anti-worker bias. The folks who favor Uber's model have been taking over the courts by winning local elections via heavy money spending and gerrymandering for 20 years. I guess it's just another example of our "post-truth" society. If Uber was going to lose on facts they would have done so by now. Hell, they've more or less won every court case so far. Worker's rights went out the window when the blue collar and white collar guys started fighting among themselves and solidarity went out the window...

Re: I don't think it matters at this point

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe that is the case in the US, but elsewhere Uber has lost some major cases, including being kicked out of some countries altogether. I have no sympathy at all for companies whose business model is "illegally profit by avoiding social responsibility" by either tax dodging or in this case avoiding giving their workers due privileges.

Re:I don't think it matters at this point

[jellomizer]

Only 20 years?
Are you only 20 years old?

There has always been a gap between the big boss man and the workers. Communism started because of these issues.
During the 1990s we were at a peak. Cold War ended we were for the most part at peace with the world. People were working to fix the Y2K bug or replacing their infrastructure.
It was mostly due to circumstances and the tech bubble. Not politics.

Part of the issue from getting out of the 2008 Recession is the fact we do not have too many major players that came up with something new. The few exceptions are the gig economy jobs. Were people can empower themselves to make some extra cash on their free time. The problem became when these people made it their full time jobs.

Re: I don't think it matters at this point

[TapeCutter]

As an ex-taxi driver Uber look remarkably similar to old fashioned racketeers with deep pockets. In those jurisdictions where lawmakers have capitulated to Uber's 'corporate disobedience' tactics society will be spending the next 20-30yrs reinventing a well regulated taxi industry.

Re:I don't think it matters at this point

[ClickOnThis]

Don't presume to tell me what I'm confusing, asshat.

I just gained a new understanding of your username.

Single people hook up anywhere, news at 11

[Kjella]

They can make up any rules they want, if people take an interest they'll try flirting regardless. Compliments and open ended questions will for the most part get you clear feedback if your interest is wanted or unwanted. The rule is just there to punish those who think they're at a meat market or don't take a hint or outright rejection and starts being a dick to the point where they get a complaint filed against them. It's basically like hooking up anywhere except Tinder, it's not like that's the only place it happens...

Re:Single people hook up anywhere, news at 11

[BarbaraHudson]

The rule is just there to punish those who think they're at a meat market

Uber treats their drivers like meat, a commodity to be used and then disposed of, so Uber kind of IS a meat market.

Re:How can they stop this

[mysidia]

Next thing you know you will have discounted rides and "Sex" expected as part of the payment for the transaction

It may be a completely natural extension to the platform, but I could see why Uber might have obvious objections, As
this potentially eliminates their business model ---- it is a potential compromise on the professionalism, And this is fodder for competitors to get more regulations passed to protect consumers from Uber drivers.

Re:How can they stop this

[Mr D from 63]

Seems like a natural extension of their platform. I am wondering how they could have not seen this possibility, and how they think they can prevent this.

They could have some hook up version of Uber Select. Conversion vans would be allowed. It might require fuzzy dice and carpet on the dashboard just so you know what you are getting in to.

Re:No sex between rulemakers.

[BarbaraHudson]

Why should they worry about being sued if they're not the employer and the drivers are just independent contractors?

Re: No sex between rulemakers.

[prefec2]

The best thing for Uber is, legally they are only an app and drivers are using the app or are contractors. However, in the UK they got one over the head, as they were classified by court as an employer.

This is not about drivers

[afgam28]

From reading the comments, it seems a lot of people are misunderstanding the situation here. I think even the summary is missing the point! This is about passengers hooking up with other passengers, not with drivers.

Uber Pool and Lyft Line are services that let you carpool/fare split with other people. You request a ride, and it tries to match you up with people who have requested a similar pickup/dropoff point.

It's common to make small talk with the other passengers (just like you would with a taxi driver, or a regular UberX/Lyft driver) and people have realized that this provides a social pretense to meet other people and chat them up. FTFA:

Although passengers have no control over whom they’re partnered with, there’s a high-enough density of young, single people in a city like San Francisco that occasional romantic interludes happen. As people share the ride to their respective destinations, they have a bit of downtime to get to know one another...It’s speed-dating on demand, and the people doing it say it’s better than Tinder.

Lyft has even experimented with features to facilitate this: https://techcrunch.com/2015/05...

Re:No sex between rulemakers.

[Hognoxious]

If they arrange a meeting by old fashioned letter writing does that create a liability for Parker, Basildon Bond & The Royal Mail?

They're "settling" their big California case

[rsilvergun]

it's only a matter of how much they pay. But that won't change how they treat employees as contractors when it's convenient for them. Still no benefits, not workman's comp, no unemployment insurance payments and no matching Social Security or Medicare payments.

It's especially bad for SS & Medicare. The 'gig' economy is going to be a big part of dismantling what's left of the safety net. It'll pull billions out of those systems and then the right wing will point to a lack of funds as a reason to privatize the system (they don't want to do away with it, they want to pocket the money for themselves...)

Re:They're "settling" their big California case

[Actually, I do RTFA]

It's especially bad for SS & Medicare.

Only if people cheat at reporting. And given 1099s, they cannot make much from Uber while cheating. Contractors are required to pay both the employee and the employer portions of SS & Medicare.

Re:No sex between rulemakers.

[jenningsthecat]

They help arrange the meeting via their app, which creates some amount of legal liability.

They don't 'help arrange the meeting' - that implies intention. Their app and their infrastructure are being used for other than their intended purpose - that is, to arrange dates. Arguably, the telephone, a bulletin board, and a newspaper can be used in the same way - and I'm unaware of any liability ever having been assigned to any of those because people used them to hook up.