Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber Drivers “Strike” and Switch to Lyft Over Fares and Conditions

buzzfeed.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 196 posts

Re: Uber Drivers “Strike” and Switch to Lyft Over Fares and Conditions

#181

Post by Spooky23 »

paulhauggis wrote: post #176
brianbreslin wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that it has been a long time in the USA since a taxi driver could earn a middle class income driving. Medallion fees basically make them indentured servants.

If that's the case, why would anyone do this by choice? You could just work for McDonalds and make just as much money for less effort.

Taxi drivers are usually contractors, so it's easier to get a job (sometimes as a sub) and its easy to avoid taxes. Think of it as a waiter job without the need to communicate well. Also, because of the off/hours nature, it's a good second job.

Because you have networks of contractors, you can lever social ties to get a job... This is especially important for immigrant communities.

Re: Uber Drivers “Strike” and Switch to Lyft Over Fares and Conditions

#182

Post by Spooky23 »

jefflinwood wrote: post #14

The really interesting story here is that if drivers are so willing to switch networks for better opportunities, there isn't a compelling reason for Uber to have the valuation that they do. The value of Uber isn't really in the tech or the app - it's in the networks of riders and drivers in each city. If each of those can be aggregated into some other kind of service, where Uber, Lyft, etc. are just providers of paym…

IMO, it's a great example of what happens when you dress up fundamental disrespect for the law and society at large as creative disruption.

Re: Uber Drivers “Strike” and Switch to Lyft Over Fares and Conditions

#183

Post by Cowboy_X »

paulhauggis wrote: post #176
brianbreslin wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that it has been a long time in the USA since a taxi driver could earn a middle class income driving. Medallion fees basically make them indentured servants.

If that's the case, why would anyone do this by choice? You could just work for McDonalds and make just as much money for less effort.

Please spend an hour in traffic, and then an hour In your kitchen -- cooking for a hundred people -- and tell me what is less work.

Re: Uber Drivers “Strike” and Switch to Lyft Over Fares and Conditions

#184

Post by jacquesm »

mncolinlee wrote: post #83
toomuchtodo wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're electric vehicles, they'll charge on their own based on closest charging station and the cost of electricity at the time they need their charge. Also, the only maintenance you'd require would be tire rotations/changes every ~5K miles, and a new battery every 150K-200K miles (Tesla automated the battery pack swap, I'm sure they could automate pulling four wheels off and bolting four new ones back on). I agr…

Heck, they won't even need to plug in once we get wireless, inductive charging stations or inductive roads. Both are coming. You could outsource the car cleaning with an agreement at any full service car wash. One doesn't even need a physical presence anywhere to make the business work.

Reliable wireless inductive charging for cell phones doesn't even exist. I imagine an inductive charger for a car would function very well as a harddrive eraser as well, especially in 'inductive road' form.

There will be significant power losses (10-20%) and alignment issues.

One thing I really like about the whole inductive road concept is that it totally removes the need for a battery, one of the most expensive parts of an electric car.

You'd basically have a full-size slot car (if you remember those) track (but without sliding contacts).

Re: Uber Drivers “Strike” and Switch to Lyft Over Fares and Conditions

#185

Post by rhino369 »

dnautics wrote: post #130
avalaunch wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Best guess: Uber/Lyft can't demand exclusivity from their drivers without crossing a line clearly delineated by the IRS. Doing so would be considered an "inappropriate degree of control" and the drivers would no longer be considered independent contractors, but instead employees. Neither Uber nor Lyft would want that. Penalizing drivers that don't accept a high percentage of rides offered them is Uber's attempt to de…

It's state-by-state/region-by-region. IIRC, California specifically disallows non-compete clauses in general [citation needed]. Seattle outlaws driving for more than one service.

Non-moonlighting employment rules / provisions aren't the same legal issue as non-compete. Non-competes are for after the contract ends.

It still might not be legal for a part time contractor, but it wouldn't be because of non-compete law.

Re: Uber Drivers “Strike” and Switch to Lyft Over Fares and Conditions

#186

Post by stackcollision »

Spooky23 wrote: post #182
jefflinwood wrote: post #14

The really interesting story here is that if drivers are so willing to switch networks for better opportunities, there isn't a compelling reason for Uber to have the valuation that they do. The value of Uber isn't really in the tech or the app - it's in the networks of riders and drivers in each city. If each of those can be aggregated into some other kind of service, where Uber, Lyft, etc. are just providers of paym…

IMO, it's a great example of what happens when you dress up fundamental disrespect for the law and society at large as creative disruption.

Thank you for saying this, it's exactly what I've been thinking since the start.

Re: Uber Drivers “Strike” and Switch to Lyft Over Fares and Conditions

#187

Post by TillE »

jbigelow76 wrote: post #64
peatmoss wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The media attention that drivers get through this action help signal to consumers that they are moving to a competitor. This might make me (a rider) more likely to fire up the Lyft app instead of Uber next time I need a ride.

True, media attention is important but I wonder if the protest will make it onto more mainstream channels and not just the tech news/blogosphere. Local papers in Dallas have been doing quite a bit of coverage as Uber and Lyft taken on the politically connected taxi industry here. I don't know if intra-service fighting would get as much attention. Maybe some HNers in the Long Island area will chime in.

> in the Long Island area

Long Island City is right across the river from Manhattan. It's technically on the Island, but for most people Long Island = Suffolk and Nassau, not Brooklyn and Queens.

Re: Uber Drivers “Strike” and Switch to Lyft Over Fares and Conditions

#188

Post by 11Blade »

Clearly the cracks are starting to show.

If the drivers create the value/provide the service and Uber is facilitating that by taking a share, it has to make sense for the value-creator/service provider to continue the relationship. If Uber erodes that margin, the drivers will leave.

Eventually Uber has to change to benefit their service providers and act a little more ethically. The drivers know of their underhanded ways with dealing with Lyft and eventually the public will.

I am an immigrant, I drove a black car in NYC(many years ago), my cousin drives one now. He is none too happy with the UberX situation right now.

Uber should consider the plight of the drivers and not their 100X VC overlords. Nobody ever got rich driving a cab, why victimize the drivers?

"Because we can?"

"We are making the market more efficient"

"Frictionless"

It is just at the expense of the drivers. That's your friction point.

Hard working people just want a fair shot, not to be exploited.

Instead of a billion-dollar pay day, why not just a little human decency.

Re: Uber Drivers “Strike” and Switch to Lyft Over Fares and Conditions

#189

Post by IanCal »

ghaff wrote: post #174
IanCal wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a certain amount of, umm, aggression is needed to make any forward progress They added a slight "aggression" back in 2011, if other cars aren't letting it out it starts pushing forwards a bit: > Sometimes, however, the car has to be more "aggressive." When going through a four-way intersection, for example, it yields to other vehicles based on road rules; but if other cars don't reciprocate, it advances a bit to sh…

I hope you're right but the very uneven progress of AI generally--especially when it involves real world interfaces--makes me skeptical. As I wrote elsewhere, even voice recognition is very much still a mixed bag.

But voice recognition is something we take many years to learn, even when are brains are highly plastic. I find it hard to understand people when they speak often. We disambiguate heavily based on context and expectation, very complex issues.

Re: Uber Drivers “Strike” and Switch to Lyft Over Fares and Conditions

#190

Post by mbesto »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #134
hnal943 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not optimistic about municipalities running anything efficiently. However, this would provide great opportunities to get rid of public transit as we know it. Private sector rides could simply be subsidized for low income users. How much more convenient would this be vs taking the bus?

A municipality can't write a check every year to a white label service that sits between its citizens and the self-driving vehicles, maintenance facilities, and charging stations built to provide automated mobility? My city provides roads, fire, police, and other services in a pretty efficient manner. If yours doesn't, I suggest you campaign for more transparency.

> My city provides roads

My city (or well my old city) Chicago takes 12 years to resurface a road. That's not efficient.

Post reply on HN