Hacker News Reader

> In this case Uber offered you $x. You agreed to $x.

When did they agree on $X? There's no contract between the drivers and Uber stating they they will work for a given amount.

The app sets rates based on supply and demand. Uber offers them $X. The drivers decide they don't want to work for less than $Y. If demand is sufficient, Uber eventually offers them $Y.

Surge pricing is basically a negotiation between company and driver. Just because the drivers have found a case in which they have extra leverage doesn't make it wrong or fraudulent.

Cartels colluding together to artificially reduce supply in a market is often considered illegal market manipulation. That lyft is acting as a middle-man to set market-clearing prices here doesn't change that.

This was brought up elsewhere in the thread, and it's a valid concern. But consider that this might instead be a strike. Drivers want to be paid $Y, so they refuse to work until Lyft agrees.

I'm not sure where the line is between the two. But given that the market in question is the drivers' labor — and the ongoing question of whether the drivers are employees or contractors of these multi-billion dollar companies — I'm inclined to consider this "labor organizing" rather than "price fixing".

Yeah, and I'm not sure what's described in the article need even be considered "labor organizing". It seems to be just drivers exercising their power to not drive if the market rates aren't high enough. It seems like the weird signing off from the app actions wouldn't be needed if Lyft had better provisions for drivers to enter the rates that they're willing to provide rides at.

> In this case Uber offered you $x. You agreed to $x.

The value of x was established under different circumstances. What's wrong with bumping that to 1.5x as soon as you have the power to do so?

When the cab industry was "the system", Uber and Lyft beat the system and made money. Now the drivers are beating the Uber/Lyft system and making money.

Viva disruption.

EDIT: Actually Uber/Lyft beat the cab system and lost money, but that's another kettle of fish.

> In this case Uber offered you $x. You agreed to $x.

This is not true. Uber and drivers did not sign any contract specifying set rate.

Every ride that is offered to drivers has price based on supply/demand. Drivers are free to cancel jobs if they feel the offered rate is too low.

So the driver agreed to a certain amount and was paid a certain amount? Seems like I’ve heard that somewhere...

I never said they agreed to an hourly rate, I said they agreed to a rate, and they did.

They agreed to rates for previous rides and gave those rides. Each ride is has independent rates, there's no reason they have to accept past rates for future rides.

>They are contractors because they do not have any set obligation for time. Rate of pay or overall pay has nothing at all to do with that. According to the IRS they do not have a set schedule and they are contractors (that is 1099, not W2).

I'm not saying they're not contractors, I'm saying if Uber wants drivers who will work at a specific constant rate instead of signing out and demanding surge rates before they'll sign back in, then that's too bad for Uber. They created a market for driver contractors, and the drivers are participating in it. If they want shift employees who are obligated to stay logged in when a plane lands, they can hire some.

>In this case Uber offered you $x. You agreed to $x. You have no schedule, which is the perk of the job vs driving a cab, where you will have a schedule.

It's working exactly as intended then, Uber offers $x, drivers say "I'm not interested in driving for $x." Uber automatically counters with "Fine, I'll pay you $y."

Uber could make their system more hesitant to offering surge pricing after a bunch of drivers sign out like this, but when it comes down to it this isn't even a strike. The drivers haven't agreed to take fares at the lower rate, and Uber isn't entitled to their labor at any particular cost. They can all go home if they want to.

>And as for your third point... Uber already charges me for both time and mileage. I don’t see any problem with them paying their drivers based on both... but from the drivers I’ve talked to they already do. I can’t speak for any other service at all.

My point is that if Uber wants drivers a fixed particular price than then their "everyone is contractors" solution isn't appropriate. They can hire employees on an hourly wage to take shifts where they're paid whether or not they're currently driving a fare (mileage on top of that is to cover vehicle expenses). Sometimes they'll be busy, other times they'll have a slow night.

They don't get to have their cheap no strings attached driver arrangement cake and then also whine when drivers sign off and prices spike.

You have not agreed to 'x' until you accept the ride - and either the driver or the rider can cancel the engagement without penalty for a few minutes after the acceptance.

Plenty of contractors have set hours and come into an office. Several friends in software contracting firms for example do that. Also uber doesn't agree to pay you a damn thing. You could literally go work for 4 hours and make <$10.