Former Uber And Lyft Drivers In Austin Sue Over Abrupt Pullout

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The sad part about this story is that the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act doesn't cover independent contractors and self-employed workers. So, even though they got a raw deal, this lawsuit probably isn't going anywhere.

In Austin, TX last month, city voters approved a ballot measure that would require drivers for ride-hailing apps to pass city background checks and be fingerprinted. Both companies immediately pulled out of the city, suddenly leaving thousands of workers, many of whom were driving for their full-time jobs, out of work. Now drivers are suing the companies, alleging that they were owed notice under the WARN Act. The WARN (Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification) Act is a federal law that requires employers to notify employees and the state government at least 60 days in advance of a plant closing or mass layoff.
 
Really? You want to blame Uber / Lyft for pulling out of the market due to lawmakers and voters screwing them over? This is one of those special kinds of stupid.
 
I'm confused as to why there are all these stories about contractors trying to sue their customers. It seems like the media outlets are totally ignorant about how this works. If you don't want to be a contractor, don't take the contract.
 
Feel bad for them, the way Uber woos them into buying new cars for their "premium" uber service, throwing out all this info about how much money they "will" make, then they basically say "yeah we're not going to be running our app in that city because we don't want anyone to get fingerprinted because that would push more towards a case that these are employees"
 
Uber should be sued for false advertising. Other than that, anyone that really believes that Uber lets them make a living as a taxi driver without actually being a taxi driver are delusional.
 
Cyraxx said:
Really? You want to blame Uber / Lyft for pulling out of the market due to lawmakers and voters screwing them over? This is one of those special kinds of stupid.
Click to expand...

Actually it was the voters, not the lawmakers.
And Austin is probably the only city in Texas that is liberal enough to vote for such a stupid law that put so many people out of work.
 
nutzo said:
Actually it was the voters, not the lawmakers.
And Austin is probably the only city in Texas that is liberal enough to vote for such a stupid law that put so many people out of work.
Click to expand...

It really has more to do with voting against corporations writing laws. Are you in favor of all the laws that AT&T has put in place to keep fiber out of their market? I think not. Get real. Maybe if you had voted on the issue here in Austin, you may be able to speak more on topic about the issue. It's fine, though. There are many startups that are taking the place of Uber and Lyft.

To add...Houston did this first in the state of Texas...
 
Last edited:
Hey, guess where else does Uber operate that requires background checks? New York City. Guess Austin is just too small for Uber to actually care about.

To drive a commercial vehicle in NYC (whether with Uber or with anyone else) you need a TLC license, a TLC-licensed vehicle, and commercial insurance.
Click to expand...

Submitting a TLC license will cost about $400. This includes converting your Driver's License to Class E (approximately $20), a 3-year license ($252 paid upon applying), and the TLC drug test and background check ($100).
Click to expand...
 
From what I have read and seen, these people get paid less than minimum wage after factoring their business expenses (like their car usage costs). I don't see why in the world anyone would work for Uber let alone feel so butthurt to sue over their departure.
 
People I know made a fair amount off of it. Not sure how it is after bussiness expenses... but if it's a car they own already... I don't see how it would be bad.
 
Uber (and Lyft) left Austin because the voters weren't letting them have different rules for themselves than what were required for all other 'taxi service' drivers. Uber and Lyft isn't, and never was, concerned for their drivers. They're just another corporation interested in making the most money they can. Requiring background checks and fingerprinting was going to cut down on the number of drivers they had available. The more drivers they have, the better able they are to control the costs. If they have "enough" drivers, they will be able to tell them 'take what we're giving or we'll find someone else who will'. Sooner or later Uber (and all the other ridesharing app providers) will end up with self-driving cars and all those drivers will be out of work anyway.
 
Cyraxx said:
Really? You want to blame Uber / Lyft for pulling out of the market due to lawmakers and voters screwing them over? This is one of those special kinds of stupid.
Click to expand...


No one is blaming them, dude. The point was they were legally due notice before it happened, which would have given them time to find new jobs.
 
Still do not see how people thought that ride shares operating on the fringe of the law, would ever be some sort long term employment. A special sort of stupid there.

It was meant to be a car pooling app. You have a car you are going to work or wherever, why not pick up someone and drop them off along the way, and pick up a few dollars while you are at it. If it had stayed like that, I think it would have stayed under the radar. But, greed and stupid people turned it into something else.
 
pothb said:
People I know made a fair amount off of it. Not sure how it is after bussiness expenses... but if it's a car they own already... I don't see how it would be bad.
Click to expand...

As an independent contractor, if they report it in their taxes properly, they'll lose about half of it. Wear and tear on cars isn't cheap, something many people underestimate. It's not just gas, it's oil, tires, brakes, and all the other preventative maintenance.
 
Like I said, the ones I knew seemed to be doing good. They weren't doing it full time, as they were my co workers who do IT, but it was good money on the side for them.
 
pothb said:
Like I said, the ones I knew seemed to be doing good. They weren't doing it full time, as they were my co workers who do IT, but it was good money on the side for them.
Click to expand...

Yep, the ones doing it on the side were using it as it was intended for. The ones doing it for a living... They should just get a real taxi license already.
 
Zion Halcyon said:
No one is blaming them, dude. The point was they were legally due notice before it happened, which would have given them time to find new jobs.
Click to expand...

They were legally due notices as contractors?

I had a Soldier who drove for Uber after work and on the weekends. Eventually you know when the best times to go out are, he made around 400-500 a night on Friday and Saturday nights. He made around 225 working weekdays. After gas and adjusting his hours (40 hours a week) plus taxes he made around 3500-4000 a month. It really depends on where you are, I'm in Colorado Springs so there are always Soldiers and Airmen needing a ride on weekends who are out drinking. Weekdays he said the majority of rides were airport related.
 
next-Jin said:
They were legally due notices as contractors?

I had a Soldier who drove for Uber after work and on the weekends. Eventually you know when the best times to go out are, he made around 400-500 a night on Friday and Saturday nights. He made around 225 working weekdays. After gas and adjusting his hours (40 hours a week) plus taxes he made around 3500-4000 a month. It really depends on where you are, I'm in Colorado Springs so there are always Soldiers and Airmen needing a ride on weekends who are out drinking. Weekdays he said the majority of rides were airport related.
Click to expand...

Entirely depends on whether or not this state is an at-will state or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top