I have used Uber and almost all drivers tell me what they love about doing this kind of work is that their time is flexible, they can work when they want and choose to work. They are not being managed, they use their own vehicle and this is a clear sign that they are Independent Contractors. I can just imagine this was brought upon by a very few of their drivers and /or the taxi industry. At what point do we exercise to much control over business that it is impossible to do business anymore and provide great services that consumers want and can afford? This is not a good judge and can’t see his decision standing over the long run. If it does, it will be a sad say for America.
I can almost guarantee you this suit did not come from disgruntled drivers as much as it did from the personal injury lawyers who have asked for class action status. That’s the clue. That allows them to sue on behalf of a larger class and exact a higher settlement amount. This case won’t likely go to trial because there is too much at risk for Uber and the trial lawyers know this. They will use the fact that a loss could mean all the other things Uber would have to pay for (social security tax, work comp, unemployment)…..so this will allow the plaintiff’s lawyers to exact a much higher settlement amount, which I’d venture to say will be well into the higher 9 digits.
I disagree with Agency. Uber is a group of venture backed people who want to go public asap. They are not doing anything more than providing taxi service. They are just “re-branding” the service from taxi to “ride sharing”. These Uber drivers do not go into the “desert areas” and pick up fares – no Uber drivers are ever seen in the ghetto areas of the cities in which they operate. They are just trying to gain market share in an already established business model. Some Uber drivers may love it because they do not have to go thru what a cab driver does. In my city the cab drivers must pass a background check, pass a drug test, PAY for their medallion so the city makes money, take and pass a CPR course, have their taxis inspected for SAFETY and cleanliness two times a week – plus wear a shirt and tie everyday. No wonder UBER drivers “love” what they do… they do not have to comply with any laws or regulations. And what about that SURPLUS lines policy Uber is carrying… if the carrier goes out of business and there are passengers with open claims – I guess they can complain on Facebook since surplus lines carriers do not pay in to any of the State Guaranty Associations!
One of the reasons I use Uber often is because it’s inexpensive, they come in a regular car, its easy to contact as you can get them with a click of an app in about 5 minutes and I can site in the front seat. I never used a cab as much as use Uber, it so convenient and easy that it a service I want (as compared to a Cab were I always used them only if I had to). All driver I have come across speak English and are easy to communicate with, they don’t play the games like Taxi driver so, such as start the meter well before they arrive for pickup. Basically everything is transparent. Your approach is to handcuff innovation, also the taxi companies would have never come out with their own app had it not been for Uber. The best regulation consumers have is competition. As far as going into the “ghetto” as you state, I am not sure about that being the case for Uber, but many people don’t want to go there for their own safety, let alone there probably is not any kind of a serious business in this area for this upscale type of service. I completely get it that your Cab company has to go through all kind of credentials, you can make that market choice to go with a Cab over Uber, but kindly don’t dictate how other consumers are going to choose the type of vendors they do business with in the marketplace.
But Surplus Lines carriers do have to pay a higher premium tax in the states they operate in to sort of compensate for not being subject to the same solvency regulation and not having to pay the guaranty fund assessments. In my state they pay a full 1% more in premium tax and that can add up quickly for some of them, especially if there are few insolvencies to assess against.
I have used Uber and almost all drivers tell me what they love about doing this kind of work is that their time is flexible, they can work when they want and choose to work. They are not being managed, they use their own vehicle and this is a clear sign that they are Independent Contractors. I can just imagine this was brought upon by a very few of their drivers and /or the taxi industry. At what point do we exercise to much control over business that it is impossible to do business anymore and provide great services that consumers want and can afford? This is not a good judge and can’t see his decision standing over the long run. If it does, it will be a sad say for America.
I can almost guarantee you this suit did not come from disgruntled drivers as much as it did from the personal injury lawyers who have asked for class action status. That’s the clue. That allows them to sue on behalf of a larger class and exact a higher settlement amount. This case won’t likely go to trial because there is too much at risk for Uber and the trial lawyers know this. They will use the fact that a loss could mean all the other things Uber would have to pay for (social security tax, work comp, unemployment)…..so this will allow the plaintiff’s lawyers to exact a much higher settlement amount, which I’d venture to say will be well into the higher 9 digits.
I disagree with Agency. Uber is a group of venture backed people who want to go public asap. They are not doing anything more than providing taxi service. They are just “re-branding” the service from taxi to “ride sharing”. These Uber drivers do not go into the “desert areas” and pick up fares – no Uber drivers are ever seen in the ghetto areas of the cities in which they operate. They are just trying to gain market share in an already established business model. Some Uber drivers may love it because they do not have to go thru what a cab driver does. In my city the cab drivers must pass a background check, pass a drug test, PAY for their medallion so the city makes money, take and pass a CPR course, have their taxis inspected for SAFETY and cleanliness two times a week – plus wear a shirt and tie everyday. No wonder UBER drivers “love” what they do… they do not have to comply with any laws or regulations. And what about that SURPLUS lines policy Uber is carrying… if the carrier goes out of business and there are passengers with open claims – I guess they can complain on Facebook since surplus lines carriers do not pay in to any of the State Guaranty Associations!
One of the reasons I use Uber often is because it’s inexpensive, they come in a regular car, its easy to contact as you can get them with a click of an app in about 5 minutes and I can site in the front seat. I never used a cab as much as use Uber, it so convenient and easy that it a service I want (as compared to a Cab were I always used them only if I had to). All driver I have come across speak English and are easy to communicate with, they don’t play the games like Taxi driver so, such as start the meter well before they arrive for pickup. Basically everything is transparent. Your approach is to handcuff innovation, also the taxi companies would have never come out with their own app had it not been for Uber. The best regulation consumers have is competition. As far as going into the “ghetto” as you state, I am not sure about that being the case for Uber, but many people don’t want to go there for their own safety, let alone there probably is not any kind of a serious business in this area for this upscale type of service. I completely get it that your Cab company has to go through all kind of credentials, you can make that market choice to go with a Cab over Uber, but kindly don’t dictate how other consumers are going to choose the type of vendors they do business with in the marketplace.
But Surplus Lines carriers do have to pay a higher premium tax in the states they operate in to sort of compensate for not being subject to the same solvency regulation and not having to pay the guaranty fund assessments. In my state they pay a full 1% more in premium tax and that can add up quickly for some of them, especially if there are few insolvencies to assess against.
Robbing Americans of their freedom is like taking candy from a baby. The judge, Edward Chen, has roots in a communist culture.