Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Stats Transportation

Uber Challenges Study Suggesting Its Drivers Earn $3.37 Per Hour (reuters.com) 271

An MIT study using data from more than 1,100 Uber and Lyft drivers concluded they're earning a median pretax profit of just $3.37 per hour. But now Reuters reports: Uber Chief Executive Dara Khosrowshahi criticized the MIT study in a tweet on Friday as "Mathematically Incompetent Theories (at least as it pertains to ride-sharing)," and linked to a response by Uber chief economist Jonathan Hall that challenged the study's methodology. Hall's rebuttal to the study said the likely misinterpretation of a survey question and the study's "inconsistent logic" produced a wage result that was below similar studies elsewhere. He said the study used a "flawed methodology" compared with a survey that found drivers' average hour earnings were $15.68. "The earnings figures suggested in the paper are less than half the hourly earnings numbers reported in the very survey the paper derives its data from," wrote Hall.

The MIT study's lead author, Stephen Zoepf, told Reuters in an email on Saturday, "I can see how the question on revenue might have been interpreted differently by respondents" and called Hall's rebuttal thoughtful. "I'm re-running the analysis this weekend using Uber's more optimistic assumptions and should have new results and a public response acknowledging the discrepancy by Monday," he wrote.

Saturday Uber's CEO tweeted a thank-you to MIT, "for listening and revisiting this study and its findings. Right thing to do."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Uber Challenges Study Suggesting Its Drivers Earn $3.37 Per Hour

Comments Filter:
  • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Sunday March 04, 2018 @02:18PM (#56206479)
    Nice, calm discussion about the merits of an argument. Listening to and understanding the points made by those with an opposing viewpoint. Assessing the points they make in an unbiased manner. And acknowledging when they may have a legitimate point, and re-doing your work to adjust for it.

    Instead we mostly have people shouting at each other, refusing to listen to or even to interact with each other simply because they have different viewpoints. Because both sides "know" that their side is right and the other is wrong.
    • A common issue with these wage calculations is - what happens when you are logged into the app but there are no fares? If you count that time as working, then your hourly rate will be quite low. But are you really working if the app is on and you are just waiting for a fare to show up?

      This is part of the argument the employee rights people try to make, they want people to be paid minimum wage just for turning the app on. But that immediately falls apart because drivers often log into Uber and Lyft simultane

      • by Kjella ( 173770 )

        A common issue with these wage calculations is - what happens when you are logged into the app but there are no fares? If you count that time as working, then your hourly rate will be quite low. But are you really working if the app is on and you are just waiting for a fare to show up?

        Well how practical is it to be doing anything else, accept the fare, drop whatever you're doing, get in your car and make the pickup? And when that fare brings you to the other side of town you can either pick up a new fare or drive home on your own dime, not much choice then. I don't think a retail clerk has time off even if the store is empty for a few minutes, I don't think a taxi driver has time off if he's idling in his car waiting for the next fare. That said, if Uber were forced to introduce a "shift

        • Well how practical is it to be doing anything else, accept the fare, drop whatever you're doing, get in your car and make the pickup?

          Well, if I were mowing the grass, pretty easy. Or watching TV, for that matter. Or even driving home from my day-job.

        • Taxi drivers pay the taxi cab company to rent the taxi in 24hr blocks. What they do with it during the 24 hrs is their own business. Taxi drivers are independent contractors not employees. If a taxi driver is idling for a fare, that's because he chose to not because his employer made him do it.

          Retail clerks have assigned tasks to do when no customers are present. How do you think the stores get restocked and who refolds everything when someone messes it all up? Who does inventory, who cleans the restroom, e

          • Why would a taxi driver rent a taxi for 24h when he legally only can drive it 8h a day?
            Most taxi drivers in my country are employees of the taxi company.

            If a taxi driver is idling for a fare, that's because he chose to not because his employer made him do it.
            No, he is idling because he has no customer, you moron. And as you said above: he has no employer anyway in your county ... how fucked up is that?

      • they want people to be paid minimum wage just for turning the app on.
        That is just silly sorry.

        On the other hand: if the people are "full time working" and not just ride sharing and sitting with a magazine or espresso in a caffee, then yes: they should earn minimum wage during the time they have the app on.

        What else would you suggest?

        • The compensation paid by Uber/Lyft for doing a ride should include enough profit to cover some down-time and deadheading to the next pick up. So if you stay busy you will get enough padding to cover reasonable gap between your rides. But if you just turn the app on and don't pay attention to it, you won't be getting anything to cover down-time.

          That is how existing taxis work. The drivers pays a flat fee for the 24hr rental. If he does one fare in 24hrs he won't make anything, if he does 30 fares he makes a

    • Civil discussion aside, as someone who drove for Uber for a while, I can say without a doubt that MIT's numbers are FAR closer to the truth than Uber's. MIT said their hourly pre-tax PROFIT was $3.37/hr. Uber says EARNINGS are $15.68/hr and I wouldn't be surprised if that is what UBER makes per hour from my gas, my car, my wear and tear. Uber takes more than half of the fare that the rider pays. Once I'd figured that out, it was "buh-bye" to Uber. In my opinion, Uber is just a wage slave operation with dubi
      • You should actually be able to predict that already by the fact that driving a taxi is a very low wage job, and Uber claims to both be cheaper, and also to use more technology. But it still involves a driver. So. Obviously.

    • by sphealey ( 2855 )

      - - - - - And acknowledging when they may have a legitimate point, and re-doing your work to adjust for it.

      Instead we mostly have people shouting at each other, refusing to listen to or even to interact with each other simply because they have different viewpoints. - - - - -

      Uber's entire business model is based on (a) outright breaking laws duly passed by democratically elected legislatures (b) violating regulations enacted by regulatory agencies duly constituted by legislators and put in place by electe

    • Instead we mostly have people shouting at each other, refusing to listen to or even to interact with each other simply because they have different viewpoints. Because both sides "know" that their side is right and the other is wrong.

      The Godwin online meme used to reference a twentieth-century dictator. Now it's any reference to Uber.

    • I'll point out that Uber and it's ilk are bypassing employee protection laws that folks literally died for. Tempers can get a little high as a result. It's easy to forget all that if you've worked in tech your whole life, have a college degree and avoided the worst of the layoffs; which to be blunt a lot of us /.ers have.
    • I think Uberâ(TM)s business plan is to use people as a bridge to when Uber owns self driving cars, until then the whole ride âoesharingâ economy is total BS. At the current price level fares are simply not high enough to pay people well enough to support themselves and maintain their car.

      Just look at traditional cab companies before uber, they were no âoegolden ticketâ to mass riches, most were barely scraping by, that was the minimum fare to pay people and maintain the vehicles.

      No

  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Sunday March 04, 2018 @02:19PM (#56206491)
    it was the part where 30% of the drivers made nothing when maintenance was factored in. I've heard Uber called a payday loan on the maintenance of your car.

    I'll say this, I've taken 5 Ubers in my life and 3 of them were recently laid off folks trying to make rent with cars bought from when they were employed.
    • by Ecuador ( 740021 )

      Exactly this caught my attention too.
      And if 30% of drivers are losing money, even if they are really bad on personal finances on average, wouldn't, say, half of them eventually realize it and the first time we'd be hearing about it would not be from a study?
      Don't get me wrong, I've talked to a few drivers and I'd say most are not that happy with Uber, but the complaint is that they have to work more to make a proper income after their expenses - which means at least they are not on the red as in that case w

      • And if 30% of drivers are losing money, even if they are really bad on personal finances on average, wouldn't, say, half of them eventually realize it and the first time we'd be hearing about it would not be from a study?

        Yes? Only 4% of Uber drivers stick with it for over 1 year, and the number one reason for leaving is the pay. So yes, it seems like well over half eventually realize it and leave.

        Don't get me wrong, I've talked to a few drivers and I'd say most are not that happy with Uber, but the complaint is that they have to work more to make a proper income after their expenses - which means at least they are not on the red as in that case working more would not help...

        Well, the median driver is in the black, just not very far in the black. And if, as another study said the drivers that do earn reasonable wages tend to be the ones that have been on the platform long enough to know where and when to be driving, it could be the vast majority of Uber drivers either don't stick around long enough to

    • I'll say this, I've taken 5 Ubers in my life and 3 of them were recently laid off folks trying to make rent with cars bought from when they were employed.

      It's also a way for someone to get a way nicer car than they could otherwise afford, or get financing for. It's predatory, like most types of non-traditional lending (and plenty of traditional types, too) but it's conceivably a viable route for someone with a part-time job to get the kind of car they would get if they had a full-time job... by spending the time they're not spending working at their normal job helping Uber to put humans out of the business of driving cars. It's not a good career plan, but it

      • >It's also a way for someone to get a way nicer car than they could otherwise afford, or get financing for. Can they still afford it after they purchase ridesharing insurance on top of their normal insurance policy?
    • If you maintain your car properly in the first place that's bullshit. However if you're the sort of person who only does maintenance in an emergency or when a warning light pops on, that's probably true. Also, 4 cylinder cars are an inherently better choice for this sort of thing since the maintenance/repair costs for engine issues are significantly cheaper.

  • by selling copies of my poorly-xeroxed newsletter on the street corner. Should I be banned from doing so on the grounds that I can't feed a wife and two kids by doing that?
    • by selling copies of my poorly-xeroxed newsletter on the street corner. Should I be banned from doing so on the grounds that I can't feed a wife and two kids by doing that?

      Only if the trucks delivering your poorly-xeroxed newsletter to the street corner are improperly licensed, insured and unregulated, and you try to define the drivers of those trucks as "independent contractors" in order to skip out on paying payroll taxes.

      Other than that, your false equivalence is spot on.

      • Let's say a friend of mine with a van is willing to haul a load of papers for me on his way to work, which takes him an hour each way and happens to go by both the print shop and my street corner.

        Is it OK if he does it for free out of the kindness of his heart?

        Is it OK if I pay him $3 to reimburse him for the gas in his truck?

        Is it OK if I pay him an extra dollar because I don't believe in accepting charity?

        If it isn't, then why?
        • I'm pretty sure your example would be more apt if you had 327,000 friends that you tried to pay $3 for hauling your papers.

          Unless you believe that all Uber drivers are personal friends of the owners of Uber and are happy to help out by working for $3/hr.

          • So somewhere between one and several hundred thousand there's a magic number? What is it? How does one go about determining what it should be?

            What if I'm particularly gregarious and have ten friends? A hundred? What if we entered into an LLP and our trucks and our time are the capital we invest in this operation? What if we plan to, but haven't yet filed the paperwork?

            No one is forcing anyone to drive for Uber or Lyft or any of the dozen and a half local equivalents.
            • So somewhere between one and several hundred thousand there's a magic number? What is it?

              Three. The number is three.

              How does one go about determining what it should be?

              Fortunately, you don't have to go about determining what the number should be because I've just told you. You're welcome.

        • Is it OK if he does it for free out of the kindness of his heart?

          Yes. You are not paying, so the regulations about commercial delivery service do not apply.

          Is it OK if I pay him $3 to reimburse him for the gas in his truck?

          No. You've entered the world of commercial service and regulations apply. Doesn't matter if you say "this is for gas!". It's not like a regular delivery truck driver is not charging you for gas.

          Is it OK if I pay him an extra dollar because I don't believe in accepting charity?

          No, still commercial service.

          If you want to be 100% legal with this, you'd need to disconnect your "gift" from the service your friend provided.
          You're also not likely to be caught unless this is a regular thing.

    • by selling copies of my poorly-xeroxed newsletter on the street corner. Should I be banned from doing so on the grounds that I can't feed a wife and two kids by doing that?

      Except you're working for yourself and not another company as an employee.

    • by judoguy ( 534886 )

      by selling copies of my poorly-xeroxed newsletter on the street corner. Should I be banned from doing so on the grounds that I can't feed a wife and two kids by doing that?

      This is exactly the point. Is someone forcing the Uber driver to drive?

      If not, what's the beef? We somehow want to make it illegal to make a bad business decision?

      I assume that driving for a ride share service, unlike buying a storefront and inventory, etc., provides immediate feedback. Am I making any money? Am I making enough money? Seems to be one of the lowest risk things one could try.

    • You're free to be as innovative and entrepreneurial as you want, as long as you're not imposing negative externalities [investopedia.com] on others.

      However, rideshare drivers are not entrepreneurs. They're signing up with a central entity that is using them to make money. The individual drivers are terrible negotiators and as a result, keep a small fraction of the income they generate. This is true in a lot of industries. For programmers working at government contractors, get a look at the rates you're billed out at, and the

      • No one forces anyone to do anything. If a programmer wants to "negotiate" he can bill himself out and cut out the middle man. Many do. Many don't. I know a bunch from column A and a bunch from column B. The ones who don't don't because they don't want the hassle of running a business on top of doing the work they're paid to do and the difference in dollars isn't worth it.

        Same thing with Uber. No one is making you drive for them. If you've got the entrepreneurial bent, you can start your own car service. Yo
        • No one forces anyone to do anything. If a programmer wants to "negotiate" he can bill himself out and cut out the middle man. Many do. Many don't. I know a bunch from column A and a bunch from column B. The ones who don't don't because they don't want the hassle of running a business on top of doing the work they're paid to do and the difference in dollars isn't worth it.

          I'm not saying they need to become a business, just that they're being taken advantage of because they're poor negotiators. I'm just saying it's not an equitable outcome.

          Same thing with Uber. No one is making you drive for them. If you've got the entrepreneurial bent, you can start your own car service. You'll have to do a lot more leg work though, and that means giving up your day job if you've got one. That's not worth it for a lot of people. So they take the lower pay for the lower amount of things to have to worry about.

          They can do what they want. I'm just saying it's not particularly fair that they're being taken advantage of. And they probably don't realize it either. They're just bad negotiators.

          What is it in the water that's making people automatically assume that when money changes hands in exchange for services rendered that it means someone's doing something to someone?

          The economy is a competition for resources. Sometimes the exchange is win-win: vendor makes a profit, and customer pays less than the benefit he

    • If you're just handing out a newsletter, go for it.

      If you're punching people in the face and then handing them a newsletter, there's a problem. Because you're breaking the law while handing out your newsletters.

      The problem with Uber is in most cities it is breaking the law. Calling it a "ride share" doesn't suddenly make it not a taxi, nor does it make you suddenly immune to all taxi regulations.

      (The taxi regulations on the books need to be changed too, but you still have to obey them)

  • Uber will authorize a multi million dollar study, headed by a professor with the creds and a history of being critical of Uber in the past.

    Can you guess who is going to get that job?

  • Uber no longer needs to pay its drivers well to build its base; that's done, and the rates came tumbling down.

    The pay is the smallest it can get away with before drivers leave in droves, in order to compete with cabs and other services. The only upside to Uber driving is the ability to set your own hours. Otherwise, there's no reason not to work at fast food.
    • Thats exactly how markets are supposed to work; and it is a good thing.

  • by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Sunday March 04, 2018 @03:36PM (#56206837)

    Or is the Uber economist's more confusing than it looks at a glance?

    At a high level his argument seems to be that MIT analyzed some data from this survey [therideshareguy.com] and came up with an inappropriately low number.

    The error the MIT paper is being accused of making is the survey tries to get 3 numbers:
    1) How many hours a week do you work on a ridesharing service?
    2) How much money do you make in a week?
    3) What percentage of your income comes from ridesharing?

    So the $3.37 is basically (#2 / #3) / #1 (presumably minus expenses).

    The Uber economist claims that respondents actually interpreted the first question as:
    1) How many hours a week do you work total?

    So if you worked 1 hour ridesharing and made $20, then you worked 40 hours at a regular job then the $20 you made ridesharing would be divided by 41 instead of 1 to give you earnings of ~$0.50/hour.

    The problem is the survey questions look a bit odd and the Uber economist claims an even odder interpretation:

    Q11: “How many hours per week do you work on average? Combine all of the on-demand services that you work for.”

    Q14: “How much money do you make in the average month? Combine the income from all your on-demand activities.”

    So the Uber economist claims that the MIT authors interpreted #11 to mean hours only from on-demand services and #14 to be money from all sources. Which is a bizarre interpretation of questions with almost identical questions wording, yet instead of pointing out how weird the interpretation is the Uber economist actually seems to imply that their interpretation is correct and it was the respondents who misunderstood. Which makes me wonder what the actual sequence and context of the questions looked like.

    Unfortunately he doesn't link to the study and the survey questions seem to only be available if "If you’re a media member and would like a full question list and anonymized data/calculations used in this report, please make a request here.

    The MIT authors seem to be taking the criticism seriously so maybe I just suck at reading, but given the nature of the claimed error it seems like he should be able to make a much clearer argument.

    • by Cederic ( 9623 )

      The MIT authors seem to be taking the criticism seriously so maybe I just suck at reading

      Nah, they just may have academic integrity and want to look into it in detail in case they did somehow miss something.

      • by dj245 ( 732906 )

        The MIT authors seem to be taking the criticism seriously so maybe I just suck at reading

        Nah, they just may have academic integrity and want to look into it in detail in case they did somehow miss something.

        Or somebody at Uber reminded the author that on a Friday night last September, they took a ride from a bar to a residential property that was not their home. And the next morning at 6:35AM they took another ride from that property back to their home. Perhaps they further suggested that the author must love his wife and kids, and it would be a shame if the author's ride information was made public.

  • by dave562 ( 969951 ) on Sunday March 04, 2018 @04:38PM (#56207149) Journal

    I drive for Lyft sometimes, but the pay is similar. I earn anywhere between $8 and $20 an hour. Mostly it averages in the $10-12 range. (In the Portland, Oregon area.) I have only been doing it for a few months. I have talked to some guys who were doing it when ride sharing first came to the region, and they said that they were making around $800 a night on the weekends. I pull around $200 for ~6-8 hours on Saturday. Any other night I am lucky to get between $75-100.

    I do not understand how people can try to make a living doing it.

    I do it for a few reasons. I like to drive and talk to people. It gets me out into the real world and off of the computer. I also appreciate that I can write off car maintenance, tires and things like that. I would also be able to write off my cell phone, but my main job already pays for that.

  • I am pretty sure the ~$3 figure is wrong, from one simple fact - Uber and Lyft are still in business.

    Because the truth is no-one could even afford gas for cars at that kind of wage. No drive would work for more than a few days for that kind of wage. And all of the Uber/Lyft drivers I have had have all been doing it for a while.

    The fact is that serious drivers work for both companies, and know how to take advantage of surge pricing and location to make sure they earn a decent amount of money. The fact is t

    • by Average ( 648 )

      No drive would work for more than a few days for that kind of wage. And all of the Uber/Lyft drivers I have had have all been doing it for a while.

      Irrationality can last a lot longer that an econ textbook says it will. I have relatives who have been hawking the same multi-level-marketing garbage for 4+ years and couldn't, at least honestly, show a penny of profit from it. And they'll defend their particular MLM religiously. Hell, I've known people who sent money to African e-mail scammers for multiple years. Didn't make them rational actors.

    • I am pretty sure the ~$3 figure is wrong, from one simple fact - Uber and Lyft are still in business.

      Multi-level marketing still exists, despite the vast majority of the workers losing tons of money.

  • I earn $13.37 per hour.
  • from a few years ago:
    Re:Amazon's Self-Reinforcing Decline in Hires (Score:5, Insightful)
    by Chris Johnson (580)
    Sure, a bit. Uber's the same thing. It's designed to make maximum use of crazy people and force the others to live up to that standard or be fired.

    I'll define 'crazy Uber people' not as 'danger to customers', but 'people who are bringing more value in terms of vehicle, skill and desire to please, than they are getting back in pay and benefits'. So the crazy Uber person is the one who keeps buyi

  • the numbers when the Fox counts the chickens....

6.023 x 10 to the 23rd power alligator pears = Avocado's number

Working...