Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Technology

Uber Stops Upfront Ride Pricing in Response To California Worker Law (reuters.com) 123

Uber informed its California customers this week that it would switch to providing estimates as opposed to fixed prices for its rides in response to a new law that makes it harder to qualify its drivers as contractors. From a report: In an email sent out to riders and seen by Reuters the company said the final price would now be calculated at the end of a trip, "based on the actual time and distance traveled." "Due to a new state law, we are making some changes to help ensure that Uber remains a dependable source of flexible work for California drivers," the company said in the email. The change applies to all private rides, while upfront prices will continue to be provided for shared, or pooled rides. The email included a picture displaying an example of a ride request on the Uber app. It showed a $27 to $36 range for an UberX ride, the company's most popular private ride option.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Uber Stops Upfront Ride Pricing in Response To California Worker Law

Comments Filter:
  • In other words (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by quonset ( 4839537 )

    Just like every other taxi service does. At least those who turn a profit.

    • Re:In other words (Score:4, Insightful)

      by fluffernutter ( 1411889 ) on Friday January 10, 2020 @01:18PM (#59607106)
      A taxi service has a meter in the car so you can see as you drive what you will pay and get out if you don't like the price. This sounds like you get the price at the end and have to pay it.
      • That's right. Now Uber's pricing is a mystery, just like Cancer in California.
      • A taxi service has a meter in the car so you can see as you drive what you will pay and get out if you don't like the price.

        If you get a ride in a taxi and at some point don't like how much it's going to cost and simply get out without paying, that's theft. You still owe the driver for the amount up to that point.

        But the point is you don't know how much you'll pay until you get to your destination. Which is exactly what the Uber taxi service is now doing. Before they had flat rates, even though those rat

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Firethorn ( 177587 )

          This should mean more money for their drivers since now the true cost of being a taxi is being taken into consideration.

          It may or may not mean more money for the driver. It also incentives taking longer routes, a common complaint against taxis.

          That said, I think you're mixing up cost with revenue. Letting the meter run may increase their revenue. It doesn't do jack to their costs.

          Costs are stuff like fuel, maintenance, interest on car loan, depreciation of vehicle, cleaning, taxes, and insurance.

        • When you get out you have to pay, but my point was if you know what price you are at you have the choice not to keep riding and just pay what you are at.
        • The parent did not say "without paying" -you added that part, thus creating a strawman that you then attacked.

          The parent was stating that if you see the price on the taxi meter (the law requires the meter to be visible to passengers during transport) is going to be higher than you are willing to pay, you can choose to cut the ride short. With Uber's new method, you will not know if the ride is beyond what you are willing to pay until after the fact -there is no opportunity to terminate an expense that is g

        • did uber pre bill tolls as well?

    • by AvitarX ( 172628 )

      When I book a car from point A to point B, I always get an upfront price using a car service.

      Usually it's quicker than calling a cab company too, though it is not as quick as using Uber.

      What I'm actually surprised about is that the Uber is a fixed price, I never noticed but assumed it was calculated on reality of the drive.

      • by Nidi62 ( 1525137 )

        What I'm actually surprised about is that the Uber is a fixed price, I never noticed but assumed it was calculated on reality of the drive.

        I did as well. I usually pulled up Google maps (or watched the app's built in map) with my destination to make sure the driver wasn't going some crazy route

        • by AvitarX ( 172628 )

          I'm usually doing short runs around town (to avoid drunk driving) and tell them to go the correct way since it's sometimes stupid.

          Sometimes I'll stop and buy smokes too, I really hope they get some compensation for that.

          I also always tip the max amount (often 50% or so), so I think they do alright.

      • To me, that is the entire appeal of Uber. Knowing how much it is. In fact, that is what forms the basis of the decision. How much is it? Ok, go ahead and use them.

        Without try fixed price up front? May as well call a taxi.

  • So it's like how taxis price stuff? what about airport where at some it's fixed prices based on zones?

    • So it's like how taxis price stuff? what about airport where at some it's fixed prices based on zones?

      What about it? They appear entirely able and willing to charge for that.

      That's why when getting a Lyft from Folsom airport, you walk over to the state department of education building on the other side of the road and get picked up from there.

  • by DogDude ( 805747 ) on Friday January 10, 2020 @01:19PM (#59607112)
    I know that I'm in the extreme minority, but I refuse to do business with shitty companies like this. I'm happy to use my local taxis, thanks.
    • I know that I'm in the extreme minority, but I refuse to do business with shitty companies like this.

      That is pretty rich, have you seen how absolutely shitty taxi companies treat drivers? That's why most taxi drivers are rude and hostile, and the taxis piece of crap cars that were last cleaned in the 70's.

      If you actually cared about the workers or even ride quality you'd take Lyft/Uber every time, this small change is nothing compared to the loss of quality you suffer as a rider or a driver by going with

      • is it possible to use uber/lyft without a smartphone APP installed?

        website would be fine. but I'm under the impression that its ONLY via the app that you can use these services.

        apps are security risk. I won't install anything from any of those 2 companies. zero trust in them and less than zero trust in anrdroid ecosystem.

        so, unless you are willing to give up your data and privacy, you cannot use those services.

        true or not?

        • by DogDude ( 805747 )
          Well, there's that too. You're 100% right. I don't use a "smart phone" for exactly the reasons you state, but if I wanted to, I could order a ride from one of those companies via a friend or family member's phone, which I also would never do.
        • by raymorris ( 2726007 ) on Friday January 10, 2020 @02:47PM (#59607508) Journal

          > is it possible to use uber/lyft without a smartphone APP installed?

          Yes.

          I typed "uber.com", then clicked "Ride". It took me allmof six seconds to do this, less time than it took you to post.

          > website would be fine.

          Then use it.
          > but I'm under the impression that its ONLY via the app that you can use these services.

          You could have corrected that guess in less time than it took you to write it.

          • You have fast typing skills to get your credit card number in that fast (I'm assuming smart people don't have one click payments from paypal and dont ever save credit card info to anything online).

        • website would be fine. but I'm under the impression that its ONLY via the app that you can use these services.

          http://m.uber.com/ [uber.com]

      • by DogDude ( 805747 )
        That is pretty rich, have you seen how absolutely shitty taxi companies treat drivers?

        Yeah, it's so shitty that they offer them fixed rates, living wages, insurance, and benefits. That's awful.

        If you actually cared about the workers or even ride quality you'd take Lyft/Uber every time

        Did you recently have a blow to your head?
        • You are a monster (Score:2, Informative)

          by SuperKendall ( 25149 )

          Yeah, it's so shitty that they offer them fixed rates, living wages, insurance, and benefits. That's awful.

          Living wages [chron.com]? Really?? And piss-poor "benefits".

          You are a monster, trying to normalize how cab companies are living off the backs of drivers.

          There is a reason why most taxi drivers also work for Lyft/Uber, because they need to make enough to live.

          • by DogDude ( 805747 )
            Uh huh. And Uber/Lyft drivers make how, much, exactly? Do they make minimum wage?
            • by alvinrod ( 889928 ) on Friday January 10, 2020 @02:14PM (#59607340)
              First, since you're the one claiming that drivers aren't earning enough, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that. However, you should probably stop to ask yourself why if they weren't making minimum wage, why they wouldn't just go get any job that pays minimum wage?

              How is Uber supposed to pay their drivers more when they're losing money at alarming rates? The usual (and inane) line about companies exploiting their workers doesn't even come close to applying here. Apparently it's only the customers that are exploiting anyone since the company clearly isn't profiting and it's your own belief that the drivers (who continue driving for some reason) are getting screwed.

              If you believe that the taxi companies are somehow benevolent employers that great friends to their workers, you might want to read the news [nytimes.com]. It sounds like they were exploiting employees far worse than Uber could ever hope to do.
              • by DogDude ( 805747 )
                How is Uber supposed to pay their drivers more when they're losing money at alarming rates?

                That's not my problem. In the US, we have very basic wage laws. It is illegal to employ people and not pay them a minimum wage.
                • Comment removed based on user account deletion
                • In the US, we have very basic wage laws. It is illegal to employ people and not pay them a minimum wage.

                  Which is the crux of the disagreement, isn't it? When I hire a contractor to perform a service, it's fee for service. Neither I nor the law care how much they make per hour. If they're efficient, I'm probably paying much more than minimum wage. If they screw up, I may pay much less.

                  Uber has been very clear to everyone, especially the drivers: you're being hiring by the rider to perform a defined service at a set rate. How many hours it takes you is the driver's problem, not Uber's and not the rider's. And a

                  • by DogDude ( 805747 )
                    Uber drivers are not private contractors. They work for Uber. Uber is required to pay a minimum wage to its employees.
                    • Uber drivers are not private contractors. They work for Uber. Uber is required to pay a minimum wage to its employees.

                      Uber claims otherwise. The Feds agree. The California Assembly and Senate wish to change that designation and the point of the article is Uber is making changes to their policies to ensure the courts agree with Uber.

              • How is Uber supposed to pay their drivers more when they're losing money at alarming rates? The usual (and inane) line about companies exploiting their workers doesn't even come close to applying here. Apparently it's only the customers that are exploiting anyone since the company clearly isn't profiting and it's your own belief that the drivers (who continue driving for some reason) are getting screwed.

                Wow! There's some master level delusion going on in this post. Uber is not a charity or non-profit. Th

              • by Nidi62 ( 1525137 )

                However, you should probably stop to ask yourself why if they weren't making minimum wage, why they wouldn't just go get any job that pays minimum wage?
                 

                Because they fail to account for vehicle depreciation, fuel, increased maintenance, and time waiting for fares so don't realize they are coming in below minimum wage net?

              • How is Uber supposed to pay their drivers more when they're losing money at alarming rates?

                You tell us. How come Uber is buying back its own stocks if it's losing money? How come Travis Kalanick just pulled out 2.5 billion dollars of cash from Uber when the company is supposedly losing money? Or how come Lyft is giving its CEO a total remuneration package of more than 100 million dollars per year?

              • How is Uber supposed to pay their drivers more when they're losing money at alarming rates?

                Do what all other companies do - charge the customer enough to cover costs and earn a profit! Oh, but then Uber/Lyft becomes as much cost as a taxi, and loses a lot of the "appeal" of low cost... This is the natural end result of a business that builds its entire customer base on the premise of paying them (via heavily discounted services) to use them. When you give customers money, they will flock to you; but do NOT be surprised when they go away when you stop paying them.

            • Look dude, they are obviously trying to feel morally superior whilst simultaneously taking an edgy contrarian position - stop with your logic and reason and just let them strut ffs!
            • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • by taustin ( 171655 )

            Taxi Company: shitty wages

            Lyft/Uber: wages so low the state changes the law to make them increase it.

            Taxi Company: shitty benefits

            Lyft/Uber: no benefits at all.

            Taxi Company: high fares, but you know what it will cost in advance

            Lyft/Uber: We'll charge you whatever we think we can after you're committed to paying.

            The lesser of two evils may well still be evil, but it's also still less evil.

            (Did Uber ever fix their under-insurance problem when one of their drivers is hit by someone with no insurance?)

            • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • According to that link, taxi drivers make wages above the poverty line, and the job has no education or experience requirements. In other words, for people with the typical education of a taxi driver, it is one of the best jobs they could get.

            Now compare the wages for Uber. I looked it up and the average is below minimum wage, and the average driver only does 10 hours per week. They make different amounts at different times, do to the pricing method. That implies that their hourly wage would go way down if

          • Your link shows cabbies average about $25K; median US income is about $31K. So not too far below median, for a job that takes no skill or training beyond that needed to get a driver's license.
        • by AvitarX ( 172628 )

          Using Uber/Lyft and tipping (such as most people do with Taxis vs a few percent on those services) seems to me that it would provide just as well for the drivers.

          The biggest pay discrepancy between the two is that Uber/Lyft passengers don't tip.

        • If you actually cared about the workers or even ride quality you'd take Lyft/Uber every time

          Did you recently have a blow to your head?

          Since I can tell by your user id that you were born yesterday, I'll explain this one: He was born that way.

          You probably should have inferred it by the Super- and the cosplay cape.

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • Comment removed based on user account deletion
            • In fact, in the private property paradigm, a taxi medallion represents a share of curbside real estate.

            • by j-beda ( 85386 )

              Which the government restricts to keep the prices artificially high

              The places I've seen that use medallions have roads literally clogged with taxis. They're there to limit the number of taxis so the roads are usable, not for any absurd libertarian conspiracies.

              My impression was that most places using medallions were set up so that there was a significant shortage of medallions which is why ridesharing solutions managed to succeed against the existing taxis exploiting the loophole of being a "car hire" service rather than a taxi/"car hail" service - the cell app made a "car hire" as convenient as the "car hail" of the taxi.

              Anyhow, here is info on the crazy NYC situation: in New York City, the number of medallions has not changed since since 1937 at under 13,600.

              ht [citylimits.org]

      • I know that I'm in the extreme minority, but I refuse to do business with shitty companies like this.

        That is pretty rich, have you seen how absolutely shitty taxi companies treat drivers?

        In my State workers have rights, taxis are well-regulated, and taxi drivers get treated fine. There is always demand for competent drivers, they can easily switch companies.

        Most drivers lease the car, and are real-life contractors who set their own hours, choose where to wait when not on a call, etc. They also keep most of the profit when they have a good day. And there is profit, because we set minimum rates that are calculated by the State with the intent of guaranteeing that the rates are high enough to

    • by AvitarX ( 172628 )

      I'm happy to do business with local taxis when they're happy to do business with me.

      They often aren't. Unless it's a drinking Holiday in town, or an airport run, they take 30+ minutes to show up telling you ten minutes every time you check for up to 2 hours.

      • by DogDude ( 805747 )
        Maybe use a different cab company. You know that all taxis in the world aren't run by the same company, right? I live in two cities, and I have a great taxi service that I use in each.
      • When I call a cab, if they say 20 minutes they show up in 10.

        You either live in a tiny, tiny town, or else your taxi regulations fail to set a minimum rate. Places without a minimum rate often only have one significant company per city, because of consolidation driven by price wars.

        I'm in a pretty small city and we have nearly a dozen cab companies, and they compete mostly on service with the prices in a narrow band. Some people want more service, some of us want to load our own bags. There is a range of se

        • by AvitarX ( 172628 )

          Or I live in an area where there's no money in having a network of cars dedicated to driving around drunks (we are the worst) since it's only a few specific areas.

          Though I did see someone wait in my shopping center (where I work) 2 hours for a cab once.

    • Same here, never used it, never will.

      At least, not unless the outside world starts looking like Snow Crash.

    • LOL... If you actually think that the taxi companies aren't 10x shittier than Uber and Lyft, I'm pretty sure you're young enough that all you've ever known is the era of Uber and Lyft. Neither would have ever gained a foothold if the legacy cab companies were not a steaming pile of craptastic.

      With Uber and Lyft, I have no trouble getting a ride to or from where I need... that includes the Sunset and Richmond, where taxis just won't pick you up, and only drop you off grudgingly and with much complaining, ev

  • by rossdee ( 243626 ) on Friday January 10, 2020 @01:27PM (#59607140)

    So is it cheaper if you sit in the back?

  • Dickenomics (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Friday January 10, 2020 @01:29PM (#59607148) Journal

    They could statistically guess a single decent price, adjust their model over time, and have it average out to profits. They are just being a dick to "send a message" to other states.

    Fuber
     

    • I still don't get why they don't just let drivers and passengers set their own rates and negotiate. If they're worried about the prices getting to high and driving customers away all they need to do is provide a good way of notifying drivers when the average prices have passed some threshold which should get more drivers logged in and balance supply and demand. Just skim a fixed amount or a percentage of the fare and make some money instead of burning through investor money in the hope that somehow they can
      • by tippen ( 704534 )
        Who the heck wants to have to negotiate the price to get a ride? When I'm traveling, I generally have only a vague idea about how far the trip is or how bad traffic is, etc. The way Uber/Lyft handle it (pre the goofy change for CA) is great for riders.
      • I still don't get why they don't just let drivers and passengers set their own rates and negotiate.

        They're pathologically incapable of following rules, that's why changed the rule to a different rule that still doesn't comply with the intent of the law. They'd rather end up owing the drivers a bunch of money later than to have been following the rules all along. Just because. I guess it is the company culture.

        • ...that's why changed the rule to a different rule that still doesn't comply with the intent of the law.

          Funny about that. You can pass a bill and it still doesn't guarantee people will behave the way you want them do. Kind of makes you wonder whether legislation is an effective tool to address every social question, don't it?

          Seriously, when will we learn? Clearly, gig companies, workers, and customers we all happy with the arrangement, otherwise they wouldn't participate. Or more specifically, they prefer the gig alternative to their next best option. Why do we insist on second guessing them?

          Gotta go, need to

          • ...that's why changed the rule to a different rule that still doesn't comply with the intent of the law.

            Funny about that. You can pass a bill and it still doesn't guarantee people will behave the way you want them do. Kind of makes you wonder whether legislation is an effective tool to address every social question, don't it?

            No, I restrict myself to answerable questions instead of vapid, cynical, masturbatory rhetorical utterances.

            So to start with, does the process I describe end in the legislation not being effective? No, what I described is merely a multi-step process, operating as intended, that leads to the intended result.

            Because Freedom requires Process.

      • by pz ( 113803 )

        I still don't get why they don't just let drivers and passengers set their own rates and negotiate.

        You've never taken a taxi in an undeveloped country, or a one where attempts to fleece tourists is rampant, clearly. You've never had someone take advantage of you in a negotiation, either, and you have enjoyed great benefit from fixed, transparent pricing.

        The reason that taxis have meters that are certified by some local governing body is to prevent fleecing of unsuspecting or naive customers by nefarious drivers.

        All that you are suggesting, by following along the path that Uber is now setting, is that we

    • That's precisely what they did. Until California made it illegal for them to set the price. The driver needs to be the one to set the actual price, in order for them to be an independent contractor.

      The driver chooses when to work, where to work, what car to use, how much to charge ...

  • By refusing to give prices up front, corporations can just take everything we have like the medical cartel does. Our lives with having enough money to buy food and shelter are over in CA since they can just take whatever they want. CA hates the people.

    • by taustin ( 171655 )

      California is the second most hostile state (after New York) towards business in the US.

      Mostly, the state sides with the unions that contribute millions to reelection funds every year, and Hollywood's rich people. Everybody else is there solely to have money extracted out of them.

      • California is the second most hostile state (after New York) towards business in the US.

        OK, now look up what "business" does, and how businesses measures success.

        It may turn out that California has one of the friendliest business environments in the entire world, with New York right behind them. But that's only true if the purpose of business is to make money; if the purpose of a business is merely to appear Virtuous to people with certain political leanings, then you might be right.

      • That's funny, plenty of business are thriving in California. Ones that play by the rules.

        • My company has an office in San Mateo, CA that is thriving. It's despite the huge taxes and higher costs though. We have it since it's much easier to find good developer talent than here in Seattle.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by thomn8r ( 635504 ) on Friday January 10, 2020 @01:41PM (#59607198)
    What is the actual relationship between this pricing change and the new California worker law?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      Exactly. Explain it to me as well. I don't see how these things are related at all.

    • As I understood, nothing: it's a political move, to create pressure from users
    • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Friday January 10, 2020 @01:50PM (#59607240)
      I believe it's so Uber can ostensibly claim that they are not setting the price. They are merely matching ride seekers with drivers, and the driver is the one setting the price. That way the driver is acting as an independent contractor (charging his own price at a markup over what Uber charges him for the referral), rather than as an employee (giving a ride that his boss ordered him to do).
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • Uber is a logistics company where all costs are externalized...I'm not impressed.

          You're not? It's a brilliant bit of disintermediation and financial engineering. The "sharing" economy is a fascinating and unanticipated way to improve the efficiency of our use of physical assets. It only seems unimpressive in hindsight after we've had the "why didn't I see that?" moment.

          What I find ironic is that it seems to be liberals who both want to improve efficiency to Save The Planet and also hate on the sharing economy. Hiring out otherwise idle cars/houses/tools/whatnot is a great way to improve

    • What is the actual relationship between this pricing change and the new California worker law?

      The relationship is that while the old policy was clearly not legal since the new law was designed to force them to change it, the new policy hasn't been evaluated yet, so they can get away with this new thing while the State takes a bunch of time proving that they're not in compliance.

      Expect at that point an additional new policy that also doesn't comply. Eventually, they'll end up in court with a Consent Decree that sets the policy to something the State writes for them. But that's years of process away.

  • USA != world people!
    • Don't worry Ivan, if you keep going to your ESL classes eventually you'll have enough vocabulary to make an actual comment. Keep trying!

  • by bblb ( 5508872 )

    What a shocker, California ruined something...

    • by ghoul ( 157158 )

      You do realize Uber wouldnt exist without California?

      • Lol, sure. You sound like that fat idiot on Mr Robot who argle-bargled out the story between heavy breaths about cities being invented by a lightening strike, why without that one strike we wouldn't have cities! What fucking rubbish. Sorry, someone else would have done from somewhere else.
      • by Toonol ( 1057698 )
        I thank heaven every night, as I sit under the warm light of an incandescent light bulb, that New Jersey exists. Without that state, we would obviously still be using candles and gaslight.
  • This range of price display is anti-consumer.

    Range pricing will allow the Uber to send always send you the highest priced available driver, because then Uber gets a larger cut. Which you already agreed to, when you were shown the range.

    What is needed is a list of ranked drivers (number of rides and number of stars along with vehicle make/model) plus their ask price to give you a ride. Uber already has all this info. They just need to display it to the buyer.

    As a buyer you could also set a price and let driv

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • This range of price display is anti-consumer.

      No kidding. By institutionalizing the ABC test (one of which is the contracting company can't set prices) we're demonstrably hurting consumers. Way to go Sacramento. Too bad no one saw that coming.

  • between its initial offer of the price to the customer, and the actual distances and times (apparently need to compensate driver on that basis), across all the rides for the day (or a week, or whatever) across a whole region.

    And thus keep a fixed price for the customers (hint to Uber: This price certainty is your MAIN value proposition to customers) and get fair compensation to each driver.

    If the problem is that the initial offered prices are just systematically too low, on average, then figure out how much

Some people manage by the book, even though they don't know who wrote the book or even what book.

Working...