I am glad that the city claims that Uber drivers should have better wages when they work, and I don't see why they shouldn't. Anyone who feels that this will make their rates cost more should understand that Uber has already increased their rates even when they weren't raising wages. To me, that is just the same excuse anyone who doesn't believe in raising the minimum wage even though the cost of anything has very little to do with the wages to begin with. If those people could have better paying jobs, they would have found them by now, but they can't, so they end up where they do. Seriously, I don't see how the executives over at Uber claim that they can't afford to give their employees living wages despite how much they are making in revenues yet they can easily afford for the high life for themselves. Also, those who believe that the workers are asking for so much just for driving people around in a vehicle, I would like to see you guys try doing that for a period of time and then tell me if they deserve a more decent wage or not rather than just claim that they chose to live their life and that what they got is nothing but tough love. On a side note, getting Uber reinstated in London didn't come for free, they had to agree to actual and more stricter oversight otherwise that would never happen, and I feel that the same should be for here as well. Then again, we will probably have Uber supporters starting to cry foul and feel as if the TLC is in this in response.
6
I am concerned this is all just short-term thinking and band-aids: I don't think everybody wants to acknowledge that in max 10 years both Uber and Lyft will replace all their drivers with computers. Don't get me wrong - I appreciate the effort and am extremely concerned for driver welfare, but if I was doing that (as many of my friends are) I would be already planning my exit from the industry and figuring out what the next step was
2
Need to go back to the friendly drivers and great service in the clean, well-maintained yellow cabs, Checkers, preferably.
1
The increased traffic of large Uber SUVs has an impact on air quality and safety of bike riders.
Here is a suggestion for Manhattan: reserve 2 parking spots on every central street corner in each direction (= 16 spots) for taxis and Uber/Lyft drivers - so they stop idling and cruising endlessly. Saves them a lot of gas as well.
3
There should be a 10% tax on all Uber and like ride fares to fund a longtime buyback of tax medallions from single medallion owners only. Fleet owners can take care of themselves. Yes, the medallions were purchased in a secondary commercial market, but they were purchased with an expectation that they had an intrinsic value established by the public authority, the City of New York, that ultimately is their issuer and regulator. So let the ride hailing public pay a tax to compensate single medallion owners for the public's desertion of taxis for slimy companies like Uber and Lyft who are making billions cheating everyone in every way with no respect for civility, decency or the need for responsibly regulated commerce.
8
I see two fundamental flaws in this minimum wage for drivers idea: 1) $17.22 per hour whether I up passengers or just sit in my car playing video games? OF COURSE drivers will "game" that system! 2) When the word gets around that you can make $17.22 for NOT working, even more drivers will sign up and there will be even more competition and more congestion on the streets.
The problem remains that the the app-based companies have over-expanded. There have too many drivers servicing their own market. And the solution remains: CAP THE APPS!
4
It is about time somebody reigned in Uber. They are nothing but a shell game. A high-tech Ponzi scheme.
5
Yellow taxi could be cleaner could play music could offer water could be little more personal. I changed to uber for most not all part because of the mentioned above. And yellow taxi does cost more But yellow taxi price metered the same rain , snow , rush hour. So yellow does hv that advantage
1
I've also found that yellow taxies are more consistent w regard to cleanliness and service compared w Uber, which I haven't seen any cost advantage in Manhattan.
And the result will be fewer drivers employed as prices dramatically rise
Another example of government thinking it can do better than private industry. If the ride hailing industry can’t find the right balance of fees, revenue sharing and service levels it will go out of business. Government on the other hand has never found a balance and loses money every year. The famous Jackie Mason once said, “How about the federal government, been around hundreds of years and never had a good year”. If Uber, Lyft, taxi drivers don’t feel they are paid enough, they will do something else leaving fewer drivers who will be paid more. If customers don’t like Uber’s prices or service they will switch to taxi, Lyft or driver their own cars. Government has no idea what anything should cost and with no competition, generally gets it wrong.
3
This is a naïve view of how the economy works. People who drive for Uber can't just hop to another job at the drop of a hat. They are doing it because it is a way to try and make a living. And, if they continue to do it, even if it is not paying enough, then that probably tells you that they don't really have any other good options.
And anyways, why should Uber be exempt from some sort of minimum wage law?
As for your Jackie Mason quote, it shows both ignorance (in that the federal government ran a surplus at the end of the Clinton administration) and a misunderstanding of the purpose of government (which is to help and protect people, not to make money).
11
I would like to know what drivers are they meeting with because 17.22 and hour that's really low I'm and uber driver,lyft driver and also work for a private company in nyc this year so far I'm up to almost 50,000 in revenue subtract my expenses and taxes I've probably kept a little over 30,000 for myself so I'm still trying to figure out were are people getting this information from I have pay statements and all the proof which I keep for my taxes
1
Uber loses money as a company because it’s business model is based on low prices, lower than their cost of doing business, to try to drive competition out. Then it intends in the future to raise prices and profit. In the interim, those in control have very nice paying jobs, funded on the backs of drivers and communities.
If they can’t charge more, nor pay their drivers more, or profit in the interim, or fairly compensate communities for the public infrastructure they use for free (congestion pricing in NYC or paying commercial tolls on my home town highways), then it is a failed business model. And is burning through investor cash, not in the development of a technology, product or marketplace, but as a life support system for a privileged few in the c-suite.
Maybe the vanity of personal convenience should instead be directed to making our mass transit the envy of the world and eliminating the sprawl supporting car culture that has finally evolved to personal chauffeurs for the masses.
10
And what value did the professors place on the convenience enjoyed by Uber/Lyft riders? This may hit the fan when voter/riders realize what the good mayor is about to do to them on behalf of Michael Cohen and other medallion owners. Don't kid yourself; this has nothing to do with driver pay and everything to do with political contributions from medallion owners.
4
Is that wage of $17/hour supposed to include things like auto loan payments, fuel, insurance and maintenance?
Do insurance corporations mind the additional exposure of having paying customers along for the ride?
3
Just wait until the big-scooter industry starts their lobbying efforts!
Don’t like the wages? Get a different job. Don’t cry to the government.
2
@Charles in a location that is not NYC or environs, I am wondering if you might not benefit from understanding a larger context. You could gain that understanding by reading the rich commentary here by at least 100 other commenters, most of whom actually live and move around in NYC. Your solution is so simplistic that it belies lack of understanding.
14
Why do I never read about safety (the public's, yours, mine, the drivers') when I read these articles?
I cannot be the only person who wonders about the risk we take when we ask a tired, underpaid, under-resourced person to drive me along highways and crowded roads.
I cannot be the only person who would agree to pay a little bit more to ensure dignity for the driver, safety for myself, and the general good of everyone on the roads.
I am glad all of these data analytics are being done, but they don't seem to be asking all the right questions.
11
There’s a concept in economics called externalities. It’s when costs are shared by society as a whole, essentially subsidizing those that are directly consuming the goods or services in question. The classic example is when a utility burns low grade coal: its customers enjoy lower bills, everyone suffers from higher pollution.
Uber customers realize fare savings from nyc allowing those black cars to use midtown space without paying. All of us suffer the effects of increased traffic.
23
People act like Uber is flush with cash when in fact the company loses billions of dollars every year. The idea that Uber can magically lower its commission and stay in business is just plain wrong.
Nothing good can come from decoupling the amount a rider pays from the amount a driver receives. It would completely undermine the marketplace dynamics behind things like surge pricing. If such a measure were passed it would almost certainly increase the oversupply problems the city faces because drivers would be incentivized to be online all the time regardless of whether there was enough demand.
This is not the right way to fix the problem of driver earnings and it makes me angry to see the city squeezing Uber when its failed medallion system and the ossified taxi industry have had a far worse impact.
8
I had a similar thought to you regarding their lack of profitability, but the article does state that Uber takes in $375 million in NYC alone, with operating expenses of $50 million in the area.
I admit that these are estimates and I can't couch for their veracity, but it seems that Uber's lack of profitability is by choice, not by an unprofitable business model. Uber's rapid expansion, marketing, and willingness to take a loss to grab massive market share and stifle competition in the early stages of ridesharing are why they are bleeding money. Investors are clearly fine with this, otherwise Uber wouldn't be able to raise such large amounts of money so consistently. Companies that have followed this approach (sacrificed short-term profits for market dominance) have done pretty well in recent memory, Amazon and Facebook as top-of-mind examples.
I am not saying that this law is right or wrong, but just adding some context to your point.
6
"New York City regulators are moving toward significantly raising wages for drivers for Uber and other ride-hailing apps. The step would make New York the first major American city to establish pay rules to grapple with the upheaval caused by hail-riding companies that has decimated the yellow cab industry and left many drivers in financial ruin."
This seems contradictory to me. It says that Uber and other ride-hailing companies have 'decimated' the yellow cab industry, and that this pay increase for Uber drivers is an attempt to 'grapple' with that fact. Yet won't a pay increase on the horizon only motivate ADDITIONAL people to become Uber drivers, thereby further digging into the yellow taxi drivers' pie?
10
The pay increase should come with a fare increase that will swing at least a portion of the demand back to taxis (and public transit). As noted in the article, it is agreed that rideshares are better than taxis, ergo it should cost more too. This should have the added effect of somewhat unclogging the streets that are now loaded with rideshare drivers.
3
To play devil's advocate: if rideshares are better than taxis, and rideshares cost less than taxis, maybe it is taxis that should cost less, and not rideshares that should cost more?
The fact is that Uber has ruined the lives and the wealth of many, especially taxi medallion owners. It is not a business that supports its employees or the communities where it makes its money. There are hundreds of more cars on the roads of NY than there ever used to be and, even if they are all hybrid cars, they have increased pollution.
Now we have their app, in Curb and other platforms, to help hail a NYC taxi. The best thing to do is to support NYC taxis and black cars, make mass transit better and more affordable, and end Uber's ability to conduct business in NYC. A one time buy back of license plates, and a period of "unemployment" pay for the drivers most affected would need to happen. But then, medallion prices would shoot back up to pre Uber levels, control of the streets would be reasserted by the city, and the TLC enforcement arm could make sure cars were safe and drivers properly trained.
enough is enough, time to get rid of Uber, not protect it.
8
Medallions used to cost a few dollars, however, over time, the price rose to $1M+. Owners of multiple medallions (fleets) grew richer and richer, while poor immigrant drivers got to rent these medallioned vehicles in order to eek out a measly income by driving 12 hours a day for the man.
Technology changes, and there is no way to stop progress. Airplanes replaced steamships for the most part. Do you want to go back to the good old days when it took 10 days to cross the Atlantic heading to Europe?
Would you trade in your car for a horse and carriage?
8
Richard,
Point taken. However, if the overall consideration is advancement of civilization then polluting, traffic congesting cars will not be the vehicle of choice. Mass transportation and smaller personal vehicles will do the job.
Our infrastructure needs to be geared toward the future by replacing some larger vehicle lanes with more thoroughfares for bikes, scooters, pedestrians and emerging personal transportation devices.
I thought that driving for Uber or Lyft was a choice and could provide SUPPLEMENTAL income.
6
Just because it's supplemental income doesn't mean the driver shouldn't be getting a fair wage.
5
Government regulators are much better at understanding markets than techbros. Best to allow The State to determine all aspects of transportation in the city. Tax, Regulate, Unionize!
4
I support this.
3
The taxi commission is a corrupt government agency that protects the yellow taxi companies. Notice they fail to mention that Michael Cohen owns 200 medallions. The majority of medallions in NYC are not owned by individual drivers but by such honorable parasites like Michael Cohen
15
Is it surprising that an unregulated transportation company is exploitative? Traditional cab drivers are being forced to complete with a disadvantage.
5
No one forces an uber or lyft driver to drive. They choose to. They agree to the bargin. This only props up the value of the medallions for the owners and attempts to make the taxi commission relevant again.
3
Why not charge a premium price for a premium service? Rideshare companies bought market share at the expense of the drivers.
Why do you think left and uber are "premium" services, what ever that means?
It seems that government intervention is inevitably called for. Either workers’ rates of pay are too low and need adjustment and protection, or corporations seek government subsidies when they cannot compete. Uber is clearly exploitive. No Uber executives are committing suicide (just destroying themselves in other ways). It is hopeful that NYC is regulating Uber profits rather than allowing them to dominate and destroy an industry and a work force. Uber’s ability to do business in NYC is not a right. Drivers’ need to make a living wage is an absolute necessity.
1
I see some people when they lose they gives excuses for this and for that, but Brazil’s players did better than the Mexico’s players on the pitch. Brazil will meet Belgium on Friday. Good lucks Brazilians you can do it this time. Neymar can score 2 goals next game.
2
Certainly all workers have the same right to a minimum wage. However, this will further legitimize these dishonest companies, which should be driven out, so perhaps the drivers should get even less. If they can't get drivers, they can't operate. Car services already provided an alternative to taxis.
They can CHARGE MORE. If you want a cheap ride take the bus.
1) These unwanted cars are jamming our streets---they just barged in here, then sent out political mailings threatening to run candidates against our elected representatives. If you use them, you are contributing to gridlock,
2) We don't need them in Manhattan----keep them in the outer boroughs in places where they may be needed, like green taxis
3) Congestion pricing should be $10/ride for Uber. Taxis have paid for medallions. If you think it's cool to "uber"--it isn't. It reveals you as a newbie, not a New Yorker.
4) Uber is making billions by exploiting drivers and jamming up our streets and polluting the air all of us breath,
24
No one is forcing people to ride or drive with Uber. It works. A low cost ride for New Yorkers. Di Blasio should be building more roads in the city and not messing with something that is functioning well
3
Yes, it's liw cost to users because the costs are being paid by drivers, public trans, taxi drivers, commuters dealing with traffic, etc. etc. Another example of transferring costs to the many to make money for the few.
8
Make no mistake, the leaders of Uber, Via, Juno and Lyft, are cutthroat capitalists. They have been dancing on the proverbial grave of the Taxi Commission while hard-working citizens who have played by the rules, mostly immigrants of astounding work ethic, have literally been cutting their own throats as the value of their hard-won taxi medallions has declined due to the capitalist chicanery and cheating of the ride-hailing apps. I applaud Mayor de Blasio for regulating the ride-hailing apps. These apps not only have failed to play by the rules, they claim no rules apply to them. The greed of the corporate leaders of the ride hailing apps is only surpassed by their arrogance, and like the disgraced Martin Shkreli, their day of legal Reckoning is coming, and may it come swiftly and with all the power and might of the just power of government.
12
Why stop with Uber drivers? Let's have the government decide the prices for all commodities, goods, and services in all US locations for all persons. This could be set up in a spreadsheet and revised periodically, say every five years. After all, there are very smart economists who know just what every item should cost. What could possibly go wrong?
10
Joel:
So you're good with workers (anywhere) earning poverty wages?
6
the market will determine the price. if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen. where were you when they invented the answering machine. thousands of secretaries lost their jobs. etc etc etc
3
For one thing, Uber is different because they are using city streets that were built, owned and managed by the government, and the government in every developed country must set rules for the use of their streets. You can't drive down 10th Avenue at 90 miles an hour, you can't drive without liability insurance, and you can't park wherever you want. If you are making city streets unusuable for everyone else, the government has a right and obligation to stop you.
There is no country in the world that is run according to the principles of Ayn Rand.
9
So now the Uber drivers want government involvement because they've decided that capitalism just isn't fair or fare. These are the people who have been trying to destroy the medallion owners and now they're crying.
3
Is it possible that Manhattan traffic is slowing down because
1) there are too many cars not paying enough to use this particular grid i.e. massively underpriced public utility,
2) REDUCED AVENUE CAPACITY... overlaying so-called offset bike lanes on top of the street grid, duplicating mass transit routes and not cutting back on street parking is just ridiculous and stupid, and cowardly. Great optics for politicians though.
3) there is no movement to force street parking to evolve (read: move it to another location e.g. indoors) and thus recover valuable street grid capacity, regardless of bike lane fiasco(s).
4) lame-brain Mayor, in his zeal to pander, orders delayed change from red light to green light.
5) dedicated bus lanes are well below sub optimal. In fact, they are wasteful. No network is designed today with dedicated paths. Shared paths, multi-use is optimal.
Technology exists to fix all this. Smart, honest, and clever politicians do not, however.
1
DC:
One of the big things slowing traffic in Manhattan is construction sites taking up massive amounts of street and avenue space.
Correct, most of the bike lanes (and I'm not gonna claim to speak for all) were stupidly laid out. A good example is 9th avenue north of 30th street. The Lincoln Tunnel is not going anywhere.
Uber has flooded the city with its cars, currently outnumbering taxis four to one, according to Curbed. The City Council should have restricted the number of Uber’s from the start and there wouldn’t be this problem. But of course Uber ran all of those ads saying that they were providing high paying jobs to minorities. So here we are.
15
How many minorities would be paid 17 an hour at McDonald's? Minorities often take jobs at places that dont pay well, and unless they go after all low paying jobs that hire mostly minorities, they are discriminating against one company compared with another. It makes you wonder who's pocket some of the lesser paying companies are in...
1
Dova...$17/hr less cost of gas, maintenance, wear and tear and the likelihood that you don't get a passenger on return trip. That's why they came up with $17. Costs are borne by the driver and gas ain't getting any cheaper.
Who didn't know this was the endgame for Uber - take the hugest cut possible from the drivers? The catchwords "change the world" and "disruption" are synonyms for "stiffing the working guy/gal." All those millennial munchkins who like tapping an app instead of flagging down a medalian are contributing to the rise of the next robber barons in this new guilded age. And uber drivers of the same generation, you are what used to be called scabs - those willing to sacrifice job security for ALL drivers to make a few bucks for yourselves right now. And it backfired on you a didn't it? Frankly you could see it coming like it was in slow motion.
You have been taught two key lessons. The only reason people "change the world" is to get filthy rich off the backs of others. And, this is why organized labor unions are so important.
M
30
Really, you’re going to blame the “millennial munchkins” for this, not all the generations before that allowed for an incredible corruption of the government and erosion of the middle class? If not for years of decisions enhancing the corporate lobby and undermining any semblance of the democracy, people wouldn’t be in desperate straits having to pick between driving Uber and other bad jobs with a minimum wage that hasn’t caught up with an ever rising standard of living. Grow up and take some responsibility. Millennials are the ones suffering the most from all the messes the older generations made and trying to fix them. Sorry if some of us aren’t perfect while we’re at it.
1
Right on.
Although the users of ride share apps aren't limited to milennials ("munchkins" was uncalled for), people of all ages utilize them.
1
A good rule in financial arrangements is that the risks and benefits must be allocated to those who can control them.
A Uber driver has no control over the supply of other drivers, and little visibility on demand. As a result having a business model where drivers must commit by purchasing the main capital element (a car at the required luxury standards) of the business does not make sense: of course they will end up getting screwed, and the only reason why they accept the deal is because they don’t have many options in life.
Conversely Uber controls pretty much the availability of drivers (virtually unlimited supply) and has very good knowledge of demand patterns from all their data. They should be the ones leasing the cars and attributing them to drivers, or at least have some skin in the game if demand is too weak to cover the vehicle’s costs. Also this way they might have a better case at pretending that the drivers are independent.
17
You would think that with the labor market as tight as it is, many drivers would take full time job and give up Uber/Lyft/Juno. Anyone who has been self employed as they are, paying self employment tax, on earnings that low should be looking to do something better. I wonder what proportion of the drivers aren't legally here, so aren't legal to work for any employer who would check.
3
It has been interesting to meet the number of so called legal residents in my city who can't find jobs. Houston has a ton of open jobs in all markets, and anyone needing one just has to apply. I find it fishy when a driver claims they can't find a job...right...
1
Kurfco, there are myriad reasons why people drive Uber. Many are 'doing something better' like going to school, starting their own business or just trying to get some extra money to get ahead. They drive because of the flexibility. That doesn't mean they shoukd be exploited. From some of the comments here, I think the concept of respect for working people is just bunk.
1
The drivers knew exactly what they were signing up for. Sorry, but they new that Uber would take a steep commission! My empathy is with the taxi drivers who spent thousands on a medallion. Uber drivers had no problem cutting into the profit of these drivers and frankly, driving for Uber was never meant to be a full-time gig!
8
empathy yes, sympathy no. anyone have sympathy for the non existent Kodak company? they didn't see digital coming
Limit the number, limit the number, limit the number.
Make Uber pay for medallions.
Also, on a separate matter...any app hailing below 96 street must cost MORE than a yellow cab. PERIOD.
16
@ tomfromharlem
"...any app hailing below 96 street must cost MORE than a yellow cab. PERIOD."
Um....WHY? You bring down the gavel in a way that screams 'irrational dictate.'
Do you think the person driving the Uber is somehow more deserving of such a lash than the driver of a yellow-cab, town-car or SUV? Or are you saying that only rich people use app-hailing rides? That taxis are for poor people?
Hmm...
1
sir, you need more information to say what you have. go look around and see what the gig economy is built on and then come back telling us how you see things.
1
No I don't believe so. Though I am sorry that this venue for expressing views tend to make statements seem so cut and dry, and brusque in fashion.
The debate of the good of the gig economy is not really the issue here - in general I am open to either view, and those in the middle about that. Tut in Manhattan, below 96 street, the issue is about the need for limiting the number of hailing vehicles bellow 96 street. Taxi cabs are already regulated. It is sad, though, no matter how you slice it, that app hailing is cutting into their business - because app hailing is less expensive and can charge less. But be that as it may, the issue here is the NUMBER of vehicles going into manhattan. Taxis are limited. App hailing is not. Where is the fairness in this? Since the city is allowing app hailing in Manhattan, and ALSO keeping taxis, something has to deter the number of vehicles entering the area. Taxis already have a limit. The extra charge for app hailing non regulated cabs is the only way to do it, otherwise the taxis will go out of business. If you don't mind the elimination of taxis as a full time decent paying jobs, and believe that everybody should be allowed to fight for a piece of a limited amount of road space, riders, and fares...then I see your point. Otherwise, there needs to be a limit, and app hailing must pay more to protect the regulated taxi system. Sorry, but that's the choice I see. Do you see it any other way --- in Manhattan, that is?
The main problem for the driver and the city is that there are too many ride-hailing app cars on the road. NYC should regulate the number of cars these service companies have on our streets.
The drivers can't earn enough and the city has gridlock.
As a former Uber driver I saw all of the EMPTY cars sitting in traffic.
The traffic has gotten so bad that the riders cancel their request for a pickup due to the long wait, and most likely grab an empty yellow taxicab. Fewer cars equals more money for those who decide to continue to drive and faster pick-ups for the customer. And for NYC less traffic, pollution and noise.
36
Hmm - isn't this why they started taxi medallions years ago?
1
Great article.
I just have one quibble:
Based off of anecdotal evidence (i.e. paying $12 for a ride and having my Lyft driver show me that he only earned $6 for the same ride) I think the article's estimate of how large of a commission Uber and Lyft take on rides may be a little low.
31
Welcome to the new predatory economy. Tech is used to pit worker against worker for maximum owner profits.
52
At Uber, Dara Medvedev perpetuates and babyfaces his boss Travis Putin's backdoor employment dressed up as contracting. (The latter crook's still there, just concealed for PR.)
de Blasio would've so acted on Uber sooner (or better yet, banned the crooks and their stupid, street-clogging "ride-sharing" fad), but Cuomo and MMV banded together to block him and betray the people. I hope that at least this pay rule gets through the Cuomo Corporate Gantlet.
8
When a hard worker can't make a living, what hope do the rest of us have?
23
Don't expect this level in compassion in Jerry Brown's California or Gavin Newsom's San Francisco where both these soul-sucking gig jobs got green-lighted and fast-tracked.
16
Is it true the SF Board of Supervisors is entirely composed of android "Synths" who strongly stand behind all replacements of humans in the job market and in security agency on-the-ground personnel?
For years, SF was sorely underserved by taxi services. This gave the inspiration for Uber.
Would that minimum hourly rate have pay roll taxes also paid, that means Social Security and Medicare?
Also would these drivers be eligible for paid sick leave and paid vacation?
Then of course will these drivers be eligible for Uber or Lyft medical insurance?
Typical that the NY Times doesn't spell out any of this.
Assuming the drivers get none of the above, one can reduce that new proposed hourly rate to about to about $11 per hour--less actually.
20
This is absurd. On what basis do NYC bureaucrats have to interfere with a contract between a private company and a private worker?
When I was paid too little for a job ... I left and found a better paying job.
Absurd.
13
Right because there are so many great paying jobs out there to choose from.
24
Maybe you should go find ANOTHER Professor Emeritus to explain to you why we have minimum wage laws.
8
S.B.
...and maybe we can set minimum wages at about $100,000/year and that way everyone can be financially solvent.
1
The only thing this will do is raise fares. If you can’t make ends meet, do something else.
4
If you cannot find a way to pay the increased fairs so workers are paid fairly - find another way to your destination.
37
If they do something else, it'll make rides more expensive for you anyways.
4
According to NYC DEP, noise is the number-one quality-of-life problem in New York City. Uber (and other) drivers honking their horns out of road rage is a big part of that problem. Horn honking damages pedestrians’ hearing and raises our blood pressure. Just install a device that charges Uber drivers $1 every time they honk their horns. Either we get less ear and heart damage for pedestrians or we get more money for the City.
22
One of my colleagues had a great idea for how to fix this. Mandate that all cars be built in a way that, when they use the horn, it makes the same sound INSIDE the car, but 5 times louder. If every car on the road had a feature like that, people would very quickly learn to use the horn only when absolutely necessary.
25
With the amount of people in this city .
Who drive with there phones on their laps
Or have no licenses.
Are you kidding ?
Move to South Carolina if you don't want to hear honking
Sam,
Works for me!
I am outraged that DeBlasio et al allow drivers to use their horns to attack pedestrians with impunity. If elected officials continue to do nothing to protect pedestrians, some day someone is going to organize a counterattack against horn-honking drivers.
3
The rate floor needs to be the same for ehail and taxi. Workers and a decent wage must have priority over luxury rides for passengers, i.e. quick rides with nice cars. This can only be done when all parts of the industry have the same floor and the city can raise that floor to give workers wage increases when needed.
24
The problem is that the taxis’ prices had been designed in a context where supply was restricted artificially by the license system. If you raise prices to that new level, demand will collapse to a level that is barely higher than pre-Uber (still slightly higher because Uber’s convenience encouraged demand), but with a number of drivers that has been multiplied. With excess supply, the drivers’ lot won’t be much better: the only ones staying in business would be the ones that can tolerate to spend their day in their car working very little.
In other words, people must be forced to take less convenient, less comfortable rides to subsidize an inefficient and outmoded form of transportation. Good plan!
6
Supply must be restricted because it is an unskilled job and anyone can do it, that’s why it was restricted with a limited number of medallions, so drivers and owners could make a living in the depression, this is an industry where regulations are imperative to ensure a balance in supply and wages, all the fancy market theories evaporate in this industry
1
The "study" was authored by professors from the New School and UC Berkeley! Well there's a recipe for an problem solution that would sell well in Havana or Venezuela. For a city that holds itself out to be "market center" of the world, New York's politicians certainly don't believe in the efficiency of the free market.
9
Yeah, that efficiency of the “free market” works real well doesn’t it?
Just like in the 2008 crash when the free market was so efficient in getting a bailout for all those Wall Street gamblers, all those in the top 1% who couldn’t pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.
Ah, but anyway, enjoy all that cheap convenience of having all those servants at your disposal. And while we are at it why don’t we just eliminate licensing for other professions like law, medicine, engineering, aviation, contracting, and so on. Just as Al Greenspan said, the markets will regulate themselves.
17
James:
You just posted on the government invented and nurtured for 20 years thing called the internet.
2
Oh the "taxi commission". This isn't about their concern about "low wages" of Uber drivers, its about protecting the taxi monopoly and the revenue the taxi commission and city get from overpriced medallions. Driving for Uber is a voluntary arrangement, so if someone is having a hard time making an adequate wage doing it they ought to consider doing something else. Its not like they are chained to a desk.
A second note is its funny how they calculate the increase in earnings - assuming that hours worked will remain constant despite this intrusion of the government into Ubers operations.
5
Here is another idea: if the pay is too low, get another job.
17
Right, because people who work full-time jobs in the gig-economy have all the options in the world. Yes, they should go get another job where the NYT will write another exposé about that particular industry's inability to pay living wages, so someone else can comment saying "well if they don't pay enough, just go get another job."
This comment is both insensitive and also ignores the heart of the problem: for low-skilled workers, the national job economy offers little in the way of living wages.
73
Right, like with the current administration? Apparently, prior experience or subject matter knowledge is not required to work there.
3
Alex,
It's not only "low-skilled workers" who are patching together gigs, there are multitudes of experienced, college educated who are juggling two or three jobs to survive.
Why stop with Uber? Why not have minimum income rules for every job in New York? Wait. They’ve tried that in the Soviet Union and Venezuela. Not a good outcome.
17
They've tried it too in Denmark, Germany, and Norway too. Good results.
40
Amen to that thought. Can you imagine what would happen to this country if companies paid their workers a living wage.
The horrors.
41
Just to be clear you would rather pay more in taxes in order to stick it to hard working people who are trying to make ends meet.
Does that really make your life any better?
I stopped using Uber and Lyft for this reason, but New York really has to do more to make sure these apps aren't driving out taxis in order to assert their monopoly power later.
29
"New York really has to do more to make sure these apps aren't driving out taxis"
Why? Why should the government protect taxis if people no longer want to use them? Its actually taxi companies that have monopoly power, with their medallions.
If you're against monopoly power you should be calling for the abolishment of the medallion system to make it easier for people to start taxi businesses.
20
I don't want it to be easier for people to start taxi businesses. Public safety is at stake. This is not like delivering pizza. Sometimes taxi drivers even have to deliver babies! I can't imagine Uber being able to deal with that.
With revenue of $2B annually, Uber can certainly afford to ensure its drivers earn a fair share for themselves. Confronting Uber on this issue for low-paid workers, many of whom are immigrants, will be a critical test for de Blasio, a do-little mayor who casts himself as Mr. Progressive. We will all be watching. We will be watching the inert City Council, as well, but that's like watching a puppet show. You don't know where the controlling money is coming from or where it's going.
30
"We will all be watching. We will be watching the inert City Council, as well, but that's like watching a puppet show."
City Council members are more interested in e-mailing constituents about how busy they are than they are interested in getting anything done.
Uber's revenue maybe 2B annually, but in 2017 they lost 4.5 billion; not that I feel sorry for them.
6
"With revenue of $2B annually, Uber can certainly afford to ensure its drivers earn a fair share for themselves. "
Is that so Tom? You've gone over Uber's books? Do you have an exact definition of what this "fair share" is?
I don't know the answers to these questions. Maybe Uber can afford to pay drivers more and still make a profit, I don't know. But I suspect you don't know either.
1