1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Uber Drivers Strike - Misguided?

Discussion in 'Lounge' started by damodici, May 8, 2019.

  1. Luckily I'm not in a position whereby my income requires me to top up by being a part time uber driver, equally as I'm fully employed and busy with my current role I'd never have intention of giving it up to become an uber driver full time either.

    But having just watched an interview with one of the striking drivers on sky, someone who initially came across intelligent and fairly articulate, I'm struggling a little with what exactly did they expect given the model of the business.

    Uber is cheap for a reason, and that's because it was started with the idea that private use cars could make 'money on the side' by acting as taxis. Or people without work but in possession of a road worthy car could indeed make some money full time to make ends meet.

    So this chap had taken a Mercedes (no doubt on lease) and was/is working uber full time. When he'd factored in his costs and time on the job he's been making on average about £4.50 an hour. Apparently that's after Uber have taken their 25% cut, so without uber making any money at all then at best it's what, £6 or there about.

    He complained that much of this is down to the short distances 'fares' sometimes travelled , a rather ridiculous complaint given the customer is king and if that's what they want to do then that's life.

    He also complained about the cut Uber take, but even if they only took 5% (highly unlikely they'd remain solvent if they did), then his take home per hour would only rise from £4.50 to £5.60 ish

    So what is it these drivers expect?

    Uber could reduce their percentage, but even at the figures above its still not mega money doing it in the way this chap is. Let's say they go to 10%

    Uber could increase fares, but wouldn't that make it less compelling and therefore reduce business, thus reducing available work for the drivers or put them out of work entirely?

    I'm not looking down on people who need to do this to make ends meet, but from a purely commercial perspective the whole 'gig economy' boomed because it's supposed to be dip in and out work without bells and whistles, that's how it remains cheap and thus popular.

    If you turn it into well paid work with sick pay and all that good stuff then overheads rise, taxes on them rise, the business model as it is fails.

    Is it just that some people have turned the Uber role into something it was never supposed and be?
     
  2. If the guy is making £4.50 an hour, without sick pay or any benifits, he cannot make it. The "business model" that forces the prices down to unsustainable levels, could be called legalised mass exploitation?
     
  3. Don’t work, don’t get paid.

    Not sure striking is the best idea.
     
  4. Uber would say the more he’s available, the more he works. If someone chooses a gas guzzling newer car with higher costs, more fool them.

    I’d say that some suits in an office in wherever are and will continue to exploit not only the workers but also the tax system. They make lots of cash for a bit of PR, while customer risk themselves in god knows what cars driven by god knows what driver, and the drivers are pushed to work longer and longer hours with no support or recourse or (probably) ability to work elsewhere.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. All the time that workers are paid so badly that they cannot get by, the rest of the countries workers are paying for their tax credit wage top ups, housing benifit, in addition to providing all the nations infrastructure -education, NHS, defense, law & order etc etc- whilst large corporations make fortunes and pay minimal taxes.

    Our brilliant government wants to reduce taxes on business to stimulate the growth of this sector.

    Ultimately it will have to stop. The people will not have enough money to buy the products from the corporations.
     
  6. Yes it could quite easily, and yet that sir is pretty much 'globalisation', and without meaning to lean back towards Brexit (I've really had enough), its exactly the same principle that 'free movement of people' encourages as those from far Eastern EU prepared to work at the cheapest rate possible, thus giving larger corporations the ability to run their businesses on cheap labour. It as, whichever way you cut it, exploitation dressed up as 'opportunity' for the poor.

    My arguments still stand though, and the only way to give these disgruntled Uber 'employees' more is to raise prices or reduce the profits from the business.

    Raise prices lose custom, lose custom and lose working opportunities, lose those and lose everything.

    Catch 22 isn't it surely?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. They are paid by the customer, not the company, and rates are set by councils for taxis (is that different for Uber?)

    Bear in mind it is probable many will be on benefits anyway, will likely be paying little or no tax (especially cash paying fares). It’s more black market economy that’s been ‘legalised’ than mainstream work imho
     
  8. There has to be some onus on certain drivers within this though. I mean if you're to commit to a lease deal on a new car, then the math needs to stack up.

    Its ok getting a new car, but in this chaps case, did it need to be a Mercedes? I mean did he run the numbers or gain any benefit from leasing a Mercedes over a Mondeo, Kia, (insert cheaper name)?

    The problem with the Gig Economy is that everyone loves it when its a 'top up' earner in spare time, the flexibility suits them as does the lack of commitment (their choice)

    Yet what many fail to see is that when you change the gig economy to a more normal business model with 'bells and whistles' then they have to commit and operate in the same manner as everyone else with the same taxes and same drawbacks.

    You change some of these 'Gig' business models then they cease to be as competitive and cease to exist.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. how can a gated and protectionist ecconomic and political union be accused of, and labeled "globalists"? hmm.
    anyhoo, as you where.
    :D
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. I don't know who controls the fares charged by Uber tbh.

    My comments were more general; thousands of workers on zero hours contracts, or many people working for example at Tescos are also paid working credit because their wage is so low they cannot afford to live. We taxpayers effectively pay a portion of their wages, provide all their medical, kids education etc, whilst Tescos makes millions... I do not begrudge the benifits being paid, I don't want more people living in poverty, but surely Tescos should pay their staff instead of you & I?
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. You make good points. Perhaps these "Gig" businesses need to go before every taxi driver ends up being paid £4.50 an hour?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Possibly so, i dare say the very reason why the London cabbies were and are so up in arms about it all.

    However, competition is good, as is the technology to make ordering a taxi easy, nobody can say a London taxi isn't expensive and when you truly needed to have 'The Knowledge' then i guess thats what you were paying for. But times move on, sat nav on every bit of tech have removed much of that need. All you want as a consumer is a reasonable price for a reasonable service thats quick to access.

    I love Uber and also use a product called MyTaxi in Germany where Uber is banned in some cities. Its great for travel and in any city worldwide (including the UK) as if they offer coverage in that area you can sit indoors, use the app, say where you want to go and it'll tell you what the price is and who's arriving and when.

    No need to know perfect Spanish, Italian, German etc

    Old school taxi ordering in London is stand on the street and wave your arms about in the blind hope someone will stop, before ripping you off £20 for a 1-2mile trip. Not great really and always hated it

    Again much of the issue is hypocrisy, you say remove these Gig businesses and for reasons that are honourable, to protect workers pay.

    But they'll be an equal amount of vocal (normally very liberal minded) people say to ensure these gig business remain as so many families rely on them. I get both points entirely, but business is business, and tax is tax, and neither will alter fundamentality.

    The minute you add benefits to some of these gig businesses (not all) then the only way consumer prices can go is higher, that then effects the consumers (some on low wages) and ultimately will effect some of the workers as drop in business levels will reduce earning opportunity.

    Which kinda brings me back to the initial point of some of these Uber drivers expectations.

    The fundamental Uber business strategy hasn't changed, only the manner in which some people(workers) approach the opportunity or job. Because they've now made this their main line of earnings, and thrown so much time and investment in to it, they want Uber to change strategy, the very company that gave them the opportunity. Its a bit stupid and short sighted in my opinion as i can't understand why they don't see the pitfalls from this.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Possibly so, i dare say the very reason why the London cabbies were and are so up in arms about it all.

    However, competition is good.
    hmm.
    :D
    carry on.
     
  14. I was more referring to the similarity of exploitation of workers on low pay, which as you well know can happen to a country that already resides within a gated economy, as we do, and as happens within it.

    But this isn't a Brexit or Indi thread, its an Uber thread, and they're not political (i don't think) :upyeah:
     
  15. Is competition not good? :thinkingface:
     
  16. okidi.
    :D
    carry on.
     
  17. Indi?
     
  18. nah, its pish.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  19. It's all pish finm, pish upon pish
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  20. Competition is good, but not at any price. A "Race to the bottom" is bad for everyone.
     
Do Not Sell My Personal Information