Uber STL

All the ways we move people and things: trains, planes, automobiles, biking, walking, etc.
First unread post319 posts
In reference to the issues being hammered out in anti-trust court, there is a very real possibility that Uber's business model is going to have to change radically or else just shut down. They have so far gotten away with treating their drivers awfully by stating that they are independent contractors, but if that is really the case, then surge pricing is clearly breaking anti-trust regulations. The current situation isn't sustainable.
anti-trust? over what? the fact that no one wants to use a sh*tty cab service anymore? If their drivers don't like working for uber, then they can leave and find work elsewhere. every driver I've talked to was happy with uber, the rates, the flexibility, etc. They preferred it by far over the awful cab companies that really exploit their workers. I love the anti alleged "sharing economy" mindset of many on here. fascinating..
KerrytheKonstructor wrote:
[url]

The strange thing is the Uber driver I talked to said it takes 30 days to do their background anyway.


Looks like all they need is a picture of you license and a few days

Image
jcity wrote:
Oh Mark... My favorite little urbanstl bleeding- heart liberal... So do you prefer taxis over uber? Many uber drivers have told me they are former taxi drivers and that they prefer the flexibility and freedom working for uber. Do you really not like the convenience of uber?


Can we please not be condescending and antagonistic? We should try to have a reasonable and well thought out discussion.

Also, is there a rule on profanity on this forum? It really is pretty annoying to read through the posts and have to filter through all the expletives
jcity wrote:
anti-trust? over what? the fact that no one wants to use a sh*tty cab service anymore? If their drivers don't like working for uber, then they can leave and find work elsewhere. every driver I've talked to was happy with uber, the rates, the flexibility, etc. They preferred it by far over the awful cab companies that really exploit their workers. I love the anti alleged "sharing economy" mindset of many on here. fascinating..

Well, Uber claims that they don't have to pay their workers benefits or anything because they're just a software platform used by a bunch of independent contractors. If that's the case, surge pricing amounts to collusion to manipulate prices across the industry, which is generally considered an anti-trust violation. If Uber claims that, no, they're just setting "their" price, then they're contradicting their position that they are facilitators and not themselves actors in the driver market.

In any case, there's no doubt that Uber is bad for drivers. Income not related to hidden car depreciation, instant cash promised for signing up and predatory lending practices make it smell more like a MLM-scam than a real company. Uber is indisputably exploitative; whether traditional cab companies are even worse is a separate issue.
Yes, it is impossible to imagine a situation where the anti-trust courts aren't either going to declare that the pricing mechanism is collusion or declare that the Uber drivers are actually employees and come down hard on Uber. Their business model is fraud and fraud never lasts.
So, if you don't like the service, then don't use it. If people don't like the terms working for uber, then don't work there. What is wrong with a free market economy? I'm not saying Uber is perfect, and i guess we'll see where the courts rule regarding drivers being independent contractors, but it has clearly changed the playing field. No longer are people required to rely on the cab monopoly and it infuriates them. Wait until there are driver-less uber cars, that'll really change things..
jcity wrote:
What is wrong with a free market economy?

Nothing, except that it doesn't, can't and has never existed. Every economy has mutable rules, whether legal or social or both. "Free market economy" is just something people say when the current rules benefit them, and they want to pretend that those rules are immutable laws of nature and thus beyond debate. See also: Biotruths, Social Darwinism, Slavery.

jcity wrote:
Wait until there are driver-less uber cars, that'll really change things..

I think Uber figured the best, fastest way to get cars without human drivers is to recruit drivers and pretend they aren't human.
MarkHaversham wrote:

jcity wrote:
Wait until there are driver-less uber cars, that'll really change things..

I think Uber figured the best, fastest way to get cars without human drivers is to recruit drivers and pretend they aren't human.


Ha! Good one!
I took advantage of UBERPOOL while in Seattle this past weekend. It's an Uber option that allows you to car share with others headed in the same direction. I'd like to see it added in StL since it pretty much cut my fares in 1/2.

From the Website
UberPOOL allows you to share your ride and split the cost of your trip with another Uber rider headed in the same direction.

The average time added to an uberPOOL trip is less than 5 minutes. Each uberPOOL rider can bring one additional passenger along.
moorlander wrote:
I took advantage of UBERPOOL while in Seattle this past weekend. It's an Uber option that allows you to car share with others headed in the same direction. I'd like to see it added in StL since it pretty much cut my fares in 1/2.

From the Website
UberPOOL allows you to share your ride and split the cost of your trip with another Uber rider headed in the same direction.

The average time added to an uberPOOL trip is less than 5 minutes. Each uberPOOL rider can bring one additional passenger along.



I used the LyftShare option which is basically the same thing in Chicago. Half the time we didn't pick up anyone else and it was still half the price. Not sure how drivers make any money doing that
^It's subsidized by Uber. Uber is eating $ by paying the drivers the same rate while charging a lower price in an attempt to gain long term users.
Anyone else been following this crazy story?

http://www.riverfronttimes.com/newsblog ... ion-speaks

Basically, an Uber driver prevented a rape last July, and documented the entire story that night on facebook. A few days ago, amid all of these stories about legal rulings between the MTC and Uber, the P-D runs with a story about that night, only it says she was sexually assaulted by two guys in the back of the Uber driver's car, in full view of the driver. This is, of course, in direct contradiction to how the Uber driver detailed the story when it happened last July.

Not only that, but the story also contains quotes from the Laclede Cab Co. president about how something like this would never happen a Taxi Cab.

Basically, either the Uber Driver made his side of the story up in the moment on facebook in order to cover his tracks down the road, or the Post-Dispatch reported blatant lies as fact and may be in bed with the MTC.

Our crazy town
So can I take uber to the Airport today or no?
U.S. public transit agencies are working with Uber, Lyft to provide short rides, sometimes with government subsides.
https://www.thestar.com/business/2016/0 ... vices.html
Has anyone seen that old bank on Oakland near SLCC that now has an Uber sign on it? Is that an office or what?
Yes, they call it a "Greenlight Hub".

And it's nothing more than a Sprint store where they have a few driver assistance individuals to help process new drivers, deal with driver complaints, answer questions etc. Nothing fancy and they're most likely making $10-12 bucks and hour. Don't expect to see any IT or other individuals based out of it.
And next door Paraquad's Bloom Cafe recently opened.