Category: drivers

Practices that distinctively affected drivers.

Posted on

MIT researchers estimated median Uber driver profit at $3.37/hour

Four researchers associated with the MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research studied Uber drivers earnings. Based on drivers’ responses to a survey, the researchers estimated that the median driver earned $3.37 per hour before taxes, and 74% earn less than minimum wage in their respective states. Net of vehicle expenses, 30% of drivers are losing money driving for Uber.

The authors also studied the impact of deductions on taxation of driver earnings. Based on IRS rules about deductability of vehicle expenses, the researchers estimated that 74% of driving is untaxes (because deductions exceed driver earnings).

Uber’s chief economist responded by questioning the researchers’ methodology, including survey questions, driver understanding, and possible errors in analysis. Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi responded on Twitter: “MIT = Mathematically Incompetent Theories (at least as it pertains to ride-sharing).”

After criticism, lead author Stephen Zoepf offered a statement agreeing that alternative methods of calculating revenue and profit yield higher profit to drivers, and planning a revision of the paper with this principle in mind. Zoepf also called on Uber to provide more data about driver profits net of vehicle costs and to distinguish actual and tax-reportable vehicle expenses in order to clarify driver true economic profit versus tax subsidies.

Posted on

Kalanick re-debated with Uber driver, then (without authority) promised equity in Uber

After being caught on video arguing with Uber driver Fawzi Kamel, Kalanick sought to meet with the driver again to try to make things right. Bloomberg reports that Kalanick had planned to meet with the driver briefly, as little as five minutes, for a simple apology. Instead, the meeting lasted more than an hour, and Kamel and Kalanick reopened their debate about Uber’s pricing policies.

As part of the discussion, Kalanick suggested that he give the driver Uber stock. Uber attorneys rejected the proposal, seeing it as improper that Uber shareholders pay to clean up Kalanick’s personal problem. Kalanick ended up paying Kamel $200,000 of personal funds.

Posted on

Covered up 2016 hack, paid hackers to delete data, and failed to disclose to regulators

In an October 2016 attack, hackers extracted names, email addresses, and phone numbers of 50 million Uber riders (details), as well as personal information about 7 million drivers (including 600,000 US drivers license numbers). Details from Uber. A subsequent FTC investigation found that more than 25 million names and email addresses, and more than 22 million names and phone numbers, were affected.

Uber did not tell the public about the hack or alert the affected drivers or passengers. Nor did Uber tell regulators, although at the same time Uber was negotiating with the US FTC about other claims of privacy violations. As of November 2017, when the attack was publicly revealed, Uber admitted that it was required to disclose the hack because driver’s license information was among the information taken.

Instead of disclosing the hack to regulators or the public, Uber paid the hackers $100,000 to delete the data and not tell anyone what had happened. The New York Times reported that Uber also pushed the hackers to sign nondisclosure agreements, and that the company “made it appear” as if the $100,000 payout had been part of a “bug bounty” program (paying hackers to find problems) rather than a response to hackers’ demands.

Uber then-CEO Travis Kalanick learned of the breach in November 2016, a month after it took place. Reuters indicated that new CEO Dara Khosrowshahi indicated only having learned about the problem “recently.”

Uber Chief Security officer Joe Sullivan oversaw Uber’s response to the hack. As part of Uber’s 2017 investigation of the situation, new CEO Dara Khosrowshahi fired Sullivan along with Craig Clark, who had been legal director of security and law enforcement (reporting to Sullivan).

Upon learning of Uber’s failure to disclose the privacy breach, multiple regulators criticized the company’s action and opened investigations.

Uber’s statement

In a December follow-up, Reuters reported that the hacker was a 20-year-old man from Florida.

Posted on

Drivers in Nigeria use fake GPS to inflate fares

In Lagos, Nigeria, Uber drivers used apps to override phone GPS, causing Uber’s app to record a longer route than was actually taken and inflating the fares charged to passengers. Quartz reports many drivers inflating fares by 1000 to 2000 naira ($3 to $6), though some inflated far more than that.

Drivers reported using this tactic in response to Uber reducing the amount they were paid. They describe protesting unsuccessfully, and resorting to GPS trickery for lack of other ways to get the payment they thought they deserved.

Some drivers said Uber knew about their methods and allowed them to continue. One driver described the Uber app reporting “fake location detected” yet allowing the driver to proceed and charge an inflated fare.

Uber says it refunds all riders who report fraudulent activity.

Posted on

Passenger steals driver’s tips; Uber declines to assist

After a passenger stole cash from a driver’s tip jar, caught in dashcam video, the driver contacted Uber to report the problem. Uber replied to note that the passenger denied the allegation. Uber continued:

If you believe the rider has your cash as captured from your dash cam and is refusing to return it, you may want to initiate a formal investigation via the police.

Facing subsequent media scrutiny, Uber indicated having banned the passenger from further use of Uber.

Posted on

Female driver in UK claimed gender discrimination due to insufficient security

A female driver in the UK claimed gender discrimination in that Uber purportedly failed to provide sufficient security to female drivers. She complained that she had to accept a passenger’s request without knowing the destination in advance, and had no option to cancel requests to remote or unsafe destinations. She also complained that Uber would penalize her if she canceled a trip for an aggressive passenger or a passenger raising other safety concerns.

Posted on

London Employment Tribunal determined that Uber drivers are employees

In response to a complaint from trade union GMB, the London Employment Tribunal determined that Uber drivers are employees.

Remarking “the lady doth protest too much, methinks” at Uber’s numerous contractual provisions insisting that drivers are not employees, the LET simultaneously looked at Uber’s various “unguarded moments” in which the company used terminology most consistent with employment status. Ultimately the LET said it is “unreal” to deny the “practical reality” that Uber provides transportation services, and in that context the LET found that the drivers must be employees.

The LET rejected as “ridiculous” the suggestion that Uber is “a mosaic of 30,000 small businesses linked by a common ‘platform.'” The LET rejected Uber’s claim of only providing driver with “leads.” For one, drivers have no opportunity to negotiate or bargain with passengers. The LET also examined the interaction between drivers and passengers, including when drivers learn the route and how payment occurs. The LET said all these factors indicate an employment relationship.

In a 13-item list, LET gathered factors indicating that drivers are employees, including those detailed above as well as Uber’s practice of interviewing and recruiting drivers, instructing drivers in various respects, setting routes, collecting ratings and imposing penalties, handling complaints, and having the power to amend the contract provisions of the relationship.

Informed by the finding that drivers are employees, the LET went on to analyze their rights as employees and Uber’s violations of those rights.

Proudly powered by WordPress