(08-12-2018 09:55 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(08-12-2018 02:03 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  I hear what you're saying, but I don't think it's the same at all.

Have you ever had a yard sale or garage sale (depending on which part of they country you're in)?

Should you be regulated the same as and forced to operate the same as department stores?

Should children be able to run a lemonade stand without facing the same regulations as Starbucks?


I don't know if this is true or not, but I've heard Uber started with the intent of selling the tool to taxi companies. No one was interested so they got creative.


I actually started driving Uber back in June 2015 as a way to fund a family trip to Disney World. When November rolled around I had made enough to:

1. Reserve a 7-day/6-night stay at Disney's Polinesian Resort (considered one of their delux resorts)
2. Buy 5 park hopper tickets for 7 days
3. Buy the table service dining plan for 5
   

In 4 & and half months I had earned enough to cover a pretty darn expensive trip to Disney.

During those initial months of driving I came to realize that I actually enjoyed doing it. It's amazing how many people I've met from not only across the U.S. but from around the world.

... {not going to quote your whole post here---see above for reference if needed}
...

To each his own. Everybody is at different places in their lives. Why deny people an opportunity because some long-standing companies don't like losing business due to their own out-dated business model?

Thanks for sharing blue/gray.

It seems reasonable a lot will depend on 1) location, 2) vehicle type and mileage 3) Insurance costs 4) quality of cab service in area among other variables.

I have heard from a friend from Memphis it is a particularly difficult market for a lot of things, not just cabs. He has some strong opinions of why, but then he grew up there. I've visited for a convention, been to the Peabody a few times to see the ducks walk, and been to the Liberty Bowl and Beale Street.

You say you have USAA, which I generally understand to be the cheapest insurance around bang for buck. Not every Uber/Lyft driver will be able to match that, so generally most of their costs will be higher there.

When I first started in 2015 the car insurance industry didn't know what to do about insuring ride share.

I knew Uber provided insurance for each fare. They were not forthcoming with the information that the insurance only covers from the time you START the trip to the time you END the trip. It does NOT cover when you're in-between fares. Come to find out, your regular insurance didn't cover ANY rideshare time. That's when I realized I had been driving for months with basically no insurance coverage.

Essentially, the moment you turned on your app your regular car insurance stops. The rideshare insurance is $1,000,000 but it only covers when a rider is in the car.

I researched online and found out this was a gray area. I called various companies to get rideshare coverage rates.

Progressive covered rideshare the same as commercial vehicles. It was going to be over $6,000 per year.

USAA was doing a trial run in Texas but they didn't have a product for other states.

I kept calling USAA periodically. They finally had a product they could add to your existing policy called "gap insurance". It's only $5 per month. I jumped on it.


You say you do this part time and are careful about mileage. I guess you refuse some trips you've learned are not worthwhile? You sound pretty astute at this. I'm not sure the average driver is as on the ball as you are. Kudos for you, though for being thorough.

Astute, only due to trial and error.

Uber has a demand-and-supply model for pricing. If more riders are requesting rides from a certain area than there are drivers, prices begin to multiply... 1.3, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, .... 8.0.

Early on, when I didn't know any better, I would see a surge-price area on the map and drive toward it. Invariably, once you got there the surge disappeared. Probably because every one else is driving to it.

So you learn how to work the patterns. For example, before a Grizzlies game people will want rides downtown to the arena. These people are scattered all over the metro area. So I'll hang out in a suburb that's farther away. It won't be a surge, but it's a long trip both time and distance. Uber charges based on 2 components: distance traveled and time duration of ride.

From a suburb to downtown you could net around $30 for one ride. But then you're downtown. It may not make sense to turn off the app and drive out to the suburbs again hoping to get someone running late to the game.

After the game is a different story. 18,000 people concentrated in one area at the same time causes prices to surge. Make sure you're near the arena when the game is ending.

But this is hit or miss... some people might live a few blocks away while some might live in Mississippi.

The same strategy goes for concerts or various other special events.

There are few exceptions to this. One is Memphis in May. There's a 3-day music festival the first weekend of May. Those prices are always surging all day long.

And there's the barbecue contest over the 2nd or 3rd weekend. Believe it or not, those prices surge even higher than the music fest.

I picked up a couple of guys in town visiting for business last May. They were at Beale St hanging out. They didn't go to the BBQ contest, but they were in the price surge regardless. They were going to a hotel in one of the far-flung suburbs. That was a $90 trip.

As far as rejecting trips -- that's a no-no, for various reasons.
1. Uber has to make sure it does not discriminate. When you get a ride request, you don't know where you're going. They only show you the pickup location after you accept the trip.
2. You have a rejection rate and cancellation rate. Get too high and you get booted off the platform.


Do you think it would be different for you if you did it full time instead of part time? I'm not sure the difference in ratio for full time vs part time for cabbies and limos vs Uber/Lyft. I'd imagine it's more skewed to full time for cabs. The medallion thing and extra costs and regulations running a cab in most places makes a difference also, I'd imagine.

I want to make a disclaimer before I continue. What I'm about to say is in NO WAY meant to disparage anyone. I hope no one takes it that way.

I belong to a Memphis Area Uber Driver facebook group. Some members drive full time, others part time.

Those who drive full time seem to like the money they generally make. Sometimes they might hit $200 per day, sometimes more, sometimes less. But it takes pretty much all day to get those higher amounts.

Uber recently added a feature that will lock you off the platform once you hit 12 hours online. You have to take 6 hours off before you can go online again.

Folks who drive full time like the fact they don't have a boss. I completely understand that.

But doing it full time is not an option for me because I couldn't replace my job income with uber income.

But as far as extra income goes, you can't beat it. I had no desire to get another job where I might be stocking shelves or running a cash register. Not that there's anything wrong with that at all. There is NO shame in gainful employment - period.

At my age I don't want to put in 8 hours (sometimes more) and then go do another 5-8 hours. Consider needing to get some sleep time... when would I see my family?


I'm not as much against these services as I am the unequal playing fields due to regulation. I just think Uber and Lyft, etc.. are taxi services and should fall under the same regs, or they should have gotten rid of the regs for cabs so everyone was on a level playing field (yeah, govt give up regulation, right.)

I don't claim to know the history of taxi services and how they came to be regulated as such.

I imagine some of that was at the request of taxi companies decades and decades ago to keep competition OUT of the market. I envision some backroom graft somewhere in New York buying off a councilman to make sure nobody comes over to my turf.


Still to your garage sale/lemonade stand analogy--I get where you want to come from, but next to no one is making that a real business- garage sale is just get a few bucks but really you mainly want to get rid of stuff without dumping it yourself. Lemonade stands are mostly run by kids, right? (i'm not sure if this is different in Memphis, but do you really have adults doing lemonade stands for a going concern, even part time?) I'm not sure it's wise for govt to treat those the same, but mainly due to intent of business purposes and age of proprietors (again, maybe in Memphis its different.)

OK. Valid points.

But there are people who make their living from flea markets. Surely they should not be regulated the same as a department store.

Also, there are differing laws which pertain to sole-proprietorship, partnerships, and corporations. And the laws for each can vary depending on the number of employees you have. And there laws can differ depending upon the type of corporation you are.

I also have a bookkeeping business. It's just me and at the moment I have one client. I've had another client previously and I'll probably have another in the future.

I'm not their employee. I get a 1099.

Surely I should not have to follow the same laws and regulations as one of the Big Four.

I mentioned lemonade stands primarily because of recurring news stories over the past several years where municipalities shut down these sidewalk endeavors for the lack of the proper permits.

It's ridiculous to force children to buy a business permit to sell lemonade.

Another example could be lawn cutting services. Should established lawn companies try to shut down the guy who goes door to door with his lawn mower in his trunk trying to put food on the table for his family?


Still thanks for your insight. I'm sure it will help round out the picture a bit for those reading this thread.

No problem at all. I hope it has helped in some way.

I understand that there are arguments pro and con on both sides.

Oh, by the way, I just remembered... Uber has a service called Uber Taxi.

The passenger can use the app to hail a local taxi.

In this case, the taxi company is using the uber platform to gain ride requests.

Again, these drivers are not independent uber contractors, they are employees of a taxi service that uses the uber app platform.

Something interesting to ponder.

(08-12-2018 12:02 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  link: New York City issues temporary cap on ride-hailing vehicles

I think they should all be treated the same: regulated as taxis vehicle by vehicle, and employees. I'm not at all big on regulation or over-taxation, but I am big on common sense fairness. Allowing internet-based companies to avoid playing by the same rules, especially when people have invested time, sweat and years to build their lives, seems only unfair. They could go the other way and treat all cabs and limos as ride-share services and remove the taxes, medallions and regulations, but in either event, I think the cabbies, et cetera have a reasonable unfair trade practices case against loss of value against these thieving internet pirate companies.

Most drivers I know have said they don't really make the money they thought. I believe I saw the average ride-share driver quits after about a year-and-a-half. Which makes sense--they get hit with the self-employment taxes after about that time, and expense most don;t even consider when they sign up to drive. That forces them to desperately look for vehicle deductions and actual cost of use of driving their vehicle into the ground for the slave-masters, and then it dawns on most of them that they are barely breaking even, or losing their butts while Uber and Lyft rake in the dough without much overhead. I did see a few studies showing NY and Chicago were the few cities you could actually profit a little bit in. I have a buddy who drove in Chicago for nearly 2 years. Lost his azz doing Uber. Almost lost his car because of all the taxes/expenses he did not forsee and bought the kool-aid from uber on how he was an "entrepreneur" and would make big dollars driving his car for them.

I've never taken a uber or ride sharing service, and don't see a reason that I ever would. Wonder how many here have? What were your experiences, and do you/did you get any feedback from drivers on how they're doing? Anyone here actually drive/drove for them? What were your experiences?

My Brother drives for one or the other, maybe both if you can do that, about 2-3 hours a night maybe 3-4 days a week. Says he makes about 25 an hour and "it's kinda fun".

Uses the money to pay his bar tabs.

(08-12-2018 04:31 PM)pkptigers07 Wrote:  

(08-12-2018 12:02 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  link: New York City issues temporary cap on ride-hailing vehicles

I think they should all be treated the same: regulated as taxis vehicle by vehicle, and employees. I'm not at all big on regulation or over-taxation, but I am big on common sense fairness. Allowing internet-based companies to avoid playing by the same rules, especially when people have invested time, sweat and years to build their lives, seems only unfair. They could go the other way and treat all cabs and limos as ride-share services and remove the taxes, medallions and regulations, but in either event, I think the cabbies, et cetera have a reasonable unfair trade practices case against loss of value against these thieving internet pirate companies.

Most drivers I know have said they don't really make the money they thought. I believe I saw the average ride-share driver quits after about a year-and-a-half. Which makes sense--they get hit with the self-employment taxes after about that time, and expense most don;t even consider when they sign up to drive. That forces them to desperately look for vehicle deductions and actual cost of use of driving their vehicle into the ground for the slave-masters, and then it dawns on most of them that they are barely breaking even, or losing their butts while Uber and Lyft rake in the dough without much overhead. I did see a few studies showing NY and Chicago were the few cities you could actually profit a little bit in. I have a buddy who drove in Chicago for nearly 2 years. Lost his azz doing Uber. Almost lost his car because of all the taxes/expenses he did not forsee and bought the kool-aid from uber on how he was an "entrepreneur" and would make big dollars driving his car for them.

I've never taken a uber or ride sharing service, and don't see a reason that I ever would. Wonder how many here have? What were your experiences, and do you/did you get any feedback from drivers on how they're doing? Anyone here actually drive/drove for them? What were your experiences?

Perhaps taxi drivers have an unfair trade case to make against the government. It sounds like this is an industry that has been overly regulated to the detriment of cab drivers and consumers.

Ive heard one Taxi medallion in NYC runs a millions bucks. That's some pretty high stakes to wade in to.

(08-13-2018 05:19 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(08-12-2018 12:02 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  link: New York City issues temporary cap on ride-hailing vehicles

I think they should all be treated the same: regulated as taxis vehicle by vehicle, and employees. I'm not at all big on regulation or over-taxation, but I am big on common sense fairness. Allowing internet-based companies to avoid playing by the same rules, especially when people have invested time, sweat and years to build their lives, seems only unfair. They could go the other way and treat all cabs and limos as ride-share services and remove the taxes, medallions and regulations, but in either event, I think the cabbies, et cetera have a reasonable unfair trade practices case against loss of value against these thieving internet pirate companies.

Most drivers I know have said they don't really make the money they thought. I believe I saw the average ride-share driver quits after about a year-and-a-half. Which makes sense--they get hit with the self-employment taxes after about that time, and expense most don;t even consider when they sign up to drive. That forces them to desperately look for vehicle deductions and actual cost of use of driving their vehicle into the ground for the slave-masters, and then it dawns on most of them that they are barely breaking even, or losing their butts while Uber and Lyft rake in the dough without much overhead. I did see a few studies showing NY and Chicago were the few cities you could actually profit a little bit in. I have a buddy who drove in Chicago for nearly 2 years. Lost his azz doing Uber. Almost lost his car because of all the taxes/expenses he did not forsee and bought the kool-aid from uber on how he was an "entrepreneur" and would make big dollars driving his car for them.

I've never taken a uber or ride sharing service, and don't see a reason that I ever would. Wonder how many here have? What were your experiences, and do you/did you get any feedback from drivers on how they're doing? Anyone here actually drive/drove for them? What were your experiences?

My Brother drives for one or the other, maybe both if you can do that, about 2-3 hours a night maybe 3-4 days a week. Says he makes about 25 an hour and "it's kinda fun".

Uses the money to pay his bar tabs.

If you're JMUDunk is he JMUDrunk?

well, some good news on this from, of all places, Calicrazia:

Uber likely to shut down temporarily in California over new driver ruling - CNBC

Quote:"If the court doesn't reconsider, then in California, it's hard to believe we'll be able to switch our model to full-time employment quickly," the report added, citing Chief Executive Officer Dara Khosrowshahi's interview with MSNBC.

The taxi companies got totally screwed over Uber and Lyft's unfair labor practices. And Uber drivers have gotten screwed for years, but most of them don;t discover that they've been paying Uber to work for about a year to year-and-a-half. When they get their tax bill and find out they've actually made negative income, then most of them quit. Uber and Lyft's business model is based on churning through employees and not properly paying them, in unfair defiance of what legitimate taxi companies have to do per regulations. Plus, Uber and Lyft make traffic worse, not better:

Uber and Lyft admit they're making traffic worse Which means all the global warming idiots are contributing to their own peril when they use these scam companies.

Taxis are always a scam and ripoff and a con job. Anywhere. Anytime. Any country. Period.

Uber is a slimy company at the executive level. They're sleazy, they're anti-competitive, they behave with brazen callousness to others.

Lyft is now a virtue signalling shill with Obama administration expats stuffing the Board of Directors.

In summary ... f*** all three, get a rental from Enterprise.

(08-13-2018 06:29 AM)JTiger Wrote:  Cabs did to themselves. Every cab I've been a bad driver that tried to take me on a ride for extra miles and money. F those guys.

I've had pretty good experiences with Uber.

Pretty much.. Cabbies did this to themselves...

Ever look at the prices listed for some cabs?

This is just one cab company in St. Louis...

$3.00 for the first mile
$1.50 for every 1/10th a mile after that.

2 Mile trip gonna run you $18 bucks? I'll take Uber any day of the week over that..

Quote:I've heard one Taxi medallion in NYC runs a millions bucks. That's some pretty high stakes to wade in to.

And cities put a limit on how many medallions they give out.. I think St. Louis says 200 cab medallions maximum. (I think it's still 600K for a medallion once it's released)

Quote: When they get their tax bill and find out they've actually made negative income, then most of them quit

This honestly depends on how you do your taxes.. You try to write off money by mileage or by car maintenance costs?

(08-12-2020 11:42 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Taxis are always a scam and ripoff and a con job. Anywhere. Anytime. Any country. Period.

Uber is a slimy company at the executive level. They're sleazy, they're anti-competitive, they behave with brazen callousness to others.

Lyft is now a virtue signalling shill with Obama administration expats stuffing the Board of Directors.

In summary ... f*** all three, get a rental from Enterprise.

I agree, but two things:



1. kinda hard to do that off-the-cuff when you just need one ride in another city , and
2. please give us a hockey puck icon to go with the others in "Post Icon"

(08-12-2020 02:01 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(08-13-2018 06:29 AM)JTiger Wrote:  Cabs did to themselves. Every cab I've been a bad driver that tried to take me on a ride for extra miles and money. F those guys.

I've had pretty good experiences with Uber.

Pretty much.. Cabbies did this to themselves...

Ever look at the prices listed for some cabs?

This is just one cab company in St. Louis...

$3.00 for the first mile
$1.50 for every 1/10th a mile after that.

2 Mile trip gonna run you $18 bucks? I'll take Uber any day of the week over that..

Quote:I've heard one Taxi medallion in NYC runs a millions bucks. That's some pretty high stakes to wade in to.

And cities put a limit on how many medallions they give out.. I think St. Louis says 200 cab medallions maximum. (I think it's still 600K for a medallion once it's released)

Quote: When they get their tax bill and find out they've actually made negative income, then most of them quit

This honestly depends on how you do your taxes.. You try to write off money by mileage or by car maintenance costs?

It's the Social Security tax that ends up biting most of them. Sure, they can write off the mileage or the maintenance if they're really careful and keep good records, but then they get hit by self-employment SS taxes--which employers subsidize for many regular workers, and this is what they don't anticipate, so they end up owing.


Cities could give out more medallions to compensate for the removal of Uber/Lyft or rather, the addition of treating every company equally, and that would help mitigate that issue.

As to the cost of cabs, it's partially the over-regulation (by Dems in big cities, hmmmmm whaddaya know? (I'd agree to deregulate and let the market decide how many, just make everyone the same for tax purposes, but older cab cos aren't gonna like that much; neither will Uber/Lyft because they'd actually have to learn how to run a REAL business for a change) and the fact that Uber/Lyft actually cost more to run than they charge, it's just they don't have to pay their fair share of costs and they also pass/steal from costs onto their employees that they try to pretend are not. In a fair and equal market, they'd get their lunch eaten, but due to their "preferred status" they can lie and say they make money...for now.

Not a Supreme Court ruling (yet) but still important:

Prop. 22 is ruled unconstitutional, a blow to California gig economy law

Quote:Ride-hailing giants Uber Inc. and Lyft Inc. were dealt a blow after a California judge ruled the state's Proposition 22, which classified drivers as independent contractors, was unconstitutional.
Proposition 22, a voter-approved measure, said gig-economy businesses were exempt from state labor laws that classified more workers and employees, awarding them benefits.

The ruling caused investors to dump shares of both companies, with Lyft declining as much as 4% and Uber falling up to 2.77%.

Uber, following the decision, announced existing stockholders would sell up to 25.3 million shares....

Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch said Proposition 22, which was passed by voters in November, was unenforceable and unconstitutional in a ruling on Friday. Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and other app-based companies pumped more than $200 million into supporting Proposition 22, which made their businesses exempt from treating drivers as employees under state law. The measure was passed when 58% of California voters backed the proposition.

Roesch ruled that Proposition 22 broke the state constitution by unfairly hampering the power of the Legislature when it comes to workers’ compensation and collective bargaining. It comes after a group of drivers and labor unions challenged the ballot measure....

The ballot initiative defined app-based transportation, rideshare and delivery drivers as independent contractors and not employees or agents, exempting them from the new law created to mandate that most workers in California be classified as employees eligible for employer-paid benefits.

The Service Employees International Union, along with four individuals, sued in January, arguing Proposition 22 was unconstitutional and unenforceable. They argue it violates Section 4 of Article XIV of the California Constitution, which “grants to the Legislature ‘plenary power, unlimited by any provision of this Constitution’ to establish and enforce a complete system of workers’ compensation.”

On Aug. 20, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch agreed, ruling that two sections of Proposition 22 were unconstitutional and that the law resulting from the proposition was unenforceable.

“A prohibition on legislation authorizing collective bargaining by app-based drivers does not promote the right to work as an independent contractor, nor does it protect work flexibility, nor does it provide minimum workplace safety and pay standards for those workers,” Roesch wrote. “It appears only to protect the economic interest of the network companies in having a divided, ununionized workforce, which is not a stated goal of the legislation.”

I've said before these are Taxi service companies, and all such companies should be treated similarly--internet companies do not deserve exemptions when others in same/similar businesses do not get them and/or have to follow additional regulations.

Quote: The 9th Circuit has issued a scathing rebuke of Newsom and the Legislature. The court advanced a case alleging AB 5 is Unconstitutional and rooted in "Corruption, pure Spite, or naked Favoritism."

— Kevin Kiley (@KevinKileyCA) March 18, 2023

Quote: A U.S. appeals court on Friday revived a lawsuit by Uber Technologies Inc (UBER.N) and subsidiary Postmates Inc challenging a California law that would require them to provide more proof that workers are independent contractors, a classification that helps the companies save millions.

In a major win for app-based services that heavily rely on contractors, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the state must face claims that the law known as AB5 is unconstitutional because it improperly singles out app-based transportation businesses while exempting many other industries.

(03-19-2023 11:12 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

Quote: The 9th Circuit has issued a scathing rebuke of Newsom and the Legislature. The court advanced a case alleging AB 5 is Unconstitutional and rooted in "Corruption, pure Spite, or naked Favoritism."

— Kevin Kiley (@KevinKileyCA) March 18, 2023

Quote: A U.S. appeals court on Friday revived a lawsuit by Uber Technologies Inc (UBER.N) and subsidiary Postmates Inc challenging a California law that would require them to provide more proof that workers are independent contractors, a classification that helps the companies save millions.

In a major win for app-based services that heavily rely on contractors, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the state must face claims that the law known as AB5 is unconstitutional because it improperly singles out app-based transportation businesses while exempting many other industries.

dems are 'efficient' at developing law that goes after the 'head cheese and the mice' at the same time ... isn't that why the mice that can are fleeing...

@whoMovedMuhCheese (it's actually a great book if one is into the philo side of the equation)

I've never used Uber and can count on one hand the number of times I've been in a cab. I can't even imagine a scenario where I would use Grubhub etc. Went to try it a couple years back to order ~$40 worth of food for the family and after all the fees and the tip it was almost $60. F-that, restaurant is 4 miles away. How lazy do you have to be?

Take away how nasty most cabs are Uber is so much easier to use alone

(03-20-2023 08:33 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  I've never used Uber and can count on one hand the number of times I've been in a cab. I can't even imagine a scenario where I would use Grubhub etc. Went to try it a couple years back to order ~$40 worth of food for the family and after all the fees and the tip it was almost $60. F-that, restaurant is 4 miles away. How lazy do you have to be?

It's not for everyone. The platforms do offer perks to drivers, though.

I don't know about Lyft, Door Dash, Grub Hub, but Uber offers its drivers health insurance and free college tuition, to name a few.

(08-12-2020 11:42 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Taxis are always a scam and ripoff and a con job. Anywhere. Anytime. Any country. Period.

Uber is a slimy company at the executive level. They're sleazy, they're anti-competitive, they behave with brazen callousness to others.

Lyft is now a virtue signalling shill with Obama administration expats stuffing the Board of Directors.

In summary ... f*** all three, get a rental from Enterprise.

Exactly

Ive never ridden in a cab. Ever.

Yesterday via the Chicago Sun Times:

Quote:Grubhub cutting 400 people, including workers in Chicago

Food delivery service Grubhub said Monday it is laying off about 400 workers, or 15 % of its corporate staff.

Grubhub employs 850 at its Chicago headquarters and another 2,000 nationally. A spokesperson said the cuts in Chicago should be in line with the 15% reduction, indicating that around 120 layoffs are due locally. The layoffs do not impact drivers or employees at restaurants that work with Grubhub.

CEO Howard Migdal announced the cuts in a companywide message, saying the “tough decisions” were necessary to stay competitive. He said workers would be notified of their terminations throughout the day.

Quote:New York City Mayor Eric Adams and the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) Commissioner Vilda Vera Mayuga announced a novel initiative to implement a first-of-its-kind minimum pay rate for app-based restaurant delivery workers.

“‘Getting Stuff Done’ for working people is what this administration is all about, and that includes some of the hardest working New Yorkers: our delivery workers,” said Mayor Adams during a press conference Sunday.

“Our delivery workers have consistently delivered for us — now, we are delivering for them. This new minimum pay rate, up by almost $13.00/hour, will guarantee these workers and their families can earn a living, access greater economic stability, and help keep our city’s legendary restaurant industry thriving,” he added.

While the headlines might initially draw applause, a closer look reveals potential unintended consequences and raises questions about the viability of such a policy.

The proposal involves more than doubling the average hourly rate for delivery workers from $7.09 to $19.96, a change touted as a means to ensure economic stability for the city’s more than 60,000 delivery workers.

“The pay rate will be $17.96 when it takes effect on July 12, 2023, and will increase to $19.96 when it is fully phased-in on April 1, 2025,” according to the news release.

“The rate will also be adjusted annually for inflation. Apps have the option to pay delivery workers per trip, per hour worked, or develop their own formulas, as long as their workers make the minimum pay rate of $19.96, on average. Apps that pay workers for all the time a worker is connected to the app (the time waiting for trip offers and trip time) must pay at least $17.96 per hour in 2023, which is approximately $0.30 per minute, not including tips. Apps that only pay for trip time (the time from accepting a delivery offer to dropping off the delivery) must pay at least approximately $0.50 per minute of trip time in 2023, not including tips.”

Though it’s an impressive figure and seemingly noble gesture, such a substantial increase could drastically impact the operations of delivery apps, restaurants, and, ultimately, the very workers it purports to assist.

Delivery apps, already struggling to attain profitability, will bear the brunt of these additional costs. With thin profit margins, these platforms may have to pass the added expense onto restaurants and consumers, potentially resulting in higher prices for customers and decreased sales for eateries. This shift could lead to a reduced demand for delivery services, threatening the jobs of the very workers this initiative aims to support.

“The city is lying to delivery workers — they want apps to fund this increase by eliminating jobs and reducing tipping while forcing the remaining workers to deliver orders faster,” Uber Eats spokesperson Josh Gold told AP.

This is Stupid, but so are Democrat Leaders.

I haven't taken a taxi in the US in years.

Lyft is cheaper, quicker and easier.