Uber Drivers
- Thread starter Darts
- Start date
Doesn't mean they can't use their freedom of association to negociate collectively. Or that Uber can ignore a contract it might agree to with their …, call it a professional association. We called the one I belonged to a 'Guild'.
Y'know, like the CMA.
This plays into Teslas master plan perfectly...Uber just dug their grave with this one.
As soon as the 1,000,000 rated mile battery comes into production or 4,000 recharges I am getting one.
This is the current warranty model:
As soon as the 1,000,000 rated mile battery comes into production or 4,000 recharges I am getting one.
This is the current warranty model:
Not sure exactly what the complaint is. Buddy of mine drives for them and averages out at just over $20 an hour.
I know he will have maintenance costs which will lower the take home.
As for the conditions, it is their own vehicle and they knew driving people around town was the whole idea when they signed up. Not sure what they can complain about.
I know he will have maintenance costs which will lower the take home.
As for the conditions, it is their own vehicle and they knew driving people around town was the whole idea when they signed up. Not sure what they can complain about.
You assume they're complaining, and the suggestion is that it isn't justified. Why not assume that they're just asking for a better rate than the one they signed on for way back. It's what businesses do.
Like your gas station does, when it puts up that sign with a higher price than yesterday.
As for your buddy, CAA estimates ordinary car ownership costs at $9500-10,000/yr (their 'Calculate your annual car-cost' site is down just now) or somewhere north of 75¢ per km. Hope it's worth it for him
Well, there are no required qualification that are specific for Uber drivers that such "association" can monopolize. And they are not employee, so, they cannot prevent a "non-unionized" driver to work for Uber (which is the main advantage of a unionized workforce).
The price was the advantage only because Uber and Lyft have been subsidizing the cost of the rides; prior to its IPO, Uber never posted a profit. Now that both companies are publicly traded, the Executives for each respective company have indicated that the subsidies will decrease.
It seems to me that the strategy was simply to undercut the Taxi industry (who didn't do any favors for themselves, let's be honest), destroy the Taxi industry, and then raise prices to profitability when consumers have no other options.
I also think the average Uber/Lyft driver is not sophisticated enough to understand that they were simply trading the increased depreciation on their vehicles for cash money; and that the so-called "sharing economy" is bullshit.
Makes the association's task harder but far from impossible.
As for "non-unionized" drivers, if you put your thoughts into words that made clearer sense, I'd bet you're wrong about that as well. Unions in Ontario cannot stop an employer from hiring non-members if it chooses to.
But we aren't talking about a union, just an association of people who already have economic relationships with Uber, now trying to better themselves by collective action.
The idea of Uber when it started is "carpooling" until it became obvious that people drive for them and make it their primary income generating work...I'm not sure how this one will end...but their expecting too much of this.
There is almost zero chance that Uber or Lyft will ever turn a profit.
https://www.aier.org/article/why-ubers-business-model-may-not-be-viable
Its a poor business model.
Are you sure about that? Except when the Union is on strike I think, no I'm sure, Ontario is a "closed shop" jurisdiction (as is Manitoba). This means everyone who is not management has to be a member of the union once one has been certified. The independent contractor argument has more promise.
More here about forming a uionhttps://opseu.org/sites/default/files/migration/olra_20rights_20flyer_i.pdf
Quote the law or judgement that says so please. Perhaps things have changed.
As an Ontario union member, reading such a restriction in our contract so visiting Americans wouldn't be hired for jobs we wanted, I was told differently by our labour lawyer. Ontario went by the Rand formula then, which allows anyone to be hired, but requires them and the employer to abide by the union contract, and specifically requires them to collect/pay whatever union dues the contract specifies. The contract could not require membership as a hiring condition (even though it said it did).
I believe that is still the case. But I'll be happy if you bring me up to date
--------
PS: Thanks for the link, but it speaks to the first organizing of a workplace and doesn't mention non-members after certification and first contract. Since it mentions the OLRB's role, I get to say I actually wound up at a OLRB hearing regarding certification of a newly-formed union of freelancers long ago, but that wasn't about non-members/closed shops either.
They are cab drivers at the end of the day. I used to think that UBER was a great idea because it would smarten up the taxi industry (who are a joke)
But I came to realize that a whole heck of a lot of cab drivers also drive for uber (if you can't beat them, join them) and bring their same shit with them.
I've always been of the opinion that if you don't agree with what your job pays, find another job.
But I came to realize that a whole heck of a lot of cab drivers also drive for uber (if you can't beat them, join them) and bring their same shit with them.
I've always been of the opinion that if you don't agree with what your job pays, find another job.
Is there something wrong with asking for a raise? Or a different schedule? Or for washrooms? Or … ? Seems to me there cannot be an agreement without someone asking. Whether it's, "Do you want our job at this rate?" or "Do you want our work at this rate?"
Unions make the asking/discussing/agreeing process more efficient than trying to manage scores of individual conversations and deals with different starts, finishes, prices, terms and conditions.
That may also include Uber's cut. It may also not account for driving time to the pick-up location, or just waiting for a request to come in. And like you said, it likely doesn't account for his expenses, like maintenance and depreciation, maybe even fuel. Most Uber drivers think they make way more than they do because they're not used to working as contractors and accounting for expenses.
Rounding the CAA's annual car-ownership cost to an even $10K, the buddy's $20 an hour rate would need 500hours work each year — 12½ full-time weeks — just to cover those car costs, before he started earning money for groceries and rent.
Not quite
In Ontario, there is no statutory law requiring union dues be paid, and no law requiring employees to become union members. Whether either requirement exists depends on collective bargaining and how a majority of employees vote.
In other words, legally they can NOT force you to join a Union or even pay Union dues (contrary to whatever a group like OPSEU is trying to claim)
At issue is the negotiated contract and that is how they try to force non-union members out (I personally think tactics like this SHOULD be illegal, it certainly is illegal for an employer to try hiring people against unions to prevent votes for unionization it seems only fair that door should swing both ways)
