New Initiatives for Lyft Drivers
blog.lyft.com
blog.lyft.com
This isn't even close to the case - being friendly, having a clean and quiet vehicle, and providing a ride that is safe and not white-knuckle terrifying will all garner a lot more in tips from me than someone careening through traffic to save 30 seconds. I think your hypothesis is baseless.
Tips can be nice in certain situations, but I think people would prefer to just be paid more, so their income is stable and dependable.
[1] http://www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/html/passenger/taxicab_rate.shtm...
In general you are getting a ride from someone. Other than the fact that with legacy taxis you tip, (just like at a restaurant) where it doesn't really relate to quality of service, I don't see how much extra someone can do that would make a ride tipworthy.
Perhaps this is just a difference depending on where you are in the world, but I'm not used to people in first world countries carrying cash.
Interesting that Germany is different.
It might be me but I perceived the culture in smaller town Scotland to be more cash oriented than I am used to in the USA.
I personally saw more people pay with cash than I am used to.
I still love your country and will go back at any time.
Probably because you didn't have chip and pin.
If an establishment takes a card without chip and pin in the UK/Europe, the fraud rules are very different.
I do have chip and pin and I wouldn't have left without a chip and pin card (I have more than one out of my 8 credit cards, not counting debit cards...which I have several as well...). There was absolutely zero reason to believe a perceived lack of chip and pin was an issue from what I wrote.
Also the fraud rule are/will be different in the US as well.
I went to a deli they told me that I have to ahev £10 minimum to use a card. I went to a restaurant and they had a £1.50 surcharge for card as well and encouraged me to pay in cash.
The first time I used card while I was there was at Wetherspoons... lol...
I also base my feelings on my personal observations of watching other people pay for things as well. Of course my "feeling" could be off base as well. People are known for getting a wrong impression sometimes.
That being said - I still love Scotland and will visit again in a heartbeat. In fact I hope to visit again in the near future!
I've also been all across small town USA :)
I really hope I don't offend. I don't mean to.
The reason I went to the place I went was because the primary purpose of my trip was to visit someone.
Also if its a crowded pub waiting while you dig you card out and slowly use the one machine your holding every one up.
No? Why would it get eaten by a machine?
Been there, done that. Only once, but yeah, it happens.
Works at cash only places - this probably varies around the world. In Australia, most places will accept card - the exception being Asian places, cause we're cheap =).
Small merchants are happy to receive it - I suspect this is changing, the fees are next to nothing these days, and by not handling cash, they avoid issues like employee theft, and also people are encouraged to spend more.
You get a discount when buying gas - we don't have this here (Australia)
The aforementioned tipping - likewise, we don't have this here. In general, I prefer to know how much I am spending beforehand, and I dislike the concept of tipping, or people needing to beg for tips.
It works when the power out - err, I suspect if the power is out in say a supermarket or a restaurant, they would have more issues than just the credit card machine not working.
I'm not saying never carry cash - but I like the convenience of card. And let's be honest most people aren't keeping their money stuffed inside their mattress.
Their money is in a bank account - and not in physical notes either, it's a set of electronic digits. So the whole, going to a bank, converting it to cash, giving it to somebody, so that they can then convert it back into electronic digits - seems incredibly archaic and outmoded.
Additionaly, nothing is to prevent a driver from keeping a small amount of cash on their person and then stashing the rest periodically in a hidden safe. So yes they might lose $50 or $100 vs. not getting tips. Even if they don't get tips a person could assume they had some cash on them.
The point of the small amount of cash is twofold. One it's a small amount so if you lose it not that big of a deal. But it's also enough that if you got robbed you could give something to the robber. So they don't harm you or beat you thinking there is more somewhere. [1] This is similar to the old rule of leaving a small amount of cash in your cash register at a store and leaving the register open. That way someone comes in, takes the cash, and in theory has less of a reason to trash your store.
[1] Of course you could store more of the money where you can find it to satisfy them if the $100 wasn't enough and if you felt your life depended on it. Kind of a honey pot in a way.
Some what now?
Why would you want the hassle? Or risk it being lost/stolen?
If I'm in town and not attending a fair, I don't have cash on me. Period.
You want to buy a bottle of coke from a vending machine? Most of them don't have card readers.
You want to tip the valet/bellman/maid? Most of them don't have card readers; even if they do, it's still inconvenient to make them dig it out.
Feeling compassionate toward the beggar on the corner? Think he's got a card reader?
Want to pay the babysitter? Does she carry a card reader?
Then there's the other side of risk. Ever had your identity stolen? (I have, though not from a dodgy card reader.) And if you think chip and pin is going to make that impossible, I expect that the crooks will find a way.
I don't panhandle, but I am homeless. In fact, I have a PayPal account. IIRC, I could get a card reader from them if I wanted it (though, in practice, I might need a better phone than I currently have to make that work).
Although I am posting this merely because it strikes me as humorous, it isn't crazy to think beggars may soon have card readers, at least some of them.
I carry small amounts of cash (in part to print e-gift cards at the library) and do as much as possible via debit card/paypal/online payments/etc.
I never have that urge tbh.
> You want to tip the valet/bellman/maid? Most of them don't have card readers; even if they do, it's still inconvenient to make them dig it out.
Yeah, when I'm on vacation I'll run to the bank and get some $5 bills for that sort of thing. Hence "regularly" was the word I used. I'm not on that sort of vacation 51 out of 52 weeks a year.
> Feeling compassionate toward the beggar on the corner? Think he's got a card reader?
I donate directly to large charities that I know provide food, etc. to people. I honestly don't see beggars on street corners [largely because the local police are assholes].
> Want to pay the babysitter? Does she carry a card reader?
Actually yeah. She does.
> Then there's the other side of risk. Ever had your identity stolen? (I have, though not from a dodgy card reader.) And if you think chip and pin is going to make that impossible, I expect that the crooks will find a way.
Yes. If you meant actually identity theft [e.g. social, driver license] so they can masquerade as you...a lack of credit card provides no protection. The insurance companies you use, your employer, your bank, and dozens [if not hundreds] of "big data" companies have this info as well.
If you somehow believe a lack of a credit card will magically secure you against this risk, you are very much mistaken.
Stolen credit cards, honestly, are much less of a problem than stolen cash. I can get the money back from a stolen credit card.
I'm not really sure why you are against tips for drivers.
They don't make great money so the tip is worth it.
It's great that you want people to be paid sanely for the job they do, but the fact of the matter is people largely aren't in this industry. Uber doesn't allow tipping, and doesn't pay particularly well. After factoring in depreciation of their vehicle most drivers are going to be bringing in something like $10/hr.
We live in a culture where businesses won't pay their employees sanely. Until that is fixed I want the ability to show my gratitude for a job well done with a tip. "Blah blah use cash!" Sure I can do that, but it's inconvenient for a number of reasons and the reality is that most people won't do it.
I'm not tipping you for your own (long-term) good.
I think some of it is (stupidly) driven by new credit card / eftpos machines that have the tipping option built in.
Tipping through an app allows the employer to pay them even less because "they receive tips", in the end you're tipping the company that hired them.
This makes drivers expect to be tipped (even if they did usual or mediocre job) and essentially becomes a hidden fee.
And your point is kinda negated by the fact that Lyft usually pays more than Uber.
As for the negating point, this is not something that happens instantly, but if you want an example then look at restaurants. There's even special minimum wage (currently $2.13) for jobs that receive tips.
That doesn't happen with Lyft: because tipping is built into the app, nobody asks for cash.
I don't carry cash, so I'd be screwed if I rode Uber and a driver threatened me with a 1-star rating if I didn't fork over cash.
If a driver ever asked this of me I would give them a bad rating along with an explanation. I'd expect the driver to get canned pretty quickly if passengers report such behavior and passenger reputation to be restored if the drivers gave them 1-star ratings. As far as I understand it, driver reputation is far more important than passenger reputation (they certainly have a lot more to lose).
Like the drivers who won't ask but will still give you a low rating if you don't offer a tip. And then you have the ones in the middle, who have tip jars sitting in the middle of their car. Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/uber-driver-complaints-e...
Also, while you or I might complain, a lot of people are either too scared to speak up or just figure that a big company like Uber won't care, so this kind of stuff just goes unreported.
I used to love Lyft more than Uber but then the lack of professionalism over my last three times using it in SF have made me hesitant to ever recommend them again. First time around, the driver was completely incapable of finding me at SFO despite me following Lyft's text message instructions and communicating precisely which gate I was waiting at. Second time in downtown SF, the Lyft driver 'accepted' the ride only to basically never pick me up. Third time, same thing happened. And of course, there's that time when the driver almost ran someone over because they were focused on talking.
Now, I don't see any difference between the two. I've definitely had less than stellar experiences with Uber but now I don't see any differences between the two.
No, just tell me the amount. Most of the world works this way. Even in places where bribes are routine, there isn't as much tipping.
Restaurants are moving away, slowly, from the tipping model, mostly due to increases in base wages, making it unpalatable for all but the rich, to pay a premium price and a tip on top of that.
Pay your employees/contractors a fair wage and take responsibility for it, don't shift wage responsibility to the "fare" (paying passenger).
they are ?
Obviously this is still a better job for some people then there alternative. Lyft will market to new drivers with the higher rates and ease of renting a Hertz vehicle.
And this is why uber can only currently provide their high margins because they provide no insurance between rides (only during rides), because they don’t follow laws, etc.
It’s unfair competition, and sadly, people expect Lyft to offer the same.
They have a lot of room to raise prices before it outweighs those advantages. Remember, people were using UberBlack (as "UberCab" way back then), which simply took existing, fully-insured car service drivers, which had no regulatory advantage, long before UberX/Lyft.
At least that's my experience.
Never been to San Francisco. But in Chicago or NYC I generally use Uber just because most taxi drivers seem to only drive at 99% of their limits and it's stressful. The Uber drivers are much more sedate generally. IME.
"Breaking Laws" is maybe a bit strong, as regulation is extremely bulky and a monolithic unequippted government isn't in the position to adapt. The laws vary on every level but what I think it comes down to, in a society that teies to be democratic, is whether people are comfortable with this existing. It seems they are.
* Have commercial insurance
* Have a "people-driving drivers license", which allows you to drive commercially taxis, busses, trams, etc. Costs 55€.
Uber is even refusing to follow the insurance part – they only insure during rides, but not when the person commercially drives with their car to the start of a ride.
You are ignoring the speed of getting a ride. I mean, all those things would help a lot for cabs, but if I had to wait half an hour, even if I knew it would only be half an hour, while that would be better than my previous cab experience, it still wouldn't be very useful.
If you want me to use the cab regularly, your average wait time needs to be 5 minutes or less. This means you need a lot of cabs on the road... a lot more than were in my area before this.
I'll put up with a lot of other bullshit, but if you make me wait, I'm not going to use your service, full stop.
I'm not sure that would be possible under the previous regulations. Improving dispatch only takes you so far; at some point you need more cabs on the road.
>They have a lot of room to raise prices before it outweighs those advantages. Remember, people were using UberBlack (as "UberCab" way back then), which simply took existing, fully-insured car service drivers, which had no regulatory advantage, long before UberX/Lyft.
Now, here's where we need to stop and remember that the average HN user makes a lot more money than the average person. Yes, for you and me? it's about convenience.
That's the thing, I'd be fine paying uber black rates; but waiting is not a luxury experience. At the same price, I'd much rather ride in a ratty honda that shows up in four minutes than take a limo that takes twenty minutes.
But there are a lot of people for whom the price matters a whole lot. There are more of them than there are of us, by a lot. If Uber only wants to keep me as a customer, yes, they can double prices for me. but their customer base is massively larger if they are cheaper than cabs, and the larger their customer base, the more cars they will have wandering around, and the less time I need to wait for a car.
I suspect that if uber doubled their prices, their ridership (and thus drivers on the road) would fall to the point where my wait times would increase to the point where I would no longer find the service interesting.
I would have zero problem calling a cab, even with the regulated cab prices, if they had a Lyft/Uber-like app. Hit the button, accepted in 60 seconds, tracked to your door. The fact that the cab companies simply won't do this grinds my gears.
This is also why Lyft/Uber grind my gears. JUST BE A COMPETENT CAB COMPANY and people would love you. Uber/Lyft doesn't have to flout the existing laws while lobbying to get them changed.
I literally have like 5 different taxi apps here offering me paying via app, rating, calling a taxi per button press, etc.
And they existed before uber did.
Taxi service, provides rating, has app, can pay and rate via app, fully insured, hired and trained drivers, transparent rate (rate set by law and shown in app), guaranteed arrival, etc.
And it costs 5€ less than uber.
And it existed since 2008.
What I am wondering is why this only caught on in some european cities, but never worldwide?
And they never really expanded over Europe and South America.
But you have to know: My region had a dozen of these apps, all competing with each other.
So, the only reason why people used uber was that sometimes it was cheaper. But that only because they ignored the laws.
German Taxi market is a seriously free market, and uber can’t compete fairly.
Italy, France, etc still have insanely overprotective markets.
Most people with cars are already making a car payment or lease agreement payment, taxes, insurance, etc. Having a car is typically not cheap.
Hard to say if this will really be a good deal for anyone. That always depends on a lot of details. But I am wondering if you were perhaps not counting your car payment and other expenses because you had to make those anyway, whether you drove for Lyft or not.
Perhaps there is only a big difference if you compare it to someone whose car is paid off, not to typical car owning costs.
Someone who is a college student or relatively poor for some reason might view this as a chance to get access to a car for themselves and also make enough money to cover it and perhaps a bit more than that. It might not be a paradigm that would occur to you because your situation is different from that. But I think we need to not turn our noses up at giving people the chance to make what looks to you like a poor wage.
A quick google suggests Nevada's minimum wage is either $7.25/hour or $8.25/hour, depending upon what benefits they have. If you are only making $7.25/hour, then $10/hour is more than a 33% increase in income. That extra $2-$3/hour may seem piddling to you, but for people who have very little, it can be huge and make a big difference in their quality of life. Furthermore, if it also gets them access to a car that they wouldn't otherwise have, this may be hugely life changing. Living without a car in America can be quite challenging.
This -- along with Uber's car financing plan -- really raises my "ick" factor in that they seem to be taking advantage of those who don't see the full expense or risk that they're taking on, and it may end up similar to the GM situation: "we're a finance company that happens to give rides too".
In a city like SF, $10/hour is actually less than minimum wage, yet there is no shortage of Uber/Lyft/Etc drivers.
After that stretch I drove periodically when I wanted some extra money. It's very flexible on hours.
[1] http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blogs/john-l-smith/mask...
I can't tell you how many people I know whose livelihood essentially depends on their single, aging vehicle not dying. These are often folks whose university debt is, essentially, a monthly car payment.
I would guess that the greatest demand for Lyft drivers is outside or nearly outside normal working hours. If a person with no car can subsidize a long-term rental by spending their after-work hours being a Lyft driver, perhaps arranging to leave work slightly early to help with the after-work rush, that could be a huge benefit to a lot of low-income individuals and families.
It could also be a benefit to families with one car. If one partner uses the car to commute and the other can subsidize a rental, that could provide opportunities to earn something which might otherwise not exist (not every location is amenable to public transportation or cycling).
There are certainly some potential problems with this model. But looking through the eyes of an under-privileged family, I can see this being a huge opportunity too. I just hope the pay rate and the negotiated rental rate and fuel rate are enough to make more than a pittance at the end of the day.
Reminds me of the days when alltheweb had just become the popular SE beating AltaVista, Excite and others, and Google stormed in and cleaned up.
I don't have a car, and I would be willing to drive lyft for limited funds AND access to the vehicle. Sure you couldn't take the car on vacation, but if you could make a bit of money and knock out some errands locally, I could see this catching on. The magnitude and evonomics might not be there for everyone, but the cars would just be at Hertz so it could be a positive thing for both parties.
This is so obviously an employee status I wonder if they're doing it to try to draw a clean line between employees and contractors somewhere to their liking.
"As Tesla Motors Inc. develops self-driving technology, an analyst asked Chief Executive Elon Musk a provocative question Wednesday: Will his company sell cars to a transportation service like Uber, or try to start something similar on its own?"
"Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas posed the question to Musk in an earnings call Wednesday afternoon, noting that Uber CEO Travis Kalanick has reportedly said he would want to buy Tesla’s self-driving cars when they are released."
Musk called it “an insightful question,” then added, “I don’t think I should answer it.”
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/will-tesla-launch-uber-like...
EDIT: I'd like to add, Tesla is building up massive manufacturing capacity and already is beta testing self-driving technology in end user vehicles. Uber has an app.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/is-uber-a-friend-or-foe-of-carne...
This is exactly what they do now, they just don't pay Uber, they pay those companies directly. But as a company with employees, they could negotiate a deal to get cars for cheaper, negotiate a better insurance rate, and save the driver the hassle.
But then we've come full circle, inviting regulations that drive up costs. This is an attempt to stay on the edge of that.
Did you mean applying labor regulations where they're supposed to be applied? Of course employing people under labor law has a cost.