Why is the prevailing attitude in these comments "they have no contract with Uber, they should leave if they don't like it"? Many people in tech have at-will contracts yet when we get articles on HN about bad work conditions we don't just say "well then quit!". I do agree that in the long term these unhappy drivers should look for a different source of income but for now they clearly need uber and as such it's not unfair of them to express their distaste for certain things uber does until they find a better place to work.
If they hate Uber so much they should stop using it. They aren't obligated to Uber in any way.<p>The "rampant firing" happens when drivers who suck get poor ratings (below 4.7 and you go on probation according to an Uber driver I talked to) sounds like their own problem not Uber's.
I had a Sidecar driver this afternoon who told me he was suspended by Uber after he had the bad luck to get Travis Kalanick as a passenger, and failed to pick him up on the right side of the street (according to him).
"A large group ..."<p>I count 25 (or 24 if the guy at right-rear has big hair) people in the picture and I suspect that if there were more than that, they'd have made sure to squeeze them into the shot.<p>A small group (proportionally) if you look at the number of drivers Uber has. And do they really represent drivers from the other cities served by Uber or is that wishful thinking.<p>"They don’t have the balls to come down and talk to us" ... maybe because they're busy dispatching thousand of drivers to waiting customers? If Uber is really that hard on the drivers, why don't they work elsewhere? They have no contract, so they're free to go.
I've been a heavy Uber user in SF since they started. I was first in line when they launched Uber X, then Uber cab. I then saw Lyft and Sidecar rise in the city and, honestly, do to Uber in a single month what Uber took about a year to do to the taxi industry. Lyft drivers are more friendly and totally trustworthy. The service is cheaper and there are a bunch of cars all around town. Why use Uber anymore, unless all Lyfts/Sidecars are taken?<p>To me this is clearly what this is about. Uber is already being disrupted, so they are desperate to lower their costs to be able to compete again. As a guy who literally gave up vehicle ownership just because of these services, all I can say is god bless startup darwinism.
I just got back from San Francisco, where I used Uber for the first time (and continued to use it throughout the trip). I talked to all of the drivers and they seemed quite happy - all had been using the service for over a year, and they had been in the limo business for five to eight years each. They said that now all of their business comes through Uber. However, one stated that there has been a huge increase in Uber drivers, thus making it more difficult to keep busy.<p>I think that some driver backlash is a normal part of growing, and that Uber should maintain strict quality control.
As far as I can tell this is mostly a consequence of Uber responding to the market (i.e.: competitors like Lyft). With Uber X, Black car drivers no longer have a monopoly on convenient transportation (and from what I hear, that has significantly decreased their business). I can't entirely fault Uber for this...they need to adapt or die.
I love the way Uber works and use it all the time. It is hard for me to assess whether they have a legitimate gripe though since every driver I have asked directly about the service (which is every ride I take) has answered enthusiastically positive. Maybe just trying to use their leverage to negotiate rather than being truly harmed?
“They’re running a sweatshop with an app."<p>Guys riding around in air-conditioned cars all day calling their working conditions a sweatshop.<p>What if Uber can't actually pay them what they want? Is the solution to force Uber to not fire any drivers, to pay them more than they're able? And by what insane reasoning should they be forced to pay more? Uber isn't owned by the government, and isn't the sole dispatcher around (and certainly not in SF!).<p>If Uber's business model can't support paying the drivers more than there's nothing that can be done except for the drivers that don't like the conditions to quit. If that means that Uber then goes out of business, so be it. No amount of protesting is going to fix that.
The major complaint I hear about Uber from Chicago taxi drivers (I like to chat when in a cab) is that Uber only pays them after 10 days. They have to pay weekly rent on their cab, though, which means they can only use Uber when they already have enough money to pay the rent.
I was surprised to go through these comments (including with a command-F) and not find mention of the recent news of the Uber driver charged with raping a customer. While that story was pretty damaging to Uber, it was equally--if not more—-damaging to the arguments made by the protesting drivers. The rape incident is exactly the type of thing that Uber is trying to prevent by being so strict with its drivers (though, admittedly, a rape could still have occurred with a highly-rated driver). For PR reasons, Uber understandably does not want to point out that bad event, but it would be pretty compelling if they said something like, "Drivers, even if it was just one driver who ruined it for all of you, your bad behavior has forced our hand. We have to do everything we can to protect our customers."
The combination of having a relatively low-skill and undifferentiated job (as a driver) and of having no employment protection (as a contractor) is unfortunate.<p>I feel for these men, but I think their best choice is to find other employment - this protest will lead nowhere.
A very interesting dilemma as a consumer/customer.<p>I am sure out of the many fired some are legit firings - drivers not respectful or just not good enough. And similarly some who have been short changed by customers giving bad reviews.<p>So here is my dilemma, wearing the customer hat - if this move by Uber guarantees me that every time I hail a Uber cab, I am guaranteed to get a 4.7 star experience in the minimum (ya sometimes not, but on an average yes). So why wouldn't I want that as a customer?<p>Now if I wear the hat of a sympathetic human, I can probably see some injustice if I sift through all the firings. So how can we hold Uber accountable?<p>Being a realist, sometimes one has to understand that many systems don't have equality and maybe in this case the injustice/inequality benefits the Uber customers.
I've used Uber a lot over the past 2 and a half years. I've made a point to ask nearly every driver how they liked the service and I can only recall one (out of dozens) giving anything but praise.<p>So yeah, does not compute, unless things have drastically changed recently.
I was surprised to see the phrase "Uber Drivers". As I thought I understood it: Uber has no drivers and drivers haver their own companies, simply using Uber as a source of leads for customers. It's like OpenTable for cars, right?
You know what killed uber for me? Car2Go. That's what these drivers should be worried about.<p>Wait until it's in SF. This company is going to change the world, even before the driving part is automated.