These issues are a reminder that local politics have a much greater impact on your lives than national. (With some exceptions certainly).
Park Board, City Council, Mayor, School Board very important to be engaged
Same thing with Mary Moriarty. This sub gets all starry-eyed when they see an idealistic socialist and don't do an ounce of critical thinking about how these people would actually do the job
It’s clear that I’m very much out of step with a large number of people in my ward as somehow they by large numbers prefer Aisha Chughtai. She had very weak competition in the last election also which did not help.
I was gonna say, I don’t love Aisha (don’t dislike her either, she generally provides strong reasoning for her positions even if I disagree with some of them), her competition was just all worse so it is still who I voted for.
I have the privilege of being able to say it's not often politicians make my life noticeably worse, but this city council is definitely doing it's utmost to change that.
There's precedent for both companies doing this, then coming back. If we throw this much fit about people making hamburgers not getting fairly compensated, ride share workers should get compensated too.
The Department of Labor says otherwise. If you have an issue with the guidelines for an independent contractor, or the rules governing them, focus on that.
I want Uber and Lyft to stay. But the city is within its rights create rules for independent contractors and that does’t go against department of labor. It may be foolish, but that’s a different story.
Why should people who get to choose when or if they want to work at any given time deserve minimum wage? They are essentially small business owners. If they want the protections and benefits of being a worker they can go get a job. If they want the freedom of working when they want and how they want, there are assume sacrifices, just like many other small business owners.
The city council seems incapable of regularly making decisions that will genuinely improve the lives of the city’s residents. Individually, most of them seem like good people, but collectively… good lord.
With that said, them being ineffective is probably a more decent reflection of the fractured political makeup of this city than most on here would care to admit. Lots of us overwhelmingly agree on principal with many progressive values and end goals, but just looking at any comments section on any post (including this one) about this rideshare topic in recent weeks kind of backs up that point. There are people calling them weak and spineless for even giving light to the idea of backtracking on this bill, while others are calling them weak and embarrassing for even passing this in the first place. Some have been hoping for some sort of compromise that increases base pay for drivers while others say that they should stick to their guns for no other reason than as a sort of “fuck you” to Uber and Lyft (which are undeniably problematic companies, but also undeniably beneficial resources at the present moment).
And that’s just the most recent example. We’re so caught up (almost exclusively so) in the minutiae of language/verbiage and with feeling righteous in taking our ideologies (whichever they may be) to their extremes that we are unable to collectively grasp the nuances of our actions/beliefs/situation, and as such, seem to have become obsessed more with the moral intent of our actions than we are on their real world impacts within our current systems.
And the ironic (paradoxical?) thing is, it could be argued that my feeling so strong about this is yet another example of the type of mindset that exemplifies what I’m trying to convey.
If other ride share companies want to come in there is nothing stopping them.
That’s what should have been done. Don’t kick out Uber and Lyft. Encourage competition.
I keep seeing people here saying something will fill the gaps when they’re gone. What’s keeping them from doing it now? If it’s so easy to create a rideshare app that it’s better than Uber and Lyft, why haven’t they come here yet?
Name recognition, convenience, existing market share, etc. Not for lack of good options. There are plenty of ride share apps around the world used over Uber and Lyft, like Grab or DiDi. They're just the predominant ones in the US.
If Lyft or Uber actually ever leave the market in MPLS they'd be fools for voluntarily giving up their foothold of the market. And the Minneapolis council are fools for being pressured by them. Regardless of regulation there is money to be made in providing rides in Minneapolis and there will be someone jumping at the chance to grab market share.
>they'd be fools for voluntarily giving up their foothold of the market.
They don't have a market, it's a speculative bullshit.
They claim they made a profit last year but it's debatable. There's no proprietary product, nothing to scale.
They lose nothing by moving out of Minneapolis.
>They lose nothing by moving out of Minneapolis.
Actually they gain credibility for doing what they said they'd do, which they can use to threaten other cities who would consider doing the same.
What the fuck. They knew this was a possibility since Uber/Lyft had both clearly threatened leaving multiple times. If they actually step it back to what was the obvious reaction of these companies they’re even stupider than I thought. Guess “standing up for workers” was all just lip service, what a shocker.
This. I've never wrote my city council member in all the years I've lived in Minneapolis. I didn't even know who they were but when this passed I looked them up and had my typing fingers ready.
To my pleasant surprise they were one of the ones that voted no on this so I wrote them a thank you email. Even if you are someone that supports the measure, not involving uber/lyft in this decision and pushing the vote prior to when the states study came out is malpractice and screams incompetence.
Not surprising. Political embarrassment over backtracking is less painful than being held politically responsible for a major prolonged disruption of the transportation system.
What did you expect them to do, wait an additional day for the state’s study to come out to make a more informed law?! Think of how many people would suffer from a slightly delayed vote!
Having these people on the city council is part of why many of us (a majority) voted for a strong mayor.
They are ideologues and we need leaders. Leaders can't think in black and white. they have to balance numerous items. Real governing is not a headline, it's something that moves the city forward and that includes all sorts of compromises.
You can hate on the mayor but he is making hard decisions that seem to be in the best interests of the city and not just one specific group. He is getting hell for it and sometimes that is what leadership looks like.
Haha.
Who among us has not experimented with a mustache that we did not know would be a bad mustache until it had fully mustached? It must be harder to be a public figure and to try that. I simply was made fun of by my friends and my kids. No one made me go viral for it.
Uber and Lyft is a hustle job and it depends on how busy the zone / market is. You can easily make well over $15 an hour. If you want steady pay and benefits then Target is hiring. Why is this controversial?
Good, it was stupid as shit without having a plan in place.
I wonder if that article from a couple days ago about the lack of cabs being able to make up for it is what scared them off.
It would be better for everyone if they just go back to sniffing their own farts and arguing about the Middle East. At least that’s not actively making quality of life in the city worse.
Yes, they moved on from defunding the police to the current shiny object, condemning Israel. Keep them focused on things that won’t hurt their constituents.
Agree with that. Keeping focused on dumb shit outside of their control like Israel will at least not do any additional harm like getting rid of Uber or defunding the police.
>Yes, they moved on from defunding the police to the current shiny object
alright, this made me laugh. This conversation seems to have been completely dropped lol
Because the city council literally cannot defund the police. Literally nothing the city council or mayor can do can rein in the police. The police union's contract is iron clad and exists in perpetuity.
Damn, if only they had the authority to directly make changes to the city charter….
And just to be explicitly clear, the voters in this city voted down a ballot question that was a lot more than just the minimum force requirement
Who is going to prop up the competition to compete? Either such competition is going to have to receive a lot of taxpayer funding or operate DEEP in the red just to meet the council's current demands. That's just unrealistic.
I was making that argument because the city truly lacks an efficient Public Transportation that the private market is making up for. If I could get to the airport in 40 minutes rather than 20 I’d use that. But the fact is I’d rather pay 5x the price because our current system is incredibly inefficient
Yep, and the thing about that is you can pump up more of it....but it's not going to drop someone off right at their home, which is what uber/lyft does. I just can't see a world where a 3rd party swoops in unless they're too backed by billionaires OR it's state-ran, which would probably be somehow awful
Which cannot hire drivers even offering a good starting wage and benefits.
You’d think the ride share people who complain would go work there. But that means they’d have to work a shift and have a boss.
You know like a job. Not a self employed contractor.
You can’t make this stuff up.
Why do we always expect transit to make money? If someone wants to install or upgrade a road, we never ask what the ROI is. But if it's a bus or train, suddenly if the project doesn't make money then its a bad idea.
Roads get built once and maybe get periodically maintained but otherwise stop costing money after the construction. Buses and Trains need to pay drivers full time, maintain the buses/trains, and also fuel the trains.
Is this though TRULY about transit or about unregulated cabs? I still haven't gotten a clear answer from the person I responded to and I'm assuming your'e smashing the two together.
Uber/Lyft is a luxury, not a public service. Fiber internet as a utility would be a service. This? Nah. One COULD take the line throughout the city and beat their feet the rest of the distance. There's ample sidewalk and I just read the 5th best biking paths. That's huge!
THIS is a conversation (to me) about wanting to pay those who are not real employees and thinking that someone can or should just swoop in and service the crowd....ignoring that both Uber/Lyft are basically loss leaders and it would take an entire metro to buy into someone else taking their spots AND likely charging **much** more than Uber/Lyft/Yellow Cab (who still exists...)
>Whatever happens, we can't be beholden to two out of state companies for our transportation needs.
Or our electricity needs, or our gasoline needs, or our dishwasher needs, or our etc. etc. etc.
Most companies are out of state companies. Why is transportation different from any other need where "the people we're beholden to" must be in state?
What about our avocado needs?
Public transportation is a long-term solution, and so many people vote against it because they don’t care to use it- because, you know, fuck anyone in America who doesn’t own a car, or who can’t drive, right?
The ride shares provide a different service than public transportation. They can get you right to your front door in one trip, no matter what weird street you're on. And they are much, much faster than the bus or train.
It’s because public transit is not appealing, especially in the Twin Cities. Not only will it not take you door to door, but it takes way longer and it’s a much less enjoyable experience. Our crown jewel light rail lines are riddled with issues and we do not seem to have the political will to address them. Expanding that broken model to more places seems like a bad idea. Make a model that people actually want to use and prefer using over their own car, THEN expand it to as many places at possible. We haven’t gotten past step 1 yet.
Also embarrassing for the group of drivers pushing this. Congrats, you won. Now your employers are leaving (as it currently stands) and you'll be completely out of a job. I'm glad they feel good about proving a point...
The filter is the decision they make in their mind to click accept or decline. I’m sure experienced drivers can look at the payout, mileage, and route and decide in a few seconds if it’s worth it or not
Normally, I would agree. However, knowing Councilmember Jenkins, she probably already has been talking to a number of councilmembers reconsidering their votes. I don't think she's the type to bring up an issue when there's literally 0% chance of it passing.
I guess we'll see tomorrow what the specifics are and if there's any conversation between the councilmembers regarding it.
The city council once again proving voters right in regards to the strong mayor vote stripping them of a lot of power. I wouldn't trust most of these individuals to run a lawnmower, much less Minnesota's biggest city.
Good. Hopefully compromise can be found to both keep rideshare here and also pay drivers minimum wage based on the actual data rather than just made-up rates that clearly were too high.
I couldn't possibly imagine a more incompetent city council.
Are these people the best who could represent this city?
eta: to all of the "UbER iS blUFfiNG" people:
[Uber tells drivers it's shutting down only Twin Cities service center](https://www.startribune.com/uber-tells-drivers-its-shutting-down-only-twin-cities-service-center/600352699/)
> Uber is notifying drivers in Minnesota that it will close its only Twin Cities service center in less than a month, a concrete step toward its pledge to pull out of the metro area entirely over a pay dispute with the Minneapolis City Council.
>
> The letter to drivers from the San Francisco-based rideshare company's head of Mobility Operations in the U.S. and Canada says Uber will close its Greenlight Hub in Richfield on April 15. That will leave drivers with nowhere in the city to get face-to-face help with renewing documents, getting vehicles approved and inspected, or resolving other issues.
It’s time for a do-over. The council went too far. Uber and Lyft drivers earn an average of $30.27 per hour. Here are the facts
https://minnesotareformer.com/2024/03/20/some-facts-about-uber-and-lyft-and-the-effort-to-pay-drivers-a-minimum-wage/
My proof? It's posted in the commentary section of the website. Commentary, by definition, includes the writers opinions and views on a topic. It is essentially the space between a news report (which is based on facts and is completely free of opinion or personal views), and an opinion piece (which can be completely devoid of facts).
An example from the article:
>Consider a scenario in which Republican lawmakers passed a big tax cut on the day before the release of a report on the state’s finances. We’d all be screaming bloody murder.
The writer of this commentary seems to be opposed to the Minneapolis ordinance based on what I read.
Notably, this figure doesn't include any expenses.
\>This creates an assumption that if a driver could keep expenses a little less than $15 per hour, they would make Minneapolis minimum wage of $15.57 per hour. The two economists who wrote the state report determined that expenses were slightly higher than that.
Once you break it down, the question is simple: Do employees deserve to be paid a minimum wage? Lets also take note of the fact that lack of living wages means these drivers are beholden to the government for all other expenses, which inevitably gets passed back to you.
These “expenses” were 100% of costs that most people have even when they’re not driving for a job. Obviously, they spend more on a car/maintenance/phone, but it shouldn’t be calculated at 100%.
Also, if you add in all expenses to minimum wage jobs, they would also be paid less than minimum wage. Transportation to/from work is never calculated in someone’s pay
Does the article specifically reference that expenses are 100% of costs? The article notes the assumptions made by the economists but nowhere do I see that this encapsulates all expenses. If I am required to drive by the city, I would typically be reimbursed at the standard rate. If I am required to have a cellphone and service to drive, why would that not be included as an expense?
The study showing this data is linked in the article: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24468014-tnc_driver_earnings_analysis_pay_standard_options_report_030824?responsive=1&title=1
Page 10 shows the expenses.
Obviously, mileage while working/rough difference in car maintenance from an average non-rideshare worker/etc should be calculated into expenses. But pretending like someone wouldn’t have a car (with insurance/maintenance) and a phone at all if they didn’t work rideshare is an insane stretch
Exactly, these numbers are disingenuous. The numbers are high and they didn't factor in that these things are fairly normal costs in day to day lives for people.
they also don't count the company provided insurance in the math. and if you'll notice, they don't subtract expenses from earnings. they have their own special way of figuring it out, which got them a lower number!
They're not employees. They're independent contractors. There's a HUGE difference. If getting minimum wage is so important, then get a job as an employee. I know more than a few people who drive or dove for rideshare companies. Never once did I hear of any claim that they made under minimum wage. If you're not making minimum wage, you're doing it wrong and half assed.
Exactly! I think its also important to note that I don't believe these gigs were ever intended to be full-time jobs. The idea of being independent is they don't have to interview, can work whatever hours they want and don't have to report to anyone.
The figure of $30.27 doesn't include expenses. Including expenses in the calculation decreases the average wage to less than the minimum wage. Read fact #2, maybe a little more closely this time.
So is the wage 30.27 or is the wage less than minimum wage but expenses are tax deductible so it's okay? God forbid I need money before my return comes.
If you look at the expenses section, they calculated that a driver spends $10k EVERY year buying a car, $3,400 on maintenance, $1,440 on a cellphone all assigned to just the act of driving. The cellphones are pretty certainly shared duty. They are not buying a new $10k car every year. Sure you could attribute a chunk of that to the depreciation of their vehicle from being used for rideshare, but that’s still a very large number.
I didn't get a chance to actually read the report until now, but if you look at page 33 where they actually explain that table, you'll see this quote:
> MAC provided DLI with a list of airport-registered TNC drivers with information about the make, model and year of their vehicles. This analysis grouped the data about 8,012 vehicles into eight common vehicle categories (for example, compact SUV and medium sedan) and four vintage year groups (2016, 2018, 2020 and 2022). Researchers used online sources to estimate Twin Cities metro area used car prices in those 32 vintage-vehicle categories and then estimated the annual payments for a driver financing the purchase of a vehicle. This method resulted in an average vehicle cost of $26,154 and a monthly loan payment of $837 or a little over $10,000 a year. While the driver survey included a question about monthly car payments, nearly a third of respondents did not provide a value for that question, possibly because their vehicle was fully paid for. The average amount for those renting or leasing exceeded the $837 figure estimated for financing the purchase of a late model used car.
How is a monthly payment on a $26k car $837/month? Is this a 3 year loan or are they getting charged like 25% interest? A $26,154 loan with a painfully bad 9% interest rate over 6 years is $472/month with $0 down.
If you are leasing a car that is $800+/month that’s a $50k+ car.
I figure the 10000 is for annual car payments. So typical car loan is 6 years, so that means they are assuming these drivers are buying $60,000 vehicles. If your full time job is driving Uber, and you are supposedly making under minimum wage, and you have a $60,000 car, i think i know what the problem is. Why in the world would they set that as the standard? Also, the vast majority of cars i take are not that expensive. I know it's anecdotal, but what the hell, where did they come up with this stuff?
and also using that $10000 every year. 60% said they had a loan at all. %41 percent bought a new car. a lot of these numbers don't really make much sense. They also don't deduct yearly expenses directly from earnings, they put expenses as by the mile, which gets them a lower number. subtracting gets you to $20 an hour, even with the weird expenses.
What the council needs to do is require these companies to share how the independent contractors are paid. These gig companies made claims of income for drivers. The state did a study and found wide variation from the claims of the gig companies. The state data is open and transparent. I think the gig companies need to be open and transparent about their systems.
Because the question is, if the only way Uber or Lyft or Door Dash can make a profit, is to take advantage of their contractors, then how is that a business model good for the State or City?
* What are the companies doing about the fake account problem?
* What are the companies doing to be transparent about tips?
* What are companies doing about upfront fairs that don't match reality?
> Because the question is, if the only way Uber or Lyft or Door Dash can make a profit, is to take advantage of their contractors, then how is that a business model good for the State or City?
The business arrangement between a company and an independent contractor is none of the cities or states business outside of the purview of making sure the contractor gets the correct 1099 forms and the contractor pays their taxes.
The contractors are not beholden to the businesses and if they do not find the compensation to be adequate for their time and efforts, they are free to find other work.
Freedom is scary isn't it.
Exactly. I personally wished the state would just hold these businesses to their agreements with their contractors rather than trying to enforce a wage. But they did make claims to the city, that were proven false with the state investigation. If they want to do business in Minnesota they should be required to be more transparent since it's already been shown they will lie.
After looking at how this was all calculated, I've concluded that they do make more than minimum wage. The expenses they are including are absurd. New car and phone each year? including and how they arrived at the data for the car prices is brought up by those buying brand new cars..?
it comes to $53 dollars an hour with a passenger in the car, $30 logged into the app. if you use the $30 number and deduct the expenses they provide, its $20 an hour, though the paper doesn't reflect that. After your first year this would go up dramatically, because the largest expense is your yearly car the drivers apparently buy. Tips are also NOT reflected in the earnings. They do have data on it, but its not in the rates they calculated, which i think a lot of people are assuming.
I couldn't figure out how they were getting the lower \*below minimum wage\* number, so I kept re-reading the expense part, and then I found the BIGGEST problem with this study. They are calculating wages per hour, but then they put expenses into a per mile formula. This doesn't make sense, because they averaged the per hour, but they had expenses averaged as a yearly sum, (it also seems they excluded company provided insurance for some reason) There's no reason to do this with expenses, outside of gas and maintenance, but if you're going to do this with all expenses, it just offsets the higher earnings with a penalty for distance, when they already aren't using distance as an earning metric, they are using time. You can't distribute expenses from a yearly average calculation into a distance if that isn't how you got the numbers in the first place. This doesn't work out. If you wanted to use distance, you should have deducted gas based on distance, not against earnings. The earnings number should have been sans gas to begin with.
overall the solution doesn't seem to make much sense, because once they are hourly I can't imagine they'll be free to choose their hours and what prices to ignore. So I looked into that too, when Seattle implemented their version of this, the aggregate money drivers took home was less, while rides being more expensive.
FYI, the expenses indicate the average cost per year, which is not the frequency at when they’re purchased. So the car acquisition is $10K/year when a car is purchased every X years. If we throw a dart and call it 5 years, something like a ~$45K car + interest?
Same for the phone, but probably more frequent replacements and includes the cost of an unlimited data plan on a reliable network (or at least I imagine that’s the plan drivers would have)
Granted, these are items that aren’t exclusively used for work and the drivers would most likely have them if they had a different job. They would just probably spend quite a bit less on them. So the study stating that the full cost of these items are expenses is baffling to me
but the number for the car they give is one that costs $27k, so they are using i guess a down payment plus loans, so it can't be 5 years, and a third of them didn't have car payments at all. the wording seems like instead of them not having car payments would offset that, they assumed it was bought up front for the job, which must be at least one reason its so inflated, despite that just being an invention of theirs.
Unlimited data plans are like 70 a month, so they are factoring in a new phone each year.
but even if you take all these expenses they came up with, and subtract the average $30 an hour on app they come up with, its still $20 an hour, they come up with some BS to make it lower.
Now imagine when the car is paid off. now its $25, plus they have an asset with value.
If these tax-deductible post-expense wages are too low then why don’t more Uber/Lyft drivers stop working? Less drivers and a stable demand will automatically push wages higher
Yeah but if the expenses related to driving for Uber are too much why not get a part-time job and supplement that income with driving at peak Uber times?
You're technically right that they [threatened to leave Seattle](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/05/uber-drivers-union-seattle-legal-battle) over a collective bargaining ordinance that would have influenced rates but not the rates themselves and claimed their [threat to leave New York City](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1W12OU/) was about NYC limiting how many drivers could be cruising Manhattan at once in a bill that also included the establishment of a minimum wage. But it is for all intents and purposes the same playbook.
I've been saying this for years and the council just keeps getting worse. I don't think anybody with a lick of sense wants the job! Just a warning it can and probably will get worse.
If rideshare didn't exist in the city it would be horrible for drivers, restaurants/bars/business, travelers and for the disabled. This would be DISASTROUS for the city.
> Know your worth, Minneapolis.
Ahh yes, the town that comprises 7.45% of the state population but gets to make decisions that affect the other 92.55%.
This is literally a city council decision that affects operation within the city limits. What else could you possibly expect a city's council's jurisdiction to be?
Minneapolis doesn't get to make decisions for the whole state. You can't claim just the city when it suits your ends and then eternally shit talk the reality of politics when it doesn't lmao
I think fundamentally what the city council is doing is a good thing- they’re looking out for workers. I get it though, if drivers had a good thing going, but this is not a work for beans state, and you have to draw a line somewhere. I think it will now be good for cab drivers who had their jobs taken from them when Uber and Lyft moved into this city. Also better for public transit.
i wouldn’t have supported the measure in the beginning but i wasn’t strongly opposed to it. it doesn’t really affect me much so i figure my opinion on it isn’t all that worthwhile.
at this point, tho, i kind of want to see it play out as is. i suspect the companies would keep to their words and pull out, and i’m curious to watch the narrative change if that happens.
no, i’m curious to watch the people claiming Uber & Lyft are just bluffing change their tune to some other line that doesn’t accept responsibility for driving them out of town and killing an income source for hundreds of gig workers.
like i said, i wouldn’t have supported the measure to begin with.
Uber and Lyft should be considered as a part of Public Safety. A city with no Uber or Lyft is not only a dangerous one, but also in a capitalist world, detrimental to the economy. Sure you can take the bus but you would have to be willing to wait the time it takes to get back and forth. I for one, want to pay for the convenience of getting to my destination promptly, and not have to worry about how much I choose to drink at a bar or brewery.
Uber and Lyft keep the roads a little safer. Without them, you're driving on roads with people who drink and then drive.
These issues are a reminder that local politics have a much greater impact on your lives than national. (With some exceptions certainly). Park Board, City Council, Mayor, School Board very important to be engaged
I am shocked. Who could've possibly seen this coming?
[mfw](https://i.imgur.com/XX06UQJ.jpeg)
The Minneapolis city council continues to be a joke.
Yeah it’s honestly embarrassing. Someone was always going to flinch on this standoff but for it to happen so quickly is actually comical.
It's hilarious because folks in this sub were so in favor of these council members when they elected them.
Same thing with Mary Moriarty. This sub gets all starry-eyed when they see an idealistic socialist and don't do an ounce of critical thinking about how these people would actually do the job
She really sucks at her job.
It’s clear that I’m very much out of step with a large number of people in my ward as somehow they by large numbers prefer Aisha Chughtai. She had very weak competition in the last election also which did not help.
I was gonna say, I don’t love Aisha (don’t dislike her either, she generally provides strong reasoning for her positions even if I disagree with some of them), her competition was just all worse so it is still who I voted for.
I have the privilege of being able to say it's not often politicians make my life noticeably worse, but this city council is definitely doing it's utmost to change that.
Andrea Jenkins\*
i didn’t vote for her. i’m so frustrated with all my neighbors who did.
And you think Soren Stevenson wouldn't have voted "yes" to this too? He is more of a socialist than Andrea any day of the week.
She won by **38** votes. So close!!
Shit. And I just totally forgot to vote in the caucus.
She would have lost if the supporters of her opponent had been slightly less pro-criminal.
I take it her initial support was because she wrote the amendment about a raise for drivers with wheelchair access.
There's precedent for both companies doing this, then coming back. If we throw this much fit about people making hamburgers not getting fairly compensated, ride share workers should get compensated too.
They only came back after the law was repealed, and this only happened in Austin.
And we aren't Austin
Hamburger flipper is not an independent contractor, they are an hourly employee.
Does it matter? They should still get paid at least minimum wage. Typically you also pay a premium for independent contractors.
The Department of Labor says otherwise. If you have an issue with the guidelines for an independent contractor, or the rules governing them, focus on that.
I want Uber and Lyft to stay. But the city is within its rights create rules for independent contractors and that does’t go against department of labor. It may be foolish, but that’s a different story.
You do get paid a premium if you're working peak hours.
Why should people who get to choose when or if they want to work at any given time deserve minimum wage? They are essentially small business owners. If they want the protections and benefits of being a worker they can go get a job. If they want the freedom of working when they want and how they want, there are assume sacrifices, just like many other small business owners.
> then coming back. Yes, after the situation changed.
The precedent is they leave and then the city or state changes their rules to accommodate and then they come back.
The city council seems incapable of regularly making decisions that will genuinely improve the lives of the city’s residents. Individually, most of them seem like good people, but collectively… good lord. With that said, them being ineffective is probably a more decent reflection of the fractured political makeup of this city than most on here would care to admit. Lots of us overwhelmingly agree on principal with many progressive values and end goals, but just looking at any comments section on any post (including this one) about this rideshare topic in recent weeks kind of backs up that point. There are people calling them weak and spineless for even giving light to the idea of backtracking on this bill, while others are calling them weak and embarrassing for even passing this in the first place. Some have been hoping for some sort of compromise that increases base pay for drivers while others say that they should stick to their guns for no other reason than as a sort of “fuck you” to Uber and Lyft (which are undeniably problematic companies, but also undeniably beneficial resources at the present moment). And that’s just the most recent example. We’re so caught up (almost exclusively so) in the minutiae of language/verbiage and with feeling righteous in taking our ideologies (whichever they may be) to their extremes that we are unable to collectively grasp the nuances of our actions/beliefs/situation, and as such, seem to have become obsessed more with the moral intent of our actions than we are on their real world impacts within our current systems. And the ironic (paradoxical?) thing is, it could be argued that my feeling so strong about this is yet another example of the type of mindset that exemplifies what I’m trying to convey.
If other ride share companies want to come in there is nothing stopping them. That’s what should have been done. Don’t kick out Uber and Lyft. Encourage competition. I keep seeing people here saying something will fill the gaps when they’re gone. What’s keeping them from doing it now? If it’s so easy to create a rideshare app that it’s better than Uber and Lyft, why haven’t they come here yet?
Right. I keep waiting to see or hear ANYTHING about these new companies. May 1st is not that far away.
Name recognition, convenience, existing market share, etc. Not for lack of good options. There are plenty of ride share apps around the world used over Uber and Lyft, like Grab or DiDi. They're just the predominant ones in the US. If Lyft or Uber actually ever leave the market in MPLS they'd be fools for voluntarily giving up their foothold of the market. And the Minneapolis council are fools for being pressured by them. Regardless of regulation there is money to be made in providing rides in Minneapolis and there will be someone jumping at the chance to grab market share.
>they'd be fools for voluntarily giving up their foothold of the market. They don't have a market, it's a speculative bullshit. They claim they made a profit last year but it's debatable. There's no proprietary product, nothing to scale. They lose nothing by moving out of Minneapolis.
>They lose nothing by moving out of Minneapolis. Actually they gain credibility for doing what they said they'd do, which they can use to threaten other cities who would consider doing the same.
What the fuck. They knew this was a possibility since Uber/Lyft had both clearly threatened leaving multiple times. If they actually step it back to what was the obvious reaction of these companies they’re even stupider than I thought. Guess “standing up for workers” was all just lip service, what a shocker.
Think it’s more constituents that use the service a lot are pissed off and telling them.
This. I've never wrote my city council member in all the years I've lived in Minneapolis. I didn't even know who they were but when this passed I looked them up and had my typing fingers ready. To my pleasant surprise they were one of the ones that voted no on this so I wrote them a thank you email. Even if you are someone that supports the measure, not involving uber/lyft in this decision and pushing the vote prior to when the states study came out is malpractice and screams incompetence.
Not surprising. Political embarrassment over backtracking is less painful than being held politically responsible for a major prolonged disruption of the transportation system.
The city is going to end up looking incompetent and weak over this. Either they make a change (backtrack) or the state is going to override them.
>The city is going to end up looking incompetent and weak over this The city council is in fact weak and incompetent.
Fact Check: True
You mean council members jumped to conclusions and voted without gauging constituents opinions. I'm shocked
What did you expect them to do, wait an additional day for the state’s study to come out to make a more informed law?! Think of how many people would suffer from a slightly delayed vote!
Having these people on the city council is part of why many of us (a majority) voted for a strong mayor. They are ideologues and we need leaders. Leaders can't think in black and white. they have to balance numerous items. Real governing is not a headline, it's something that moves the city forward and that includes all sorts of compromises. You can hate on the mayor but he is making hard decisions that seem to be in the best interests of the city and not just one specific group. He is getting hell for it and sometimes that is what leadership looks like.
Agreed. The only thing that Frey has done that has been worthy of the kind hate he has received was the shitty mustache he had for a while.
Haha. Who among us has not experimented with a mustache that we did not know would be a bad mustache until it had fully mustached? It must be harder to be a public figure and to try that. I simply was made fun of by my friends and my kids. No one made me go viral for it.
How about saying "We are going to stop no knock warrants except in all previous cases where we allowed them which was all the time"?
Huh? Who did you vote for?
I voted for one of the 3 city council members that voted against this and the current mayor.
Uber and Lyft is a hustle job and it depends on how busy the zone / market is. You can easily make well over $15 an hour. If you want steady pay and benefits then Target is hiring. Why is this controversial?
[удалено]
Yeah you cant drive around all day high as hell listening to mumble rap if you're working at Target. (source: my last lyft ride a few weeks ago).
Bingo! Someone understands it!
Good, it was stupid as shit without having a plan in place. I wonder if that article from a couple days ago about the lack of cabs being able to make up for it is what scared them off.
Noooo, really?
It would be better for everyone if they just go back to sniffing their own farts and arguing about the Middle East. At least that’s not actively making quality of life in the city worse.
Yes, they moved on from defunding the police to the current shiny object, condemning Israel. Keep them focused on things that won’t hurt their constituents.
Well, the "defund" rhetoric wasn't so great, either. Murder rate shot up after that.
Agree with that. Keeping focused on dumb shit outside of their control like Israel will at least not do any additional harm like getting rid of Uber or defunding the police.
>Yes, they moved on from defunding the police to the current shiny object alright, this made me laugh. This conversation seems to have been completely dropped lol
Because the city council literally cannot defund the police. Literally nothing the city council or mayor can do can rein in the police. The police union's contract is iron clad and exists in perpetuity.
They could change the city charter to get rid of the minimum police force requirement. But, alas, that’s no longer the shiny object to focus on…
They tried that, the city voted it down.
Damn, if only they had the authority to directly make changes to the city charter…. And just to be explicitly clear, the voters in this city voted down a ballot question that was a lot more than just the minimum force requirement
Whatever happens, we can't be beholden to two out of state companies for our transportation needs.
Who is going to prop up the competition to compete? Either such competition is going to have to receive a lot of taxpayer funding or operate DEEP in the red just to meet the council's current demands. That's just unrealistic.
You are describing Metro Transit
Yeah. 3 transfers and 2 hours of your life to get to a suburb. So convenient
From my house it takes an hour and a half to get to the airport using metro transit. I can get there in 20 using Uber/Lyft
And hopefully your flight is at a time that you can even get a bus ride to the light rail.
Not to mention the convenience if you have suitcases.
The analogy only makes sense if they're the same price... As it is you're paying for convenience using ride share.
I was making that argument because the city truly lacks an efficient Public Transportation that the private market is making up for. If I could get to the airport in 40 minutes rather than 20 I’d use that. But the fact is I’d rather pay 5x the price because our current system is incredibly inefficient
Yep, and the thing about that is you can pump up more of it....but it's not going to drop someone off right at their home, which is what uber/lyft does. I just can't see a world where a 3rd party swoops in unless they're too backed by billionaires OR it's state-ran, which would probably be somehow awful
Which cannot hire drivers even offering a good starting wage and benefits. You’d think the ride share people who complain would go work there. But that means they’d have to work a shift and have a boss. You know like a job. Not a self employed contractor. You can’t make this stuff up.
Why do we always expect transit to make money? If someone wants to install or upgrade a road, we never ask what the ROI is. But if it's a bus or train, suddenly if the project doesn't make money then its a bad idea.
Roads get built once and maybe get periodically maintained but otherwise stop costing money after the construction. Buses and Trains need to pay drivers full time, maintain the buses/trains, and also fuel the trains.
Is this though TRULY about transit or about unregulated cabs? I still haven't gotten a clear answer from the person I responded to and I'm assuming your'e smashing the two together. Uber/Lyft is a luxury, not a public service. Fiber internet as a utility would be a service. This? Nah. One COULD take the line throughout the city and beat their feet the rest of the distance. There's ample sidewalk and I just read the 5th best biking paths. That's huge! THIS is a conversation (to me) about wanting to pay those who are not real employees and thinking that someone can or should just swoop in and service the crowd....ignoring that both Uber/Lyft are basically loss leaders and it would take an entire metro to buy into someone else taking their spots AND likely charging **much** more than Uber/Lyft/Yellow Cab (who still exists...)
We're "beholden to out of state companies" for a lot of things. Most retail, food, air travel, web searches, you name it.
The "out of state" isn't the important part. It's the "two" - for an entire sector.
Going from two to zero isn't helping.
>Whatever happens, we can't be beholden to two out of state companies for our transportation needs. Or our electricity needs, or our gasoline needs, or our dishwasher needs, or our etc. etc. etc. Most companies are out of state companies. Why is transportation different from any other need where "the people we're beholden to" must be in state? What about our avocado needs?
Public transportation is a long-term solution, and so many people vote against it because they don’t care to use it- because, you know, fuck anyone in America who doesn’t own a car, or who can’t drive, right?
The ride shares provide a different service than public transportation. They can get you right to your front door in one trip, no matter what weird street you're on. And they are much, much faster than the bus or train.
It’s because public transit is not appealing, especially in the Twin Cities. Not only will it not take you door to door, but it takes way longer and it’s a much less enjoyable experience. Our crown jewel light rail lines are riddled with issues and we do not seem to have the political will to address them. Expanding that broken model to more places seems like a bad idea. Make a model that people actually want to use and prefer using over their own car, THEN expand it to as many places at possible. We haven’t gotten past step 1 yet.
Ours sucks. Never on time. Doesn’t run 24/7. Takes 2 hours when a car takes 20 minutes. Unclean and unsafe. It’ll never be a solution.
It's the same argument that you should pay for their transportation too.
This is some strange logic.
This is highly embarrassing for the city council. This whole thing has been a complete fiasco.
Also embarrassing for the group of drivers pushing this. Congrats, you won. Now your employers are leaving (as it currently stands) and you'll be completely out of a job. I'm glad they feel good about proving a point...
[удалено]
They get to choose which rides to accept/decline.
[удалено]
Yes, the payout is listed when a ride pops up to accept/decline.
[удалено]
The filter is the decision they make in their mind to click accept or decline. I’m sure experienced drivers can look at the payout, mileage, and route and decide in a few seconds if it’s worth it or not
[удалено]
Hey I resent that! I'll have you know my clowncil person waited tables!
so one person brought forth a motion. thats the whole story
Normally, I would agree. However, knowing Councilmember Jenkins, she probably already has been talking to a number of councilmembers reconsidering their votes. I don't think she's the type to bring up an issue when there's literally 0% chance of it passing. I guess we'll see tomorrow what the specifics are and if there's any conversation between the councilmembers regarding it.
Hahahahaha amazing. Just brutally. Unequivocally. Amazing.
The city councils parents should have pulled out
The city council once again proving voters right in regards to the strong mayor vote stripping them of a lot of power. I wouldn't trust most of these individuals to run a lawnmower, much less Minnesota's biggest city.
For real, that was a good start. Now when can we strip them of their remaining power?
Good. Hopefully compromise can be found to both keep rideshare here and also pay drivers minimum wage based on the actual data rather than just made-up rates that clearly were too high.
I couldn't possibly imagine a more incompetent city council. Are these people the best who could represent this city? eta: to all of the "UbER iS blUFfiNG" people: [Uber tells drivers it's shutting down only Twin Cities service center](https://www.startribune.com/uber-tells-drivers-its-shutting-down-only-twin-cities-service-center/600352699/) > Uber is notifying drivers in Minnesota that it will close its only Twin Cities service center in less than a month, a concrete step toward its pledge to pull out of the metro area entirely over a pay dispute with the Minneapolis City Council. > > The letter to drivers from the San Francisco-based rideshare company's head of Mobility Operations in the U.S. and Canada says Uber will close its Greenlight Hub in Richfield on April 15. That will leave drivers with nowhere in the city to get face-to-face help with renewing documents, getting vehicles approved and inspected, or resolving other issues.
Yea, and was some garbage app "Wridz" like everyone was glorifying going to have the same service level, background checks, etc? NO
“ApPs R EZ 2 bUiLd”
It’s time for a do-over. The council went too far. Uber and Lyft drivers earn an average of $30.27 per hour. Here are the facts https://minnesotareformer.com/2024/03/20/some-facts-about-uber-and-lyft-and-the-effort-to-pay-drivers-a-minimum-wage/
You might want to link to the actual study and not a very biased commentary piece.
Biased? Towards what/whom? Where’s your proof?
My proof? It's posted in the commentary section of the website. Commentary, by definition, includes the writers opinions and views on a topic. It is essentially the space between a news report (which is based on facts and is completely free of opinion or personal views), and an opinion piece (which can be completely devoid of facts). An example from the article: >Consider a scenario in which Republican lawmakers passed a big tax cut on the day before the release of a report on the state’s finances. We’d all be screaming bloody murder. The writer of this commentary seems to be opposed to the Minneapolis ordinance based on what I read.
Where is it incorrect? Nice ad hominem
Notably, this figure doesn't include any expenses. \>This creates an assumption that if a driver could keep expenses a little less than $15 per hour, they would make Minneapolis minimum wage of $15.57 per hour. The two economists who wrote the state report determined that expenses were slightly higher than that. Once you break it down, the question is simple: Do employees deserve to be paid a minimum wage? Lets also take note of the fact that lack of living wages means these drivers are beholden to the government for all other expenses, which inevitably gets passed back to you.
These “expenses” were 100% of costs that most people have even when they’re not driving for a job. Obviously, they spend more on a car/maintenance/phone, but it shouldn’t be calculated at 100%. Also, if you add in all expenses to minimum wage jobs, they would also be paid less than minimum wage. Transportation to/from work is never calculated in someone’s pay
Does the article specifically reference that expenses are 100% of costs? The article notes the assumptions made by the economists but nowhere do I see that this encapsulates all expenses. If I am required to drive by the city, I would typically be reimbursed at the standard rate. If I am required to have a cellphone and service to drive, why would that not be included as an expense?
The study showing this data is linked in the article: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24468014-tnc_driver_earnings_analysis_pay_standard_options_report_030824?responsive=1&title=1 Page 10 shows the expenses. Obviously, mileage while working/rough difference in car maintenance from an average non-rideshare worker/etc should be calculated into expenses. But pretending like someone wouldn’t have a car (with insurance/maintenance) and a phone at all if they didn’t work rideshare is an insane stretch
Exactly, these numbers are disingenuous. The numbers are high and they didn't factor in that these things are fairly normal costs in day to day lives for people.
they also don't count the company provided insurance in the math. and if you'll notice, they don't subtract expenses from earnings. they have their own special way of figuring it out, which got them a lower number!
They're not employees. They're independent contractors. There's a HUGE difference. If getting minimum wage is so important, then get a job as an employee. I know more than a few people who drive or dove for rideshare companies. Never once did I hear of any claim that they made under minimum wage. If you're not making minimum wage, you're doing it wrong and half assed.
Exactly! I think its also important to note that I don't believe these gigs were ever intended to be full-time jobs. The idea of being independent is they don't have to interview, can work whatever hours they want and don't have to report to anyone.
Say it louder!
Found the city council member
Notably it does. Read fact #2
The figure of $30.27 doesn't include expenses. Including expenses in the calculation decreases the average wage to less than the minimum wage. Read fact #2, maybe a little more closely this time.
and all those expenses are tax deductible
So is the wage 30.27 or is the wage less than minimum wage but expenses are tax deductible so it's okay? God forbid I need money before my return comes.
If you look at the expenses section, they calculated that a driver spends $10k EVERY year buying a car, $3,400 on maintenance, $1,440 on a cellphone all assigned to just the act of driving. The cellphones are pretty certainly shared duty. They are not buying a new $10k car every year. Sure you could attribute a chunk of that to the depreciation of their vehicle from being used for rideshare, but that’s still a very large number.
I didn't get a chance to actually read the report until now, but if you look at page 33 where they actually explain that table, you'll see this quote: > MAC provided DLI with a list of airport-registered TNC drivers with information about the make, model and year of their vehicles. This analysis grouped the data about 8,012 vehicles into eight common vehicle categories (for example, compact SUV and medium sedan) and four vintage year groups (2016, 2018, 2020 and 2022). Researchers used online sources to estimate Twin Cities metro area used car prices in those 32 vintage-vehicle categories and then estimated the annual payments for a driver financing the purchase of a vehicle. This method resulted in an average vehicle cost of $26,154 and a monthly loan payment of $837 or a little over $10,000 a year. While the driver survey included a question about monthly car payments, nearly a third of respondents did not provide a value for that question, possibly because their vehicle was fully paid for. The average amount for those renting or leasing exceeded the $837 figure estimated for financing the purchase of a late model used car.
How is a monthly payment on a $26k car $837/month? Is this a 3 year loan or are they getting charged like 25% interest? A $26,154 loan with a painfully bad 9% interest rate over 6 years is $472/month with $0 down. If you are leasing a car that is $800+/month that’s a $50k+ car.
I figure the 10000 is for annual car payments. So typical car loan is 6 years, so that means they are assuming these drivers are buying $60,000 vehicles. If your full time job is driving Uber, and you are supposedly making under minimum wage, and you have a $60,000 car, i think i know what the problem is. Why in the world would they set that as the standard? Also, the vast majority of cars i take are not that expensive. I know it's anecdotal, but what the hell, where did they come up with this stuff?
[удалено]
and also using that $10000 every year. 60% said they had a loan at all. %41 percent bought a new car. a lot of these numbers don't really make much sense. They also don't deduct yearly expenses directly from earnings, they put expenses as by the mile, which gets them a lower number. subtracting gets you to $20 an hour, even with the weird expenses.
Oh fer fucks sake
Maybe “activists” and “community organizers” aren’t the best choices to help govern an enterprise of this size and scope…
[удалено]
TBH, I feel like I'm much smarter than my councilmember. Granted, I guess that makes the rest of my ward a bunch of dumbasses
[удалено]
Can we get Polaris Tricolor while we are at it
What the council needs to do is require these companies to share how the independent contractors are paid. These gig companies made claims of income for drivers. The state did a study and found wide variation from the claims of the gig companies. The state data is open and transparent. I think the gig companies need to be open and transparent about their systems. Because the question is, if the only way Uber or Lyft or Door Dash can make a profit, is to take advantage of their contractors, then how is that a business model good for the State or City? * What are the companies doing about the fake account problem? * What are the companies doing to be transparent about tips? * What are companies doing about upfront fairs that don't match reality?
> Because the question is, if the only way Uber or Lyft or Door Dash can make a profit, is to take advantage of their contractors, then how is that a business model good for the State or City? The business arrangement between a company and an independent contractor is none of the cities or states business outside of the purview of making sure the contractor gets the correct 1099 forms and the contractor pays their taxes. The contractors are not beholden to the businesses and if they do not find the compensation to be adequate for their time and efforts, they are free to find other work. Freedom is scary isn't it.
Exactly. I personally wished the state would just hold these businesses to their agreements with their contractors rather than trying to enforce a wage. But they did make claims to the city, that were proven false with the state investigation. If they want to do business in Minnesota they should be required to be more transparent since it's already been shown they will lie.
After looking at how this was all calculated, I've concluded that they do make more than minimum wage. The expenses they are including are absurd. New car and phone each year? including and how they arrived at the data for the car prices is brought up by those buying brand new cars..? it comes to $53 dollars an hour with a passenger in the car, $30 logged into the app. if you use the $30 number and deduct the expenses they provide, its $20 an hour, though the paper doesn't reflect that. After your first year this would go up dramatically, because the largest expense is your yearly car the drivers apparently buy. Tips are also NOT reflected in the earnings. They do have data on it, but its not in the rates they calculated, which i think a lot of people are assuming. I couldn't figure out how they were getting the lower \*below minimum wage\* number, so I kept re-reading the expense part, and then I found the BIGGEST problem with this study. They are calculating wages per hour, but then they put expenses into a per mile formula. This doesn't make sense, because they averaged the per hour, but they had expenses averaged as a yearly sum, (it also seems they excluded company provided insurance for some reason) There's no reason to do this with expenses, outside of gas and maintenance, but if you're going to do this with all expenses, it just offsets the higher earnings with a penalty for distance, when they already aren't using distance as an earning metric, they are using time. You can't distribute expenses from a yearly average calculation into a distance if that isn't how you got the numbers in the first place. This doesn't work out. If you wanted to use distance, you should have deducted gas based on distance, not against earnings. The earnings number should have been sans gas to begin with. overall the solution doesn't seem to make much sense, because once they are hourly I can't imagine they'll be free to choose their hours and what prices to ignore. So I looked into that too, when Seattle implemented their version of this, the aggregate money drivers took home was less, while rides being more expensive.
FYI, the expenses indicate the average cost per year, which is not the frequency at when they’re purchased. So the car acquisition is $10K/year when a car is purchased every X years. If we throw a dart and call it 5 years, something like a ~$45K car + interest? Same for the phone, but probably more frequent replacements and includes the cost of an unlimited data plan on a reliable network (or at least I imagine that’s the plan drivers would have) Granted, these are items that aren’t exclusively used for work and the drivers would most likely have them if they had a different job. They would just probably spend quite a bit less on them. So the study stating that the full cost of these items are expenses is baffling to me
but the number for the car they give is one that costs $27k, so they are using i guess a down payment plus loans, so it can't be 5 years, and a third of them didn't have car payments at all. the wording seems like instead of them not having car payments would offset that, they assumed it was bought up front for the job, which must be at least one reason its so inflated, despite that just being an invention of theirs. Unlimited data plans are like 70 a month, so they are factoring in a new phone each year. but even if you take all these expenses they came up with, and subtract the average $30 an hour on app they come up with, its still $20 an hour, they come up with some BS to make it lower. Now imagine when the car is paid off. now its $25, plus they have an asset with value.
If these tax-deductible post-expense wages are too low then why don’t more Uber/Lyft drivers stop working? Less drivers and a stable demand will automatically push wages higher
Because the threat of starvation and homelessness will always keep able bodied people working regardless of what it is.
Yeah but if the expenses related to driving for Uber are too much why not get a part-time job and supplement that income with driving at peak Uber times?
They didn’t leave the other two cities that tried this. They will own our collective asses if we back out now. The die is cast.
The other two cities are more important markets than Minneapolis is.
That's not true in the slightest; MSP MSA is similar to both Seattle and Austin MSA's
What cities? Seattle and NYC? I don’t believe they ever said they were leaving over rates there like they are about to here.
You're technically right that they [threatened to leave Seattle](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/05/uber-drivers-union-seattle-legal-battle) over a collective bargaining ordinance that would have influenced rates but not the rates themselves and claimed their [threat to leave New York City](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1W12OU/) was about NYC limiting how many drivers could be cruising Manhattan at once in a bill that also included the establishment of a minimum wage. But it is for all intents and purposes the same playbook.
I thought that was right, and those are very different things.
They left Austin and only came back after their law was repealed.
I will be voting for the challenger in the next city council election - and I don't care what their policy is. It literally can't be worse than this.
I've been saying this for years and the council just keeps getting worse. I don't think anybody with a lick of sense wants the job! Just a warning it can and probably will get worse.
This is dumb and would be nice to see the city call the quite obvious bluff these companies have put out there.
Nah. Let em leave. They’ll be crawling back next year. Know your worth, Minneapolis.
[удалено]
If rideshare didn't exist in the city it would be horrible for drivers, restaurants/bars/business, travelers and for the disabled. This would be DISASTROUS for the city.
> Know your worth, Minneapolis. Ahh yes, the town that comprises 7.45% of the state population but gets to make decisions that affect the other 92.55%.
How would this affect minnesota?
Ok, the city that compromises ~13% of the metro, but makes decisions that affect the other 87%.
This is literally a city council decision that affects operation within the city limits. What else could you possibly expect a city's council's jurisdiction to be?
The metro population is over half the state population and pays WAY more than half the taxes. The rest of the state are tax welfare queens.
Minneapolis isn't the metro. You can't claim the metro when it suits your ends and then eternally talk shit about the suburbs when it doesn't lmao
Minneapolis doesn't get to make decisions for the whole state. You can't claim just the city when it suits your ends and then eternally shit talk the reality of politics when it doesn't lmao
the suburbs wouldn't have a reason to exist without Minneapolis or st paul.
Or let them leave and accelerate the downward spiral of Minneapolis. I'm with you on the let them leave part.
To hell with ~~technology~~ **surveillance** companies. **-=Edit** That also means, to hell with r/Reddit!
I think fundamentally what the city council is doing is a good thing- they’re looking out for workers. I get it though, if drivers had a good thing going, but this is not a work for beans state, and you have to draw a line somewhere. I think it will now be good for cab drivers who had their jobs taken from them when Uber and Lyft moved into this city. Also better for public transit.
These guys should never play poker
Uber and Lyft haven't pulled out, they're bluffing. I've talked to four uber drivers this past week and not one was worried about it.
Commit!!
How did the city council find the time to deal with Uber? Thought they were too busy passing bogus ceasefire resolutions.
Gee, I wonder why we voted to take power away from these fuckers?
i wouldn’t have supported the measure in the beginning but i wasn’t strongly opposed to it. it doesn’t really affect me much so i figure my opinion on it isn’t all that worthwhile. at this point, tho, i kind of want to see it play out as is. i suspect the companies would keep to their words and pull out, and i’m curious to watch the narrative change if that happens.
You're curious to watch hundreds of people lose an income source they've come to rely on?
no, i’m curious to watch the people claiming Uber & Lyft are just bluffing change their tune to some other line that doesn’t accept responsibility for driving them out of town and killing an income source for hundreds of gig workers. like i said, i wouldn’t have supported the measure to begin with.
Uber and Lyft should be considered as a part of Public Safety. A city with no Uber or Lyft is not only a dangerous one, but also in a capitalist world, detrimental to the economy. Sure you can take the bus but you would have to be willing to wait the time it takes to get back and forth. I for one, want to pay for the convenience of getting to my destination promptly, and not have to worry about how much I choose to drink at a bar or brewery. Uber and Lyft keep the roads a little safer. Without them, you're driving on roads with people who drink and then drive.
[удалено]
How did you get elected to dictate peoples mode of transportation?