* Crain’s…
Members of Johnson’s administration have been involved in the discussions, but [Ald. Mike Rodriguez] is taking the lead on the effort. The measure adds to the growing list of legislation being considered heading into fall that affect relatively lower-wage workers. […]
If approved, the ordinance would increase minimum driver pay to $7 per ride, but allow for higher wages if a per-mile or per-minute rate exceeded $7.
[Lori Simmons of the Chicago Gig Alliance] says her group has no interest in giving up the larger fight and suggested a win at City Hall could tee up a larger fight in Springfield.
Although Illinois officials have not seriously pushed to reclassify workers, the General Assembly did deliver a blow to the rideshare companies this year when it approved, over the fierce opposition of Uber, a “common carrier” bill that opens the companies up to liability for accidents and injuries to passengers.
“Ultimately, I do see (reclassification) coming to the state level. And I think Illinois is uniquely positioned to actually win this fight because the companies do not have the same type of leverage to throw around here as they do elsewhere in the country.”
* Uber and Lyft have threatened to pull out of Minneapolis if a similar ordinance passes…
Rideshare companies Lyft and Uber are threatening to pull service out of Minneapolis if the city passes an ordinance Thursday that gives drivers more protections and higher pay.
Rideshare drivers have been pressing the Minneapolis City Council to pass legislation that would set a minimum compensation for drivers and create a process for them to appeal deactivations. The push at the city level comes just months after Gov. Tim Walz vetoed a similar bill that passed both houses of the state Legislature.
The proposed ordinance would, in part, ensure that any driver who has a ride that originates in Minneapolis would make an equivalent to the city’s minimum wage — $15 per hour.
The ordinance would change some protocols around deactivation, or the firing of Uber drivers, to give drivers more of an explanation. It would also eliminate the use of gift cards not issued by the rideshare companies, so there would be a way to trace riders and hold them accountable if necessary.
Minnesota Gov. Walz vetoed legislation after Uber threatened to cut off service in Minneapolis.
* House Bill 2231 was signed into law Friday. Here’s Sen. Martwick’s press release…
Thanks to a new law championed by State Senator Robert Martwick, rideshare companies will be subject to the same standard of care as all other transportation companies.
“As rideshare companies become an integral part of modern transportation, we must demand the same high standards of care as we do for traditional carriers,” said Martwick (D-Chicago). “Holding companies accountable for the actions of their employees is about safeguarding every passenger who places their trust in these services.”
Under the new law, rideshare companies like Uber and Lyft are subject to the common carrier doctrine, which holds transportation companies to the highest standard of care for their passengers. This allows the state to hold the company liable if an employee causes harm to a passenger through intentional means such as assault, or if a driver is intoxicated and causes an accident.
Previously, transportation network companies like Uber and Lyft were exempt from the common carrier doctrine, leaving victims with few means to hold the companies liable for harm caused by their drivers. Between 2017 and 2020, there were almost 14,000 reports of sexual assault from Uber and Lyft passengers, with 824 reported rapes.
“As we embrace innovation, we shouldn’t forget about safety,” Martwick said. “Today we reinforce the notion that safety is non-negotiable for every individual using rideshare services, which is paramount in preserving the trust and peace of mind of all who seek reliable transportation.”
* Related…
Thoughts?
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 11:58 am:
That’s one way to make people take CTA more.
- Homebody - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:01 pm:
If an industry can’t exist without exploiting its workers, then the industry shouldn’t exist. We shouldn’t just accept exploitation of our neighbors as a necessary evil of modern convenience.
- Steve - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:05 pm:
-make people take CTA more.-
My guess is Martwick is sincere in his beliefs on this issue. I doubt he’s thinking about the CTA. However, if the rideshare companies don’t want to be in Illinois because of the cost structure they’ll face: they will leave. This is a big issue because a lot of people use Uber and Lyft.
- Donnie Elgin - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:12 pm:
“If an industry can’t exist without exploiting its workers, then the industry shouldn’t exist”
Whos exploiting? Saw lots of rideshare drivers in the city this past weekend. No one is coercing them into driving for Uber/Lyft - if the pay is too low they won’t get drivers.
- Nick Name - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:14 pm:
===If an industry can’t exist without exploiting its workers, then the industry shouldn’t exist.===
This. All day. Furthermore, I don’t believe Uber and Lyft for a second when they threaten to pull out of a city, especially a big city like Minneapolis. Pass up on all that revenue? No way.
- Hannibal Lecter - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:14 pm:
I believe that the only way that Uber or Lyft are still in existence in 10 years is if they are able to use self-driving cars. Since its inception in 2009, Uber had never turned a profit until this past quarter because they are cutting significant costs. To continue losing money every year is not sustainable.
- Steve - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:18 pm:
Uber’s net profit margin as of December 2022 is 4.27%.
- vern - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:20 pm:
It’s good to hear, I guess but color me skeptical. Uber owes their entire existence to municipal governments declining to enforce existing regulations. Their business model was flagrantly illegal when they started operating. They decided to ask for forgiveness rather than permission, and got away with it. Since then, they’ve regularly violated customer privacy and built a famously toxic corporate culture. Now, instead of working with governments to find compromises, they’re making piratical threats. They’re bad corporate citizens, and government should treat them as such.
- Hannibal Lecter - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:23 pm:
=== If an industry can’t exist without exploiting its workers, then the industry shouldn’t exist. ===
There are a good number of Uber Drivers that don’t drive for Uber as their primary source of income. It is literally a side gig where they can work as much or as little as they want. If it isn’t financially lucrative for them, they can stop doing it.
- Huh? - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:25 pm:
How is the ride sharing services any different than a taxi?
As a former cab driver, if I get into a car to take me to a destination, my exception is that I will have a safe comfortable ride, with a known fare.
To claim the ride share services are not common carriers is specious.
- Just Me 2 - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:28 pm:
Former Uber Driver here (drove to make ends meet during a bad year) and I absolutely oppose guaranteeing a minimum hourly wage. The whole system is built on attracting drivers when they are needed, and letting drivers set their own hours. If Uber has to guarantee a minimum hourly pay then they’ll have to deny riders the opportunity to log-in so as to avoid drivers just logging on and taking naps in their car while making money.
- Lake Villa Township Dem PC - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:30 pm:
Thank god we are tackling abusive ride share drivers, can only imagine the horror stories that led to the passage of the bill.
- Rudy’s teeth - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 12:41 pm:
Because many Uber/Lyft drivers are not from the area, they depend on their phone map to reach a destination. I want a driver whose eyes are on the road not on a phone.
The worst experience was when a Uber driver took LSD north, drove in the far right lane, crossed three lanes of traffic and nearly missed the Chicago Ave exit. That would never occur with a cab driver.
Depending on location, one can still hail a cab in the neighborhood. I use taxis and have the Curb app.
A simple route: go south on Clark, turn left on Polk, then turn right on Plymouth Court. An Uber/Lyft driver couldn’t follow the directions yet a taxi driver knows exactly how to reach the destination.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 1:01 pm:
===Under the new law, rideshare companies like Uber and Lyft are subject to the common carrier doctrine, which holds transportation companies to the highest standard of care for their passengers.===
Really? The actual bill does not say that TNCs are common carriers. It just says that a section of the law that said they are not common carriers is ineffective on January 1, 2024. It seems to me the courts still have to define the TNCs as a common carrier.
- Donnie Elgin - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 1:03 pm:
I particularly enjoyed reading the paid Uber ad that is posted immediately before this.
- Wobblies United - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 1:07 pm:
===There are a good number===
And what would that number be exactly?
The fact of the matter is Uber and others are bending over backwards to stop legislation such as this (including advertising on this nice website quite often, as recently as today) to suppress wages and drive up returns for executives and share holders. Meanwhile the Executive Director of Uber was bringing in $42M in 2019, $12M in 2020, and $20M in 2021.
But please do keep on about how its the workers being too greedy…
- Pot calling kettle - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 1:09 pm:
It’s not “rideshare” anymore (if it ever was). It’s unregulated, amateur cab/chauffeur service. It should be treated the same as cab/chauffeur services are.
Ridesharing is when you’re driving somewhere and share the trip with someone.
- Just Me 2 - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 1:19 pm:
Totally oppose. The entire system is built on incentives to encourage drivers to work when they are needed. If any driver can be guaranteed an income regardless of whether their services are needed, then the company will have to deny drivers the opportunity to work when they want.
- ChicagoBars - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 1:24 pm:
If this proposed ordinance doesn’t include the drivers who work for those companies food delivery divisions as well you can hold my wake at the crater that’ll be created when I spontaneously combust at the “oversight”.
- The Office - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 1:26 pm:
There are some folks in the GA pushing to reclassify ride share drivers and other gig workers, but the gig companies know how to put up a big, and effective, fight.
https://ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=10200SB0837sam001&GA=102&SessionId=110&DocTypeId=SB&LegID=133464&DocNum=837&GAID=16&SpecSess=&Session=
- Hannibal Lecter - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 1:31 pm:
=== But please do keep on about how its the workers being too greedy… ===
Nothing of the sort has ever come out of my mouth (or my keyboard). Uber and Lyft have provided opportunities to earn extra money that they didn’t have prior to their existence. What will those driver’s do when those companies go under?
- Red headed step child - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 1:37 pm:
Knee jerk reaction…slowly bleeding another industry dry..
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 2:06 pm:
Vern +1.
- Incandenza - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 2:14 pm:
=== That’s one way to make people take CTA more ===
=== This is a big issue because a lot of people use Uber and Lyft. ===
Though it is likely not considered a goal of these efforts mentioned, encouraging more ridership of the CTA is good for the city. It improves revenue for CTA, removes congestion from the streets, and reduces green house gas emissions. In a city as dense as Chicago, Uber and Lyft services should be rare (but also safe for users and drivers alike).
- annoning - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 2:50 pm:
Uber also threatened to leave chicago in 2016 when the first regulations went into effect in the city, and they keep paying for ads touting the high pay they already give their drivers. If they already pay drivers more than the proposal, why the threats?
- Jeremy Rosen - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 3:29 pm:
It’s unlikely that Uber and/or Lyft will leave Chicago and/or Illinois. Why? Because they make a lot of money here and still would even if this ordinance becomes law.
- Hannibal Lecter - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 3:34 pm:
=== It’s unlikely that Uber and/or Lyft will leave Chicago and/or Illinois. ===
Unless they go bankrupt. Also if providing service becomes unprofitable because their expenses exceed their revenues. Another alternative would be to raise rates for using those services, which would cause a decline in ridership.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 4:24 pm:
Let me be the first to congratulate Rich on the new banner ad revenue.
- Frida's boss - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 9:09 pm:
Raise the fees and allow more surge pricing. That will enable the guaranteed income per ride. Uber/Lyft are corporations, they will adjust to new rules.
Do what it takes to give the drivers more money the folks who use Uber/Lyft will pay more. It’s not that tough to figure out.
- Pot calling kettle - Wednesday, Aug 16, 23 @ 9:51 pm:
==if providing service becomes unprofitable because their expenses exceed their revenues==
If they can’t make a profit without paying sub-minimum wages to their workers, they shouldn’t be in business.
Also, there appears to be a fair amount of cushion in the hoarder-level wages paid to top execs; they can probably afford to let the proletariat earn a tiny bit more.