It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


A Driver’s Suicide Reveals the Dark Side of the Gig Economy

page: 7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 10:54 PM
Manhattan is a brutal place to drive. Almost every car is a competitor. Expensive insurance, expensive license plates, Uber's cut.

Drivers are building their own client list and hiring other part timers directly.

Uber and Lyft are just a marketing channel to them.

NYC is not a place for people who cannot adapt. Maybe the guy didn't figure out how to play the game, but why not just move?

posted on Feb, 9 2018 @ 10:54 PM

originally posted by: eventHorizon

Man committed a suicide because of criminal Uber enterprise, "sharing" scam and corrupt lying regulators.
This is not a laughing matter. Not at all.

Adapting is not corporate propaganda.

Adapting to what??? This is not a fair competition, never was, and still isn't, by far. You don't get it do you?
You refuse to understand that Uber is not a "tech" company but a company operating essentially illegally
in violation of the very laws taxis are forced to follow, the very taxes cabbies are forced to pay - and Uber is left off the hook. Try a boxing match where your opponent carries a handgun and has bribed a referee. Adapt to that. That will show you how fair this situation really is.

He didn't adapt to his situation. He had to know when he was working double and triple shifts as stated that his chosen profession was going belly up and apparently didn't try to fix his situation. Instead he chose to end his life because he didn't have to courage to make the necessary changes needed. Your attack on Uber regarding this cabbie would make sense if he was hit and killed by an Uber driver but that isn't the case.

He chose to throw his life away prematurely not knowing what the future may have held for him. I don't understand why you're having an issue grasping what I'm saying. Everyone has hit a low point where they can't see the light at the end of the tunnel. That's just how life works and you can choose to adapt to whatever crap it throws your way or do nothing and hope it gets better but suicide is never the answer.
edit on 9-2-2018 by Anathros because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 12 2018 @ 10:03 PM

He didn't adapt to his situation. He had to know when he was working double and triple shifts as stated that his chosen profession was going belly up and apparently didn't try to fix his situation. Instead he chose to end his life because he didn't have to courage to make the necessary changes needed.

He was over 60 years old. He was a professional driver. That was his life. Life that got stolen and destroyed. Yet, you want him to "adapt" at his age....

Your attack on Uber regarding this cabbie would make sense if he was hit and killed by an Uber driver but that isn't the case.

He WAS hit and killed by criminal uber enterprise and its criminal operations. There are no doubts about that.
He blamed Uber (and local moronic regulators) for that in his last letter.

I don't understand why you're having an issue grasping what I'm saying.

Oh I understand.... for you CORPORATIONS and their CORPORATE profits are more important than justice, fairness or lives of human beings. See....for me and millions of others Uber is 100% criminal enterprise that should be, and will be - banned or adequately regulated and taxed all over the world - at which point Uber's corporate management leaches will leave (nothing to milk no more), and so will its hired army of soulless clueless lying social media "warriors" glorifying this otherwise 100% sick criminal tax-evading ride-sharing scam.

posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 09:05 PM

originally posted by: eventHorizon

You're making it sound like I'm all for large corporations and the loss of jobs for Americans. I'm not. Infact, I worked for Medicaid in my state taking disgruntled calls from recipients for quite some time. I was fired for quoting federal law to a healthcare provider who asked what and if we had anything available for an adult illegal immigrant. I was very friendly in the beginning letting the lady know we had programs for children like healthcare and foodstamps regardless of their citizenship status but not for adults. As the conversation went on, the lady became increasingly agitated with me. Finally when I had heard enough, I quoted the federal law pertaining to illegal immigrants not eligible for Medicaid unless they fall under certain conditions. She grew even more irate. Not being allowed to hang up on callers and having one person over my position to escalate the call to (he was out of the office) I finally told her if she could pay his bills, she could drive him back to the border, or call immigration. Those were her options.
I spent years of dedication helping hundreds to thousands with no appreciation but because I enjoyed doing so. I did this so people could get the coverage they needed and did so for all races. I worked the call center and could not change things on my end so it was mostly done on my own time dealing with DHS officials across dozens of counties. This call was overheard by a Hispanic co-worker who had been there for less than a month during the height of the Trump/Hillary campaign and was fired because she labeled me a bigot.

I left that job with knowledge of 5 different programs being used to keep track of government aide and was hired by the largest healthcare provider in the country with a much larger salary though. The point is I could've sat around whining about how I was mistreated had crashed but I have a family to care for. I went out and found a job as quickly as possible and was blessed but would've taken an entry level position available in any field. My pride will never stand in the way of me doing what I have to do which isproviding for my family.

posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 01:18 AM

originally posted by: Edumakated

No doubt the purchasers of medallions got screwed.

Agreed. They got totally hosed with this deal.

However, this is why government shouldn't be imposing reckless regulations that act as unfair barriers to entry for basic services.

Perhaps, but that doesn't excuse what happened when the ride sharing corps came to town. They worked a deal that allowed them to circumvent existing taxi regulations, or moved their official offer to the next town. We all(taxi drivers in towns that the ride sharing corps moved into) got screwed right there. The next day there was a huge fleet on the streets that didn't have to conform to the laws that we were required to conform to. That IS an unfair advantage, and it doesn't really conform to the concept of rule of law.

Like I said, I'm not bitter about it, but let's not sugarcoat this. I'd be surprised to find that there is an area where they actually do conform to the same regulations, I don't think there is. Any of these areas could have sensibly deregulated to even the playing field, but this did not happen.

posted on Feb, 16 2018 @ 03:56 AM

originally posted by: Edumakated

I think the cab industry was just shocked by the speed of which the technology obliterated the established business model. The only other industry I can think of that experienced such as shock was the music industry when Napster and other sharing services came along. They were completely unprepared for not only the change, but how consumers preferred the alternatives.

Agree. It was interesting to experience, for sure. I am the honest professional in this game, in my town. I would have thought that would have counted for more than it did. It didn't count for much, apparently.

Try ninety to ninety five percent of my bar goer personals initially gone with the wind, almost to the day that the ride sharing corps came to town. I've gotten some of that back over time, but less than half of what it was.

It's hard to say what the company business should have done, as the company I was with at the time chose that moment to accelerate the downward spiral they had been gliding through for years...

I found it interesting that customers would embrace the price gouging that the ride sharing corps engage in as an acceptable business model. I always thought that this was the worst of taxi complaints I had ever heard. I've never charged more than my city's established rate, ever. To see customers embracing this as something that is a good deal seems odd to me. I'm not really into spending any more than I have to for the services I must purchase.

Sure they beat us on the base rate that's not a sustainable rate, but upon any appreciable surge, my rate is lower. I guess if you guys want that Uber expensive ride go ahead and have fun with that. I'll be over here charging a reasonable rate if you ever get tired of that.

It's created a permissive environment, at least it has here, I'd guess it's the same elsewhere. With the murky regulatory climate that one guy here in town who used to disappear my cards, who has nothing approaching anything like the right insurance, and also seems to always have like literally a one foot deep pile of nasty fast food wrappers in his passenger area(I'm actually not exaggerating here, I concluded he must be doing it for shock value, his vehicle was always like that), can also operate unnoticed and unmolested.

There are others who are much more professional who are also skating under the radar, but the permissive environment sort of defeats the purpose of regulating in the first place. Quality of service, and safety, will suffer in this environment. Not to mention that any horror story of a cab ride can, and I'm pretty sure has already happened, in a ride sharing ride.

Some of the taxi companies have started surging their prices at times, following the ridesharecorps's lead. I think it's sad. This means that the working poor, and those on fixed incomes, will have less access to this essential transportation when they need it. I can bill them fairly, but I'm only one man.

new topics

top topics
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in