Lyft announces need to implement NYC TLC driver "lockouts". Asks Taxi & Limousine Commission (TLC) not to act on Uber's call for use of standalone utilization rate (UR) vs. industrywide metric
I’ll tell you this, Uber will continue to put locks and lay off drivers, because they won’t pay out of their own pocket for other people’s mistakes, and TLC won’t be able to do anything either and force Uber to pay out of their own pocket, or reduce the number of plates. Uber simply doesn't have that much work. I think that this will be resolved over time, when the number of cars and license plates decreases due to natural reasons. someone will change jobs, someone will go bankrupt.
even if you lower the ur rate and drivers earn 20 per hour, they will go on strike again, and with today’s insurance and prices it is necessary to increase the ur rate))
It looks like the negotiation with TLC isn't going well. Lockouts might become a permanent situation. I read on the uberpeople forum that someone spoke to TLC directly.
Quote by Dst Rain
"I called TLC talked to 3 individuals. All three saying go email driver pay.org etc. I spoken to someone with little knowledge said. This is how it's gonna stay. He couldn't say much directly since the call has been recorded but I got the picture what he's trying to say. TLC is not going to back down from the utilization rate. It doesn't matter if the drivers go bankrupt because it will make the city look stupid and that's how it's going to be for some time. Mind you he wasn't saying all this directly, but if you're smart enough you're able to pick up what the answers and the questions were. For example like this, the TLC has set minimum wage for the drivers and the TLC will always protect the driver's minimum wage. So you should get some sort of idea what's going on here."
Yes, let's see what unfolds. One thing we've all learned is the TLC is an incredibly unpredictable organization right now and will also react to political ground realities. If you have a long enough time horizon, more lockouts > (leads to) less drivers ?> (leads to) less risk of lockouts as there are less drivers / FHVs.
However, if they let it play out that way *assuming* trips don't decline due to a weakening economy / consumer, it'll cause a very painful 3-6 month time period where drivers, certain leasing companies, etc simply can't afford to keep their FHV Licenses (TLC Plates) active. So, you might see the total TLC Plates go down from ~109,000 level it is at right now, to 105,000 to ~100,000, etc. Lot of variables. At the same time, more yellow cabs might become active, which will take away trips from Uber/Lyft-focused drivers (very zero-sum dynamic).
Next few months will very interesting to track in the market, especially as we hit seasonally slow August. Lot of drivers might give up during that month, if nothing changes.
Agree they can be very unpredictable nowadays so we'll have to wait and see what happens, them just letting it play like that it will create a tendency of the industry only being stable for 1-2 years, then driver leaving the industry and then new drivers foolishly getting into the same industry until lockouts happen again and I don't think that will respond to their political agenda, if anything it looks way better that they prohibited lockouts and forced this companies to either adjust to what the regulations are or simply just go! At the end of the day if Uber and Lyft would've not been greedy and stopped hiring drivers when they were supposed this wouldn't be an issue. Them not prohibiting lockouts since UR was reinstated lead to Uber and Lyft think they could use that to their advantage once it got to that to try to force TLC to eliminate it completely.
Question for you is how would TLC prohibit lockouts technically? Would you call for TLC to make rules saying Uber / Lyft cannot forcefully log out a driver? If so, the only issue is they might then deactivate a ton of drivers (would rebalance market quickly, but would be very painful for a lot of drivers). What's your thoughts on how the TLC technically prevents lockouts?
They can prohibit any measure not only lockouts that these apps use to manipulate DATA, deactivating them without a reason or a decent appeal process, will also be another way of manipulating the data, this is just my perspective, that being in place Uber and Lyft are forced to implement new marketing tactics to increase demand will that means they have to pay money owed to drivers for the time not being busy and penalties to TLC?Yes, that will make their Ceo's to turn their attention to specific markets if they want to continue to do business there.
Understand what you're saying. Think the way forward is make it a more simple - control FHV supply and new driver license issuance, and earnings will inherently be protected. If you begin to make too many rules to try to close every loophole it'll be a game of whack a mole, lot of unintended consequences can arise (exactly what happened with UR - good concept but lot of loopholes to game the system that aren't easy to close and also reliance on data that only TLC can produce)
That has always been the correct pathway to follow and if they go that way i will support it and be the first one to congratulate you guys (experience cannot be improvised) but the regulator decided to implement this UR and even though they may surprise us, it’s very hard for this people to admit they were wrong since the very first moment they implemented the rule, and honestly for them to come up with something that is not going to benefit either parties, continue issuing licenses, etc, i rather 1000 times them coming up with something that put these companies in their place.
I’ll tell you this, Uber will continue to put locks and lay off drivers, because they won’t pay out of their own pocket for other people’s mistakes, and TLC won’t be able to do anything either and force Uber to pay out of their own pocket, or reduce the number of plates. Uber simply doesn't have that much work. I think that this will be resolved over time, when the number of cars and license plates decreases due to natural reasons. someone will change jobs, someone will go bankrupt.
even if you lower the ur rate and drivers earn 20 per hour, they will go on strike again, and with today’s insurance and prices it is necessary to increase the ur rate))
Ideally, it's the role of the TLC to prevent such volatility in the marketplace that, in many ways, is a direct result of its own policy missteps
It looks like the negotiation with TLC isn't going well. Lockouts might become a permanent situation. I read on the uberpeople forum that someone spoke to TLC directly.
Quote by Dst Rain
"I called TLC talked to 3 individuals. All three saying go email driver pay.org etc. I spoken to someone with little knowledge said. This is how it's gonna stay. He couldn't say much directly since the call has been recorded but I got the picture what he's trying to say. TLC is not going to back down from the utilization rate. It doesn't matter if the drivers go bankrupt because it will make the city look stupid and that's how it's going to be for some time. Mind you he wasn't saying all this directly, but if you're smart enough you're able to pick up what the answers and the questions were. For example like this, the TLC has set minimum wage for the drivers and the TLC will always protect the driver's minimum wage. So you should get some sort of idea what's going on here."
Yes, let's see what unfolds. One thing we've all learned is the TLC is an incredibly unpredictable organization right now and will also react to political ground realities. If you have a long enough time horizon, more lockouts > (leads to) less drivers ?> (leads to) less risk of lockouts as there are less drivers / FHVs.
However, if they let it play out that way *assuming* trips don't decline due to a weakening economy / consumer, it'll cause a very painful 3-6 month time period where drivers, certain leasing companies, etc simply can't afford to keep their FHV Licenses (TLC Plates) active. So, you might see the total TLC Plates go down from ~109,000 level it is at right now, to 105,000 to ~100,000, etc. Lot of variables. At the same time, more yellow cabs might become active, which will take away trips from Uber/Lyft-focused drivers (very zero-sum dynamic).
Next few months will very interesting to track in the market, especially as we hit seasonally slow August. Lot of drivers might give up during that month, if nothing changes.
Agree they can be very unpredictable nowadays so we'll have to wait and see what happens, them just letting it play like that it will create a tendency of the industry only being stable for 1-2 years, then driver leaving the industry and then new drivers foolishly getting into the same industry until lockouts happen again and I don't think that will respond to their political agenda, if anything it looks way better that they prohibited lockouts and forced this companies to either adjust to what the regulations are or simply just go! At the end of the day if Uber and Lyft would've not been greedy and stopped hiring drivers when they were supposed this wouldn't be an issue. Them not prohibiting lockouts since UR was reinstated lead to Uber and Lyft think they could use that to their advantage once it got to that to try to force TLC to eliminate it completely.
Question for you is how would TLC prohibit lockouts technically? Would you call for TLC to make rules saying Uber / Lyft cannot forcefully log out a driver? If so, the only issue is they might then deactivate a ton of drivers (would rebalance market quickly, but would be very painful for a lot of drivers). What's your thoughts on how the TLC technically prevents lockouts?
They can prohibit any measure not only lockouts that these apps use to manipulate DATA, deactivating them without a reason or a decent appeal process, will also be another way of manipulating the data, this is just my perspective, that being in place Uber and Lyft are forced to implement new marketing tactics to increase demand will that means they have to pay money owed to drivers for the time not being busy and penalties to TLC?Yes, that will make their Ceo's to turn their attention to specific markets if they want to continue to do business there.
Understand what you're saying. Think the way forward is make it a more simple - control FHV supply and new driver license issuance, and earnings will inherently be protected. If you begin to make too many rules to try to close every loophole it'll be a game of whack a mole, lot of unintended consequences can arise (exactly what happened with UR - good concept but lot of loopholes to game the system that aren't easy to close and also reliance on data that only TLC can produce)
That has always been the correct pathway to follow and if they go that way i will support it and be the first one to congratulate you guys (experience cannot be improvised) but the regulator decided to implement this UR and even though they may surprise us, it’s very hard for this people to admit they were wrong since the very first moment they implemented the rule, and honestly for them to come up with something that is not going to benefit either parties, continue issuing licenses, etc, i rather 1000 times them coming up with something that put these companies in their place.