With the newest of many initiatives to reportedly provide drivers with greater independence as a reaction to the state’s new gig economy law, Uber Technologies is piloting a function that allows some drivers in California to set their own rates. Drivers who shuttle riders from airports in Palm Springs, Sacramento and Santa Barbara can charge as much as five times higher than the Uber-set fare on the ride per an unnamed source cited in a report by The Wall Street Journal.
The fare test, as well as other recent changes, are reportedly part of the ridesharing firm’s moves to bolster its case that its drivers work with some autonomy. Uber put a cap on its commissions for trips in California earlier in January. And, in December, it let drivers in the state view the destinations of their trips, allowing them to select their journeys. Drivers in the past agreed to jobs without knowing where their ride would end.
The firm has made several changes to its operations as it responds to the passage of Assembly Bill 5 (AB5). The legislation makes firms treat workers as employees who can have sick days, among other benefits, instead of independent contractors if they are controlled by an employer and they pitch in to its usual course of business. Uber, however, has contended that it is a tech platform that links passengers with drivers and is not a transportation firm, so drivers are not a part of its normal course of business.
The news comes after it was reported that Uber was removing upfront pricing and replacing it with estimates in response to the California gig economy law that took effect at the beginning of the year. Reuters saw an email to passengers, as well as drivers, on January 8 telling them that a journey’s final price would be calculated at drop-off “based on the actual time and distance traveled.”
The company reportedly wrote in the email, “Due to a new state law, we are making some changes to help ensure that Uber remains a dependable source of flexible work for California drivers.”
Featured News
Automakers Challenge Maine’s Right to Repair Law
Feb 12, 2025 by
CPI
Senators Urged to Expedite Gail Slater’s Confirmation as DOJ Antitrust Chief
Feb 11, 2025 by
CPI
Former Michigan Asphalt Executive Pleads Guilty in Bid-Rigging Scheme
Feb 11, 2025 by
CPI
Ballard Spahr Expands Litigation Team with Addition of Antitrust Attorney in Seattle
Feb 11, 2025 by
CPI
Portuguese Court Overturns €225 Million Fine for Banking Collusion Due to Statute of Limitations
Feb 11, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – International Criminal Enforcement
Jan 23, 2025 by
CPI
The Antitrust Division’s Recent Work to Combat International Cartels
Jan 23, 2025 by
Emma Burnham & Benjamin Christenson
Information Sharing: The New Frontier of U.S. Antitrust Enforcement
Jan 23, 2025 by
Brian P. Quinn, Casey Kovarik & Michael Tubach
The Key Role of Guidelines on Exchanges of Information Among Competitors and the Divergent Transatlantic Paths
Jan 23, 2025 by
Rosa Abrantes-Metz & Albert Metz
Leniency, Whistleblowers, and Compliance
Jan 23, 2025 by
Richard Powers, Tara O’Malley & Cory Gordon