Ride-share drivers need industry protections and higher wages too
Drivers deal with too much for too little pay and need the government to back them up
With difficult working conditions and few protections, the gig economy needs a transformation. (Unsplash/Dan Gold)
Ride-hailing has undergone a significant shift since the rise of “ride-sharing” companies like Uber and Lyft.
They challenged the taxi industry and public transit with their model of quick requests via apps, and cars being driven by free-lance owner-operators who can make their own schedules. The idea was couched in “freedom.”
The “freedom” of drivers to choose when to work, and the “freedom” of clients to choose their driver and car instead of getting assigned a vehicle. But let it be clear these “freedoms” are not nearly as amazing as the companies claim them to be.
On Valentine’s Day, drivers for Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash protested outside Vancouver International Airport over pay disputes with their respective employers. Strikes by ride-share drivers also took place in Toronto and multiple other cities across Canada and the United States.
Notoriously, many “gig economy” companies list their employees, or ride-share drivers in this case, as independent contractors to avoid normal employment regulations. This includes minimum wage laws as detailed in a report by the RideFair Coalition and the Rideshare Drivers Association of Ontario. The report shared gig-workers in the province get a median pay of $6.37 to $10.60 per hour when the minimum wage is $16.55. In B.C., government protections were afforded to gig-workers in 2023 due to complaints of low and precarious pay.
The thing about the gig-economy is it thrives on said precarity. The work is “low-skilled” and can theoretically be done by anybody with a car and a smartphone. In actuality, it requires great effort to barely eke out a decent day’s pay.
Due to being labeled “independent contractors,” drivers lack employment protections that leave them vulnerable to employers and hostile customers alike. This forces drivers to work longer hours to net as many tips as possible, effectively the opposite of the proposed ethos of drivers having flexible schedules and freedom to choose when to work.
Most ride-share drivers are visible minorities and/or immigrants, a demographic that is already vulnerable to workplace exploitation. Ride-sharing companies care very little about employee retention when it comes to drivers. As long as the main office gets its cut of the daily collection, everything is just fine to them. Clearly, drivers think otherwise.
Ride-share companies came onto the scene touting themselves as being cheaper, more reliable, and more modern than the taxi-cab industry or public transit. Of course this was back when Uber and Lyft were cheaper, but once they cut the competition’s legs out from underneath them, in came the price hikes.
This model is called surge pricing. Rates rise or fall with demand, meaning that during peak hours, passengers either pay more than they would during off-hours or wait. Say what you will about taxis and transit, but at least they are consistent with their fares and have drivers protected through legislation, industry organizations, and, in the case of transit, labour unions.
Despite what advertisements and recruitment campaigns claim about their commitment to a diverse, inclusive, and time-flexible workforce, the gig-economy only cares about what all companies want — the dollars in the customers’ pockets.
Ultimately, the drivers are absolutely right — as any employee in any industry would be — in publicly airing their grievances. If they’re not dealing with difficult, irritating, or even outright threatening passengers, they are being treated as the middlemen for Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash’s cut of the profits and leaving the people who carry the bulk of the burden with peanuts. Ride-share drivers must have the same protections and representations as their taxi and transit counterparts.
