If they increased wages, their employees wouldn't need uber credits from a charity to get to work.
The app seems to make it easier for large corporations to pay lower wages.
With you there, but a huge challenge to make work in car-dependent suburbs. Best IMO would be to pay a living wage, so workers can afford reliable cars or all the Waymo rides they need.
If someone's car breaks down at the last minute or they need a ride right now, and the app sends them a bus ticket, then they may show up in about 2+ hours. That is not great for a shift that needs filling.
Currently since I am qualified for the Paratransit/Dial-a-Ride in my region, the transit operator has developed a new app that matches riders with all kinds of ride-share services, including Lyft and Uber. These Lyft/Uber/whatever rides cost $3 flat for each trip, up to 20 trips per month, with a generous maximum mileage. Taking the bus would literally cost more than that.
So, I like this app a lot, and I like that it's been a solution for at least one business. Obviously, the solution was not "an app" in itself, but a safety net wrapped around various goods and services that could be deployed (and gate-kept) conveniently through the tech of the app. I hope that Escalate gets a wide audience and enjoys increased usage. It could be helpful to all sorts of employers where their workers are at-risk of getting lost along the way.
That's what I'm saying. Proper public transit that gets places on schedule. Not the current best-effort crap across most of the US, if your area even has public transit to begin with.
I don't care how cheap a Lyft or Uber looks, it's being subsidized (venture cap, baybee) to be cheap. Just like the gas you put in a (non EV) car.
You're not selling me on "just another app bro". You've been captured by the automotive industry. The whole country has.
Uber is not subsidizing rides, it's the transit operator that made a deal with them. Ordering with the normal app costs more than $3.
Ride share apps are profitable today because they double and triple dip on every ride. They charge you as much as they can, add hidden fees with political messages, make you pay their taxes and then take most of it for themselves and leave the driver with a poverty wage.
Uber uses dynamic pricing on both sides of the transaction to "discover the fair market value", aka how little they can pay drivers before they reject the offer and how much they can charge you for a ride.
I don't think this can be fixed with transit alone because building a proper network takes time and there will always be situations where you want to get from point A to B as fast as possible (coming late to the airport, going home drunk, missed a bus that runs twice a day). There is a place for ride share apps in the economy, and instead of fighting it we can start a state supported non profit app that gives drivers a 90% cut and lets them set their own price schedule. Make it fair for workers and cheap for users.
If they increased wages, their employees wouldn't need uber credits from a charity to get to work. The app seems to make it easier for large corporations to pay lower wages.
Why not invest in public transit for a change maybe?
With you there, but a huge challenge to make work in car-dependent suburbs. Best IMO would be to pay a living wage, so workers can afford reliable cars or all the Waymo rides they need.
I don't want to waymo to work, I want an economic mass-transit solution. One car one person is not, and never will be economical.
If someone's car breaks down at the last minute or they need a ride right now, and the app sends them a bus ticket, then they may show up in about 2+ hours. That is not great for a shift that needs filling.
Currently since I am qualified for the Paratransit/Dial-a-Ride in my region, the transit operator has developed a new app that matches riders with all kinds of ride-share services, including Lyft and Uber. These Lyft/Uber/whatever rides cost $3 flat for each trip, up to 20 trips per month, with a generous maximum mileage. Taking the bus would literally cost more than that.
So, I like this app a lot, and I like that it's been a solution for at least one business. Obviously, the solution was not "an app" in itself, but a safety net wrapped around various goods and services that could be deployed (and gate-kept) conveniently through the tech of the app. I hope that Escalate gets a wide audience and enjoys increased usage. It could be helpful to all sorts of employers where their workers are at-risk of getting lost along the way.
That's what I'm saying. Proper public transit that gets places on schedule. Not the current best-effort crap across most of the US, if your area even has public transit to begin with.
I don't care how cheap a Lyft or Uber looks, it's being subsidized (venture cap, baybee) to be cheap. Just like the gas you put in a (non EV) car.
You're not selling me on "just another app bro". You've been captured by the automotive industry. The whole country has.
Uber is not subsidizing rides, it's the transit operator that made a deal with them. Ordering with the normal app costs more than $3.
Ride share apps are profitable today because they double and triple dip on every ride. They charge you as much as they can, add hidden fees with political messages, make you pay their taxes and then take most of it for themselves and leave the driver with a poverty wage.
Uber uses dynamic pricing on both sides of the transaction to "discover the fair market value", aka how little they can pay drivers before they reject the offer and how much they can charge you for a ride.
I don't think this can be fixed with transit alone because building a proper network takes time and there will always be situations where you want to get from point A to B as fast as possible (coming late to the airport, going home drunk, missed a bus that runs twice a day). There is a place for ride share apps in the economy, and instead of fighting it we can start a state supported non profit app that gives drivers a 90% cut and lets them set their own price schedule. Make it fair for workers and cheap for users.
[dead]