Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday September 20 2017, @03:39PM   Printer-friendly
from the always-read-the-fine-print dept.

Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1937

Uber is fighting a proposed class-action lawsuit that says it secretly over charges riders and under pays drivers. In its defense, the ride-hailing service claims that nobody is being defrauded in its "upfront" rider fare pricing model.

The fares charged to riders don't have to match up with the fares paid to drivers, Uber said, because that's what a driver's "agreement" allows.

"Plaintiff's allegations are premised on the notion that, once Uber implemented Upfront Pricing for riders, it was required under the terms of the Agreement to change how the Fare was calculated for Drivers," Uber said (PDF) in a recent court filing seeking to have the class-action tossed. "This conclusion rests on a misinterpretation of the Agreement."

The suit claims that, when a rider uses Uber's app to hail a ride, the fare the app immediately shows the passenger is based on a slower and longer route compared to the one displayed to the driver. The rider pays the higher fee, and the driver's commission is paid from the cheaper, faster route, according to the lawsuit.

Uber claims the disparity between rider and driver fares "was hardly a secret."

"Drivers," Uber told a federal judge, "could have simply asked a User how much he or she paid for the trip to learn of any discrepancy."

Source: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/09/uber-driver-pay-plan-puts-a-significant-risk-on-ride-hailing-service/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by frojack on Wednesday September 20 2017, @05:21PM

    by frojack (1554) on Wednesday September 20 2017, @05:21PM (#570722) Journal

    Well, that seems like a rather pedantic rant, not totally on topic. Why should privately developed software used privately in a business require open source?

    Here's your estimated ride duration, driver, car, yadda yadda: Accept / Decline
    Here's what your fare: Accept / Decline.
    Here's your credit card charge: Accept / Decline:

    As long as your ride takes place (and you weren't raped or robbed by the driver) and your credit card was properly charged, you got everything out of the software you were entitled to.

    Similarly the driver is offered a gig for X dollars, and X route, and can decide, screw that, the 405 is bumper to bumper for the next 3 hours, no way am I doing that for that price.

    These are both private transactions between consenting parties. Why do you get to audit software?

    If you want to audit somebody's software go audit the Cell Phones and the carriers that service them. Good luck with that.

    The company could draw fare out of a hat if they wanted. If the drivers acc

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3