The question of whether or not USC will restore the single-ride free Lyft program has gone viral. Even under the pressure of the “single-rides” petition with 7,500 signatures, there are still no signals that USC, which is “dealing with a big budget deficit,” will backtrack the decision.
Tracy Tao, a junior majoring in computer science and business administration proposed new solutions. Upset by the long waiting time for Lyft at night and the obscurity of USC’s response to the shared Lyft debate, Tao decided to take action.
Her project, the University Safe Drive program (USD), is a rideshare platform exclusively for USC students. “Uber and Lyft are not and should not be the only options when we are talking about how to address the ride issue,” Tao said.
She handed out 85 questionnaires on January 25 at the spring involvement fair and 50 digital copies to her BUAD 302 classmates. In her questionnaires, she asked questions such as “If there is an app that provides $4 to $8 ride inside the safety zone every day after 6 p.m. with a waiting time of around 10 minutes, would you use it?”
The findings of the online questionnaires show that those who replied “yes” and those who said “no” are divided nearly half-and-half. A responder to the questionnaire, who is unwilling to use the platform, believes that the safety zone should be “accessible to all students without the inconvenience of having to spend any money just to be safe,” which “discourages those students of low-income to access these resources.”
Tao said that the majority of responders at the involvement fair are willing to try the new platform and she noticed that the ones who expressed interest were mostly international students, non-Californian students, and students of color, who usually don’t own cars in L.A.
“My idea is that it’s best if the school can see the value in it, and then they can consider either working with a better platform or we get our own platform,” Tao said. “That is not hard at all from the software side.”
However, from the administration side, Tao has experienced difficulties communicating with the USC administration and student government.
“I just feel like this is not something that we students can take in part at all,” Tao said.
She visited the transportation office next to Leavey Library after getting the results from her questionnaires. The staff told her to email the office because they have no power over the issue. She then sent two emails to the transportation office and one to the student government, but all received no response.
Tao said that she is frustrated and disappointed by the fact that she has no way to voice her suggestions. “What really matters to me is that the school should respond, no matter if it’s a rejection,” Tao said.
Besides students’ reactions, Tao also dug deep into the drivers’ situations. She talked with the founder of Rideshare Drivers United, Nicole Moore, and found out that Uber and Lyft win it all.
According to Rideshare Drivers United, drivers are receiving as little as 20% of passenger fares, and Uber and Lyft have never made a rate adjustment to account for the price of fuel, despite raising the prices for customers.
They talked about how dynamic pricing has been added to the algorithm to get customers to pay more while giving drivers a smaller share of the fares. They also discussed that even though drivers are protected by labor law, Lyft did not fulfill the responsibility and that USC has an obligation to support laborers’ and students’ rights. “We are like boiling frogs,” Tao said.
Since the topic affects all of the students, the candidates running for student body president have all shared their opinions during the public debate held last Thursday.
Yoav Gillath (P) and Monica Rodriguez (VP) said that they’ve talked to DPS. DPS mentioned that through parents and public outcries, the university may switch its decisions. Therefore, the team believed that there’s a possibility for single-rider free Lyft to be restored.
Divya Jakatdar (P) and Michelle Lu (VP) proposed two solutions. One of which is students spend $20 a semester to sustain the single-rider free Lyft model. The other option is a cap on individual rides as well as unlimited shared rides for the rest of that month.
However, Aidan Feighery (P) and Ashley Ka (VP) said that they recognized the university has said time and time again that we will not go back to the old system, so they don’t advocate going back to the single-rider system but call for a lower cap instead.
Miko Mariscal (P) and Andrew Taw (VP) agreed with the former group, saying that “We need to go ahead and be honest with this question: Is this something that University Student Government will accomplish? Or is this something that the administration will accomplish? "
Devin Ayala (P) and Navya Singh (VP) shared that they have been advocating for a compromise between the administration’s budget concerns and students’ efficiency concerns. “You think it’s impossible, such as Fryft, but I do think that there’s a possibility to find that compromise,” Singh said during the debate.
Tao read the transcripts of the debate a day later. She noticed that the only team who has proposed fresh solutions is Divya and Michelle, but she hoped to see more options from the student candidates as well as other students.
“This is not a cry from afar. It’s from us,” Tao said.