that's awesome you were able to do that. but i think you might have been one of the lucky ones who got in when the dynamics weren't quite as unbalanced. uber, lyft, et al. needed initially to entice drivers to the platform so paid more to jumpstart the labor supply.
the disproportionate power i'm talking about is the ability of these companies to unilaterally decide the terms of the contract with labor as a whole (and really, they don't have as much choice as this makes it sound). yes, you can choose to accept or not accept, but your decision has no bearing on the market dynamics because you have no power to dictate the terms for which you'll work (e.g., you couldn't demand an extra $5/hr). part of this is because the fluidity of fractional employment means that labor supply can instantaneously fill demand--there's no longer a penalty for an employee leaving.
so uber and lyft[0] have "disproportionate power" because they operate a marketplace of drivers, and some of these drivers have a sense of entitlement that they should be paid X, but actually there are even less fortunate individuals that these companies are empowering because they aren't as entitled and are willing to be paid X - δ. Are these X - δ drivers victims or villains?
Keep in mind that uber and lyft aren't so powerful that they can force drivers to drive pro bono.
[0]sidecar lets drivers effectively set their own rates, so the effects of being too entitled about what you're owed become clear pretty rapidly if you're counting on it for a steady income.
you have no power to dictate the terms for which you'll work (e.g., you couldn't demand an extra $5/hr)
That's right. And if there is zero market on the passenger side, you can't demand squat. Maybe Uber and Lyft should unilaterally raise their rates to $10/mile and $100/hour for the benefit of their drivers. What Uber and Lyft are doing is just price discovery. Now that may seem unfair to the driver, but the flip side is if you charge too much, people don't use the service as much, and start getting into drunk accidents.
the disproportionate power i'm talking about is the ability of these companies to unilaterally decide the terms of the contract with labor as a whole (and really, they don't have as much choice as this makes it sound). yes, you can choose to accept or not accept, but your decision has no bearing on the market dynamics because you have no power to dictate the terms for which you'll work (e.g., you couldn't demand an extra $5/hr). part of this is because the fluidity of fractional employment means that labor supply can instantaneously fill demand--there's no longer a penalty for an employee leaving.