The Uber app application with a map of New York City is seen on an Apple iPhone mobile phone in this photo illustration Warsaw, Poland on 21 September, 2022.
Nurphoto | Nurphoto | Getty Images
In some ways, Uber and Lyft are back to square one.
With federal regulators set to tighten Trump-era labor standards that let Uber and Lyft, as well as food-delivery services like Doordash, treat gig workers as independent contractors with few protections under labor law, shares dropped sharply last week. But while a shift, the Department of Labor proposal doesn’t immediately transform gig workers into employees entitled to overtime pay, unemployment insurance and other benefits.
What’s clear is that the ongoing conflict over how these on-demand companies treat their drivers isn’t going away, since an estimated one in six Americans has worked in the gig economy in one way or another. Analysts and pundits following the rideshare industry think the future holds some series of compromises that will give drivers at least limited benefits — a model known as independent contractor-plus — with some believing that the Biden administration’s pro-union stance will lead to workers being classified as employees eventually.
Both solutions would be likely to raise Uber and Lyft’s costs — and create a different business model for the entrepreneurs using their cars to run, in effect, small businesses of their own. And each highlights the unrealized promise of ridesharing business models: The absence of self-driving cars that investors once believed would make profits at the companies soar and put most drivers out of business.
“It seems like the start of a Game of Thrones battle between the Department of Labor and the gig economy,’ Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said. “When pressure was confined to the states, it was one thing. It has added another variable.”
For now, the rules proposed by the DOL won’t make drivers into employees, who would also be entitled to benefits such as minimum-wage protection, overtime pay, and to be paid when they are at work but don’t have a passenger in their car. Such a move would likely also cause pressure on the companies to offer the drivers health insurance and vacation pay, especially for the minority of drivers who do gig work full-time, though Morgan Stanley analyst Brian Nowak said state-level litigation could also force such change.
For now, the DoL rules will apply a broader series of tests to determine who is a truly independent contractor and who’s not. The companies point to the flexibility of rideshare employment, which lets drivers set their own hours, as a sign that drivers are independent contractors. Advocates for drivers being treated as employees argue that Uber and Lyft set workers’ pay, dispatch them to trips, and monitor their work as closely as they would an employee’s, even using technology to ask passengers in mid-ride whether their driver is acting erratically based on a vehicle’s speed.
The shift in federal policy, largely restoring the status quo under the Obama administration (and most of the Trump years, since the last administration didn’t loosen the rules until early 2021), comes at a delicate time for both rideshare companies.
Each has been promising Wall Street that it will soon turn profitable. By some standards — especially the more lenient earnings before interest taxes, depreciation and amortization — they have gotten there. But neither makes money under formal accounting standards, and neither has had positive free cash flow over the last 12 months, though Uber was positive in the second quarter.
Both businesses were hammered by the Covid pandemic, which made both drivers and passengers use car services much less often. Each company lost more than half of its value in 2020, recovered to new highs by last year, and has seen shares pounded anew in 2022.
And that pain has been passed along to drivers, who have seen their pay cut since before the pandemic, said Nicole Moore, president of Rideshare Drivers United in Los Angeles and a rideshare driver herself.
“They got America hooked on cheap rides, and drivers hooked on what they got paid,” Moore said. “Now passengers are paying more, and drivers are getting paid less.”
Uber believes the Department of Labor is focused less on ridesharing and more on industries such as construction that also use gig workers, pointing out that the proposed rule doesn’t single out rideshare drivers.
“The Department of Labor listened to drivers, who consistently and overwhelmingly state that they prefer the unique flexibility that comes with being an independent contractor,” Uber head of federal affairs CR Wooters said in a statement. “Today’s proposed rule takes a measured approach, essentially returning us to the Obama era, during which our industry grew exponentially.”
The company also disputes Moore’s claims. It says driver pay has risen, reaching $37 per what Uber calls a utilized hour. The company’s 10-Q filing doesn’t disclose an average utilization rate – or percentage of hours a car is carrying passengers while a driver is on the clock – but Sergio Avedian, senior contributor at industry blog The Rideshare Guy, said it’s about 60%. Uber drivers also supply their own cars and gasoline, though the company in March added a per-trip fuel surcharge that goes directly to drivers.
Uber and Amazon Flex drivers protest the fuel price serge and demand more money outside an Amazon warehouse in Redondo Beach, California, March 16, 2022.
Mike Blake | Reuters
The risk of change in the legal environment is pushing the companies toward a new kind of business model, similar to what has happened in Washington State already under a new law, said Avedian, who is a driver for both Uber and Lyft himself.
In Washington, drivers are still considered contractors, but Seattle drivers are guaranteed $1.65 a mile, which he said is more than double the prevailing rate in California, effective next Jan. 1. (Rates will be lower elsewhere in Washington). They also will get worker’s compensation insurance, paid time off and a right to appeal if they are effectively terminated by the companies.
“The only reason to be involved in the gig economy is the flexibility,” Avedian said, referring to policies that let rideshare drivers set their own hours. “Uber’s not going to do that and give you employment rights. If you put [health insurance, Social Security taxes and other benefits] in, Uber will go to zero.”
New Jersey, New York and Massachusetts are working with the companies on deals similar to the one reached in Washington, Nowak said. Uber and Lyft have coped with new requirements in Washington with little impact and would be able to weather any hit to profits as the model spreads, he wrote.
“Reaching an agreement in those states was important 24 hours ago (before this announcement), and it still is today,” Nowak said in relation to the DoL rule proposal.
Both companies said they are willing to work on such deals with state regulators, exchanging better pay for continuing the flexibility that independent contracting allows the companies. “It’s incumbent on us to make it appealing to drivers, because they have lots of options,” said Uber spokeswoman Alix Anfang, referencing the tight labor market.
Surveys by The Rideshare Guy also show that most drivers prefer to be independent contractors.
Any increase in expenses from classifying drivers as employees, or otherwise raising their pay, is likely to be recovered in the form of higher prices because the companies have already cut their fixed expenses hard, said CFRA Research analyst Angelo Zino. How much costs may rise isn’t known, but the range of possibilities runs from 10 percent to 30 percent, he said. Uber is also pursuing advertising revenue, which may produce as much as 20 percent of the company’s profit before interest, taxes and non-cash expenses within three years, he said.
The need to prevent drivers from claiming full employment benefits, if regulators ever do classify them as employees, is likely to mean the companies pressure drivers to work less than full time, Moore said. Companies like Amazon that also use quasi-independent drivers may face some of the same issues as Uber and Lyft, Nowak said.
All of this would matter less if the companies were closer to implementing self-driving vehicles on a large scale, which would have let them reduce the cost of drivers. Uber’s federal disclosures ahead of its 2019 IPO predicted the company would become a hybrid of automated and human-driven transportation, and Lyft’s filings said self-driving cars would “be a critical part of the future of transportation.”
Last week, Lyft president John Zimmer, who had previously predicted majority self-driving by 2021, said he got it wrong, but he added, “I really think in the next two to three years that kind of actual no driver, driverless vehicle will be something you can order pretty easily on the Lyft platform.”
Gig workers are likely to remain on the scene, and their business models will change, Avedian said. The question is whether they will change fast enough for drivers and regulators.
“If it’s enforced, we will have status, benefits and pay that is guaranteed to employees under the law,” Moore said. “99 percent of drivers want to be independent — but we’re not.”
Join us October 25 – 26, 2022 for the CNBC Work Summit — Dislocation, Negotiation, and Determination: The World of Work Right Now. Visit CNBC Events to register.
Formula One F1 – United States Grand Prix – Circuit of the Americas, Austin, Texas, U.S. – October 23, 2022 Tim Cook waves the chequered flag to the race winner Red Bull’s Max Verstappen
Mike Segar | Reuters
Apple had two major launches last month. They couldn’t have been more different.
First, Apple revealed some of the artificial intelligence advancements it had been working on in the past year when it released developer versions of its operating systems to muted applause at its annual developer’s conference, WWDC. Then, at the end of the month, Apple hit the red carpet as its first true blockbuster movie, “F1,” debuted to over $155 million — and glowing reviews — in its first weekend.
While “F1” was a victory lap for Apple, highlighting the strength of its long-term outlook, the growth of its services business and its ability to tap into culture, Wall Street’s reaction to the company’s AI announcements at WWDC suggest there’s some trouble underneath the hood.
“F1” showed Apple at its best — in particular, its ability to invest in new, long-term projects. When Apple TV+ launched in 2019, it had only a handful of original shows and one movie, a film festival darling called “Hala” that didn’t even share its box office revenue.
Despite Apple TV+being written off as a costly side-project, Apple stuck with its plan over the years, expanding its staff and operation in Culver City, California. That allowed the company to build up Hollywood connections, especially for TV shows, and build an entertainment track record. Now, an Apple Original can lead the box office on a summer weekend, the prime season for blockbuster films.
The success of “F1” also highlights Apple’s significant marketing machine and ability to get big-name talent to appear with its leadership. Apple pulled out all the stops to market the movie, including using its Wallet app to send a push notification with a discount for tickets to the film. To promote “F1,” Cook appeared with movie star Brad Pitt at an Apple store in New York and posted a video with actual F1 racer Lewis Hamilton, who was one of the film’s producers.
(L-R) Brad Pitt, Lewis Hamilton, Tim Cook, and Damson Idris attend the World Premiere of “F1: The Movie” in Times Square on June 16, 2025 in New York City.
Jamie Mccarthy | Getty Images Entertainment | Getty Images
Although Apple services chief Eddy Cue said in a recent interview that Apple needs the its film business to be profitable to “continue to do great things,” “F1” isn’t just about the bottom line for the company.
Apple’s Hollywood productions are perhaps the most prominent face of the company’s services business, a profit engine that has been an investor favorite since the iPhone maker started highlighting the division in 2016.
Films will only ever be a small fraction of the services unit, which also includes payments, iCloud subscriptions, magazine bundles, Apple Music, game bundles, warranties, fees related to digital payments and ad sales. Plus, even the biggest box office smashes would be small on Apple’s scale — the company does over $1 billion in sales on average every day.
But movies are the only services component that can get celebrities like Pitt or George Clooney to appear next to an Apple logo — and the success of “F1” means that Apple could do more big popcorn films in the future.
“Nothing breeds success or inspires future investment like a current success,” said Comscore senior media analyst Paul Dergarabedian.
But if “F1” is a sign that Apple’s services business is in full throttle, the company’s AI struggles are a “check engine” light that won’t turn off.
Replacing Siri’s engine
At WWDC last month, Wall Street was eager to hear about the company’s plans for Apple Intelligence, its suite of AI features that it first revealed in 2024. Apple Intelligence, which is a key tenet of the company’s hardware products, had a rollout marred by delays and underwhelming features.
Apple spent most of WWDC going over smaller machine learning features, but did not reveal what investors and consumers increasingly want: A sophisticated Siri that can converse fluidly and get stuff done, like making a restaurant reservation. In the age of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude and Google’s Gemini, the expectation of AI assistants among consumers is growing beyond “Siri, how’s the weather?”
The company had previewed a significantly improved Siri in the summer of 2024, but earlier this year, those features were delayed to sometime in 2026. At WWDC, Apple didn’t offer any updates about the improved Siri beyond that the company was “continuing its work to deliver” the features in the “coming year.” Some observers reduced their expectations for Apple’s AI after the conference.
“Current expectations for Apple Intelligence to kickstart a super upgrade cycle are too high, in our view,” wrote Jefferies analysts this week.
Siri should be an example of how Apple’s ability to improve products and projects over the long-term makes it tough to compete with.
It beat nearly every other voice assistant to market when it first debuted on iPhones in 2011. Fourteen years later, Siri remains essentially the same one-off, rigid, question-and-answer system that struggles with open-ended questions and dates, even after the invention in recent years of sophisticated voice bots based on generative AI technology that can hold a conversation.
Apple’s strongest rivals, including Android parent Google, have done way more to integrate sophisticated AI assistants into their devices than Apple has. And Google doesn’t have the same reflex against collecting data and cloud processing as privacy-obsessed Apple.
Some analysts have said they believe Apple has a few years before the company’s lack of competitive AI features will start to show up in device sales, given the company’s large installed base and high customer loyalty. But Apple can’t get lapped before it re-enters the race, and its former design guru Jony Ive is now working on new hardware with OpenAI, ramping up the pressure in Cupertino.
“The three-year problem, which is within an investment time frame, is that Android is racing ahead,” Needham senior internet analyst Laura Martin said on CNBC this week.
Apple’s services success with projects like “F1” is an example of what the company can do when it sets clear goals in public and then executes them over extended time-frames.
Its AI strategy could use a similar long-term plan, as customers and investors wonder when Apple will fully embrace the technology that has captivated Silicon Valley.
Wall Street’s anxiety over Apple’s AI struggles was evident this week after Bloomberg reported that Apple was considering replacing Siri’s engine with Anthropic or OpenAI’s technology, as opposed to its own foundation models.
The move, if it were to happen, would contradict one of Apple’s most important strategies in the Cook era: Apple wants to own its core technologies, like the touchscreen, processor, modem and maps software, not buy them from suppliers.
Using external technology would be an admission that Apple Foundation Models aren’t good enough yet for what the company wants to do with Siri.
“They’ve fallen farther and farther behind, and they need to supercharge their generative AI efforts” Martin said. “They can’t do that internally.”
Apple might even pay billions for the use of Anthropic’s AI software, according to the Bloombergreport. If Apple were to pay for AI, it would be a reversal from current services deals, like the search deal with Alphabet where the Cupertino company gets paid $20 billion per year to push iPhone traffic to Google Search.
The company didn’t confirm the report and declined comment, but Wall Street welcomed the report and Apple shares rose.
In the world of AI in Silicon Valley, signing bonuses for the kinds of engineers that can develop new models can range up to $100 million, according to OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.
“I can’t see Apple doing that,” Martin said.
Earlier this week, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg sent a memo bragging about hiring 11 AI experts from companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google’s DeepMind. That came after Zuckerberg hired Scale AI CEO Alexandr Wang to lead a new AI division as part of a $14.3 billion deal.
Meta’s not the only company to spend hundreds of millions on AI celebrities to get them in the building. Google spent big to hire away the founders of Character.AI, Microsoft got its AI leader by striking a deal with Inflection and Amazon hired the executive team of Adept to bulk up its AI roster.
Apple, on the other hand, hasn’t announced any big AI hires in recent years. While Cook rubs shoulders with Pitt, the actual race may be passing Apple by.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk speaks alongside U.S. President Donald Trump to reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30, 2025 in Washington, DC.
Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images
Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who bombarded President Donald Trump‘s signature spending bill for weeks, on Friday made his first comments since the legislation passed.
Musk backed a post on X by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who said the bill’s budget “explodes the deficit” and continues a pattern of “short-term politicking over long-term sustainability.”
The House of Representatives narrowly passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on Thursday, sending it to Trump to sign into law.
Paul and Musk have been vocal opponents of Trump’s tax and spending bill, and repeatedly called out the potential for the spending package to increase the national debt.
The independent Congressional Budget Office has said the bill could add $3.4 trillion to the $36.2 trillion of U.S. debt over the next decade. The White House has labeled the agency as “partisan” and continuously refuted the CBO’s estimates.
Read more CNBC tech news
The bill includes trillions of dollars in tax cuts, increased spending for immigration enforcement and large cuts to funding for Medicaid and other programs.
It also cuts tax credits and support for solar and wind energy and electric vehicles, a particularly sore spot for Musk, who has several companies that benefit from the programs.
“I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!” Trump wrote in a social media post in early June as the pair traded insults and threats.
Shares of Tesla plummeted as the feud intensified, with the company losing $152 billion in market cap on June 5 and putting the company below $1 trillion in value. The stock has largely rebounded since, but is still below where it was trading before the ruckus with Trump.
Stock Chart IconStock chart icon
Tesla one-month stock chart.
— CNBC’s Kevin Breuninger and Erin Doherty contributed to this article.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella speaks at the Axel Springer building in Berlin on Oct. 17, 2023. He received the annual Axel Springer Award.
Ben Kriemann | Getty Images
Among the thousands of Microsoft employees who lost their jobs in the cutbacks announced this week were 830 staffers in the company’s home state of Washington.
Nearly a dozen game design workers in the state were part of the layoffs, along with three audio designers, two mechanical engineers, one optical engineer and one lab technician, according to a document Microsoft submitted to Washington employment officials.
There were also five individual contributors and one manager at the Microsoft Research division in the cuts, as well as 10 lawyers and six hardware engineers, the document shows.
Microsoft announced plans on Wednesday to eliminate 9,000 jobs, as part of an effort to eliminate redundancy and to encourage employees to focus on more meaningful work by adopting new technologies, a person familiar with the matter told CNBC. The person asked not to be named while discussing private matters.
Scores of Microsoft salespeople and video game developers have since come forward on social media to announce their departure. In April, Microsoft said revenue from Xbox content and services grew 8%, trailing overall growth of 13%.
In sales, the company parted ways with 16 customer success account management staff members based in Washington, 28 in sales strategy enablement and another five in sales compensation. One Washington-based government affairs worker was also laid off.
Microsoft eliminated 17 jobs in cloud solution architecture in the state, according to the document. The company’s fastest revenue growth comes from Azure and other cloud services that customers buy based on usage.
CEO Satya Nadella has not publicly commented on the layoffs, and Microsoft didn’t immediately provide a comment about the cuts in Washington. On a conference call with analysts in April, Microsoft CFO Amy Hood said the company had a “focus on cost efficiencies” during the March quarter.