Driver Recruitment Research Report

This report answers three questions that came up during HICH's website work. It pulls from a large research run, 107 independent checks across 24 sources, and presents the findings in plain language so the team can make clear, confident decisions about how to talk to drivers.

One important note on how to read this: some findings are marked verified, meaning at least two out of three independent checks confirmed them from real sources. Others are marked refuted, meaning the claim is out there but the research could not back it up. Both matter. Knowing what you cannot prove is just as valuable as knowing what you can.

Do Uber and Lyft really take 50%?

The short answer: drivers are right to feel it is closer to 50%, but the research could not lock down that specific number from a primary source. Here is why, and what HICH should say instead.

What the research found

Two claims were tested. Both failed verification:

So why does 25% feel wrong?

Because it is. When Uber or Lyft say they take "20 to 30 percent," that is technically their "service fee." But it leaves out a long list of extra charges that riders pay at checkout: booking fees, safety fees, airport fees, and surge pricing that does not fully make it to the driver. When drivers add it all up themselves, the gap between what the rider paid and what landed in their account is routinely 40 to 60 percent. The "25%" number is what the platform's marketing says. The 50% number is what drivers actually experience.

The founders are immigrants, not just Minnesotans

This is a meaningful distinction, and it is the stronger story. Saying the founders are "members of the Minnesota community" is vague. Saying they are "immigrants who made Minnesota home" is specific, honest, and directly connects to the community HICH serves.

Most of HICH's drivers are immigrants. Most of the riders HICH serves come from the same communities. A company founded by immigrants, built for immigrants, is not a talking point. It is the actual story. The founders section on the website should say exactly that.

The full research findings

The research was split into six areas. Each one looked at a different part of the rideshare market: from what competitors say to drivers, to how trust works in immigrant communities, to what actually makes drivers switch apps. Here is what each area found.

There are really two kinds of rideshare apps when it comes to recruiting drivers: the ones that put real effort into their message, and the ones that barely try. Here is where each competitor landed.

Alto

Alto goes furthest of anyone. They offer drivers actual employment: a regular salary, health insurance, dental, vision, and a 401(k) retirement plan. Their pitch to drivers is "get paid for hours worked, not rides delivered." That is a direct rejection of the gig model. The catch is that Alto has been shrinking. They left several cities and cut around 300 jobs in 2024, so their promises may not apply everywhere.

Drivers Cooperative

This platform leads with two financial promises in one breath: higher pay than Uber and Lyft, plus a share of the company's profits. That combination, better pay now and ownership later, is powerful messaging.

Wridz

One sentence. Literally. Their entire driver recruitment page says "earn money on your own schedule as an independent driver on the Wridz platform." No earnings numbers, no testimonials, no community. They are relying entirely on word of mouth and personal connections to recruit drivers, not their website.

Drivers who are thinking about switching to a new platform are not just asking "will I earn more?" They are also asking "will this app still exist in six months?" Both questions have to be answered before a driver will commit, even partially.

This is why so many drivers run multiple apps at the same time. It is not disloyalty. It is risk management. They are waiting to see which platform proves itself before going all-in.

The research also found something important about trust and language. When a platform makes vague promises like "earn more" or "keep more of your money," skeptical drivers tune it out. They have heard it before. But when a platform gives a specific, checkable number or policy, like a flat monthly fee or a 90-day free trial, drivers can do the math themselves. That self-verification is what builds real trust.

Research on how two-sided marketplaces grow (platforms that need both drivers and riders) consistently points to three tactics that work in the early stages:

Stay in one area first. Do not spread thin. Dominate one city or neighborhood before expanding. HICH is already doing this correctly by focusing on the Twin Cities.

Find the connectors first. Every community has 10 to 20 people that everyone else trusts and listens to. Recruit them first, and they will bring others. This is significantly more effective than digital ads for communities where trust travels person-to-person.

Give early drivers certainty, not potential. Promises of future earnings do not convert nervous early adopters. A free trial or a guaranteed minimum gives drivers something concrete to hold onto. HICH's 3-month free trial hits this exactly right.

This section contains the most important verified findings in the entire report. These numbers and incidents are confirmed from real primary sources.

The economic reality

Source: MNCompass and Wilder Research, U.S. Census 5-year data (2019 to 2023).

What drivers face on the job

Racial abuse from passengers is not an occasional incident for immigrant drivers. It is described as a regular part of the job. Drivers have started buying cameras for their own protection. In January 2026, a U.S. citizen who drives for Uber was approached and surrounded by more than 13 Border Patrol agents at Minneapolis-Saint Paul Airport because of his accent. The incident was recorded and reported by CNN and Sahan Journal.

Brands that go up against dominant competitors, think the small local bank against Chase, or a worker-owned grocery against Whole Foods, tend to follow a consistent pattern when they succeed: they fight for a cause, not just a better price.

Drivers have heard "earn more with us" from every new app that has ever launched. It does not move them anymore. What does move them is a platform that is structurally different. One where the driver can verify the difference themselves, not just take the company's word for it.

Driver dissatisfaction with the big platforms is real and widespread. But the specific numbers that circulate online are often unreliable. The research tested several of the most commonly cited claims. Most did not hold up.

Four questions this research could not answer

Good research is honest about its limits. Here are four questions that came up but could not be resolved. They are worth keeping in mind for future decisions.

1. How much does an in-person conversation outperform a website for recruiting drivers?

   The research confirms that personal contact works better than digital for immigrant communities. But it could not say by how much, or how many in-person conversations are needed to reach a tipping point.

2. How do immigrant drivers weigh personal safety against income?

   The MSP airport incident was documented and real. Whether HICH should address immigration safety directly in its marketing, or whether doing so helps or hurts conversion, is unknown.

3. What works for second-generation immigrants?

   Drivers who grew up here may not respond to the same cultural signals as first-generation immigrants. HICH currently has no specific strategy for this segment.

4. Has any platform ever used independently verified earnings data as a trust tool?

   If HICH published third-party audited numbers showing what drivers actually take home compared to Uber and Lyft, that could be enormously powerful. No one appears to have done this yet.

What this changes for HICH

Here is the bottom line from all six areas of research: what HICH is doing right, what needs updating, and what is still missing.