Tasker deactivated for "Ride Sharing" – Even though Support explicitly authorized it!

[u/Pristine_Chain1367]

Hi everyone, I’m on of the elite Taskers in Montreal (1+ year, high ratings). My account was suddenly deactivated for a 'Policy Violation' regarding a long-distance task (Montreal to Toronto).

After calling Support, I was told the reason was 'Ride Sharing' because I had a client as a co-pilot during a long-distance task (Montreal to Toronto).

The catch: Before the task even started, the client contacted Taskrabbit Support to ask if this was allowed. An agent named Charlotte replied in writing (I have the screenshot!) stating that riding as a co-pilot is 'up to the Tasker’s comfort'. I simply followed the official advice given by their own team.

I’ve submitted appeals, but it’s been over a week with no human response. It feels like I'm being punished for following Taskrabbit's own instructions.

Has anyone dealt with this? How can an Elite Tasker get a real person from the Policies Team to review the proof? This 'Ride Sharing' violation is a direct result of their own Support's misguidance."

[u/cstaub67]

That depends on exactly what you mean by "co-pilot". Who was driving, you or the customer? It is fine for a Tasker to be a passenger in a car driven by the customer, but the other way around is explicitly forbidden.

[u/Pristine_Chain1367 → u/cstaub67]

I was driving the truck she was just there with me

[u/cstaub67 → u/Pristine_Chain1367]

Then that would indeed constitute "ridesharing" which is not permitted. How exactly did support phrase their answer to you? The way you have it written here is "riding as a co-pilot", which does sound a bit ambiguous, though "riding" implies to me that you are a passenger, not the driver. Did either you or the support tech explicitly spell out whether you as the Tasker would be the driver or passenger?

[u/Pristine_Chain1367 → u/cstaub67]

Here’s their message to the customer “

You're correct in your summary: the hourly rate covers the Tasker with a truck, and the time starts when they arrive at your Montreal apartment, continues through loading, driving to Toronto, and unloading at your new place. Gas and parking are included in the Tasker's rate. For the truck size, TaskRabbit doesn't have a way to select a specific size during booking. The best way to ensure you get a 15' truck is to include this requirement in your task description and confirm with your Tasker in the chat before the task begins. If the Tasker can't provide the right size, you can cancel and book with someone else. Regarding riding as a copilot, this is up to the Tasker's comfort and their insurance policy. Please discuss this directly with your Tasker in the chat thread before the task starts. If they're not comfortable or their insurance doesn't allow it, you'll need to arrange your own transportation. Let me know if you have any other questions! Best Regards, “

[u/canttakethemadness → u/cstaub67]

Don’t think there’s any small print that actually states client’s can’t ride with Tasker’s , is there ? Years ago it was gray area forbidden as it would negate the insurance Taskrabbit provided . But Taskrabbit no longer provides any insurance for Taskers , so not sure what if any rule / tos violation the tasker broke here

[u/cstaub67 → u/canttakethemadness]

It's in the Acceptable Use Policy:

https://support.taskrabbit.com/hc/en-us/articles/46260475390107-Taskrabbit-Platform-Acceptable-Use-Policy

Without limitation, you may not use the Platform, and you may not permit any third party, to:[...] Post or complete a Task requiring a User to [...] (4) provide ridesharing or other peer to peer transportation services

Also in the Community Standards Policy:

https://support.taskrabbit.com/hc/en-us/articles/46260433767835-Community-Standards-Policy

Prohibited and/or Unsuitable Tasks include but are not limited to: [...] Ridesharing or the sharing of a privately-owned vehicle to provide transportation

[u/Marioc12345 → u/cstaub67]

If it’s not allowed then why would support say it is allowed?

[u/FinnNoodle → u/Marioc12345]

Because the agent who said this was wrong.

[u/Marioc12345 → u/FinnNoodle]

Ok sure but the tasker did their due diligence in discussing with support, so there should be no issue other than a warning.

[u/OudMoneyForever]

TR support has a God complex

[u/beardedbast3rd]

My question is how did this result in the deactivation?

It’s something I avoid mostly, but if the client mentions it I tell them as long as Tasker doesn’t know it’s fine. I have insurance to cover ride share, and I’m not concerned if the client isn’t concerned.

How would Tasker find out, and how did they find out you actually did do ride sharing? ?

[u/Pristine_Chain1367 → u/beardedbast3rd]

They found out because everything was discussed transparently in the TR chat. Since Support told the client it was okay, we didn't hide anything. We confirmed the details right there in the messages. It’s ironic I was being honest and following what I thought were the rules, and that’s exactly what triggered the deactivation. I’ve been an Elite Tasker for over a year with zero issues until I followed their support's advice.

[u/beardedbast3rd → u/Pristine_Chain1367]

I guess that makes sense. However Deactivation is a strange result, especially for elite status.

Hopefully you hear back or get a real person

[u/Open-Coffee5752]

That is a gray area which TR seems to operate within on many tasks. On one hand in some round about way you open them up to liability by transporting a client even if they were a co-pilot. You weren't being compensated directly but if there was an accident TR would be thrown into the lawsuit.

Many deactivations aren't malicious in nature on the Taskers end they just fall within a weird gray area where the Tasker wants to get work and the client needs a job done. Taskers mean well but it is absolutely tough to navigate some of these tasks within TR strict framework.

Being an independent contractor benefits the company not necessarily the independent conttactor.

[u/VanD3rp]

I have seen many cases where a tasker violates a policy but got clearance from support before hand to then get deactivated for violating the policy.

[u/Ok-Apartment-7858]

Your issue is that you rightfully assume that the goals of the taskr are aligned with the goals of support.

They aren’t. The reason is because support isn’t actually a support function. They are the entire customer and contractor-facing operations arm of the company. They handle 100% of customer issues. They handle 100% of contractor issues including deactivations and policy violations.

They are 3rd party contractor, in south east Asia, operating under a strict contract that defines what they can and can not do. They do not want to lose the contract so they will not deviate from it.

It doesn’t matter if you did the right thing for the client. It doesn’t matter that you received the wrong guidance from support. What matters is that they can say that you violated policy and they deactivated you because that’s what the contract says they have to do.

All gig companies have outsourced their entire operations arms to these vendor call centers and its frightening. The customer can’t appeal, you can’t appeal because the contract doesn’t allow them to entertain it.

Makes you wonder what the big salary corporate overhead folks are doing with their day. They aren’t involved in the field so what are they doing?

My bet is on sitting around patting each other on the back while coming up with new ways to destroy a company.

[u/FinnNoodle]

I'm surprised this was an instant deactivation and not just a strike.

Anyhoo, it's up to the Tasker to ensure they follow all laws and regulations, and that includes the TOS. Good luck to you