RydenGo, a new ride-share startup created by Michael Pappas, is aiming to empower drivers by letting them keep 100 percent of their earnings and tips. Despite many challenging obstacles, such as a ride-share economy that is dominated by Uber and Lyft: even state regulators are aiming to block the new app.

Both Uber and Lyft currently set low prices for their drivers while collecting heavy commissions, the two ride-share giants have also been successful in lobbying against government regulation, both oppose unionization and offer workers zero benefits. This has become a problem as drivers struggle to make ends meet while also being burdened with the cost of maintaining their insured vehicle, making car payments, and simply keeping gas in their tank. Nonetheless, Uber and Lyft still remain uncontested in the ride-share market. “RydenGo came out of an advocacy group for drivers to receive better treatment and more freedom to run their businesses how they see fit,” said Pappas. “It’s about worker’s rights. I come from a pro-union family, and I always knew that workers needed to be protected no matter what.”

Pappas understands how hard it can be to get by, even more so when companies exploit the very workers who make their companies come to life. Pappas’s startup plans to unveil its Beta test this fall and it ultimately has the concept of a ride-sharing service that does not need to exploit its workers in order to make a profit. Instead, for a subscription fee of $20 per month, RydenGo drivers will be able to set their own prices, as well as keep 100 percent of their earned tips. Pappas’s simple concept may ultimately revolutionize the future of ride-share apps by putting the power back into the hands of the actual workers.

Even so, RydenGo will likely face challenges as they look to create their own space in the ride-share market. In the past, many other ride-share apps have all failed to equate to Uber and Lyft’s popularity. One key difference between RydenGo and these other failed startups though, is that these other apps essentially copied Uber’s work model while RydenGo plans to completely shift away from that concept and create their own thoroughly revised model focusing on the worker.

“To make change happen within the industry, it needs to be completely overhauled and revised.  To benefit everyone — especially the workers. Because let’s face it: they’re doing the hard work, they’re on the streets, they’re the ones who are driving at two in the morning. And they have to work at very shallow prices that benefit the corporation but don’t benefit them,” said Pappas.

By appealing to a workforce that is overworked and underpaid, RydenGo has the potential of stealing a wave a exploited drivers from both Uber and Lyft.

Through a regulatory loophole, both Uber and Lyft consider their employees ‘business owners’ which ultimately boosts company profits by cutting labor costs. Pappas views this as a form of exploitation because “This industry claims you’re an ‘entrepreneur,’ but you’re not able to determine your worth. Drivers are told, ‘You’re self-employed. But this is what you have to charge.’ And that’s a contradiction, is it not?”

Whether or not Uber and Lyft drivers are aware of this ‘exploitation,’ Pappas hopes by allowing drivers the ability to control what they charge and keep all of their tips, that the industry may slowly begin to change.

But before that change can happen, Pappas will have to deal with another roadblock. April13, Pappas was hit with a letter from the California Public Utilities Commission citing his lack of permits to conduct business in California and demanded that RydenGo cease and desist operations. There was only one problem: with no app available to download, no drivers on the streets and no advertising taking place, how could Pappas cease operations if his company was not yet operating?

“The government’s authority is protect the public. If you’re not in operation, you’re not interacting with the public and [the government] has no authority over you. This would essentially shut down 90 percent of Silicon Valley [startups]. I couldn’t believe it,” said Pappas who was not ready to go down without a fight.

He called the CPUC in an effort to get some clarity on the letter, and was only met with further confusion as the representative simply repeated what the letter stated. After Pappas presented his case, the representative then demanded him to take down his website instead, which Pappas refused.

“We’re not taking down any website. It’s a freedom of speech situation now. Can you imagine the government actually dictating you: ‘you need to take down a website?’” As of today Pappas and the CPUC are still currently in a standoff, and Pappas continues to refuse to take down his website because it is not an advertisement. The CPUC have yet to follow up on their threat of criminal prosecution.