If you have the app open, you need to take the fare - your leaving the app open and live is a sign that you are in the area and available - it puts your car on the map and everything.
If you do not have the app open, they do not reach across the ether and demand you turn it on or lose your ability to take future fares.
Your argument is misrepresentative like whoa.
For funsies, I cracked open the app and tried to find a pick up location where the ETA was > 10 minutes. I found the furthest point in Seagate and Riker's Island. Everywhere else, there are cabs running and ready for fares.
Contrast this to standard dispatch where you need to call, tell them where you're coming from, tell them where you're going to, settle on a price, and after 3 minutes of conversation have them tell you a car is 5 minutes away. (it's really 20 minutes away)
WTF kind of dispatch is your city running? When I call dispatch, I tell them where I want to be picked up, and they tell me how long before someone arrives. No one knows where my destination is except for myself, and the driver after they arrive and I tell them where to go.
It's really standard in NYC to ask where you are, where you are going, how many people, etc.
ALWAYS get the price from the dispatch though, and argue if it sounds too high then, because the drivers will fuck you over and once you arrive it is hard to deny payment.
It seems to me that allowing dispatch to ask those questions is just begging for trouble, like allowing employers to ask female job applicants if they have children. Dispatch doesn't need the information, and the cabbie having that information before accepting the fare is useless to them, and just encourages discrimination.
Are they sending a prius, black car, or SUV?
Are they sending a driver almost off shift on a 1.5 hour ride?
And finally, this one protects you, are you "the consumer" aware of what this unmetered trip is going to cost before you step into the vehicle?
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
If you have the app open, you need to take the fare - your leaving the app open and live is a sign that you are in the area and available - it puts your car on the map and everything.
If you do not have the app open, they do not reach across the ether and demand you turn it on or lose your ability to take future fares.
Your argument is misrepresentative like whoa.
For funsies, I cracked open the app and tried to find a pick up location where the ETA was > 10 minutes. I found the furthest point in Seagate and Riker's Island. Everywhere else, there are cabs running and ready for fares.
Contrast this to standard dispatch where you need to call, tell them where you're coming from, tell them where you're going to, settle on a price, and after 3 minutes of conversation have them tell you a car is 5 minutes away. (it's really 20 minutes away)
WTF kind of dispatch is your city running? When I call dispatch, I tell them where I want to be picked up, and they tell me how long before someone arrives. No one knows where my destination is except for myself, and the driver after they arrive and I tell them where to go.
If they don't know where you're going, how do they quote you the price?
They don't.
They send the Taxi, I get in, tell them my destination, they start the meter, and once we arrive, I pay what the meter shows.
If you have a smart phone, you can do some rough math using trip adviser or some other phone app to calculate the distance, and then apply that to the pickup flat rate + mileage rate.
I suppose that would be a problem for people that are cash poor and have no available credit, but at that point, maybe they should be taking the bus / train.
MWO: Adamski
+2
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
If you have the app open, you need to take the fare - your leaving the app open and live is a sign that you are in the area and available - it puts your car on the map and everything.
If you do not have the app open, they do not reach across the ether and demand you turn it on or lose your ability to take future fares.
Your argument is misrepresentative like whoa.
For funsies, I cracked open the app and tried to find a pick up location where the ETA was > 10 minutes. I found the furthest point in Seagate and Riker's Island. Everywhere else, there are cabs running and ready for fares.
Contrast this to standard dispatch where you need to call, tell them where you're coming from, tell them where you're going to, settle on a price, and after 3 minutes of conversation have them tell you a car is 5 minutes away. (it's really 20 minutes away)
WTF kind of dispatch is your city running? When I call dispatch, I tell them where I want to be picked up, and they tell me how long before someone arrives. No one knows where my destination is except for myself, and the driver after they arrive and I tell them where to go.
If they don't know where you're going, how do they quote you the price?
They don't.
They send the Taxi, I get in, tell them my destination, they start the meter, and once we arrive, I pay what the meter shows.
If you have a smart phone, you can do some rough math using trip adviser or some other phone app to calculate the distance, and then apply that to the pickup flat rate + mileage rate.
I suppose that would be a problem for people that are cash poor and have no available credit, but at that point, maybe they should be taking the bus / train.
Here's the thing - the "cabs" you call by phone in NYC are unmetered. There is no meter. They can quote you literally ANYTHING and if you want to fight it you need to call the local city hotline (311) and get into a protracted fight.
it sucks.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
If you have the app open, you need to take the fare - your leaving the app open and live is a sign that you are in the area and available - it puts your car on the map and everything.
If you do not have the app open, they do not reach across the ether and demand you turn it on or lose your ability to take future fares.
Your argument is misrepresentative like whoa.
For funsies, I cracked open the app and tried to find a pick up location where the ETA was > 10 minutes. I found the furthest point in Seagate and Riker's Island. Everywhere else, there are cabs running and ready for fares.
Contrast this to standard dispatch where you need to call, tell them where you're coming from, tell them where you're going to, settle on a price, and after 3 minutes of conversation have them tell you a car is 5 minutes away. (it's really 20 minutes away)
WTF kind of dispatch is your city running? When I call dispatch, I tell them where I want to be picked up, and they tell me how long before someone arrives. No one knows where my destination is except for myself, and the driver after they arrive and I tell them where to go.
If they don't know where you're going, how do they quote you the price?
They don't.
They send the Taxi, I get in, tell them my destination, they start the meter, and once we arrive, I pay what the meter shows.
If you have a smart phone, you can do some rough math using trip adviser or some other phone app to calculate the distance, and then apply that to the pickup flat rate + mileage rate.
I suppose that would be a problem for people that are cash poor and have no available credit, but at that point, maybe they should be taking the bus / train.
Here's the thing - the "cabs" you call by phone in NYC are unmetered. There is no meter. They can quote you literally ANYTHING and if you want to fight it you need to call the local city hotline (311) and get into a protracted fight.
it sucks.
Ugh, the only fix for something like that would be for you to call dispatch, they send the cab, then once it picks you up, you or the driver call dispatch for a quote on the trip with the destination.
Alternately, add meters to the livery service, or a flat rental rate based on time.
NYC really fucked up with this system of charging Taxi Cabs for a medallion, and letting Livery get away with not having to buy one.
MWO: Adamski
+1
Options
SixCaches Tweets in the mainframe cyberhexRegistered Userregular
Much like in discussion about housing or cost of living or I'm sure a host of other topics, when it comes to taxis and for hire cabs and the laws and history thereof, NYC is kind of it's own special animal.
can you feel the struggle within?
+2
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
If you have the app open, you need to take the fare - your leaving the app open and live is a sign that you are in the area and available - it puts your car on the map and everything.
If you do not have the app open, they do not reach across the ether and demand you turn it on or lose your ability to take future fares.
Your argument is misrepresentative like whoa.
For funsies, I cracked open the app and tried to find a pick up location where the ETA was > 10 minutes. I found the furthest point in Seagate and Riker's Island. Everywhere else, there are cabs running and ready for fares.
Contrast this to standard dispatch where you need to call, tell them where you're coming from, tell them where you're going to, settle on a price, and after 3 minutes of conversation have them tell you a car is 5 minutes away. (it's really 20 minutes away)
WTF kind of dispatch is your city running? When I call dispatch, I tell them where I want to be picked up, and they tell me how long before someone arrives. No one knows where my destination is except for myself, and the driver after they arrive and I tell them where to go.
If they don't know where you're going, how do they quote you the price?
They don't.
They send the Taxi, I get in, tell them my destination, they start the meter, and once we arrive, I pay what the meter shows.
If you have a smart phone, you can do some rough math using trip adviser or some other phone app to calculate the distance, and then apply that to the pickup flat rate + mileage rate.
I suppose that would be a problem for people that are cash poor and have no available credit, but at that point, maybe they should be taking the bus / train.
Here's the thing - the "cabs" you call by phone in NYC are unmetered. There is no meter. They can quote you literally ANYTHING and if you want to fight it you need to call the local city hotline (311) and get into a protracted fight.
it sucks.
Ugh, the only fix for something like that would be for you to call dispatch, they send the cab, then once it picks you up, you or the driver call dispatch for a quote on the trip with the destination.
Alternately, add meters to the livery service, or a flat rental rate based on time.
NYC really fucked up with this system of charging Taxi Cabs for a medallion, and letting Livery get away with not having to buy one.
Or systems that offer what uber does, which is offer a range of cost up front, a level of promised vehicle quality, and an easy to use app that handles the transaction and shows you where the vehicle is while you wait.
Supposedly other traditional cab companies have this shit happening in other cities. At least the GPS + upfront pricing bit.
I am not an uber fanboy so much as I am a fan of the user experience. If others can ape the user experience and provide something just as good to the drivers and passengers I am game.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
If you have the app open, you need to take the fare - your leaving the app open and live is a sign that you are in the area and available - it puts your car on the map and everything.
If you do not have the app open, they do not reach across the ether and demand you turn it on or lose your ability to take future fares.
Your argument is misrepresentative like whoa.
For funsies, I cracked open the app and tried to find a pick up location where the ETA was > 10 minutes. I found the furthest point in Seagate and Riker's Island. Everywhere else, there are cabs running and ready for fares.
Contrast this to standard dispatch where you need to call, tell them where you're coming from, tell them where you're going to, settle on a price, and after 3 minutes of conversation have them tell you a car is 5 minutes away. (it's really 20 minutes away)
WTF kind of dispatch is your city running? When I call dispatch, I tell them where I want to be picked up, and they tell me how long before someone arrives. No one knows where my destination is except for myself, and the driver after they arrive and I tell them where to go.
If they don't know where you're going, how do they quote you the price?
They don't.
They send the Taxi, I get in, tell them my destination, they start the meter, and once we arrive, I pay what the meter shows.
If you have a smart phone, you can do some rough math using trip adviser or some other phone app to calculate the distance, and then apply that to the pickup flat rate + mileage rate.
I suppose that would be a problem for people that are cash poor and have no available credit, but at that point, maybe they should be taking the bus / train.
Here's the thing - the "cabs" you call by phone in NYC are unmetered. There is no meter. They can quote you literally ANYTHING and if you want to fight it you need to call the local city hotline (311) and get into a protracted fight.
it sucks.
Ugh, the only fix for something like that would be for you to call dispatch, they send the cab, then once it picks you up, you or the driver call dispatch for a quote on the trip with the destination.
Alternately, add meters to the livery service, or a flat rental rate based on time.
NYC really fucked up with this system of charging Taxi Cabs for a medallion, and letting Livery get away with not having to buy one.
Or systems that offer what uber does, which is offer a range of cost up front, a level of prosied vehicle quality, and an easy to use app that handles the transaction and shows you where the vehicle is while you wait.
Supposedly other traditional cab companies have this shit happening in other cities. At least the GPS + upfront pricing bit.
I am not an uber fanboy so much as I am a fan of the user experience. If others can ape the user experience and provide something just as good to the drivers and passengers I am game.
Yeah, I don't really hate Uber, I just want them to play by the rules that every other employer / service has to abide by. If the rules are bad, then agitate for them to be changed.
Otherwise, I find civil disobedience on the part of profit seeking corporations to improve their margins suspect.
If you have the app open, you need to take the fare - your leaving the app open and live is a sign that you are in the area and available - it puts your car on the map and everything.
If you do not have the app open, they do not reach across the ether and demand you turn it on or lose your ability to take future fares.
Your argument is misrepresentative like whoa.
For funsies, I cracked open the app and tried to find a pick up location where the ETA was > 10 minutes. I found the furthest point in Seagate and Riker's Island. Everywhere else, there are cabs running and ready for fares.
Contrast this to standard dispatch where you need to call, tell them where you're coming from, tell them where you're going to, settle on a price, and after 3 minutes of conversation have them tell you a car is 5 minutes away. (it's really 20 minutes away)
WTF kind of dispatch is your city running? When I call dispatch, I tell them where I want to be picked up, and they tell me how long before someone arrives. No one knows where my destination is except for myself, and the driver after they arrive and I tell them where to go.
If they don't know where you're going, how do they quote you the price?
They don't.
They send the Taxi, I get in, tell them my destination, they start the meter, and once we arrive, I pay what the meter shows.
If you have a smart phone, you can do some rough math using trip adviser or some other phone app to calculate the distance, and then apply that to the pickup flat rate + mileage rate.
I suppose that would be a problem for people that are cash poor and have no available credit, but at that point, maybe they should be taking the bus / train.
Here's the thing - the "cabs" you call by phone in NYC are unmetered. There is no meter. They can quote you literally ANYTHING and if you want to fight it you need to call the local city hotline (311) and get into a protracted fight.
it sucks.
Ugh, the only fix for something like that would be for you to call dispatch, they send the cab, then once it picks you up, you or the driver call dispatch for a quote on the trip with the destination.
Alternately, add meters to the livery service, or a flat rental rate based on time.
NYC really fucked up with this system of charging Taxi Cabs for a medallion, and letting Livery get away with not having to buy one.
Or systems that offer what uber does, which is offer a range of cost up front, a level of promised vehicle quality, and an easy to use app that handles the transaction and shows you where the vehicle is while you wait.
Supposedly other traditional cab companies have this shit happening in other cities. At least the GPS + upfront pricing bit.
I am not an uber fanboy so much as I am a fan of the user experience. If others can ape the user experience and provide something just as good to the drivers and passengers I am game.
Last time I was in Chicago for business, I used a local dispatcher that had an app-based system for dispatch. I was able to set up a cab ride to O'Hare via app, track the cab on my phone, and pay by credit card through their tablet - based system. The vehicles were a bit older, but still clean and pleasant to ride in.
If you have the app open, you need to take the fare - your leaving the app open and live is a sign that you are in the area and available - it puts your car on the map and everything.
If you do not have the app open, they do not reach across the ether and demand you turn it on or lose your ability to take future fares.
Your argument is misrepresentative like whoa.
For funsies, I cracked open the app and tried to find a pick up location where the ETA was > 10 minutes. I found the furthest point in Seagate and Riker's Island. Everywhere else, there are cabs running and ready for fares.
Contrast this to standard dispatch where you need to call, tell them where you're coming from, tell them where you're going to, settle on a price, and after 3 minutes of conversation have them tell you a car is 5 minutes away. (it's really 20 minutes away)
WTF kind of dispatch is your city running? When I call dispatch, I tell them where I want to be picked up, and they tell me how long before someone arrives. No one knows where my destination is except for myself, and the driver after they arrive and I tell them where to go.
If they don't know where you're going, how do they quote you the price?
They don't.
They send the Taxi, I get in, tell them my destination, they start the meter, and once we arrive, I pay what the meter shows.
If you have a smart phone, you can do some rough math using trip adviser or some other phone app to calculate the distance, and then apply that to the pickup flat rate + mileage rate.
I suppose that would be a problem for people that are cash poor and have no available credit, but at that point, maybe they should be taking the bus / train.
Here's the thing - the "cabs" you call by phone in NYC are unmetered. There is no meter. They can quote you literally ANYTHING and if you want to fight it you need to call the local city hotline (311) and get into a protracted fight.
it sucks.
Ugh, the only fix for something like that would be for you to call dispatch, they send the cab, then once it picks you up, you or the driver call dispatch for a quote on the trip with the destination.
Alternately, add meters to the livery service, or a flat rental rate based on time.
NYC really fucked up with this system of charging Taxi Cabs for a medallion, and letting Livery get away with not having to buy one.
Or systems that offer what uber does, which is offer a range of cost up front, a level of prosied vehicle quality, and an easy to use app that handles the transaction and shows you where the vehicle is while you wait.
Supposedly other traditional cab companies have this shit happening in other cities. At least the GPS + upfront pricing bit.
I am not an uber fanboy so much as I am a fan of the user experience. If others can ape the user experience and provide something just as good to the drivers and passengers I am game.
Yeah, I don't really hate Uber, I just want them to play by the rules that every other employer / service has to abide by. If the rules are bad, then agitate for them to be changed.
Otherwise, I find civil disobedience on the part of profit seeking corporations to improve their margins suspect.
I am comfortable saying that Napster and Kazaa were very much in the wrong legally, but they represented a shift in what consumers expected when it came to easy, fast access to content digitally.
And then the real industries got on board with it and today we have itunes, steam, netflix, hulu, xbox live/psn, etc. etc.
It is possible that Uber ends up being one of those real businesses at the end of the day, even as they obviously engaged in illegal tactics on the way. But what they are offering right now is exactly what the people want, and even a fair number of drivers want as well. It is possible that the major cab consortiums figure out they need to evolve or die, and develop a nationally shared app with an API they can connect their dispatch systems into, which follows the local laws of the land and provides a seamless experience to the end users using it.
But right now, getting mad at uber is very much like getting mad at napster. It's super popular, questionably legal depending on zip codes, and most of its most vocal detractors would probably use it in a pinch because what it offers is simply better.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
hmm - maybe I should write this app.
Nobody steal my idea.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
the problem I've had trying to use cab company apps is they all kind of suck since they're still being developed as a secondary concern
Uber's system is rull polished
EDIT:Flywheel is of course it's own thing so I assume they're trying to make it good. But they have to work with these cab companies that for the most part want to do their own thing so it kind of ends up a mess. Uber's integrated all the way through so it works better for them.
Aioua on
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
+1
Options
SixCaches Tweets in the mainframe cyberhexRegistered Userregular
Uber offers a better experience for many riders and drivers in many places. Many of the local laws governing cabs are outdated and anti-consumer in the face of new technology. Laws should be obeyed and drivers should be able to make a living. Riders should be safe and comfortable.
Uber is making things better in some ways but isn't doing everything right everywhere and should be kept in check. Laws need to change though. Some business models may not make sense.
I'm not sure who I'm responding to but I feel like I've been pro-Uber in this thread and wanted to lay out my feelings.
can you feel the struggle within?
+4
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
If you have the app open, you need to take the fare - your leaving the app open and live is a sign that you are in the area and available - it puts your car on the map and everything.
If you do not have the app open, they do not reach across the ether and demand you turn it on or lose your ability to take future fares.
Your argument is misrepresentative like whoa.
For funsies, I cracked open the app and tried to find a pick up location where the ETA was > 10 minutes. I found the furthest point in Seagate and Riker's Island. Everywhere else, there are cabs running and ready for fares.
Contrast this to standard dispatch where you need to call, tell them where you're coming from, tell them where you're going to, settle on a price, and after 3 minutes of conversation have them tell you a car is 5 minutes away. (it's really 20 minutes away)
WTF kind of dispatch is your city running? When I call dispatch, I tell them where I want to be picked up, and they tell me how long before someone arrives. No one knows where my destination is except for myself, and the driver after they arrive and I tell them where to go.
If they don't know where you're going, how do they quote you the price?
They don't.
They send the Taxi, I get in, tell them my destination, they start the meter, and once we arrive, I pay what the meter shows.
If you have a smart phone, you can do some rough math using trip adviser or some other phone app to calculate the distance, and then apply that to the pickup flat rate + mileage rate.
I suppose that would be a problem for people that are cash poor and have no available credit, but at that point, maybe they should be taking the bus / train.
Here's the thing - the "cabs" you call by phone in NYC are unmetered. There is no meter. They can quote you literally ANYTHING and if you want to fight it you need to call the local city hotline (311) and get into a protracted fight.
it sucks.
Ugh, the only fix for something like that would be for you to call dispatch, they send the cab, then once it picks you up, you or the driver call dispatch for a quote on the trip with the destination.
Alternately, add meters to the livery service, or a flat rental rate based on time.
NYC really fucked up with this system of charging Taxi Cabs for a medallion, and letting Livery get away with not having to buy one.
Or systems that offer what uber does, which is offer a range of cost up front, a level of promised vehicle quality, and an easy to use app that handles the transaction and shows you where the vehicle is while you wait.
Supposedly other traditional cab companies have this shit happening in other cities. At least the GPS + upfront pricing bit.
I am not an uber fanboy so much as I am a fan of the user experience. If others can ape the user experience and provide something just as good to the drivers and passengers I am game.
Last time I was in Chicago for business, I used a local dispatcher that had an app-based system for dispatch. I was able to set up a cab ride to O'Hare via app, track the cab on my phone, and pay by credit card through their tablet - based system. The vehicles were a bit older, but still clean and pleasant to ride in.
I really don't want a bunch of fiefdoms though where every city has 2-3 different apps; for a traveller who uses uber it has been invaluable going to one place that just works.
I like seeing the cab companies making progress, but the next step is setting up a common marketplace that their services are offered on.
This would offer the uber experience, but allow for potentially hundreds/thousands of cab companies to participate, and the free market will let ratings sort out the winners from the losers.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
+1
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
weird, I forget that wiki tags do stuff here.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
If you have the app open, you need to take the fare - your leaving the app open and live is a sign that you are in the area and available - it puts your car on the map and everything.
If you do not have the app open, they do not reach across the ether and demand you turn it on or lose your ability to take future fares.
Your argument is misrepresentative like whoa.
If you have the app open, you have to take any fare Uber assigns you or be severely penalized (under the old system). Regardless of whether or not that fare is underwater for you or not.
This was such a serious issue that Uber just agreed to significantly relax the rules around declining fares as part of their settlement over employee status.
So no, the argument is not misrepresentative at all. You're just bringing in an irrelevant point about whether or not the app is off.
Yeah in /most/ areas this is rarely a problem. But if you have the app on and are the closest driver they can ping you, even if it's like ten miles away. I know I've see that a couple times, where my estimated wait is like 20 mins.
The one time I went ahead and requested, I saw the car sit and sit and sit, in a neighborhood, and realized eventually that was probably a guy running the app while at home, and taking his sweet time getting to me.
Or just not intending to come at all, but presumably if I cancel its better for him than if he declines?
You know Ive never made it that far south in Brooklyn but I really doubt Red Hook is a bustling metroscape with high density shopping. If it's anything like Brooklyn heights then I am 100% not surprised you can't catch a cab there. Low density low foot traffic few destinations.
And Uber actually has the same issue - drivers naturally congregate to those hub areas for the same reason John Dillinger robbed banks: that's where the money is. Staying in or near areas of high demand is the smart play, since it reduces your dead time. Their solution is to use the stick - if you're the one to get the call for a ride a good distance away, you have to go, or take a hit against your acceptance metrics.
That isn't the same issue at all.
The original issue is that cabs aren't in the area at all and essentially unusable there. The issue you've brought up is that Uber drivers do go to those areas but don't get paid enough to do so.
Both suck but they aren't the same.
The obvious solution is to increase Uber driver pay and for cab companies to start using an app system to locate fares and charge accordingly.
Cab brokerages here do have apps. Also websites where you can order a cab. And... actually, a lot of people still just call them up, because a lot of cab-riders aren't of the smartphone generation.
I continue to be baffled at all these explanations that Uber is great because Uber does X that cabs don't, and I'm always just like, yeah, cabs here do X and Uber's still here anyways.
Cabs in most places don't though. The quality of service and utility varies wildly with the local area, laws, and system.
It's genuinely great that they do where you live but that isn't the case for a lot of people posting here.
For me, I'm responding more to these arguments that "Uber makes things better! Therefore we should let Uber do whatever it wants however it wants!" esp. w.r.t. violating/rewriting existing labour laws and insurance regulations. This is a common sentiment in this thread, though it's never really elucidated, but it's essentially, "My local taxicab situation sucks, so to change it, we should also rewrite labour law and insurance law," and my response is that that is throwing out the baby with the bathwater, and why don't you just consider changing the bathwater instead, because the baby has real legitimate value and benefit.
And, also, after you throw out the baby, you're refilling the bath with something that can't ever replace the bathwater. Also it's going to spoil and go bad after a few years.
If that's who you're responding to then you should quote them and not me. I haven't said anything approaching Uber should be able to do anything they want. As far as I know no one has. That honestly just reads as a bad faith interpretation of posts.
You know Ive never made it that far south in Brooklyn but I really doubt Red Hook is a bustling metroscape with high density shopping. If it's anything like Brooklyn heights then I am 100% not surprised you can't catch a cab there. Low density low foot traffic few destinations.
And Uber actually has the same issue - drivers naturally congregate to those hub areas for the same reason John Dillinger robbed banks: that's where the money is. Staying in or near areas of high demand is the smart play, since it reduces your dead time. Their solution is to use the stick - if you're the one to get the call for a ride a good distance away, you have to go, or take a hit against your acceptance metrics.
That isn't the same issue at all.
The original issue is that cabs aren't in the area at all and essentially unusable there. The issue you've brought up is that Uber drivers do go to those areas but don't get paid enough to do so.
Both suck but they aren't the same.
The obvious solution is to increase Uber driver pay and for cab companies to start using an app system to locate fares and charge accordingly.
Cab brokerages here do have apps. Also websites where you can order a cab. And... actually, a lot of people still just call them up, because a lot of cab-riders aren't of the smartphone generation.
I continue to be baffled at all these explanations that Uber is great because Uber does X that cabs don't, and I'm always just like, yeah, cabs here do X and Uber's still here anyways.
Cabs in most places don't though. The quality of service and utility varies wildly with the local area, laws, and system.
It's genuinely great that they do where you live but that isn't the case for a lot of people posting here.
For me, I'm responding more to these arguments that "Uber makes things better! Therefore we should let Uber do whatever it wants however it wants!" esp. w.r.t. violating/rewriting existing labour laws and insurance regulations. This is a common sentiment in this thread, though it's never really elucidated, but it's essentially, "My local taxicab situation sucks, so to change it, we should also rewrite labour law and insurance law," and my response is that that is throwing out the baby with the bathwater, and why don't you just consider changing the bathwater instead, because the baby has real legitimate value and benefit.
And, also, after you throw out the baby, you're refilling the bath with something that can't ever replace the bathwater. Also it's going to spoil and go bad after a few years.
If that's who you're responding to then you should quote them and not me. I haven't said anything approaching Uber should be able to do anything they want. As far as I know no one has. That honestly just reads as a bad faith interpretation of posts.
I'm also super unclear how revisiting or examining labor/insurance law necessarily means "let Uber do what the fuck ever" anyway. It's not unfathomable that there are aspects of labor/insurance law that are suboptimal, and may need revision, while at the same time imposing (and enforcing) significant regulation on app-based livery.
, as it comes across as dismissing objections to Uber as being politically motivated.
I don't fully agree with spool's position, but it would be idiotic to deny that it does play some part. A lot of the opposition drummed up against uber is coming from politically entrenched taxi and limo commissions who have earned themselves a pretty fantastic seat at the table over the years, and anything offering faster, better, more transparent services to the populace is a threat to their business model.
This is the RIAA/MPAA losing their shit at the pirates in the 80s, 90s and early 00's, back when they were CERTAIN people would be buying their music and movies on tapes and discs forever and had no desire to compete against the admittedly illegal digital offerings, but instead leverage their clout and legal backing to try and crush the usurpers.
Problem being - the usurpers were providing a more convenient and in some ways superior product. It took those guys a long time for things like iTunes, Hulu, Netflix etc. to carve out a space that offered the good service and still sate the rights holders, who had to come to the table admitting that they needed to change with the times.
Exactly. If taxis could get a DMCA equivalent they would do so in a heartbeat, with assistance from their political allies.
You know Ive never made it that far south in Brooklyn but I really doubt Red Hook is a bustling metroscape with high density shopping. If it's anything like Brooklyn heights then I am 100% not surprised you can't catch a cab there. Low density low foot traffic few destinations.
And Uber actually has the same issue - drivers naturally congregate to those hub areas for the same reason John Dillinger robbed banks: that's where the money is. Staying in or near areas of high demand is the smart play, since it reduces your dead time. Their solution is to use the stick - if you're the one to get the call for a ride a good distance away, you have to go, or take a hit against your acceptance metrics.
That isn't the same issue at all.
The original issue is that cabs aren't in the area at all and essentially unusable there. The issue you've brought up is that Uber drivers do go to those areas but don't get paid enough to do so.
Both suck but they aren't the same.
The obvious solution is to increase Uber driver pay and for cab companies to start using an app system to locate fares and charge accordingly.
Cab brokerages here do have apps. Also websites where you can order a cab. And... actually, a lot of people still just call them up, because a lot of cab-riders aren't of the smartphone generation.
I continue to be baffled at all these explanations that Uber is great because Uber does X that cabs don't, and I'm always just like, yeah, cabs here do X and Uber's still here anyways.
Cabs in most places don't though. The quality of service and utility varies wildly with the local area, laws, and system.
It's genuinely great that they do where you live but that isn't the case for a lot of people posting here.
For me, I'm responding more to these arguments that "Uber makes things better! Therefore we should let Uber do whatever it wants however it wants!" esp. w.r.t. violating/rewriting existing labour laws and insurance regulations. This is a common sentiment in this thread, though it's never really elucidated, but it's essentially, "My local taxicab situation sucks, so to change it, we should also rewrite labour law and insurance law," and my response is that that is throwing out the baby with the bathwater, and why don't you just consider changing the bathwater instead, because the baby has real legitimate value and benefit.
And, also, after you throw out the baby, you're refilling the bath with something that can't ever replace the bathwater. Also it's going to spoil and go bad after a few years.
If that's who you're responding to then you should quote them and not me. I haven't said anything approaching Uber should be able to do anything they want. As far as I know no one has. That honestly just reads as a bad faith interpretation of posts.
I'm also super unclear how revisiting or examining labor/insurance law necessarily means "let Uber do what the fuck ever" anyway. It's not unfathomable that there are aspects of labor/insurance law that are suboptimal, and may need revision, while at the same time imposing (and enforcing) significant regulation on app-based livery.
Seems like a false dichotomy to me.
If you can't see where people are saying that Uber should just be allowed to steamroll currently existing regulatory schemes, then I don't know what thread you're reading.
It's funny how whenever the issues with Uber's system come up, the topic always gets turned to traditional cabs. It's almost like the system can't be defended, so there's some need to point to traditional cabs to say "hey, at least we're not as shitty as those guys!"
Because in pretty much every way, uber is an improvement over the status quo for both drivers and users. It's very much a "dont let perfect be the enemy of good" situation.
As for whether labour laws needs to be amended to support things like Uber, that's a broader conversation, but if you want to make the case, then make it. Because "cabs suck in my city," does not translate into, "we should rewrite labour laws across the US to further weaken them." I'm sorry that your local government sucks at regulating taxis and building public transit, but please don't drag me into your neocapitalist dystopia just because you want to save $5 and 5 minutes on a hailed ride.
You know Ive never made it that far south in Brooklyn but I really doubt Red Hook is a bustling metroscape with high density shopping. If it's anything like Brooklyn heights then I am 100% not surprised you can't catch a cab there. Low density low foot traffic few destinations.
And Uber actually has the same issue - drivers naturally congregate to those hub areas for the same reason John Dillinger robbed banks: that's where the money is. Staying in or near areas of high demand is the smart play, since it reduces your dead time. Their solution is to use the stick - if you're the one to get the call for a ride a good distance away, you have to go, or take a hit against your acceptance metrics.
That isn't the same issue at all.
The original issue is that cabs aren't in the area at all and essentially unusable there. The issue you've brought up is that Uber drivers do go to those areas but don't get paid enough to do so.
Both suck but they aren't the same.
The obvious solution is to increase Uber driver pay and for cab companies to start using an app system to locate fares and charge accordingly.
Cab brokerages here do have apps. Also websites where you can order a cab. And... actually, a lot of people still just call them up, because a lot of cab-riders aren't of the smartphone generation.
I continue to be baffled at all these explanations that Uber is great because Uber does X that cabs don't, and I'm always just like, yeah, cabs here do X and Uber's still here anyways.
Cabs in most places don't though. The quality of service and utility varies wildly with the local area, laws, and system.
It's genuinely great that they do where you live but that isn't the case for a lot of people posting here.
For me, I'm responding more to these arguments that "Uber makes things better! Therefore we should let Uber do whatever it wants however it wants!" esp. w.r.t. violating/rewriting existing labour laws and insurance regulations. This is a common sentiment in this thread, though it's never really elucidated, but it's essentially, "My local taxicab situation sucks, so to change it, we should also rewrite labour law and insurance law," and my response is that that is throwing out the baby with the bathwater, and why don't you just consider changing the bathwater instead, because the baby has real legitimate value and benefit.
And, also, after you throw out the baby, you're refilling the bath with something that can't ever replace the bathwater. Also it's going to spoil and go bad after a few years.
If that's who you're responding to then you should quote them and not me. I haven't said anything approaching Uber should be able to do anything they want. As far as I know no one has. That honestly just reads as a bad faith interpretation of posts.
I'm also super unclear how revisiting or examining labor/insurance law necessarily means "let Uber do what the fuck ever" anyway. It's not unfathomable that there are aspects of labor/insurance law that are suboptimal, and may need revision, while at the same time imposing (and enforcing) significant regulation on app-based livery.
Seems like a false dichotomy to me.
If you can't see where people are saying that Uber should just be allowed to steamroll currently existing regulatory schemes, then I don't know what thread you're reading.
This one?
Few if any are suggesting Uber be free of regulation.
Some are suggesting that some aspects of the regulatory scheme they steamrolled were shitty, and led to shitty outcomes.
But that doesn't require that the poster support a future absent any and all regulation.
You...I mean you do....you /realize/ that "let uber do whatever it wants however it wants" and allowing "existing regulatory schemes" to be steamrolled are not the same thing? That there can be a different, new regulatory scheme adopted, and Uber can be wrangled into adhering to it?
Basically existing regulatory schemes in some markets were (or are) utter shit, and few will mourn their passing.
But yeah, uber needs to be regulated, and those regulations must be enforced.
What goal should a hypothetical new set of regulations on Uber serve?
Ensuring drivers can realistically clear a minimum wage after expenses would be one. Probably a primary concern for me. May be true in your market, less so in others.
Routine safety inspections in vehicles over three years old may be another. Nothing ridiculous, beyond what some states already require. Might not be a terrible idea though.
I'm pretty flexible really. Basically less than the previous status quo in many cities, but more than nothing.
I quoted a post where AngelHedgie says, "But whenever Uber's model is criticized, the response in this thread is, 'But not as much as cabs!'" and Deebaser explains why that is.
Or spool32 claims that efforts to force Uber to follow existing labour law re. employees vs contractors is an effort by entrenched political interests to kill it.
Who here is putting forth an argument as to what currently non-existent regulations Uber should be governed by? All I see are people who are saying that Uber should not violate existing regulations, that Uber's business model is shitty and exploitative (or not), and people who are saying that Uber is better than cabs. And Six.
I mean completely unregulated businesses can be pretty awful, especially when customer safety is remotely involved. An unlicensed and unregulated uber driver is about as reasonable as an unregulated food truck in that regard.
Basically existing regulatory schemes in some markets were (or are) utter shit, and few will mourn their passing.
But yeah, uber needs to be regulated, and those regulations must be enforced.
What goal should a hypothetical new set of regulations on Uber serve?
Ensuring drivers can realistically clear a minimum wage after expenses would be one. Probably a primary concern for me. May be true in your market, less so in others.
Routine safety inspections in vehicles over three years old may be another. Nothing ridiculous, beyond what some states already require. Might not be a terrible idea though.
I'm pretty flexible really. Basically less than the previous status quo in many cities, but more than nothing.
That is a dramatic rollback of existing taxi regulations...
People have mentioned things they'd like uber to change. Particularly in regards to pay.
Literally no one has said uber should be able to do whatever they want at all. That's only been an assumption on your part, hippofant.
I may just be overreacting to a lot of "Cabs suck!" talk in the Uber thread, and reading into it an implication that is not intended, which is that Uber will magically solve these problems without generating new (possibly worse) problems.
hippofant on
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
People have mentioned things they'd like uber to change. Particularly in regards to pay.
Literally no one has said uber should be able to do whatever they want at all. That's only been an assumption on your part, hippofant.
I may just be overreacting to a lot of "Cabs suck!" talk in the Uber thread, and reading into it an implication that is not intended, which is that Uber will magically solve these problems without generating new (possibly worse) problems.
what uber is doing is flat out illegal in some places, and is not a long term solution.
But the reason for their wild success is that they have exposed and exploited a seriously fucked up business by offering a better service to consumers.
This ends with legal, established companies (one of which may be uber) becoming the iTunes or Steam of car services - legal, frictionless and consumer-friendly.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
People have mentioned things they'd like uber to change. Particularly in regards to pay.
Literally no one has said uber should be able to do whatever they want at all. That's only been an assumption on your part, hippofant.
I may just be overreacting to a lot of "Cabs suck!" talk in the Uber thread, and reading into it an implication that is not intended, which is that Uber will magically solve these problems without generating new (possibly worse) problems.
Yeah, the only people who have said "uber should be allowed to do whatever they want" are on the anti-uber side of the argument while trying to strawman anyone who has brought up the aforementioned suckiness of cabs. And the suckiness of cabs is relevant to the argument in that it explains why uber has been able to get away with its more shitty practices.
Uber has a great value proposition and shitheel management.
I think it's great from the perspective of providing additional cab options, but the way they go about it is all wrong.
+3
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
THANK YOU NEWARK RIDERS
Today, we’re happy to inform you that Uber New Jersey and the City of Newark have reached an agreement to keep Uber in Newark for the long term.
Under this agreement, Uber will be the only ridesharing app with authorization to conduct business at Newark Airport. Newark is the first major city in New Jersey to put in place comprehensive ridesharing regulations which now serve as a model for the entire state.
And, thanks to the hard work of Mayor Baraka and the City Council, Newark riders will not lose access to safe, reliable rides through the Uber app. Please take a moment to show your support and say thank you!
This looks like Uber playing by the rules of the game, and now operating under regulations such that you can use uber to get rides to and from the airport at Newark.
I'm super glad about this because Uber is the only car service even remotely trustworthy in Newark.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Why is Uber the only option available? Is Lyft not in Newark? Just gives me pause because at SeaTac there are like three or four options for app-based rides that are operating. The regs in place are open to anybody that can meet them.
Uber being the "only app with authorization" feels very "meet the new boss" to me .
mcdermott on
+7
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
Why is Uber the only option available? Is Lyft not in Newark? Just gives me pause because at SeaTac there are like three or four options for app-based rides that are operating. The regs in place are open to anybody that can meet them.
Uber being the "only app with authorization" feels very "meet the new boss" to me .
Because they negotiated the terms?
I bet Lyft could take the same deal if they wanted to.
Problem is, the terms of the deal involved paying millions of dollars over ten years to Newark for the right to even be there; smaller companies probably couldn't afford it.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
0
Options
MalReynoldsThe Hunter S Thompson of incredibly mild medicinesRegistered Userregular
Why is Uber the only option available? Is Lyft not in Newark? Just gives me pause because at SeaTac there are like three or four options for app-based rides that are operating. The regs in place are open to anybody that can meet them.
Uber being the "only app with authorization" feels very "meet the new boss" to me .
Because they negotiated the terms?
I bet Lyft could take the same deal if they wanted to.
Problem is, the terms of the deal involved paying millions of dollars over ten years to Newark for the right to even be there; smaller companies probably couldn't afford it.
Alt:
Because Uber is literally the new Satan.
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
Why is Uber the only option available? Is Lyft not in Newark? Just gives me pause because at SeaTac there are like three or four options for app-based rides that are operating. The regs in place are open to anybody that can meet them.
Uber being the "only app with authorization" feels very "meet the new boss" to me .
Because they negotiated the terms?
I bet Lyft could take the same deal if they wanted to.
Problem is, the terms of the deal involved paying millions of dollars over ten years to Newark for the right to even be there; smaller companies probably couldn't afford it.
Precisely my point.
SeaTac arranged the regs so any company could follow them, and the fees associated are on a sliding scale based on rider pickups so any competitor can afford to enter the market.
Why is Uber the only option available? Is Lyft not in Newark? Just gives me pause because at SeaTac there are like three or four options for app-based rides that are operating. The regs in place are open to anybody that can meet them.
Uber being the "only app with authorization" feels very "meet the new boss" to me .
Because they negotiated the terms?
I bet Lyft could take the same deal if they wanted to.
Problem is, the terms of the deal involved paying millions of dollars over ten years to Newark for the right to even be there; smaller companies probably couldn't afford it.
Precisely my point.
SeaTac arranged the regs so any company could follow them, and the fees associated are on a sliding scale based on rider pickups so any competitor can afford to enter the market.
This seems to be more the local government's issue than Uber. Those same competitors wouldn't have been able to get in regardless of whether uber negotiated a deal for itself or not.
Why is Uber the only option available? Is Lyft not in Newark? Just gives me pause because at SeaTac there are like three or four options for app-based rides that are operating. The regs in place are open to anybody that can meet them.
Uber being the "only app with authorization" feels very "meet the new boss" to me .
Because they negotiated the terms?
I bet Lyft could take the same deal if they wanted to.
Problem is, the terms of the deal involved paying millions of dollars over ten years to Newark for the right to even be there; smaller companies probably couldn't afford it.
Precisely my point.
SeaTac arranged the regs so any company could follow them, and the fees associated are on a sliding scale based on rider pickups so any competitor can afford to enter the market.
This seems to be more the local government's issue than Uber. Those same competitors wouldn't have been able to get in regardless of whether uber negotiated a deal for itself or not.
Its local government making the same mistakes as with the medallion system all over again.
Why is Uber the only option available? Is Lyft not in Newark? Just gives me pause because at SeaTac there are like three or four options for app-based rides that are operating. The regs in place are open to anybody that can meet them.
Uber being the "only app with authorization" feels very "meet the new boss" to me .
Because they negotiated the terms?
I bet Lyft could take the same deal if they wanted to.
Problem is, the terms of the deal involved paying millions of dollars over ten years to Newark for the right to even be there; smaller companies probably couldn't afford it.
Precisely my point.
SeaTac arranged the regs so any company could follow them, and the fees associated are on a sliding scale based on rider pickups so any competitor can afford to enter the market.
This seems to be more the local government's issue than Uber. Those same competitors wouldn't have been able to get in regardless of whether uber negotiated a deal for itself or not.
Its local government making the same mistakes as with the medallion system all over again.
That's the problem, cities see livery as a whole as an opertunity to fill their budgetary shortfalls (with million dollar medallions and this uber deal that nets them millions a year), while ignoring the benefits of an affordable, consumer friendly, livery system (such as less people trying to drive home drunk after being at the bar).
Posts
Are they sending a prius, black car, or SUV?
Are they sending a driver almost off shift on a 1.5 hour ride?
And finally, this one protects you, are you "the consumer" aware of what this unmetered trip is going to cost before you step into the vehicle?
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
They don't.
They send the Taxi, I get in, tell them my destination, they start the meter, and once we arrive, I pay what the meter shows.
If you have a smart phone, you can do some rough math using trip adviser or some other phone app to calculate the distance, and then apply that to the pickup flat rate + mileage rate.
I suppose that would be a problem for people that are cash poor and have no available credit, but at that point, maybe they should be taking the bus / train.
MWO: Adamski
Here's the thing - the "cabs" you call by phone in NYC are unmetered. There is no meter. They can quote you literally ANYTHING and if you want to fight it you need to call the local city hotline (311) and get into a protracted fight.
it sucks.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Ugh, the only fix for something like that would be for you to call dispatch, they send the cab, then once it picks you up, you or the driver call dispatch for a quote on the trip with the destination.
Alternately, add meters to the livery service, or a flat rental rate based on time.
NYC really fucked up with this system of charging Taxi Cabs for a medallion, and letting Livery get away with not having to buy one.
MWO: Adamski
Or systems that offer what uber does, which is offer a range of cost up front, a level of promised vehicle quality, and an easy to use app that handles the transaction and shows you where the vehicle is while you wait.
Supposedly other traditional cab companies have this shit happening in other cities. At least the GPS + upfront pricing bit.
I am not an uber fanboy so much as I am a fan of the user experience. If others can ape the user experience and provide something just as good to the drivers and passengers I am game.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Yeah, I don't really hate Uber, I just want them to play by the rules that every other employer / service has to abide by. If the rules are bad, then agitate for them to be changed.
Otherwise, I find civil disobedience on the part of profit seeking corporations to improve their margins suspect.
MWO: Adamski
Last time I was in Chicago for business, I used a local dispatcher that had an app-based system for dispatch. I was able to set up a cab ride to O'Hare via app, track the cab on my phone, and pay by credit card through their tablet - based system. The vehicles were a bit older, but still clean and pleasant to ride in.
I am comfortable saying that Napster and Kazaa were very much in the wrong legally, but they represented a shift in what consumers expected when it came to easy, fast access to content digitally.
And then the real industries got on board with it and today we have itunes, steam, netflix, hulu, xbox live/psn, etc. etc.
It is possible that Uber ends up being one of those real businesses at the end of the day, even as they obviously engaged in illegal tactics on the way. But what they are offering right now is exactly what the people want, and even a fair number of drivers want as well. It is possible that the major cab consortiums figure out they need to evolve or die, and develop a nationally shared app with an API they can connect their dispatch systems into, which follows the local laws of the land and provides a seamless experience to the end users using it.
But right now, getting mad at uber is very much like getting mad at napster. It's super popular, questionably legal depending on zip codes, and most of its most vocal detractors would probably use it in a pinch because what it offers is simply better.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Nobody steal my idea.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Flywheel is the biggest one I've seen
the problem I've had trying to use cab company apps is they all kind of suck since they're still being developed as a secondary concern
Uber's system is rull polished
EDIT:Flywheel is of course it's own thing so I assume they're trying to make it good. But they have to work with these cab companies that for the most part want to do their own thing so it kind of ends up a mess. Uber's integrated all the way through so it works better for them.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Uber is making things better in some ways but isn't doing everything right everywhere and should be kept in check. Laws need to change though. Some business models may not make sense.
I'm not sure who I'm responding to but I feel like I've been pro-Uber in this thread and wanted to lay out my feelings.
I really don't want a bunch of fiefdoms though where every city has 2-3 different apps; for a traveller who uses uber it has been invaluable going to one place that just works.
I like seeing the cab companies making progress, but the next step is setting up a common marketplace that their services are offered on.
It could even be something like
open app
GPS checks location
user enters destination and number of passengers
app fronts car services in your area, with ratings, filters for car types, price range, etc
user selects car, pre auths credit card on a fare estimate, car comes
This would offer the uber experience, but allow for potentially hundreds/thousands of cab companies to participate, and the free market will let ratings sort out the winners from the losers.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Yeah in /most/ areas this is rarely a problem. But if you have the app on and are the closest driver they can ping you, even if it's like ten miles away. I know I've see that a couple times, where my estimated wait is like 20 mins.
The one time I went ahead and requested, I saw the car sit and sit and sit, in a neighborhood, and realized eventually that was probably a guy running the app while at home, and taking his sweet time getting to me.
Or just not intending to come at all, but presumably if I cancel its better for him than if he declines?
If that's who you're responding to then you should quote them and not me. I haven't said anything approaching Uber should be able to do anything they want. As far as I know no one has. That honestly just reads as a bad faith interpretation of posts.
I'm also super unclear how revisiting or examining labor/insurance law necessarily means "let Uber do what the fuck ever" anyway. It's not unfathomable that there are aspects of labor/insurance law that are suboptimal, and may need revision, while at the same time imposing (and enforcing) significant regulation on app-based livery.
Seems like a false dichotomy to me.
Exactly. If taxis could get a DMCA equivalent they would do so in a heartbeat, with assistance from their political allies.
If you can't see where people are saying that Uber should just be allowed to steamroll currently existing regulatory schemes, then I don't know what thread you're reading.
As for whether labour laws needs to be amended to support things like Uber, that's a broader conversation, but if you want to make the case, then make it. Because "cabs suck in my city," does not translate into, "we should rewrite labour laws across the US to further weaken them." I'm sorry that your local government sucks at regulating taxis and building public transit, but please don't drag me into your neocapitalist dystopia just because you want to save $5 and 5 minutes on a hailed ride.
This one?
Few if any are suggesting Uber be free of regulation.
Some are suggesting that some aspects of the regulatory scheme they steamrolled were shitty, and led to shitty outcomes.
But that doesn't require that the poster support a future absent any and all regulation.
You...I mean you do....you /realize/ that "let uber do whatever it wants however it wants" and allowing "existing regulatory schemes" to be steamrolled are not the same thing? That there can be a different, new regulatory scheme adopted, and Uber can be wrangled into adhering to it?
But yeah, uber needs to be regulated, and those regulations must be enforced.
What goal should a hypothetical new set of regulations on Uber serve?
Ensuring drivers can realistically clear a minimum wage after expenses would be one. Probably a primary concern for me. May be true in your market, less so in others.
Routine safety inspections in vehicles over three years old may be another. Nothing ridiculous, beyond what some states already require. Might not be a terrible idea though.
I'm pretty flexible really. Basically less than the previous status quo in many cities, but more than nothing.
Or spool32 claims that efforts to force Uber to follow existing labour law re. employees vs contractors is an effort by entrenched political interests to kill it.
Who here is putting forth an argument as to what currently non-existent regulations Uber should be governed by? All I see are people who are saying that Uber should not violate existing regulations, that Uber's business model is shitty and exploitative (or not), and people who are saying that Uber is better than cabs. And Six.
That is a dramatic rollback of existing taxi regulations...
Literally no one has said uber should be able to do whatever they want at all. That's only been an assumption on your part, hippofant.
I may just be overreacting to a lot of "Cabs suck!" talk in the Uber thread, and reading into it an implication that is not intended, which is that Uber will magically solve these problems without generating new (possibly worse) problems.
what uber is doing is flat out illegal in some places, and is not a long term solution.
But the reason for their wild success is that they have exposed and exploited a seriously fucked up business by offering a better service to consumers.
This ends with legal, established companies (one of which may be uber) becoming the iTunes or Steam of car services - legal, frictionless and consumer-friendly.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Yeah, the only people who have said "uber should be allowed to do whatever they want" are on the anti-uber side of the argument while trying to strawman anyone who has brought up the aforementioned suckiness of cabs. And the suckiness of cabs is relevant to the argument in that it explains why uber has been able to get away with its more shitty practices.
I think it's great from the perspective of providing additional cab options, but the way they go about it is all wrong.
This looks like Uber playing by the rules of the game, and now operating under regulations such that you can use uber to get rides to and from the airport at Newark.
I'm super glad about this because Uber is the only car service even remotely trustworthy in Newark.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Uber being the "only app with authorization" feels very "meet the new boss" to me .
I bet Lyft could take the same deal if they wanted to.
Problem is, the terms of the deal involved paying millions of dollars over ten years to Newark for the right to even be there; smaller companies probably couldn't afford it.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Alt:
Because Uber is literally the new Satan.
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
Precisely my point.
SeaTac arranged the regs so any company could follow them, and the fees associated are on a sliding scale based on rider pickups so any competitor can afford to enter the market.
This seems to be more the local government's issue than Uber. Those same competitors wouldn't have been able to get in regardless of whether uber negotiated a deal for itself or not.
Its local government making the same mistakes as with the medallion system all over again.
MWO: Adamski
That's the problem, cities see livery as a whole as an opertunity to fill their budgetary shortfalls (with million dollar medallions and this uber deal that nets them millions a year), while ignoring the benefits of an affordable, consumer friendly, livery system (such as less people trying to drive home drunk after being at the bar).