|
Just watch the value of second-hand Priuses collapse as a result!
|
|
Brown envelope time from the London Cab Drivers?
|
The only thing causing Private and Public Hire to up its rather sad game in London was Uber.
If they remove Uber, should we assume that everything will return to its previous sad state of affairs?
Uber is a pretty horrible company, but at least they were bringing competition into a market where it was much needed.
|
|
They're going to appeal, so not dead yet.
|
|
Uber is not the only game in town, there are other similar alternatives, and the self employed status of the ex Uber drivers and the instant scalability of the ride hailing tech model means that the alternates can ramp up in days.
|
Isn't it?
We also have Cabify here but Uber is of a different magnitude.
|
|
Its a German car. Its supposed to be a bit better than a Gleich.
|
|
Thanks, I thought it was a version of the Prius.
|
|
No, that's the Schlechter.
|
I know very little about the politics of Uber, never used it in the UK, but always use it overseas. When travelling in the US, away from friends who's cars I normally borrow, I must have used Uber dozens of times.
All my conversations with the drivers told me that they enjoyed the flexibility.... they all worked part time in addition to their full time jobs, sometimes two hours here or there. I've saved a small fortune using their services around large cities, and the service was always spot on. Friendly drivers, decent cars, great prices, and being able to track the inbound taxi on your phone app.
|
|
Perhaps that explains how there can be 40000 Uber drivers in London. So it won't be livelihoods ruined, just a little pocket money gone for most.
|
I have been in Ubers that colleagues have booked and they have been OK.
What TFL say is that they don't do background checks properly or co-operate with the police when required.
They also run algorithms to avoid law / govt. enforcement doing their jobs and bend the law and even deliberately flout the law where they can.
They have even been accused of deliberately sabotaging rivals by booking fares that don't exist on the rivals service and cheating their own drivers out of income by showing the passenger a higher fare than the driver - who shares a percentage of the total.
It's not the type of corporate responsibility or behaviour that we should be encouraging. There are other similar companies out there and if they operate ethically, respect the law and its drivers then they should flourish in Uber's absence.
|
The news is saying 500k people have signed a petition calling for Uber to be re-instated.
Do people really take convenience and price over ethics, safety and morals?
|
>> Do people really take convenience and price over ethics, safety and morals?
>>
You don't know much about human nature do you? ;-)
|
>> >> Do people really take convenience and price over ethics, safety and morals?
>> >>
>>
>>
>> You don't know much about human nature do you? ;-)
>>
It was a rhetorical question! But hey, I'm an idealist!
|
Perhaps they're making the choice between the morals of a quasi monopoly and free market? Or new, moderns cars vs clapped out old minicabs or taxis ;)
I use Uber all the time. It's convenient. It works in lots of cities and countries. It doesn't require cash. Cost isn't a driver, but knowledge of what it's going to cost before the journey starts is. And I get a far better feeling of safety knowing the make, model, registration number of the vehicle and the name of the driver than I do from a random taxi. I know all that before I get in the car. It's emailed to me afterwards on the receipt. Plus, the cars are clean, modern and comfortable. Of course they should follow the rules. I gather it's drivers have to pass the same tests as black cabs? So it's a failure of the licensing authorities if they're letting the wrong people through, surely?
|
|
Very eloquently put young man
|
>> I gather it's drivers
>> have to pass the same tests as black cabs?
You gather incorrectly.
|
>>
>> >> I gather it's drivers
>> >> have to pass the same tests as black cabs?
>>
>> You gather incorrectly.
>>
Furthermore, it is claimed that UBER don't follow up or even make it difficult to the authorities when they investigate wrongdoing by their drivers.
There have also been stories in the papers of UBER drivers going on a tour of the M25 with sleeping passengers (all tracked of course) when the journey would have been a few miles inside the M25 as the crow flies.
|
|
Sorry, to clarify, I meant background checks rather than the actual Knowledge!
|
...from your wording, I thought you meant the MOT.....
;-)
|
|
What people don't realise is the low fares are being subsidised by Uber. They are losing substantial amounts of money which is investors money. Their plan no doubt is to push the competition out of business and then there's mostly only Uber.... and then put the prices up.
|
>> What people don't realise is the low fares are being subsidised by Uber. They are
>> losing substantial amounts of money which is investors money. Their plan no doubt is to
>> push the competition out of business and then there's mostly only Uber.... and then put
>> the prices up.
>>
I agree. They are already cheaper than social service bus services in some US states. When the competition is gone there is no doubt the prices will rise dramatically.
I wonder if the drivers will get a bigger share of the profits and will the company use the same tactics that they use to avoid law enforcement and regulation to avoid taxes on their profits or claims from victims of UBER drivers that cause accidents or worse?
A world without UBER in its current form would be a good thing IMHO.
|
Uber does not particularly care about the drivers. And we all know when level 5 automation is available in cars they will ditch the drivers.
Some of the surge pricing showed them in their true light although they did eventually reduce them when we had the terrorist incidents.... but other taxis were simply taking people elsewhere for free.
This fuss about TfL not granting a licence can be fixed by Uber easily - comply with what TfL wants including proper background checks on drivers. Some are saying not giving Uber a licence will be bad for the safety of women - but people are forgetting the poor checks on Uber drivers could mean the driver themselves is a risk.
|
You think other companies will continue to send out manned cabs in the old fashioned way for ever and ever? Well established companies may well be slower to adopt change, as they usually tend to rely on their reputation and past success (or monopoly!) and assume the new kids on the street will fail (or be barred by the regulator).
"... surge pricing showed them in their true light"
Not sure this is a fair statement really, I doubt their software considered the events which gave rise to the the surge pricing in Manchester or London and they did respond pretty quickly once they realised what was going on. Also I read some Uber drivers gave free rides, just maybe was not company policy, and I'm not sure that was so for any company really.
TfL certainly seem to be to be "black-cab-friendly", maybe in recognition of the £26.6m licensing costs TfL collect from them, and there are some cosy little schemes going on between TfL and the cabbies, e.g. tinyurl.com/kpokhto . TfL have also put Taxify out of business in London (not that they were doing that well...)
I do hope Uber fix the situation, as you say this ought to be reasonably straightforward and it should improve their chances of expansion around the country.
Last edited by: smokie on Sun 24 Sep 17 at 01:20
|
>> Their plan no doubt is to
>> push the competition out of business and then there's mostly only Uber.... and then put
>> the prices up.
>>
That's a business model that never works. Someone will look at what you are doing, realise they can do it more cheaply and come in and take your customers. Rather like Lidle and Aldi have done to the big supermarkets who thought they'd stitched the market up between them.
Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Sat 23 Sep 17 at 20:33
|
They are not losng money at the operating level though, are they? They *are* burning huge amounts of cash rolling out rapidly across a wide number of locations, and huge amounts of promo spend,as well I'm sure as development. But that's the same model as many tech companies. Ease of use is what keeps people coming back, if the price is too high someone else will move into the space.
At the end of the day, it's a technology that has proved disruptive to the business model of most black cabs. But it's what consumers want... so if they'd been smart the black cab gang, instead of paying Sadiq Khan £300k to protect their interests (via the GMB) would have spend it on meeting consumer needs
Namely:
Easily accessible
Clean modern cars
Certainty of pricing
Safety / security in knowing the details of what and who was going to carry them
I have a hunch that it's actually the unlicensed mini cabs that have lost most wth the arrival of Uber, and that has definitely improved safety and security for passengers. But the £3000k wasn't spend making that point... ;)
Last edited by: PeterS on Sun 24 Sep 17 at 12:27
|
Black cabs are over regulated - the knowledge can be simplified in the days of sat-nav and they shouldn't need to drive such expensive cabs (both of which push up the price of fares).
Uber are under-regulated. No proper background checks, non-co-operation with authorities, predatory pricing to force out competition, dubious tax arrangements, etc. A friend of a friend in the Met says they have massive amounts of assault allegations about Uber drivers which general public never get to hear about.
The solution would be somewhere in the middle. Call it Black-cab lite or Uber-heavy.
|
1. With satnav there is not the same need for The Knowledge. Indeed google knows where current traffic issues are, which The Knowledge is no help for.
2. Uber makes money in London; it is not subsidising the service (according to newspaper article this weekend).
3. The decision stinks. Whatever you think of Uber, it is a corrupt decision. The Unions back the English cabbie. The Mayor is funded by Unions. The Mayor runs TFL. TFL runs the taxi licensing. The taxi licensing committee removed the consent for Uber to operate. Ergo, even if it's not true, it looks as though this is the Mayor bowing to pressure from the Unions. It stinks like a month-old herring.
|
>> 3. The decision stinks. Whatever you think of Uber, it is a corrupt decision. The
>> Unions back the English cabbie. The Mayor is funded by Unions. The Mayor runs TFL.
>> TFL runs the taxi licensing. The taxi licensing committee removed the consent for Uber to
>> operate. Ergo, even if it's not true, it looks as though this is the Mayor
>> bowing to pressure from the Unions. It stinks like a month-old herring.
>>
I agree totally!
|
>> I agree totally!
>>
Yep, I do too. I don't particularly like Uber, but they've found a gap in the market and they are making money. Nobody is forcing people to drive for them or to use them, but the fact that both do suggests it does work for them.
This decision amounts to artificial manipulation of the market, and stinks of corruption.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 25 Sep 17 at 12:47
|
Uber boss Dara Khosrowshahi apologises after London ban
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41384499
|
>> 3. The decision stinks. Whatever you think of Uber, it is a corrupt decision. The
>> Unions back the English cabbie.
The Mayor is funded by local taxes and block grant from Westminster. The current incumbent is Labour and Labour was founded as, and to some extent remains, the political arm of the Trade Union Movement. For all the posturing of leaders of Unite etc Union power (which was historically used to back the right of the party) in Labour is waning.
The licensing function of TfL operates in a quasi-judicial manner. It's decisions are based on evidence and are subject to an appeal mechanism or to Judicial Review. Uber have said they will appeal to the Courts and TfL's decision, if in any way corrupt, will be overturned.
Some cabbies are unionised but membership seems to be split between RMT, Unite and cab specific bodies such of which the LTDA is biggest.
Uber has more or less admitted to playing fast/loose with authority including deliberately blocking regulation. It's also funding massive legal and lobbying operations in context of London licence and when it comes to influence and (legal) intimidation they make th unions look like a bunch of patsies.
The removal of licence, or rather what is in reality a threat of removal, is a shot over Uber's bows. I predict they will settle their differences with TfL either at or before any court case and that in a year's time Uber will still be operating in London.
If not something that looks and walks like Uber will occupy same commercial niche.
|
>> The removal of licence, or rather what is in reality a threat of removal, is a shot over Uber's
>> bows. I predict they will settle their differences with TfL
It's in Uber's power to sort this out by doing some of what TfL are asking. I think it's more of a threat.
The other 'threat' to Uber of course if Lyft are coming to London... some competition ;-)
|
>> A friend of a friend in the Met says they have massive amounts of assault allegations about >> >> Uber drivers which general public never get to hear about.
Hmm. Not quite. The official figures.
tinyurl.com/ybsaxhve
|
It would be interesting to have related statistics about the number of journeys undertaken. I suspect that the number will have risen since Uber started operating.
IF this has happened, the trend looks as though the actual reported rate per journey may have gone down since Uber started!
Presumably the Uber journeys have replaced the unlicensed (hence untraceable and unchecked) drivers. ie Uber has made it safer!
Maybe somebody else can have a go at interpreting these figures to validate my initial thoughts?
The insider knowledge of a ' friend of a friend' presumably is passed by the Met to TFL and is therefore included in the TFL figures.
Conclusion - a union funded stitch up!
|
>>Conclusion - a union funded stitch up!
I should think so. I think they will also regret it. Expect some kind of climb down in the near future with some face-saving words or maneuvers around it.
|
>> >>Conclusion - a union funded stitch up!
>>
>> I should think so. I think they will also regret it. Expect some kind of
>> climb down in the near future with some face-saving words or maneuvers around it.
From Uber yes. This is typically the way they work, arrive in a place, set up, stick two fingers up to regulation and safety then wait to see if they get away with it or not.
Quote:
Uber chief executive Dara Khosrowshahi said he was sorry for the "mistakes we've made" after the taxi-hailing firm lost its London licence.
He said in an open letter that Uber would appeal against the city's decision, but accepts it "must change".
|
>with some face-saving words or maneuvers around it.
So someone from the mayor's office contacts Uber and says "look, but of a cock up, and we'd like to get out of it. But the mayor has to retain credibility, so if you say you're sorry and pretend to be good, we'll let you keep you license.
Uber, who couldn't give a flying crap for appearances, say "sure" and apologize, keep their licence, nothing changes, tfl now know not to fluff them around again.
You're not naive Zero, you must have seen exactly this game a thousand times. The only loser is going to be some poor sod in tfl, who was only trying to do what he was told, eventually taking a slap for doing so.
|
>> >with some face-saving words or maneuvers around it.
>>
>> So someone from the mayor's office contacts Uber and says "look, but of a cock
>> up, and we'd like to get out of it. But the mayor has to retain
>> credibility, so if you say you're sorry and pretend to be good, we'll let you
>> keep you license.
>>
>> Uber, who couldn't give a flying crap for appearances, say "sure" and apologize, keep their
>> licence, nothing changes, tfl now know not to fluff them around again.
>>
>> You're not naive Zero, you must have seen exactly this game a thousand times. The
>> only loser is going to be some poor sod in tfl, who was only trying
>> to do what he was told, eventually taking a slap for doing so.
I have but all you wrote above is rollox. How about TFL, as a licensing authority that is independent of politics and of the Mayors office says "OK Uber as a company you are a bunch of she ites who don't give a flying buck about rules and are generally a crap employer, we have had enough. The financial effects to London of kicking your buts out of here is zero. So here you go, your license is down the toilet"
Uber. "Oh sheit, they are serious, ok we tried it on and failed, so lets eat humble pie and try and impose some control over the operation"
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 25 Sep 17 at 20:17
|
Oh and before you say the taxi licensing system in London is archaic and in the ark, yes you are right, with respect to Black Cabs you can hail on the street. However, there is a another taxi trade in London, mini cabs, that have been going for years, 10s of thousands of them, all licensed as taxi drivers. All uber has done is replace the individual taxi companies and circuits, and cut the drivers rates.
Uber can be replaced in a heartbeat, they know it and that is why they are crawling on their bellies.
|
|
Well, I guess the behaviour and style of Uber in London a year from now will suggest which of us had the more appropriate perspective
|
>>£23k net for a 60 hour week in London?
>>
>>Sign me up.
Based on a 52-week year that is £7.37 per hour, which is the minimum wage, more or less, AND you get a free car as well (if you're looking at what you get from the job) so all-in-all rather more than the minimum wage.
Many of these drivers speak insufficient English for a 'proper' job. The freedom to work as many hours as you fancy, if you need the extra cash, sounds great.
Beats the dole every day of the year - or it would do for me if I were in their shoes.
And Lygonos, that article you linked to refers to paying £100 per month for residents parking. Rot.
|
>> Based on a 52-week
So no holidays then.
>> you get a free car as well
Would be okay to drive it for non-business use, i.e. personal, if insured for taxi purposes? Would it even be classed as a benefit from your business? If hired, again is it for personal use as well?
|
>>So no holidays then.
If you're taking holidays within this annual sum then your hourly rate goes up.
>> i.e. personal, if insured for taxi purposes?
I'd be quite surprised if an individual could obtain insurance for a taxi without including private use in the insurance as well. The assumption of the insurance company would be that it was going to be used for private use so they would insist on insuring it for that too.
Obtaining insurance that excludes private use is not very easy. And it would save you peanuts.
|
>> >
>>
>> I'd be quite surprised if an individual could obtain insurance for a taxi without including
>> private use in the insurance as well. The assumption of the insurance company would be
>> that it was going to be used for private use so they would insist on
>> insuring it for that too.
>>
>> Obtaining insurance that excludes private use is not very easy. And it would save you
>> peanuts.
>>
A local councilor got into trouble a couple of years ago for using his taxi to attend a meeting. Apparently private use is in breach of the terms of the licence, and I think that applies to all licenced taxis. Obviously I'm not talking about insurance here, but the effect is the same.
Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Tue 26 Sep 17 at 17:42
|
>> A local councilor got into trouble a couple of years ago for using his taxi
>> to attend a meeting. Apparently private use is in breach of the terms of the
>> licence, and I think that applies to all licenced taxis. Obviously I'm not talking about
>> insurance here, but the effect is the same.
Hackney Carriages licensed to ply for hire use cab ranks are one thing. Private Hire licences may have different conditions. It's also possible that conditions vary between councils (or between England and Wales).
|
>> If you're taking holidays within this annual sum then your hourly rate goes up.
If we're taking the figures from Lyganos' article in account (I am sure they are not accurate), the £750pw was based on 60 hours and therefore £750 x 52 weeks gives you the £39k figure. And then subtract costs etc and it came down to £23k in the example.
So this was working 52 weeks a year hence me saying no holiday. Take 5 weeks holiday and you lose £3750 but the costs mostly stay the same apart from fuel.
|
Don't worry about Uber drivers losing their jobs.
Michael O'Leary will snap them up as Ryanair pilots.
|
>> £23k net for a 60 hour week in London?
>>
>> Sign me up.
In income terms that's gross as in before tax and NI.
Let's say he's a sole earner with a wife and children aged 4 & 7 living in Watford and paying £200pw for a 2 bed flat (slightly above govt ceiling for area). His income will then be topped up by approx £166 in Tax Credits and Housing Benefit - or £227 if Watford's a Universal Credit area.
|
>> friend of a friend in the Met says they have massive amounts of assault allegations about Uber drivers which general public never get to hear about.
Seems unlikely. Why would the Police be keeping them secret? How come so many allegations that presumably don't go to court?
|
Sole passengers, no witnesses, maybe drink involved??
Not that its an excuse, just reality.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Sun 1 Oct 17 at 11:03
|
>> Sole passengers, no witnesses, maybe drink involved??
>>
More or Less on R4 looked into that on Friday. Twenty percent of complaints about sexual assaults by taxi drivers in London concern Uber drivers yet they are responsible for a third of the journeys, so perhaps TFL ought to be looking elsewhere.
A black cab driver who I used to know but hadn't seen for over twenty years came to my attention last year when the press reported him going away for 15 years for a couple pf rapes. Most black rats were in my experience rude, unhelpful and full of the brown stuff.
Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Sun 1 Oct 17 at 11:11
|
As I said above last week...................
It would be interesting to have related statistics about the number of journeys undertaken. I suspect that the number will have risen since Uber started operating.
IF this has happened, the trend looks as though the actual reported rate per journey may have gone down since Uber started!
Presumably the Uber journeys have replaced the unlicensed (hence untraceable and unchecked) drivers. ie Uber has made it safer!
|
>> Sole passengers, no witnesses, maybe drink involved??
>>
>> Not that its an excuse, just reality.
>>
We covered this on Monday 25.9
The official figures:-
tinyurl.com/ybsaxhve
|
Looks like being asked to do more checks/training has Uber threatening to quit Quebec.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41406850
Similar to London in my eyes but this time it's Uber threatening to leave rather than being forced to change.
|
An Employment Tribunal has found, on facts of specific test cases, that drivers are not self employed but rather 'workers' entitled to min wage and sick/holiday pay:
www.theguardian.com/money/2017/sep/25/addison-lee-wrongly-classed-drivers-as-self-employed-tribunal-rules
Like the comment from Judge that its defence of the self-employment arrangement defied evidential gravity
|
|
This will run for a while.
|
>>Like the comment from Judge that its defence of the self-employment arrangement defied evidential gravity
It had never crossed my mind that AL drivers could possibly be SE. Uber, however, different kettle of fish and much more like getting a cab whereas AL is nothing like getting a cab.
|
Got a Taxi in Leeds a while ago.Uber taxi daughter used her phone to order.Chap came from Morocco spoke good English.Told me he drove home from Leeds to Morocco every year to see his family.
I told him I drove home every year to Holland,he laughed not such a distance.Just my experience with a Uber taxi driver a decent bloke with a family to support in the U.K.Don't know the rights and wrong about Uber,don't like the name that much I have heard that Uber Alles quote before.
|
What happened in the city that banned Uber
www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-41450980
|
Uber's boss in London to leave firm
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41471292
Jo Bertram said: "I've decided to move on to something new and exciting."
Uber says her departure is not connected with recent events.
|
>> What happened in the city that banned Uber
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-41450980
Effectively national government over ruling a city ordinance. Can't see it happening here.
|
Uber loses its licence to operate in London - Boxsterboy
