California Regulators Tell Ride-Shares No Airport Runs 314
An anonymous reader writes in with news about ride-share crackdowns in California. California regulators are threatening to revoke permits for on-demand ride companies UberX, Lyft, Sidecar, Summon and Wingz unless they stop giving rides to and from airports within two weeks. The move could lead to the state shutting down the companies' operations. Flouting the airport rules also flouts regulations that the CPUC set up for the new generation of ride companies to operate in California. In a clear rebuttal to an argument often made by the ride companies, Peevey wrote: "These safety requirements should not hinder your creativity nor should they impede your innovation."
let's just kill all these busybody fucks (Score:2, Interesting)
who tell everyone what to do. problem solved.
next it will be illegal (Score:2, Interesting)
to drive your friend to the airport without a permit.
A remember in the early 90 when I lived in the bay (Score:5, Interesting)
area. There were three airports and four train systems (or was it four airports and three train systems?). None of the trains went to any of the airports. I always figured the taxi union lobbied hard when it was time to decided the train line terminations. I think it has improved a little since the early 90s, but probably not much.
So wait... what? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:next it will be illegal (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Cabbies. (Score:5, Interesting)
Michael Peevey mentions "safey rules" but then goes on to 'lacking airport permits, as well as lacking proper "trade dress" on their vehicles and lacking proof of insurance.' Ok, lacking proof of insurance I can understand. So carry papers in the glovebox and all is well.
Airport permits? That's just money denied to the airports. I'd wager the complaints that are not from cabbies are from the airport authorities for this very reason.
Trade dress? Fine, slap on a cheap magnetic sign. That is not a safety issue.
They dress is up as "safety rules" but the real motives are financial.
Re:"Safety Requirements"? (Score:5, Interesting)
its a lie.
you and I can drive to the airport. and we can drop people off and pick them up!
so its a total bullshit lie.
can you say 'protectionism'? sure, I knew you could.
Console yourself cabbie, you won't be the only one (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:"Safety Requirements"? (Score:5, Interesting)
In fact, it was so bad in my hometown for a while, that they actually guaranteed the public bus wouldn't run to the airport. That way, you would have to take a cab.
Our company would hire a limousine (actually a chouffered luxury car) to the airport because it was much cheaper than taking a cab). Eventually the hotels were getting people hitching rides on the hotel shuttles who were not staying at the hotel, to such a degree that the hotel charged a nominal fee, about 1/4th the cab fare. That eventually broke the monopoly, and finally, ten years later you can take the public bus too.
It is crazy, but due to the changes, you can finally ride a cab to the airport for about half what it cost fifteen years ago. (and that's not adjusting for inflation)
Re:"Safety Requirements"? (Score:5, Interesting)
Obviously its just protectionism for the taxi companies. Nothing more or less.
They do the same thing with mass transit. The subway they're building in Los Angeles will not go to the airport.
A lot of this comes down to the taxi medallions which the cities charge taxi companies to run their fleets.
Those medallions can be very expensive. And so the cities have a very strong financial interest to protect the taxi companies.
Really the taxi companies are quite justified in asking for protection. They've paid for it. The issue however is that the protection shouldn't have been for sale in the first place. Drop the cost of new medallions to something reasonable. A price similar to what the DMV charges for car registration. Then require uber etc to get the same license for all its drivers. The cost in this case would be nominal.
Then everyone is on an equal footing. The cities won't get the same revenue from medallion sales. But then neither will they have to subvert city policy to protect taxi companies. So it should balance out in the end.
Re:"Safety Requirements"? (Score:4, Interesting)
Do I have to be licensed for chauffeur work if I drop my friends off at the airport?
What about if they pay me for it? Maybe they're just covering gas money, but cash exchanged hands for rides? Have I run an illegal taxi service?