Uber Offers Free Rides To Koreans, Hopes They Won't Report Illegal Drivers 193
itwbennett writes Uber Technologies is offering free rides on its uberX ride-sharing service in the South Korean capital of Seoul, after city authorities intensified their crackdown on illegal drivers by offering a reward to residents who report Uber drivers to police. South Korean law prohibits unregistered drivers from soliciting passengers using private or rented vehicles and carries a penalty of up to two years in prison or fines of up to 20 million won.
Screw your laws (Score:4, Insightful)
Because we gotta make that paper, bitches.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you really that naive? Give for free, get a "good" name, be made legal, "paper".
With companies like Uber capitalism has really hit rock bottom. No products, no innovation, just a parasitic entity, forcibly trying to become a middle-man in all transactions.
Re: Screw your laws (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Screw your laws (Score:4, Insightful)
They're no different from normal taxi companies really.
Exactly -- which is why they should comply with the same registration laws as other taxi companies./p.
Re: (Score:2)
Registration (Score:3, Informative)
Why? The main use of registration is to keep the number of cabs low and the prices high.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Registration (Score:4, Informative)
Keeping prices high keeps taxis available.
Try to get a taxi at 6th and 44th in Manhattan at 5PM. Taxis are pretty damn expensive in NYC, and pretty much impossible to find when demand is high. Know what is available at 5PM? Uber cars.
Re:Registration (Score:4, Insightful)
Try to get a taxi at 6th and 44th in Manhattan at 5PM. Taxis are pretty damn expensive in NYC, and pretty much impossible to find when demand is high. Know what is available at 5PM? Uber cars.
If everyone could get a taxi at peak time, would they get home quicker? No, because you'd have gridlock. This is one of the things that city planners take into account when managing taxi licensing.
Public transport is an efficient solution at peak time. It may not seem like it -- what with waiting times, multiple stops, the need to walk a bit and connect -- but mass transit is the only way to keep that many people moving. 25 years ago New York was famous worldwide for its traffic jams -- you don't want that again.
Taxis are useful at times of lower demand, when public transport becomes inefficient.
Unlimited cars leads to a tragedy-of-the-commons scenario. I'd tell you to stop being so selfish, but even enlightened self-interested says you should just get a damn bus.
Re:Registration (Score:5, Insightful)
Keeping prices high keeps taxis available.
Let me see if I can follow your logic...Limiting the number of taxis makes the price of taxis high. Keeping the prices high keeps taxis available. Therefore...Limiting the number of taxis keeps taxis available. I don't think that even the great logician and philosopher Yogi Berra could improve on your statement.
~Loyal
Re: (Score:3)
The driver works and pays for the upkeep of the car and pays a weekly or monthly fee to the taxi company. .
Not quite.. the driver pays what is called(in Scotland anyway) a "weekly weigh in". this covers the rental of the car and the rental of the tech by which they will the clients(meter and bookings equipment) .
The mechanical upkeep of the car is in the hands of the owner of the vehicle and not the driver
the cleaning of the car is the drivers responsibility as is fuelling it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but the taxi company does have some responsibilities such as making sure the drivers have licenses. As well as some insurance liability so the driver does not get stuck with everything if there is an accident.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but the taxi company does have some responsibilities such as making sure the drivers have licenses
Which means exactly what? They have fulfilled a bureaucratic check list of meaningless drivel?
Yeah, that is one of the "there ought to be a law" kind of crap laws that make noise signifying nothing.
Let me put it to you this way, would you know if you got into a taxi that the guy had three accidents last year or none? Rookie Driver or one that has been driving the town for seven years (and knows his way around)? What do you know exactly?
What you know, exactly, is that someone filled out a form somewhere, onc
Re: (Score:2)
Which means exactly what? They have fulfilled a bureaucratic check list of meaningless drivel?
Ensuring that drivers have a valid license, fairly clean driving record, and insurance is "meaningless drivel"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Screw your laws (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you really that naive? Give for free, get a "good" name, be made legal, "paper".
With companies like Uber capitalism has really hit rock bottom. No products, no innovation, just a parasitic entity, forcibly trying to become a middle-man in all transactions.
What kind of Bizarro Superman world do you live in? What's happening in Seoul is the exact opposite of capitalism in a free market.
The government is chasing out the new competition at the behest of the sclerotic old, and is actually handing their business model over to connected cronies.
Re: (Score:2)
They don't get to decide that they just aren't going to follow the laws.
Obeying dumb "we said so" laws is dumb.
Re: (Score:2)
They don't get to decide that they just aren't going to follow the laws.
Obeying dumb "we said so" laws is dumb.
So you want companies to be allowed to pick and choose which laws they will obey? hmmm that will make for an interesting world, one in which I am sure the consumers will do well out of...NOT.
Re: (Score:3)
With companies like Uber capitalism has really hit rock bottom. No products, no innovation, just a parasitic entity
If you define competition as a "parasitic entity" then you must have a VERY strange definition of capitalism.
Re: Screw your laws (Score:4, Insightful)
Parasitic in that they hose their drivers. They produce nothing of real value, they just take a cut. Like a racketeer.
Yeah! That's the way I feel about my grocer! He doesn't produce anything of real value. He just sells me the farmers' and ranchers' produce and takes a cut. And my doctor. He sits in his office and doesn't produce anything. And engineers. Just sitting there drawing all day, but not making anything. And programmers.
I just have to wonder why people keep going to them if they don't add any value. Why don't people just call people with cars and ask for a ride.
~Loyal
Re: (Score:3)
Parasitic in that they hose their drivers. They produce nothing of real value, they just take a cut. Like a racketeer.
I don't really care about Uber personally, but it's a bit disingenuous to say that they provide no value at all. There is some non-zero value to the infrastructure for connecting customers with drivers that they maintain. I doubt it's worth $40 billion, but it's worth more than nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
"We"? Is this the last roman_mir post we'll see? Or did you actually mean "the rest of you"?
Uber != ridesharing. (Score:5, Insightful)
Uber is ride sharing in the same way pizza delivery is food sharing. People and companies are making money off of it therefore it is not sharing.
Re: (Score:2)
the second money changes hands it's a commercial operation. The private conveyance becomes in legal terms, a passenger carrying vehicle, and the driver assumes commercial liability.
Re: (Score:2)
Uber business model in Korea (Score:2)
2. ???
3. Profit!
criminal organisation (Score:5, Interesting)
regardless of what you think of Uber's model, blatantly breaking a countries laws or incenting others to break laws is just asking for trouble. I am surprised more criminal charges haven't been brought down on the CEO's and other execs at Uber, could see some interesting tests of those extradition laws.
Uber is an example of a common line of thought (Score:2)
Why is this so hard to understand? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You were trying to claim that people either can be in support of monopolies or that they cannot be in support of any monopoly. That is obviously a black and white situation and entirely untrue. And there are multiple reasons that there are monopolies on running wires through neighborhoods. The number one reason is safety. Do you realize that there used to be almost free reign in running electric wires in the US? Take a look at these photos of NYC [io9.com]. You can see thousands of wires all over the neighborho
Re: (Score:2)
Good lord, there's a lot wrong with this sentence:
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So your argument is that because insisting on doctors getting a license it creates an artificial scarcity. Well in fact it does, for very good reason. Now it just so happens that a bad driver can just as easily kill his passenger as a bad doctor, so there are very good reasons for public safety to insure that certain licensing requirements for operating such a business are in place.
So yes, it does cause a certain measure of scarcity, but there are very good reasons to believe that the trade off is worth t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Are the number of doctors limited in a city?"
Have you ever priced the cost of getting a medical degree or looked a the percentage of applicants accepted into medical schools? We are talking about the need for licensing. Once licensed, the number of drivers is a separate issue that should be determined by supply and demand.
Those "scare tactics" happen to merely be pointing out that bad things DO HAPPEN when drivers are unlicensed. Call them scare tactics and sloppy thinking if you like, but it doesn't al
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There is competition in many cities as there are many different taxi companies. If you don't think so, you are free to start your own taxi company and prove your point.
The fact is that in many kinds of markets there really is a role for government to play so that costs and consequences of business practices don't get passed off onto the public. This is one of those situations, where regulations and requiring ALL businesses to play by the same set of rules makes sense. Anarchy for the benefit of a few, is
Re: (Score:3)
Cities consder taxis an important part of their transportation system. As such, they regulate with regard to things like rates, must-carry rules, equipment, driver qualification, etc. Because of those regulations, it is not possible to compete on price or service. If you can not compete on price or service, then the only ways to increase profits are by picking up more fares, or lowering your costs.
Before the 'artificial scarcity' that you decry was created cabs did extremely dangerous things to try to ge
It will be interesting (Score:2)
It will be interesting to see how the US government responds to a South Korean request for extradition of Uber corporate officers for conspiracy to break the law.
The worst part is the polished turd that is Uber (Score:3)
From that site, one of the most important claim is "using unlicensed drivers with some of its services", sometimes getting an unlicensed veichle + driver when you order a Uber drive isn't very good, and I do think the comapny should pay dearly for that. Now there are people who only care about getting cheap services, but in the case of Uber you pay the same amount for a licensed and an unlicensed driver.
The amount of unlicensed Uber drivers seems to be rather small here, but they do exist sadly, and I find
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I find it strange that Uber doesn't try harder to fix this problem.
Not at all strange. They are sociopathic libertarian company devoted to "disruption", which is generally code for "we break the law if it gets in the way of us making money and we think we can get away with it".
Re: (Score:3)
They are sociopathic libertarian company devoted to "disruption", which is generally code for "we break the law if it gets in the way of us making money and we think we can get away with it".
The funny thing about that, is that pretty much describes every big company I know.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
TL:DR - I'm getting mine, fuck everyone else.
Re: (Score:2)
You realise that the people here who can actually "report all movement" are Uber?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ka... [forbes.com]
And they're not really very concerned about privacy either when it suits them:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-j... [breitbart.com]
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
I would think the drivers should be licensed the same as taxi drivers, as far drivers licence is concerned.
And insurance sounds like a good idea too.
Maybe even a criminal background check.
But I find it rather amazing how every municipality around the world is rushing to the defense of existing taxicab services.
I wonder about the sheer amount of money that must be changing hands to induce all city governments to sing the same song from the same hymnal in perfect unison. How does that happen? You can't get t
Re:I wonder why... (Score:5, Insightful)
really?
a company comes in, says "fuck your laws, we don't need to follow them, we'll write our own", and the municipality should go "welcome to our city"?
Re: (Score:2)
One has to wonder though. What is so special about being a taxi driver, that there has to be special laws governing them? And if there is a need for very special laws around taxi drivers, why are regular drivers exempt? Where I live, the "special drivers license" for a taxi driver amounts to showing that you can figure out how to use an old school paper map to find a location reasonably well. Then you can get your special license to be a taxi driver.
There is nothing else to it. The "laws" that Uber are tell
Re: (Score:3)
Where I live, the "special drivers license" for a taxi driver amounts to showing that you can figure out how to use an old school paper map
Where I live the requirements are quite a bit higher.
1. You need a provincial class 4 licence which includes a thorough medical exam. It also includes testing the ability to inspect a vehicle for defects before driving. The road skills standard for passing the test is also much higher than a regular license.
2. The city chief's permit requires considerable knowledge of the city without using a map, English language proficiency, and knowledge of the laws governing taxis. Drivers can not follow laws they don't
Re: (Score:2)
1. The medical exam is part of the regular drivers license here. The ability to inspect a vehicle for defects likewise. If there are special skills needed, apart from being able to cruise above the speed limit and running yellow/red lights, I don't know of them - and if they're really required for the job, why are they not part of the regular drivers license? That is a double standard. There is no difference in being run over by a taxi driver or a 18 year old with a brand new license.
2. That is not the real
Re: (Score:3)
No, they don't spend "just as many hours on the road." Both involve trips ancillary to the principal occupation, so the amount of driving is less. Neither of them involve the carriage of strangers for money.
Would you suggest that other forms of commercial driver's license are also unnecessary, such as those required for driving a passenger bus or hauling hazardous materials?
Re: (Score:2)
Where I am from you are an independent, or the franchise you work for requires it, you MUST have business insurance. E.g. if a real estate agent driving a customer to a showing has an accident there MUST be insurance to cover any injuries to the customer. What Uber wants is a free ride.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a good argument. But again, why should that not apply to anyone driving people around, be it commuting or your kids football team? My main point is that anything you can make apply to taxi drivers, should also apply to regular drivers - we share the same roads after all. All the other arguments in the thread deal with current law, but much of that law is to create barriers to entry, not to ensure your safety on the road. That is my gripe.
Re: (Score:2)
Where I come from having insurance is required to legally license a car. The type of insurance is actually up to the insurance company. They demand more coverage as the more miles you drive and longer hours driving put you into another risk pool. Basic Actuarial Science. Running the kids and their friends to the football game after school is very different from picking up drunks at 2 am.
Re: (Score:2)
My main point is that anything you can make apply to taxi drivers, should also apply to regular drivers, should also apply to regular drivers
Because taxi drivers do it more often and therefore have a bigger chance in the long run of having issues. A commuter drives an average of 2 hours a day while a taxi driver drives an average of ten hours a day. A taxi driver is five times a likely to get in an accident in the same month. Therefore the licencing is much higher for taxi drivers.
Re: (Score:2)
A taxi driver is five times a likely to get in an accident in the same month.
Well, that is not exactly true. A taxi driver also accrues five times the road experience, lowering his risk profile considerably. But again, if there is indeed a risk associated with driving for long stretches (and there is), it makes no sense to only regulate professional drivers.
I can jump in my car now and drive from here to Berlin (about 5.5 hour drive), with nobody asking me any questions. That hardly seems fair. And if i take on a couple of passengers, still nobody would ask me any questions. But if
Re: (Score:2)
For instance, a guy doing on site tech support spends just as many hours on the road as a taxi driver
An on site tech support spends time at each site. I doubt that any on site tech support spends more than half their time driving. A taxi driver spends at least 90% of their time driving. Sales people do not drive to a location spend 30 seconds there and drive to a different location. They too spend time at each location.
Re: (Score:2)
You're correct of course. The point being that there are plenty of professional drivers out there, who are not regulated in the same manner. And even more amateur drivers - carpooling for instance.
I think we're kidding ourselves monumentally if we think the regulations governing taxis and the like are in place for our protection. They're just as much in effect to protect the businesses of people driving other people around for a living.
I'm all for road safety. But arguments about liability are weak. If anyt
Re: (Score:2)
Raping your daughter, or mine, is still illegal. You can't make it more illegal. You can't guarantee that it won't happen in any case, background check or not.
As we see with regular drivers licenses all over the world, you can drive drunk while having a license - the two are not connected unless you're drunk while taking your drivers test. As with the rape example, drunk driving is illegal - you can't make it more illegal or guarantee that it won't happen with professional drivers. Indeed, it does happen.
No
Re:I wonder why... (Score:5, Insightful)
Now Uber show up and declare themselves to be exempt from taxi laws because they don't employ taxi drivers, they just make money by "soliciting" "ridesharing", which is somehow different except it seems to work exactly the same*. And they're not willing to enforce that their drivers have valid licenses because they think they're not subject to the law.
Now you have lots of taxi drivers in all but name driving around without a license and you probably can't even get Uber to disclose their identities so you can fine them because, again, Uber thinks there's no legal basis for this.
I think it's fairly easy to see why Uber isn't very popular with municipalities.
* Technically it's a form of outsourcing but to my knowledge they don't require the drivers to be their own proper taxi businesses so Uber is still blatantly ignoring the law by contracting with people they know don't qualify under existing regulations.
Free Rides (Score:2)
Its pretty clear that New York and other cities just need to simply pass a law making it a crime to drive for Uber without a taxi license, proof of fitness to drive, and proof of liability insurance and give out rewards to anyone turning in an unregistered, unfit or uninsured driver. Everyone will then get free rides from Uber and the city's transportation costs will be solved.
Re:I wonder why... (Score:4, Informative)
Actually many of the people you listed are definitely licensed. most by the country and many by individual cities/states. especially, plumbers, lawyers, nannies, nurses and most certainly electricians.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I wonder why... (Score:5, Insightful)
In Australia, plumbers, electricians, doctors, nannies and nurses all need to be licensed. You're talking out your arse or you live in the wild west.
Re: (Score:3)
Cities don't license plumbers, painter, interior decorators, electricians, doctors, lawyers, nannies, or nurses. Even though these people need much more training.
In Australia, plumbers, electricians, doctors, nannies and nurses all need to be licensed. You're talking out your arse or you live in the wild west.
Even over here in the wild west, plumbers, electricians, doctors, nannies and nurses all need to be licensed.
Lawyers do too.
Only painters and interior decorators on GPs list don't need licenses here.
Perhaps by "nanny" they meant "babysitter"? Baby sitters need no license, and many do call baby sitters a "nanny" despite the medical qualifications needed for the official title.
Not that such a mistake would make the GP any more correct of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in Seattle, the city comes to inspect electrical work.
Re: (Score:2)
By god, you're right! And that makes people who are not licensed by any governmental entity entirely equivalent to those who might be licensed by a county, a state, a Federal administrative agency, or the like!
the citya regulatory body
Crumb. Now you need to address the actual argument instead a pedantive construction of a sentence.
Re: (Score:2)
Where do you live? some cities don't license many of those jobs. But in Australia nearly all of them are. Think it is the same in the US too, e.g. a quick search of the two obvious ones that I know regularly need city licenses showed up
https://www1.nyc.gov/nycbusine... [nyc.gov]
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dob/ht... [nyc.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Cities don't license plumbers, painter, interior decorators, electricians, doctors, lawyers, nannies, or nurses. Even though these people need much more training.
Come to Germany. Your plumber is licensed, and has done at least 3 years training before he is allowed to appear at your home without a supervisor who has the necessary license. Same for the painter, interior decorator, or nurse. Electricians the same, but they can get into deep legal trouble for shoddy works. Doctors and lawyers are _really_ licensed.
Re: (Score:2)
Fortunately most countries have other methods of licensing plumbers, electricians, doctors, lawyers, nannies, or nurses. Most are far more stringent than taxi drivers. So the city doesn't need to take responsibility for it.
In most places you cannot turn up at a hospital and say "I'm not a licensed nurse, but that's ok, I'm just "sharing" medical care, not providing it. Now pay me."
I don't see a need for licensing painter or interior decorators, TBH.
Re: (Score:2)
plumbers are Guilded, as are painters and decorators, and electricians (who are also required to hold current proficiency certificates AND be up on current wiring code) as a legal requirement to be able to profess those trades. Doctors are registered at the GPA or central health authority (in England this would be the General Medical Council) as a legal requirement as the title is protected under Law. Nurses are either agency (as most private practitioners are these days) or registered (in England at the Ro
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Who needs a licensed brain surgeon anyway?
Looks like an exciting business opportunity awaits in Uber-Medicine.
Re: (Score:2)
The funny thing, is if cab companies adopted some digital hailing and hiring tools, they could compete on price and availability.
Actually they couldn't due to the extra costs caused by regulations and the much lower income per driver. One of the main reasons to limit the number of taxi permits is to ensure that a living wage can be made by drivers. Uber relies on part time drivers who are making extra money. There have already been strikes due to low income through Uber. If you think it is hard to get a cab now at time think about it when the drivers are only out there during the good periods.
Re:I wonder why... (Score:5, Informative)
But I find it rather amazing how every municipality around the world is rushing to the defense of existing taxicab services.
That is because every municipality went through the time when there was no taxi regulations. There was rampant fare kiting, discrimination, lack of coverage, lack of insurance, poor customer service, bad drivers, poorly repaired vehicles, etc. While regulations have not solved all those issues it has decreased them. The fact that many communities that have gone through the same issue have come up with the same solution is not surprising. Taxi regulations have been refined over decades to produce a system that works. No municipality in their right mind would want to go back to the days before regulation.
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention the issue of robbery, assualt and rape. In Scottish cities, there are two types of cars: taxis (black cabs) and private hire cars. A taxi can pick you up off the street, a private hire car can only collect you from a pre-booked address. Outside of cities, there is only generally one category, which is called a taxi, but can only pick up from taxi ranks or pre-booked addresses. Both currently need to have clear markings, but in the old days there was only mandatory marking on black cabs (the o
Re: (Score:2)
That is because every municipality went through the time when there was no taxi regulations. There was rampant fare kiting, discrimination, lack of coverage, lack of insurance, poor customer service, bad drivers, poorly repaired vehicles, etc
Here in the USA, we still have all of that, except fare kiting.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not everyone who opposes you is automatically a shill.
Claiming so doesn't show insight, it shows an utter lack of awareness that unbiased observers may weigh things differently than you.
Show us that they've been paid or have some other financial interest in the outcome.
Otherwise recognize that you yourself could be labeled a shill by your own particularized definition.
Re: (Score:2)
While regulations have not solved all those issues it has decreased them.
It has also decreased the number of taxis in highly dense areas, to the point where it's completely pointless to even hope to get a taxi during peak hours.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is also by design, because adding more vehicles to already congested roads just means it takes much longer for anyone to get anywhere. When traffic is basically at a standstill (peak hours) it does not matter if you are in a cab or waiting for one, you are not really getting anywhere. The only difference is whether you are paying for the privilege of going nowhere.
This is another one of those things that Uber supporters just don't seem to get. Surge pricing? It's great, because it gets more driver
Re: (Score:2)
To paraphrase Yogi Berra [wikipedia.org] "No one can get a cab because everone is using them". That is caused because these peak periods only happen a couple of hours a day and a living can not be made driving only those hours.
Re: (Score:2)
I just want to add rape and robbery to that list.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Driving the long route to get a higher fare. It still happens today but with licensing there is at least an authority to report the violation to. If it happens enough times the company can be fined and the driver's permit pulled. Fare kiting is fairly easy to prove as place to place fares are easy to confirm.
Re: (Score:2)
Driving the long route to get a higher fare. It still happens today but with licensing there is at least an authority to report the violation to. If it happens enough times the company can be fined and the driver's permit pulled. Fare kiting is fairly easy to prove as place to place fares are easy to confirm.
Happens in Vegas all the time. Drivers are supposed to take the shortest route, or at least that is the law unless it has changed recently, or ask if you want a different one but on city to airport runs they go the long way. If you go through the tunnel they've nailed you for a longer fare; however if you ask them why the took the long route instead of the prescribed shorter one they will charge you the shorter fare. If they balk you can always ask the cop at the airport what to do and the driver doesn't wa
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder about the sheer amount of money that must be changing hands to induce all city governments to sing the same song from the same hymnal in perfect unison.
Have a look [nycitycab.com] at how much a taxi medallion sells for in NYC to give you an idea of the kind of money we're talking about here. Average selling price $800,000+. And that's AFTER Uber (they used to go for over $1 million).
Re: (Score:2)
Funny that they don't show us what the proposal actually was. Maybe it was so ludicrous as to never be viable but now Uber can say they "tried". The article states that it was shot down in part because it would "threaten the livelihood of small taxi companies." What are the other parts? Maybe they are better reasons. Maybe Circa is selecting specific parts of the decision to sell clicks.
Uber tried again Feb. 25 to please South Korean regulators by offering its UberX service for free in Seoul.
After a bit Uber can say "Since it is safe enough to be free why is it not safe enough to pay for?". The issue is that peo
Re: (Score:3)
I wonder why Uber don't have the appropriate license?
Probably because getting an appropriate license involves things like:
1) Paying a huge brib...ahem...."registration fee" to the issuing authorities, and/or
2) Being a good friend or relative of the right people, and/or
3) Making generous campaign contributions to the right politicians, and/or
4) Being the son or daughter of an existing license holder.
Just look at New York City, where a taxi medallion is treated like a royal asset and can set you back $1 million+. Once you get one, it's basically a privileged mo
Re:Why (Score:5, Informative)
Criminal records checks
Corporate liability for misconduct
Vehicle checks and certifications
Availability of vehicles in off hours
Services for the disabled
Rate limits.
Discrimination, passengers can not be discriminated against based on protected aspects such as race, gender, age, etc.
All of the above go into the regulation of taxis in most jurisdictions. In exchange for these regulations the taxi companies are given a limited number of licenses so that the limited revenue potential does not get spread too thin to make a living wage.
I used to work for a cab company and they threatened to fine us if we did not put on more handicap accessible vehicles. If Uber takes off the limited amount of revenue will be spread over too many people and full time drivers will find other work. Part time drivers work whenever they want and there is no guarantee there will be divers available to all times.
Uber does not care who drives for them or if they make a living wage. They just want the revenue. There has already been strikes [whosdrivingyou.org](scroll to the bottom) for higher pay.
Re: (Score:2)
"Discrimination, passengers can not be discriminated against based on protected aspects such as race, gender, age, etc."
Free rides for Koreans seems to be a direct violation of this.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree 100% that uber should not be able to just start a taxi service without any regulation and safety standards. But we could simply have all those regulations and standards you mentioned, without the absurd undue burden onto society that are the "limited licenses".
Many industries have government requirements and quality standards without the need of limited licenses, and those industries always trived, wihout anyone saying "I won't open a business because there are no limited licences". Restaurants and
Re: (Score:2)
You can not have regulated rates and must-carry rules without a limited number of licenses. Restaurants, etc, of course do not have regulated rates or must-serve rules (note that must -carry includes things not related to discrimination based on the person, but also discrimination based on the profitabilty of the trip).
If you have regulated rates, must-carry rules, and unlimited participants then there only two ways to be profitable: get more fares, and cut costs. Getting more fares means competing for f
Re: (Score:2)
References please. What you "know" may not be actual facts.
Re: (Score:2)
if you're in an incident with a fare paying passenger and no PCV licence (hence PCV liability cover), then you're directly liable for any injury that person suffers in your vehicle. Fully comp private insurance does *not* cover PCVs. There is also no commercial cover since the driver is on a private licence (no PCV provision!) hence the driver is also fully liable for any commercial claim against him! Uber are not liable for shit, yet they're happy taking money from unlicensed, uninsured drivers who are in
Re: (Score:2)