Slashdot Mirror
London Black Cabs Threaten Chaos To Stop Uber
Bruce66423 (1678196) writes in with news about a planned protest by London black-cab drivers against Uber. "London black-cab drivers are planning to cause gridlock in the city to protest against car service Uber. The Licensed Taxi Drivers Association complains that Uber's drivers are using a smartphone app to calculate fares despite it being illegal for private vehicles to be fitted with taximeters. Transport for London has declined to intervene, because it disagrees that there has been a breach of the law. LTDA now plans to force the issue by holding the action in early June. 'Transport for London not enforcing the Private Hire Vehicles Act is dangerous for Londoners,' Steve McNamara, LTDA's general secretary, told the BBC. 'I anticipate that the demonstration against TfL's handling of Uber will attract many many thousands of cabs and cause severe chaos, congestion and confusion across the metropolis.'"
Does that mean the entire LBC can be defined as a terror organization and placed in whatever Britain's equivalent of Guantanamo Bay is?
This could be a doubly pointed demonstration: Uber becomes the defacto 'taxi' service of London, and the government shows exactly what will happen if anybody things to provoke demonstrations which might infringe upon the steady operation of infrastructure :)
These are the sellers of horse feed trying to fight cars not eating oats. Quite simply the day unoccupied driverless cars become a reality this entire job description will be struck from the registry. Driver of car will be right beside shoveler of coal.
We might not see this for a number of years, but what will make me laugh out loud will be when on the eve of driverless cars these same cabbies will inform us that, "People will feel safer and prefer a human cabbie."
As for Uber, the key of any new regulations should not be to protect cabbies, but to protect customers. I suspect that some dark spots with Uber will show up and thus need solving. But one of those dark spots is not the providing of much needed competition in our city's streets.
This is England. They'll be sentenced to funny walks and an ASBO.
Mostly random stuff.
"We're going to cause gridlock preventing traffic for Black Cabs, on the same day!" Just to fuck with them. Everyone providing gridlock for everybody else, saying "Muahaha! We got 'em!" meanwhile everyone is contently stuck in gridlock. Clownshoes for all!
I think the whole point is by creating congestion, Uber also will be unable to effectively transport people. They're basically saying "if I can't have it nobody can" and stamping their feet.
By creating such congestion, *NOBODY* will be able to transport people... even those who have nothing to do with Uber.
Also, this would interfere with emergency vehicles and public transportation as well.
I'm quite sure that they could face serious fines if they actually implement this... up to and including losing their license to operate as a business if they continue.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
This is what I was thinking as well... I can see people who conspire to do this losing their license if they are caught. Shouldn't be too difficult since they've actually admitted they are intending on doing it publicly.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
It's generally the powerful who get to write the regulations you're so fond of.
That's why we have in powerful taxi companies who "own" a government granted medallion pissed off that there might be some new competition for customer's transport dollars by independent drivers and their previously lobbied regulations aren't stopping it.
No customer needs to be "protected" from Uber, a service they are free to choose to use or not use based on their own evaluation of if it fits their needs better or not. All Uber does is allow independent drivers to have the same type of dispatch infrastructure that the big taxi companies have, but more efficiently.
The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
Not really... the cabs are being artificially hamstrung by regulation that was put into place precisely because private people were doing bad things and thus government was lobbied/decided upon that regulation was required in order to protect public safety. So now there are a bunch of cabs which are following said regulations (likely at a pretty significant cost), and now this other organization is setting up a de facto cab company, but doesn't have to follow the regulation. Now... if the cab companies no longer had to follow the regulations and _still_ couldn't compete with Uber, then so be it. But as it is now you're comparing the performance of two race horses, but one of them has its legs tied together.
If people can't get a cab, they'll find another mode of transportation. That's not the smartest form of marketing ... but then I guess we're talking about cab drivers, after all.
My problem with Uber is that they don't pay its cabdrivers when they dont have any customer. If a cab driver get sick she or he will not get paid. Right now there are two few drivers for the market but when everything settles (more Uber-like companies) most taxi drivers will not get payd work thier hours they put in. Uber will still make money since it does not cost much extra to have 1000 cars or 10000 cars. But when there are two many cars for the market workers will suffer greatly.
Yes, apparently I have. I read an article yesterday about it and this one today and that's all I've really heard about it.
It's a stupid name, and I couldn't really give a fuck about it. It's sure as shit not ubiquitous - just two cities in the whole country? Fuck that.
Sure, it's disrupting traditional business models, falling foul (or not) of various vehicle licensing regulations, accessed via a mobile phone application. It's still a niche product used by a few people, so don't go acting all fucking surprised that people haven't heard of it. Shit, it's not even available in the second most populous city in the UK or the largest city in Europe. Hardly fucking everywhere is it.
In NYC, that medallion will cost you over $1million. Figuring that there are only 10-20% more medallions now (~13,500) in NYC then in the 1930s, you can see that supply has artificially been restricted.
Yup. You are one hundred percent correct. But this is not a cab problem but something fundamentally wrong with present day implementations of democracy. I can say with absolute certainty that in my area that any decisions made by government that have a large corporate or wealth family interest then the government will act to in the rich family's/corporation's interest. The only time the government acts in some form of public interest is when there is effectively no monied interest.
Personally I think this why in the US abortion is such a big issue. It is largely an issue that has no monied interest (beyond the interest groups themselves) so politicians are off the leash on that issue. But look at the morning after pill. There was a monied interest behind that abortion related aspect so whoosh it was approved in 2 seconds. I am not saying that it is good or bad, just that normally anything involving abortion is normally full on trench warfare.
So in this particular case it will be interesting to watch the fairly well monied Uber fighting with the zillion somewhat less monied cab companies.
This debate is not happening because the politicians said, "Hey look the voters are pissed off with crappy and overpriced transport." They are having this debate because they were told to.
Our interests will not be part of the equation in any way at all.
I doubt that any Uber driver has to have done The Knowledge before being fully registered, so this is just another private mini cab service. Whilst there is a bit more self-regulation in that you actually have some means of complaining about a particular driver (whereas before you had nothing, even if assaulted) being driven around London by someone relying on satnav rather than the superior Knowledge is prone to difficulties.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
It's the new bitcoin. Annoying stories about it appear just as you were about to forget the last one.
Becoming a black cab driver in London isn't as easy as buying a car, and that's for several reasons:
- London's fucking big and fucking complicated. Having a satnav isn't necessarily enough to know where to take people, or especially how to get there efficiently
- Black cabs are a part of London's reputation, attraction and transport infrastructure. There's an implicit level of quality and reliability that the licensing is intended to create
- There are too many vehicles in London already, and black cabs get priority on many streets. For this reason black cab numbers are controlled
- Taxi drivers gain personal access to individuals that may be in a vulnerable state. Solo ladies, young people, drunk people
Does that make Uber wrong? Not necessarily. It may be cheaper, it may be easier, it may offer a broader range of potential vehicles.
It also adds traffic to roads not designed to cater for it - the transport system in London is geared around a certain level of private traffic and a certain level of black cab activity, and Uber shifts that relationship.
So no, customers are not property. This situation is also not as straightforward as you're trying to suggest.
Finally an insightful comment! As opposed to the plethora of idiotic "buggy whip" vanilla bs.
hardly a fair comparison.The argument here is actually quite valid, Black Cabs and cab drivers have significant government license, knowledge and regulations imposed on them which are quite expensive I understand. If Uber are bypassing those requirements then they are operating at a considerable cost advantage that no matter how good Black Cabs operate will not be able to compete price wise. I am not from the UK but having travelled to London I do find it rather nice getting in a Black Cab and actually having a driver that knows where he is going. When travelling to the US I have gotten in Cabs in Seattle and San Fran where I have had to give the driver directions from the Airport to major hotels.
If they're worried about loosing jobs to an app, wait until they see the self drive taxis that are coming. Taxis are so expensive in London, they deserve to get competition.
- Both driver and rider can view each other's history / ratings. If a rider doesn't like the driver, they can choose a different car.
- Both driver and rider can see each other's location, in real time, up to the point of pickup.
- Both driver and rider can contact each other either by phone or SMS (I've moved location, I've forgotten a bag / phone, I can't find you).
- Both driver and rider can rate each other after the experience.
- No need for carrying cash, or dealing with post drive transactions -- just hop out, it's all handled.
- Several levels of quality, ranging from eco, black car, and suburban / limo.
Uber provides a safer experience for both driver and rider, with accountability and communication.
If you've never ridden Uber (or similar), it's a vastly superior experience to old fashioned cabs.
When you've been disrupted like this, it's either evolution or extinction.
What these drivers are asking for is a special privilege to be a superior class of citizen: To be spared any natural competition.
And what they're doing is not protesting. It's throwing a tantrum.
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
If the cab companies had their way it would be illegal to drive yourself in the city..
It's not illegal, but you do have to pay £10 per day to do so.
It's not like being a legal taxi driver prevents you from being a murderer. Or even just charging illegal fees.
I'm sure that most illegal cabbies are just trying to make a living. The best solution is probably to end the protectionist rackets that limit the numbers of legal taxis.
I don't read AC A human right
They don't. The whole story was completely misrepresented by a hysterical media. The lesson was simply to teach adjectives and illustrate that you can have a black sheep, a happy sheep a pink sheep or even a rainbow sheep.
Innovate or die.
As usual the established trade is resisting any changes to the model. Why don't they take this moment & implement their own competing system & instead of owning cabs own an app?
But but but this is our lively-hood they tell you, think of the children! -no one said driving a car & knowing London's roads will land you a lifetime job.
We know this all too well, they will used their position and established financial base to throw an army of litigation at it and maybe they'll shut the app down but this is the beginning of the end because it's an eventuality.
So many people drive a 4 seat, 5 passenger vehicle with only themselves or perhaps another person with them. Why not use that?
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
Well then, if money doesnt change hands, and each alternate week someone brings his car, is it an illegal taxi operation too?
Also, in reality, you want the taxi services to be regulated. I've been to coutries where they are not, and the taxis there range from "you will get cheated" to "you will get raped, killed, and robbed". And that's a fact. No way a foreigner can use the local taxis. You free the business completely, competition will drive the prices low (which is a good thing), but the low prices will force the drivers to cheat, steal, and rob, as the only ones making a profit will be the ones who do. And no, i'm not a taxi driver. I hate having to pay the local super high taxi fares, but on the other hand, the service is first class. They are on time when preordered, the cars are nice and clean and safe. The drivers won't rob you, beat you, cheat you, or anything. They actually know their area, they also have navigators in every car, as well as the taxi centrals help. They are not allowed to refuse a drive because they don't feel like going to a direction where they won't find anyone to come back the other way.
They don't. The whole story was completely misrepresented by a hysterical media. The lesson was simply to teach adjectives and illustrate that you can have a black sheep, a happy sheep a pink sheep or even a rainbow sheep.
And thats their problem.
The conservatives dont want an educated workforce, they want unthinking proles who aren't smart enough to rise up against their masters.
If we start teaching them adjectives, then they'll learn adverbs. interjections, prepositions and before you know it, those slovenly Midlanders and lazy Yorkies know enough to say they have rights and cant be exploited in 16 hour days for minimal pay. Some of them will actually understand Industrial Relations laws, this cannot be allowed to pass.
It's a good think Murdoch and the Daily Mail are here to save us from this horror.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
I'm a New Yorker who makes frequent use of the yellow cabs here and has had the pleasure of using London cabs.
In NYC, it's basically the taxi's the are licensed. Any yellow cab has to have a medallion and they are expensive... often going for $750k+ USD. Once you have the medallion you can lease/rent it to just about any hack who qualifies for a drivers license.
In London, it's the drivers that are heavily regulated. The tests are notoriously hard and London cabbies either have or acquire neurology that is much more spatially oriented than normal.
The difference may be subtle to most people but it's important. When you get in a cab in NYC, you usually need to be explicit about the route that should be taken. Nefarious types will often take you through Times Square, Union Square, Canal Street or other traffic nightmares to run up the tab. London cabbies pride themselves (at least in my experience) on on knowing every last back road that will get you there that much faster.
So I see their point. They're a group of professionals.... who act like professionals. They've put a lot of time and effort into becoming such, I'd want to protect my turf as well.
So in this particular case it will be interesting to watch the fairly well monied Uber fighting with the zillion somewhat less monied cab companies.
They're not fighting the cab companies. They're fighting the black cab drivers.
London has a peculiar system. There are black cabs - which can be hailed on the street, within certain limits they are obliged to take you to your destination (so if they're waiting at a major station hoping for a lucrative fare and you want to go around the corner, they have to take you and lose their place in the queue at the station), and the fare is calculated by an installed meter and is relative to time and distance travelled. (There is a minimum fare)
Private hire cars must be pre-booked (the booking only has to be a few minutes in advance - typically you ring up the office and then they send the nearest car to pick you up), and they're under no obligation at all to take you when you call when they hear where you want to go.
Uber uses a metering system linked to an app. Black cabs are the only taxis allowed to have a meter fitted. TfL (Transport for London) have said they don't consider the app to be "fitted" and therefore the law banning other cars from having a meter fitted doesn't apply.
Black cabs also have to pass a rather impressive test. Within the area they're obliged to carry passengers, they're required to show they know every street, landmark etc. (Apparently, when they're examined, a favourite trick of the examiners is to ask them to do a journey where roadworks have temporarily closed the "usual" way and the drivers are expected to know about it and not just "follow the diversion" but take the best route knowing in advance that there are roadworks.)
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
The argument here is actually quite valid, Black Cabs and cab drivers have significant government license, knowledge and regulations imposed on them which are quite expensive I understand.
It sounds to me like Uber are yet another minicab (i.e., "private hire") business. There are quite a number of other such firms already operating in the UK, including within London, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of them didn't already use websites and apps to allow a customer to arrange a transaction. Heck, I know of at least one firm that allows booking via website (even if that's just something you do a few minutes ahead) and an app is just a logical extension of that.
What makes Uber different other than some marketing bumf?
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
I doubt anyone will notice.
You say that like you think the liberals want something different.
There should be a small white space in the top tight of your browser window, if you come across a term you are unfamiliar with you can try typing it in there, your "query" will be sent to a "search engine" and you should be taken to a page of results that will help you find the answer you are looking for. Unless you are using Bing.
If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
Free marketeers and Randroids, especially those in business are the biggest hypocrites.
It's funny how the most ardent free marketers turn into rent-seekers when they're faced with real competition.
I bet Ayn Rand didn't imagine that her beloved Galtian supermen are actually the real looters and parasites.
Where's the government when you need them??
seems like black cabs should be providing excellent service
They are rated as some of the best in the world.
if black cabs service is so much better than ubers, people will surely choose to use black cabs over uber. where's the problem?
really, they just want to use government to stifle competition.
They welcome competition, on fair terms. Tourists (a rather large market in London) have no way of comparing the service provided by the Uber cabs, and the licensed cabs. They have no way of knowing if the Uber driver is actually selecting the best (and cheapest) route for the journey and as Uber have no requirements for drivers to know the area they operate in, there will be plenty of times when the customers will be ripped off, without even knowing it.
-kernel picnic-
You're right. It's completely unfair of the government to establish any sort of regulations or expectations on private professional practice on behalf of it's citizen's. You have fun with SurgeonsRUs, PilotsUnited, etc.
Nothing in your post justifies the Black cabs exclusion of a competing service for illegal reasons.
If people judge that the cabbies added value (knowledge of road closures, etc) suits them, they will use them. If people judge that Uber's added value (lower prices) suits them, they will use Uber.
What is this extra-legal right that Black cab drivers have that justifies their excluding competition?
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
what advantage are uber drivers gaining? that they provide subpar service compared to black cab?
Actually, yes! They can provide a subpar service, without the customers knowing, or having any way of knowing that the service they are paying for, is rubbish and/or overpriced.
A short while back, we had a scandal in the UK, where a lot of beef was actually more horse than anything, consumers had no way of knowing they were being cheated, as flavourings and colours were used to disguise it.
A subpar product can easily be sold without customers knowing they are being cheated, this is why we have standards and regulations
-kernel picnic-
They did, for London black cabs, there is "Hailo".
-kernel picnic-
It's a long time since I used a minicab. I'm not sure how the billing works (or that much abut Uber). Are they fundamentally different? It seems that they just offer a price per mile agreed upfront. Does it connect with unlicenced freelancers or actual minicab drivers?
And then there is waze ...
I use Waze myself and while it is brilliant, I would still trust a black cab to get there quicker when it involves anything remotely near zone 1.
-kernel picnic-
Thats going to be the "fun" part of this problem.
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
How about you stick to commenting on things you have a clue about?
We have a serious problem in that anything new always meets strong or even violent resistance without regard to the quality of the new idea or service. We see this with the Tesla cars where conspiracies to stop Tesla abound. And it is true that London is known for good taxi service but even in the US most taxi services are an abomination. Further the scope of such laws could be over reaching. Am I suddenly not free to offer a neighbor $20. to drop me at the airport? I know car dealers that feel that the "Auto Trader" and Ebay should not be allowed to sell cars at all as the dealers feel that they should have the exclusive right to sell cars. They even argue that individual car owners should be prohibited from selling their own cars as only dealers have to pay taxes and meet regulations concerning car sales. The local meat head will often remark that "He has the right to make a living." And therefore he has the right to burn down the competitions buildings or do whatever it takes to control "his area". In short anything new that is a good idea will always have to fight a war just to exist.
if black cabs service is so much better than ubers, people will surely choose to use black cabs over uber. where's the problem?
How naive. If that was true, "Please stay on the line. Your Call Is VERY Important to us. Average call waiting time is 30 minutes" would not exist. Nor would telephone menus or self-service anything.
People have consistently demonstrated that Lower Prices Every Day[TM] trump quality of product or service almost every time.
Doug Stanhope has a fabulous bit on the streets of London and WWII.
It's quite simple - people need taxis to get around. They need to know when they get in one that it's going to be the best possible service. Uber is great, but it requires multiple failures before a driver isn't allowed to pick up "fares" any more, meaning each of those passengers picked up before dismissal will suffer. That is not a great system. London is unique in this regard - its black cab drivers are excellent, and you can be as assured as possible that when you get in one, you will have the best service possible. These are not your average US taxi drivers - these are the real deal.
And they have no way of knowing that the restaurant they just waked into charges 150% more than one down the street and is considered one of the worst restaurants in town.
So...
If it were really that bad Uber would become infamous with travel guides/agents and tourists would learn that you just never use Uber.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Even those private minicab businesses have to be licensed (including background checks for drivers and regular vehicle inspections) which Uber does not. This is the problem. It will lead to people being inconvenienced, which is the antithesis of being a London taxi driver.
It sounds like these London Black Cabbys have been pretty much replaced by UPSes. Why does anyone still care about making them memorise every street of London anymore?
Take 2 of them, a few programmers and developers, and improve on current GPS tech to make an app that can navigate through London with the same precision as these cabbys, and update it with traffic conditions constantly.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
But look at the morning after pill. There was a monied interest behind that abortion related aspect so whoosh it was approved in 2 seconds.
notsureiftrolling.jpg but the morning after pill (e.g. Plan B) is a contraceptive, not an abortificant. Contrast with RU-486 (a genuine abortificant), which did get hung up quite a bit with approval, despite Big Pharma behind it.
-- The Genesis project? What's that?
You have the right to a safe ride from a professional driver. Call a black cab.
Did you mean to say the obligation to use a state-blessed professional driver?
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Dude, I ride city bus. I don't need the best possible service; I need to get from one place to another in reasonable time and cost.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
2 stories in 24 hours. Uber must love /. for the free publicity.
The argument that black cabs are making is that Uber is using a taxi-meter for their fares and its illegal to have a taxi-meter installed (in London) unless you are a black cab.
(I'm making no comment about whether that rule is reasonable, I don't know why it exists other than, presumably, to deter non-black cabs from answering hails - the price needs to be agreed which should be done at booking time)
Black cab drivers are complaining that that law isn't being enforced for Uber, hence their protest. TfL have said that they don't consider using an app, having a meter installed.
At the end of the day this can only be decided by:
a) repealing the law - Uber is welcome to lobby to get that done - but they haven't.
b) bringing a test case - this is where I suspect the black cab drivers problem is. It's probably TfL who has to bring the test case. The courts will then have to decide whether an app is an "installed taxi-meter"
After (or possibly before) b, parliament can decide to clarify the law. Generally parliament doesn't act unless there's a perceived problem though - so it won't be until: 1) The courts rule that an app isn't an installed taxi-meter but parliament decides that they intended to catch the Uber case - the law will be modified to make it explicit that an app counts as a taxi-meter.
2) The courts rule that an app is an installed taxi-meter but parliament decides that that wasn't intended to be caught and clarify the law (probably after lobbying)
3) There are a series of high profile assaults/robberies/etc by Uber drivers so parliament clarifies the law so then TfL prosecutes Uber drivers.
Black-cab and mini-cab services coexist in London. I've used both and no doubt will again in the future.
Uber appears to be treading the line between a mini-cab service (which would be legal) and a black-cab service (which would be illegal). One of the great things about London is that, late at night, when you're the worse for drink, you can get into some random strangers car and be as confident as it's possible to be that that person will deliver the promised service.
There's quite a lot of (TfL) advertising warning people that "unless it's pre-booked it's a stranger's car".
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
Who the fuck gets to compete against a regulated service without following the regulations? Taxi drivers are independent contractors and compete against each other in a regulated environment. Taxis are regulated, taxed, and often have to pay for permits. Uber and Lyft don't pay for permits, are not paying the same taxes, and are effectively unregulated.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
The problem is that with the advance of technology the regulations are no longer as necessary as they were before.
With Uber the trips are all logged by a third party before somebody gets into the car. 100 years ago you just hailed a cab and nobody knew who picked you up. In the latter situation the driver can take you anywhere and rob you, and in the former situation they can't do that without getting caught.
Technology has changed the game. That said, there is no reason that you can't have a regulated cab service that people can choose to use in competition with the less-regulated service. Nothing says that the system has to be fair - the black car drivers can always sign up to drive for Uber if it turns out to be a better deal.
And then there is waze ...
I use Waze myself and while it is brilliant, I would still trust a black cab to get there quicker when it involves anything remotely near zone 1.
Agree, but consumers might not want to pay more for a faster trip. That should be a choice that they have. The security concerns with private cabs are legitimate, but I think Uber has a decent solution for them. So, if you want to regulate, just require all dispatched cabs to record the identity of their drivers and log each trip before pickup.
Perhaps Tesla could do an exclusive deal with Uber by leasing their vehicles as the official motor-carriage of Uber-drivers. :)
You've been posting and posting about how awesome some cab service is.
What's not awesome is their price or else uber wouldn't even have a market.
No.... they should be watched for suggesting it, and only arrested if they actually implement it. Otherwise you get into the realm of effectively making it illegal to even *think* about breaking the law.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Murdoch doesn't own the Daily Mail. Yet.
I've never heard of a taxi company with navigators. In the UK at least they just require taxi drivers to have learnt every single road in London to be licensed.
Wow, finally a logical and intelligent comment in a sea of "horse buggy" detractors.
I think it was the same issue with black limousines in NYC being forbidden from picking people up curb-side. Getting a yellow cab medallion is a long process and costs a fortune. Those things are sought after. Getting a black limo on the road is much cheaper and less regulated. Why would you spend $10k for a medallion when anyone with a Crown Victoria painted black can pick people from under your nose, without any of the fees?
I've never heard of a taxi company with navigators. In the UK at least they just require taxi drivers to have learnt every single road in London to be licensed.
Actually, they only require London taxi drivers to have learnt every single road in London to be licensed. In Edinburgh, that information is of limited use.
A strike I would understand, but actively causing traffic congestion seems like a blatant disregard for the very people you're claiming to serve. As we saw with the bridge in NJ, traffic congestion causes real, life-threatening problems and we certainly do not need to be causing it artificially. There's got to be a better way for this organization to make their point.
I was surprised to hear that London private hire cars (minicabs) were not allowed to have taximeters, instead relying on a fare determined at the time of booking.
Other cities (such as Edinburgh) allow private hire cars to have them (as long as they charge the same, or less, as taxis).
. They're a group of professionals.... who act like professionals.
First off, "study for a test that's hard" is not "professional." A professional is someone who spends years training in skills specific to their vocation (navigating a city, and driving a passenger car, is not a vocation-specific skill) in order to do it.
Second, calling london cab drivers professionals is a laugh. Fire up youtube and search for "london cyclist attack" and note video after video of cabbies attacking cyclists. If they're such professionals, why do they not understand the rules of the road (that allow the cyclist to be where they are), break the rules themselves, endanger the cyclist, and then attack them?
Please help metamoderate.
Why do they need to know that it's going to be the best possible service? What if they prefer to not have the best possible service, in order to pay less?
Your reasoning makes as much sense as banning McDonalds so that restaurant customers get the best possible food.
Prosecuting conspiracy and incitement to commit crimes are not the roads to thoughtcrime. Its one thing to think it, its another to advocate something and spread the word.
Good-bye
That may be true, but is it up to those of us with Excellent Taste in Very Expensive Things to legislate the purchasing of those more expensive and nicer things? "You have very bad taste, cheapskate. You'll like it a lot better when I show you what's best for you by making those cheap things unavailable."
That may be honestly the right thing to do when people can't tell the difference before the transaction and it's a really important transaction (health insurance, prescription drugs), but as long as the car gets you where you want to go and you know what you'll be paying for it, are cab drivers really on that list? Is being driven by somebody without encyclopedic knowledge of London's history and local culture really that much of an issue?
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
The cab had a pro GPS unit, but he still got lost. I don't think he knew how to use it anyhow.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
I sounds more like the cab drivers are planning to make it more dangerous, not the LTDA
Sorry. In The Marketplace the available products are determined by intersection of The Tyranny of the Majority and the Golden Rule (as in whoever has the gold...)
Not much room in such cases for those of us who are shouted down by the mob on the one hand and not in the 1% so we can't afford the big megaphone on the other. Our voices go unheard.
The last cab I rode in was being driven at night with no dashboard lights and this was an established and reputable cab company doing the Walmart-thing.
So a little meddling in the market is perfectly fine by me.
The Black Cab drivers have to repeatedly pass proficiency testing on the street layout of London, never mind its cultural aspects. By contrast, in D.C., where the cab fares were determined by zones traversed, my driver appeared to be diverting repeatedly in order to cut through zone slices and thus ante up the fare. A black cab driver caught in the act wouldn't have been able to credibly claim ignorance of more direct routes.
There's "a little meddling" like requiring safety and price transparency. Then there's "a lot of meddling" like limiting the number of medallions (like the NY disaster), having insane pricing zones with an incomprehensible pricing scheme (DC), or requiring that a person memorize a map of one of the world's largest metro areas instead of simply using GPS. Seriously, this could all be solved with basic safety regulations and meter/GPS linkage with pricing transparency requirements. No need to insist that the driver needs to be able to perform parlor tricks or even be a particularly polite person. I'd be willing to accept the black cab as a trademark and require all other fare-charging vehicles to look different to ensure that the premium trademark retained its value.
If I were to visit London, I'd probably be really interested in the black cab option as a premium service. But if I lived in London and needed to travel regularly, I'd be pretty irritated that I was constantly paying for premium service when all I need is safe, reliable transport with transparent pricing. We don't ban buses because the experience is sub-par compared to premium cab services. We recognize that they're safe and reliable, the pricing is not a scam, and that the price point is an important consideration for most of the population.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
Snort, I live in Paris & have heard french snobs use that exact argument to say attempt to justify refusing an operating license to a MacDo*. Can't let the plebes get what they want you know...
* As they are called here.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
Best possible service is it? So, London cabs will be picking me up in an aircar and whisking me from spot to spot, all the while shining my shoes & offering me a complementary beverage? No? Well then it isn't the best possible service.
None of which addresses my point that London cabbies cannot justify the exclusion of a competing service for illegal reasons either.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
Dental appointments? In London? Pull the other one, it's got bells on.
Transport for London has already determined that Uber vehicles do not have an installed meter which kicks the crutch right out from under your argument.
Now what is happening is that the london cabs are attempting to pressure Transport for London and/or Parliament into reversing themselves or into creating a new law that will outlaw Uber.
So again I ask you: What is this extra-legal right that Black cab drivers have that justifies their excluding competition?
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
Uber is booked with a phone, making it a private hire cab, rather than a hackney carriage (which can pick people up on the street). Only the latter needed the knowledge.
Freedom of speech (yes, I know the Brits don't have it) should allow them to talk about it. But laws against conspiracy should prevent them from planning it.
Learn to love Alaska
The confusion is that in the US, most areas have "medallions" that limit the number of taxis in an area to a fixed number. If the population increases/spreads out, the medallions become worth more, but the number of medallions increases.
There have even been court cases that found it was illegal to increase the number of medallions, depending on the rules in the area.
Learn to love Alaska
In NYC, the hire cars negotiate a flat-rate for the trip. You take it or haggle. There aren't meters and "per mile" prices, though the number is generated from a time/distance estimation.
Learn to love Alaska
Actually, yes! They can provide a subpar service, without the customers knowing, or having any way of knowing that the service they are paying for, is rubbish and/or overpriced.
Then people will figure it out and correct shortly. But the Black Cab drivers disagree with you. They seem to be complaining that Uber is providing a competing service (similar enough in quality) for a lower price (not higher as you hint), and they don't like it.
Learn to love Alaska
The argument that black cabs are making is that Uber is using a taxi-meter for their fares and its illegal to have a taxi-meter installed (in London) unless you are a black cab.
(I'm making no comment about whether that rule is reasonable, I don't know why it exists other than, presumably, to deter non-black cabs from answering hails - the price needs to be agreed which should be done at booking time)
Black cab drivers are complaining that that law isn't being enforced for Uber, hence their protest. TfL have said that they don't consider using an app, having a meter installed.
At the end of the day this can only be decided by:
a) repealing the law - Uber is welcome to lobby to get that done - but they haven't.
b) bringing a test case - this is where I suspect the black cab drivers problem is. It's probably TfL who has to bring the test case. The courts will then have to decide whether an app is an "installed taxi-meter"
After (or possibly before) b, parliament can decide to clarify the law. Generally parliament doesn't act unless there's a perceived problem though - so it won't be until: 1) The courts rule that an app isn't an installed taxi-meter but parliament decides that they intended to catch the Uber case - the law will be modified to make it explicit that an app counts as a taxi-meter.
2) The courts rule that an app is an installed taxi-meter but parliament decides that that wasn't intended to be caught and clarify the law (probably after lobbying)
3) There are a series of high profile assaults/robberies/etc by Uber drivers so parliament clarifies the law so then TfL prosecutes Uber drivers.
Black-cab and mini-cab services coexist in London. I've used both and no doubt will again in the future.
Uber appears to be treading the line between a mini-cab service (which would be legal) and a black-cab service (which would be illegal). One of the great things about London is that, late at night, when you're the worse for drink, you can get into some random strangers car and be as confident as it's possible to be that that person will deliver the promised service.
There's quite a lot of (TfL) advertising warning people that "unless it's pre-booked it's a stranger's car".
excellent summation!
The best route is now called a GPS and many of these are able to deal with road works. Many cab companies have systems that monitor traffic flow and provide this information to their entire fleet. This way you can have the "Knowledge" that a black cabbie has 5 minutes after someone shows you how to enter your password into the system.
This is all about protectionism and lack of choice for the customer. Also this is the 21st century where people live by their cellphones.
Hung up for a little bit; and after much huffing and puffing it passed right along through the system; just as big pharma wanted.
most likely the other mini cabs have to tell you your fare in advance, as compared to calculating it based on distance and time while in the cab. That seems to be the regulation at issue, though I'm unclear about the specifics.
why is it everyone's argument against deregulation is only fraudsters will succeed?
That is ridiculous. What happens is that new entrants will have to spend years building a reputation in any job people highly value (like being a surgeon) before people will frequent you. It will take years, and many spent as an understudy of a doctor who has already won people's trust as being competent. This is what used to happen, and what would happen again. If you were only legally allowed to drive a specific type of car because the government certified you as competent, it would produce much the same result without requiring personal knowledge.
It does not mean that everyone would suddenly abandon quality products because someone sells something cheaper, without regards to what they are getting. I didn't run out and buy the cheapest phone available when I wanted to upgrade. In fact, I bought the most expensive one at the time because quality mattered to me. And I wouldn't do that with a doctor, a lawyer, or any other professional I have interacted with.
"...I anticipate that the demonstration against TfL's handling of Uber will attract many many thousands of cabs and cause severe chaos, congestion and confusion across the metropolis...."
And I anticipate, nay suggest, that the city should alert the towing truck services. I'm sure they will love the income boost from removing taxi cabs that are blocking the roads. :-)
http://about.me/jimm.pratt
It's not every single road in London. It's a specific set of roads north of the river in inner london, mostly inside the old city walls (The City of London).
Outside of those boundaries most cabbies are useless at navigating.
AND - it only applies to black cabs you can hail on the street (hackney carriages) in the CIty of London (which is not "London"). Elsewhere "the knowledge" isn't required to be a hackney driver.
There's a separate class of taxi (private hire car, aka minicab) in the UK which can't be flagged down in the street, but they can be booked by phone. Technically Uber falls into that category but those drivers must be police vetted too.
Gettinmg a London Taxi license is _extremely_ expensive, even more so than getting a NYC taxi medallion.
If Black Cab drivers start obstructing roads in greater London they're likely to find that the special licensing conditions and exemptions they received will be wiped - starting with prohibiting access to bus lanes.
The City of London (the square mile in the middle bounded by the old city walls) is a corporation and plays hardball with organisations which mess with it. Should cabbies cause disruption in there it's entirely possible the corporation would arbitrarily strip their licenses (They do have this power) or change the rules (they have this power too)