Slashdot Mirror
City of Toronto Files Court Injunction Against Uber
Sebolains writes: The city of Toronto in Ontario, Canada has filed a court injunction on Uber Canada Inc. today that requests for all operations in the city to cease. Uber has been operating there since 2012 without a license from the city, and so officials are concerned that Uber's operations pose a risk to both drivers and riders. How quickly this will happen, we don't know, but the city has asked the courts to be expedient in hearing this application.
John Tory (the next mayor of Toronto) has made statements actually supporting Uber. Thing is, although he's been elected he hasn't taken office yet, so he's not quite in a position to act. Be interesting to see what happens when he takes the helm, though.
For the past several years the city leaders of Toronto have been afraid to go after Uber, allowing it to operate unlicensed out of fear that the CEO and CFO of Uber will bash their heads in with baseball bats.
" Uber has been operating there since 2012 without a license from the city, and so officials are concerned that Uber's operations pose a risk to both drivers and riders."
Well, they've just been given data from a two year trial. Any reason to suspect based on that data that it does pose a risk? I suspect not...
You are wrong. It's not like this is obscure information.
It's the 4th largest by city proper population after mexico city, new York, and LA, but 13th largest by metro area.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
With the exception of Chicago, none of the cities you listed are even in the top 20 cities. If you doubt it, you should research with a brief google "largest cities in north america" before you post. Las Vegas doesn't even make the wiki list.
John Tory (the next mayor of Toronto) has made statements actually supporting Uber. Thing is, although he's been elected he hasn't taken office yet, so he's not quite in a position to act.
Well I suppose this explains why, after Uber has been operating for 2 years Toronto is suddenly in a rush to get the case heard by the courts.
Was just in Vancouver and learned that they've done away with Uber. It was horrible. Not enough taxis so it was impossible to get around the city. Frankly, it will impact my decision on whether or not I go back to visit. Unless your taxi companies can offer the same level of service, killing Uber will result in an impact to tourism... maybe just from me, but it'll be an impact. :)
1. Mexico City (pop. 8.5 million)
2 New York (8.4 million)
3 Los Angeles (3.8 million).
4 Toronto (2.8 million)
Chicago is 5th,
San Francisco at 36th and Detroit at 53rd, both fall behind Canadian cities Montreal (9th), Calgary (22nd), Ottawa (32nd), Edmonton (33rd)
Mississauga (49th), and just ahead of Winnipeg (55th) beat out Washington (60th), which is just ahead of Vancouver (63rd)
Las Vegas, with a population of 583,736, doesn't make the list.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
In the rest of the civilized world, there's a reason we license livery drivers. That's how you can get a cab ride or black car ride without getting robbed, or worse. Taxi and Livery Commission (TLC): It's a thing.
Kriston
Toronto is Canada's largest city, the fourth largest in North America, and home to a diverse population of about 2.8 million people.
4th largest? Somehow I doubt that.
New York is big, but I imagine that Las Vegas, San Francisco, Chicago, Detroit, and DC are bigger than Toronto.
New York is #2, Chicago is #5, San Francisco is #36... the rest don't even make the top 50.
Too bad for Emil Michael that the press already dug up the dirt on Toronto's mayor, Rob Ford.
England had yearly safety inspections (the MOT) but in Ontario they do not exist and a safety test is only required when the vehicle registration is transferred i.e. when ever a second hand car is sold to a new owner. I don't think the safety check is required when transferring the ownership to a family member but I wouldn't swear to that.
I've been utterly shocked at the state of many cars on the road here with no sills left and nothing but rust in other structurally essential parts of the car. I think the OPP can stop cars that they deem unsafe but there certainly is no annual safety inspection and the only required test is a bi-annual emissions check.
So, I'll flat out say to you: bullshit. Bullshit bullshit bullshit.
As in, you're spewing bullshit. You're spewing so much bullshit it isn't even funny. Are you even aware that what you say is bullshit? You clearly do not own a motor vehicle in Ontario.
There is no such thing as annual safety inspections of private, non-commercial motor vehicles in Ontario.
I have owned a motor vehicle in Ontario for almost 20 years. You periodically have to do an emissions test. When you buy and sell it needs an inspection.
But you do not, and have not for at least the last 20 years, have to do an annual motor vehicle inspection in Ontario.
There are some classes of commercial vehicles which do get inspected annually.
So these Uber guys? They're driving in their own personal vehicles with neither a commercial license, insurance, nor mandatory vehicle inspections.
In other words, Uber as a service is pretty much ignoring the law and claiming that it doesn't apply to them.
Basically, Uber is a bootleg taxi service, and the laws being applied have applied to all commercial car services for a very long time.
This isn't some powerful taxi lobby pulling strings behind the scenes. This is cities deciding that Uber is required to follow the same laws as everybody else.
Uber aren't the victims here. They're the idiots claiming they can decide the law doesn't apply to them and their drivers, and going ahead and doing it anyway.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Not simply because his post is wrong (that is not considered grounds for moderation by itself), but because it's willful ignorance and grossly insulting to readers. His post is, in essence,
"The article contains this trivially verifiable statement of fact, but I _feel_ it doesn't sound right to me, so I'm compelled to rant about it on Slashdot, while at the same time being far too lazy to spend ten seconds to check it with a search engine — but then again, I just don't respect the audience enough to care if I post total nonsense; all that matters is that I get to express my feelings, and who the hell are Slashdot readers to tell me my feelings are wrong anyway?!"
"Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
I would love the actual statistics of accidents and incidents involving Uber to be researched during the court hearings. Somehow I feel that it won't be significantly (or at all) worse than with licensed taxi drivers and companies. Of course, whatever the stats are, they have nothing to do with whether or not Uber breaks the law, but they can be used to judge if the regulation in its current form is necessary in the first place.
As a little additional information, the GP's confusion probably comes from thinking of metro areas, not cities. Those US cities have a lot of population in the surrounding areas that aren't part of the same municipality. Looking at metro areas, the top three cities are the same, but Toronto is pushed down to #10, with a few of the cities the GP expected in the middle. See: list of US Metropolitan Statistical Areas and the same for Canada.
Las Vegas has around 600k people resident, it's only just off the list. Wiki puts it at 603,488 (2013) and Vancouver, at the bottom of the list is 603,502 (2011). They're essentially the same size; 14 odd people is a statistical blip even though it's silly trying to compare census data from different years.
In case of taxi you need to ensure your passenger are covered in case of accident, you also need to make sure the meters are not tricked to count quicker etc.... Not all is regulatory capture. A lot often is real security, that some sees as an obstacle to their "cheapo" alternative.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
So, I'll flat out say to you: bullshit. Bullshit bullshit bullshit.
I was mistaken; it's been a long time since I was up there. It appears that the laws have been relaxed in most Canadian provinces, other than New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, which still have hard requirements on safety inspections because they care about their citizens safety. I'm sorry your government in Ontario no longer cares.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V...
17 states require annual or biennial inspections
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V...
Yeah, I thought it was brave of him not to post AC with a comment like that.
The subject who is truly loyal to the Chief Magistrate will neither advise nor submit to arbitrary measures (Junius)
Yes!!!
That is livery drivers must have full coverage and Uber tried to use fine print to get out of that.
Actually, according to our good friend wikipedia, Toronto is still 8th by metre area population in NA. Here's the link Important to note that the article have been tagged for multiple issues thought.
Elok
I think Toronto should get rid of cabs period. Being a Toronto resident I can tell how bad the cab infection has got around the city. They don't follow the traffic law, they don't drive safetly , they don't drive with common sense in mind and they completely fuck rush hour and add 10s of minutes to the commute. Toronto should either get properly trained cab drivers or move to Uber.
Sorry ... Mississauga is not a "city" .. it should really be a part of toronto ...
Mississauga is very much its own city, with its own municipal government, charter, and bylaws.
Just because it's immediately next to Toronto doesn't make it "not a city"
Actually, according to our good friend wikipedia, Toronto is still 8th by metre area population in NA.
It makes a difference whether you are asking about the population of the city, or the population of the metro area, the city plus surrounding areas that are not in the same political unit.
Cities: Toronto is fourth largest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Metropolitan Areas: Toronto is eighth largest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Urban Agglomertions: Toronto is number five: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
So I rate the original claim,
Toronto is Canada's largest city, the fourth largest in North America
, as True.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
On the subject of Uber, anybody else look at Uber's new privacy policy, and think it's a bit skanky?
http://www.buzzfeed.com/johana...
--What a carefully crafted weasel-worded policy. It says that Uber retains the right to violate your privacy for "legitimate business purposes"-- but doesn't define any limits on what they're going to call "legitimate." They list some "examples", which sounds soothing-- but these are just SOME of the reasons they might violate your privacy-- not ALL the reasons. Frankly, this policy states that they can violate your privacy any time they want, just as long as they say there is a business purpose to doing so.
Oh, and they don't have to tell you, either.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
"Uber is a bootleg taxi service, and the laws being applied have applied to all commercial car services for a very long time." Ahh... but Uber is NOT a taxi service. Uber facilitates a connection between people needing a ride and a driver. We could say Uber is like Facebook or Google+, or perhaps Craig's List in that they provide a platform for people to connect. Just like Aereo operated community antennas for people, rather than acting as a cable television provider. Unfortunately, in the case of Aereo, the powers that be arbitrarily declared that Aereo was something other than a community antenna. Next they will want to legislate a more rational value for Pi to simplify calculations for us.
It seemed that they have had more than long enough to either prove that they do not, or prove that they do.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Interesting, this page is the one I went on for the 13th by metro area. I guess you'd have to look into the links and figure out what stats they're each basing their rankings on.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
That's only if you look at CMAs - in reality the GTA or GTHA would be #5 or $6 with 6 to 6.5 million people
Las Vegas:
City 583,736
considering Uber is as morally bankrupt a company as they come. They should be using it only so much as their pocketbooks trump their espoused values.
they're trying to make their bones flaunting established laws, undermining competition that would make a 1900s oil magnate blush, and effectively generating profit off exploiting the hell out of their workforce.
...on the crucial finer points that make being paid to drive someone around so much different that it merits such massive legal protection and draconian regulation.
It certainly is not the burden of inspection. At least where i am at, taxis are given the EXACT SAME inspection as out of province used vehicles registered by regular drivers. As for maintenance, when i was still scrimping and saving to pay off student loan and get a house i drove used cars and went to the junk yard to get parts, and there were ALWAYS taxi drivers there getting tires off wrecks for their cabs. They were less picky than me...if they were not flat and not worn to the belts they'd take them.
I understand there may be liability issues in driving taxi as well, however that doesn't merit the nature of regulations in place--so many rules are in place to limit competition and have nothing to do with safety or fraud protection. People can and have set up online services to do deliveries, operate guided tours and so forth that require professional drivers without the challenges and hassle. Even driving schoolbus isnt given so much scrutiny! Think of the children!
I dont fault drivers, it is the fault of taxi companies and plate brokers. Tight regulation makes plates so scarce relative to demand that they can cost more to buy or lease than the vehicle.
The whole anti-uber thing honestly confounds me. I understand the need for regulation in terms of safety and liability but i really fail to see why governments ate so obstructionist. They are supposed to HELP the public, and the public is helped by efforts to improve transportation.
I suppose it has to do with history of taxi operation. Perhaps back at the early 1900's before regulation a few shady operators ruined it for the honest ones. Perhaps even organised crime established itself in the industry leading to closer scrutiny by government for our protection. My theory is that criminal element never completely left. They may have established a presence on boards/commissions to ensure that if they had to follow rules to operate honestly and safely that the rules would also ensure their enterprises were lucrative and free from competition.
I have no solid evidence of this happening, and I believe whatever mob presence there was is long gone, but there certainly is a legacy there in present regulations and powerful lobbies suggesting such influence in the past.
The lobby must be bery powerful still. A couple of right leaning pro business councillors in my city are usually quite outspoken in defending policies to cut red tape, limit taxation and regulation and so forth to help especially entrepreneurs and small businesses, but they roll over and defer to the taxi commissioner at the mere mention of uber or more taxi plates and back amendments to blunt efforts to ease restrictions or outright vote against adding plates or permitting uber and others to operate.
It makes me wonder what goes on that makes the taxi lobby so influential that even some opinionated politicians clam up at mere mention of taxis or uber.
The City is concerned that Uber's operations pose a serious risk to the public, including those who are signing on as drivers, for the following reasons:
increased risk to passenger safety – no mechanical vehicle inspections, lack of driver training
inadequate insurance that fails to meet the requirements of the Municipal Code and may not provide essential coverage to drivers, passengers and others in the event of accidents
Seems legit. I could see the rationale for requiring a higher safety standard, and perticularly better insurance. This also seems like something Uber could accomodate.
increased number of vehicles operating as taxicabs resulting in traffic congestion and a possible threat to the taxi industry, including the City's objective of increasing the number of on-demand accessible taxicabs available, mandated by the City of Toronto earlier this year
So they want to stop Uber both because it results in too many new taxis... and because it reduces the number of Taxis? This argument sounds pretty dubious/protectionist.
unregulated fares resulting in price surging/gouging, and
Predatory pricing is a concern but for a big company like Uber it's generally something that consumers figure out.
increased safety risk to the drivers due to lack of training and vehicle security equipment, normally governed by City bylaws.
Again this is defensible and could be fixed by Uber.
It seems like Uber has an ability to seek a regulatory middle ground with some basic driver training, safety inspections, and insurance standards. I'm not sure I understand their strategy of no accomodations.
I stole this Sig
Maybe they determined that "taxing" you for an annual inspection for personal cars went to far and stopped it, more then 20 years ago? (i don't recall ever having to have the cars inspected and i have been driving for 25 years in ontario).
Please come back and post some more information on Ontario, a place you clearly don't know anything about.
PS.
This map indicates that a large number of states don't have annual inspections as well, does that mean they don't care about you as well?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_inspection_in_the_United_States
Yes. It does.
It means all they care about is collecting registration fees, and they smog test fees, and while they are generally named "The Department of Public Safety", they really don't give a crap about public safety, if they let you drive around with worn-out brakes, misaligned headlights, cracked windshields within the drivers field of view, and all the other things they wouldn't let you get away with in 17 U.S. states.
In point of fact, they are doing the minimum necessary work to be able to collect the maximum amount of fees,
Here's the Utah version of the Vehicle inspection manual for "PASSENGER VEHICLE AND LIGHT DUTY TRUCK"; notice that you must pass a 78 point inspection (minimum; some vehicles require more points of inspection). Inspections can take several hours, as they examine your gearbox and motor mounts, and run alignment leveling tests, rocker arm tests, and so on:
http://publicsafety.utah.gov/s...
The point of this is to make sure that your vehicle is safe to be on the road, and you aren't going to kill someone due to an equipment failure.
-
Personally, I don't see *why*, if an inspection *should* be required in Toronto for someone to operate their private vehicle on behalf of Uber, that some dumb-ass felt that as long as Uber wasn't involved, it's perfectly fine for you to pack your grandmother and three kids into a car that *wasn't* inspected.
This dual standard for "passengers" vs. "passengers" speaks volumes about them not actually giving a damn about actual safety as they do about revenue collection.
...and the crime of unlicensed duct work. People are taking money in exchange for giving car rides. Look, if the Toronto city government is willing to let any old moron DRIVE a car (and they are), I think those same people can be trusted to delegate to a hired driver without risking a carpocalypse.
I live an hour away from toronto. It really is littered with hipsters, and it seems like the ripple effect is starting to make it near my hometown.
Cities aren't measured by the city lines, but the metro area. For example, L.A. is a small city in a large metro area. So the metro area is usually what people mean.
Learn to love Alaska