Slashdot Mirror
Calif. DMV Back-Pedals On Commercial-Plate Mandate For Ride-Share Drivers
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that
In an abrupt U-turn, the California Department of Motor Vehicles late Friday retracted its finding that drivers for ride-hailing services like Uber, Lyft and Sidecar must obtain commercial license plates.
That determination — based on a 1935 state law — ignited a firestorm of criticism from the San Francisco startups and their supporters as stifling innovation. Commercial licenses are cumbersome to obtain, meaning they could impede the companies’ growth, which relies on getting new drivers, many of whom work just part time, into service quickly. And commercial registration probably would have necessitated that drivers get commercial insurance, which is significantly more expensive than personal auto insurance.
Republican Assembly members threatened legislation over the “nonsensical” interpretation if the DMV didn’t reconsider its stance before Feb. 17.
Now the department says it will do just that.
That doesn't mean drivers for companies like Uber and Lyft can expect to be left alone by the DMV, though, which according to the article "will meet with regulators and the industry to work through the issue."
So, what's to stop an insurance company from working with the ride share companies to offer up commercial coverage to anyone driving using the company's ride share app? Some smart insurer is going to go down this path and make a lot of money. Certainly, with almost a million drivers, someone like Uber would have the clout to negotiate the lowest commercial rates on the planet. That would be absolutely no different than what taxi unions have been doing for decades, just at a larger scale. The only difference in this case, apparently, is that it's OK when a union working under a gov't sanctioned artificial scarcity (medallions) does it, and absolutely horrific and unfair when an evil corp like Uber does it.