Slashdot Mirror


Uber Faces $410 Million Canadian Class Action Suit

farrellj writes: A class action suit has been filed by the Taxi and Limo drivers and owners in the Province of Ontario in Canada against Uber, demanding CAN$400 million in compensatory damages, $10 million in punitive damages. They claim Uber is violating the Ontario Highway Traffic Act that covers taxis and limos, and has caused them to lose money. They also seek an injunction against Uber operating in Ontario. "This protectionist suit is without merit," Uber said in a statement. "As we saw from a recent court ruling in Ontario, Uber is operating legally and is a business model distinct from traditional taxi services."

8 of 247 comments (clear)

  1. Re:We're a tech company... by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There was a time when it was illegal for black people to drink from the same drinking fountains as white people. I am not equating these 2 laws. I am only pointing out that sometimes laws are not justified, and disobeying laws isn't always immoral or harmful. In fact it can occasionally be helpful in driving progressive changes to poorly thought out and/or obeselete and/or unfair laws. Surely you do not completely discount civil disobedience as a tactic with no redeeming social value, even if you are not specifically a proponent of Uber.

  2. Good by rsilvergun · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Que Grumpy Cat Meme. Uber is a major part of the global race to the bottom all us wage slaves are caught up in. In every way possible their "drivers" are employees. They can't work for competitors, they have to carry the Uber phone and if they turn down too many rides they get fired (what the hell else would you call it?). The only little difference is they don't pay benefits, reimburse expenses, pay unemployment insurance or any of the other things regular employers do. In a society where your entire quality of life depends on your job it's kinda important to clearly define what a "job" is.

    And for all you young comp-sci majors out there who want to chime in with how great your 1099 gig is; Uber is NOT THE SAME THING...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  3. Re:Uber should countersue by vux984 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So you go out and buy chocolate bars for $1 each and sell them for $5 and people only have to wait a minute or two to purchase them

    And you don't bother getting a business license. Your business entrance isn't accessible to disabled people.

    When asked whether you are insured against someone breaking their neck on your premises you mention that you've registered your place of business as your home, and that you have basic residential insurance. Besides its like having a garage sale... so its all casual and informal.

    Sure its all organized and run by multi-billion dollar multi-national corporation... but other than connecting buyers with sellers with an app, handling all the money, advertising, and deciding who is allowed to participate, well... its still casual... like a garage sale.

    Now, don't get me wrong, I have serious issues with the 'medallion' system and think its fundamentally wrong. But uber is a bunch of crooks.

  4. Re:We're a tech company... by Dragonslicer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Surely you do not completely discount civil disobedience as a tactic with no redeeming social value, even if you are not specifically a proponent of Uber.

    It seems like a lot of people use the argument that a person (or in this case, company) shouldn't be punished for their act of civil disobedience. That argument is ridiculous. 50 years ago, activists committed acts of civil disobedience knowing full well that they would be punished for them. The whole point of civil disobedience was to use the punishment to draw attention to their cause.

    Claiming that your actions are civil disobedience and then trying to escape punishment doesn't make you a hero. It makes you a coward.

  5. Re:Why this again? by bloodhawk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Taxi drivers are upset that they finally have competition and for once they have to compete in a fair market place. If I need to get from point A to point B and my choices are a Taxi, or Uber, I'll always pick Uber because it's a better car, a better car ride, driven by someone who is actually qualified to drive me and someone who cares about more then earning a dollar. Taxi drivers are unsafe, unstable, wreckless, road navigators that ignore safety and rules all to make a dollar, It's time they learn that the public shouldn't have to put up with it.

    I don't like the taxi industry, but the whole point is that Uber AREN'T competing in a fair marketplace, they are intentionally avoiding competing fairly by claiming they don't have to pay the same fees or abide by the same regulations as Taxi's and hence are able to undercut them.

  6. Uber: We're nothing like taxis by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ebay: We're nothing like auctions.
    Paypal: We're nothing like a bank.

    If you're a tech company, claim you're nothing like has ever come before as to be immune to as many laws as possible.

  7. Wouldn't the solution to the problem by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Interesting

    to enforce the existing laws for _everyone_? Instead of just saying "Well, the plat owners are violating the law so it's OK if Uber does it too"?

    Oh, and while I'm on the subject, Uber's choice of prey is slightly different. Uber requires a pretty nice car. The sort that you're run of the mill cabbie doesn't have. That's why cabbies get stuck renting their cars. Uber drivers are mostly desperate folks who just lost their job with a decent car from when they had one. The cab companies prey on recent immigrants. Uber preys on the recently unemployed.

    Both practices are abhorrent. Let's shut 'em both down.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  8. Re:We're a tech company... by Daemonik · · Score: 1, Interesting

    You claim it's an absurd monopoly, but offer nothing to prove monopoly (most cities have more than one taxi service) nor why it's absurd. The laws regulating taxi services didn't come out of nowhere for no reason. At one time taxi's were unencumbered with regulations and as people were cheated, swindled, injured, griped to their local representatives, bit by bit regulations were forced onto the industry to keep things reasonably fair and responsible. That's the problem with people who don't understand history, and only see that they can't have their own way.

    Unless you own stock in Uber, why are you a supporter exactly? Does Uber come home with you and give you a blowie or something? Was Uber best corporation at your wedding?