Slashdot Mirror
New York City Just Voted To Cap Uber and Lyft Vehicles and Require Drivers To Be Paid a Minimum Wage (cnbc.com)
New York City Council passed regulations on ride-hail companies on Wednesday, capping the number of vehicles on the road for one year and requiring that drivers to be paid a minimum wage. From a report: Council Speaker Corey Johnson said earlier that the regulations are intended to protect drivers, fairly regulate the industry and reduce congestion. The year-long cap on new licenses for ride-hailing vehicles will take place while the Taxi and Limousine Commission (TLC) studies the effects of ride-hail service in the city. The cap would not apply to new wheelchair-accessible vehicles or new vehicles serving an area demonstrating need in a way that does not increase congestion. App-based ride services account for 80,000 vehicles in New York City, and provide 17 million rides per month, according to a study by The New School for the TLC. The surge in ridership coincided with increased resident frustration with the local subway system. With the move on Wednesday, New York City, the largest American market for Uber, has become the first major American city to restrict the number of ride-hail vehicles and to establish pay rules for drivers. In a statement issued moments ago, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio said," Our city is directly confronting a crisis that is driving working New Yorkers into poverty and our streets into gridlock. The unchecked growth of app-based for-hire vehicle companies has demanded action -- and now we have it."
According to statistics, a reasonable minimum wage adjusted from 1971 for NYC would be $40 an hour.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
and that rides in a year! There are 125 million rats in the Gotham. More even than gay Paris.
You know, you in New York, who love Uber and find the Councilman's reasoning specious and serving of special interests, to your detriment, can solve the issue by "voting the bums out", as a feisty politician might say.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
So the number of vehicles will still increase. Plus Uber will add more “administrative” fees to cover the wage increase.
... that studies cause problems.
Last week we had the story that said Uber was keeping people off the subways.
Now a new ordinance that blames people's increasing frustration with subway problems with the rise of Uber.
So it is imperative to force people back onto the subways they're frustrated with...
THAT will fix it!
54.5 cents per mile + NY MINWAGE + full insurance will hurt them big time.
New York is one of like 2 to 3 US cities with an actual train system and it's falling apart.
I'm fine with capping Uber and requiring minimum wage, but for god sake fix Penn Station, dump a shit ton of money into the degrading subway system and invest in that critical infrastructure!
... the more slip between your fingers.
The city is fighting services that offer a means for people to get where they want to go at a price that they are willing to pay. So, what exactly is the problem?
I hate the whole concept of a minimum wage. The minimum wage has been and always will be zero dollars. No law will change that.
Let's say I start a volunteer ferrying service. I post my phone number and website so people can find it, and I say I'll carry you door to door in the city. I offer to carry people in my car for nothing, but if they offer me a "tip" then I'm not going to refuse. If people ask for what kind of "tip" I expect then I'll give a quick estimate of my time, fuel, wear on the vehicle, and some "buffer" above that to make it worth my time.
I basically just described how Uber and Lyft got started, as ride share programs to reduce congestion and share on the costs of the ride. Both have evolved into a kind of taxi service once people figured out that they could make a small but not insignificant income by volunteering to take people where they wanted to go. It might be below minimum wage if the hours are calculated but then it's better than making nothing at all.
Go ahead New York, go and regulate these services. All that means is another one will come in to take their place. They might structure their business plan to avoid the rules, or simply ignore them because enforcement is impossible. You want to tell people that they can't drive a friend to the airport? Good luck with that.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
If there were a high number of drivers, then there was a demand for them. If wages were too low, drivers would have change jobs. If traffic congestion was too high, people would have stopped using ride-sharing services and found a different mode of transportation.
Let capitalism work.
If it walks like a taxi, drives like a taxi, and quacks like a taxi, it's basically a taxi and is adding to congestion in the city. Market's saturated -- there's a reason why taxi medallions were limited in quantity by law. NYC streets can't support unlimited traffic. This being said, public transport in the outer boroughs needs to be improved, or some system created to preferentially license rideshares in the outer boroughs (where "real" cabs are hard to get).
I wonder how all of the drivers no longer able to drive because of the car cap will feel about being paid more per hour for driving 0 hours.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Not fucking adults in New York City.
Holy fuck.
They could but all the money went to tax cuts - especially for the rich.
Trump made a campaign promise to spend a Trillion dollars ($1,000,000,000,000+) on infrastructure.
Instead he's talking about more tax cuts that will help almost exclusively the 0.1%ers. Yeah sure, you 1%'ers here would get some crumbs (look at the stats. Many of you are one percenters!) The rest of us? The crumbs of the crumbs - the dust and scent of the slice of the pie.
Here's what wealth inequality brings! The top gets more and more and we at the bottom get less and less. And for most of you who are in the upper middle, downward mobility is in store for you!
The less of them the better..... they drive like drunks... and will just stop for no apparent reason, then start back up... then stop... change lanes.... stop in front of you again........
Yeah, that's what we're discussing here.
54.5 cents per mile + NY MINWAGE + full insurance will hurt them big time.
Which is why the Taxi Companies pushed so hard for this.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Average traffic speed in NYC is say 15 mph -- I'm being very generous by averaging Manhattan and less-crowded parts of the boroughs here.
$13/hr / 15 mph = 86 cents/mile
86 cents + 54 cents = $1.40 per mile.
Add insurance and you're probably close to $2 per mile.
Once you add Uber's profit, their charges will need to be pretty close to the $2.50 per mile that "regular" cabs charge.
But, what happens when the major NYC cab companies experience totally coincidental and nearly simultaneous fires that destroy their garages and cars?
But, what happens when the major NYC cab companies experience totally coincidental and nearly simultaneous fires that destroy their garages and cars?
NYC finest are going to come looking for you to charge you with arson. That's what happens.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Good.
You cant fit a couch into most Uber/Lyft cars.
You are a very confused man, because I am talking about the fact that NYC has specifically eliminated driving jobs, not arguing about the minimum wage per se (though actually you are also wrong there).
Reality has a bias towards reality, not myth.
It sure does, which is why I post about reality, not the mythical fairyland your mind inhabits. I mean if you can't even distinguish between an abstract concept like minimum wage and a specific cap on a class of jobs - how can you seriously claim to be grounded in reality?
I'll let you have the last response as I can only do so much to try and introduce the deluded to reality, and I have given you as much help as is warranted. The rest is up to you, good luck!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
easy to solve, employ all drivers for exactly legal minimal wage and not a cent more,
don't employ them in Uber directly instead employ them in small companies containing each 9 workers or so that provide "driving service" to Uber itself so that all those overhead laws regarding ADA, healthcare, pension ... do not get fully activated (something similar to "virtual franchise" i guess, i don't know what are laws like in USA but i'm sure good team of lawyers will find holes in letter of law needed, intent of law is not really that important),
employ each worker for exactly 29 hours so full time and other laws don't get activated ( like target and other big stores do)
provide each driver with company car and company gas card so that those "54.5 per mile laws" for using personal vehicle don't get activated
require workers to come and work on EXACT hours/schedule during exact days where "surge service" is most needed so that most value for company is extracted from each employee's 29 hours per week limit instead of letting them decide when to work, remember you can legally require employees to come exactly when you need them instead of when they would like unlike contractors
if need for workers is reduced just fire few "franchises" by not renewing their contracts, no need to fire each employee separately, also this way no need to pay any severance, franchise that should pay severance will simply go bankrupt and unable to pay for severance, you might not even have to pay last salary this way (remember those cars are rented from "real Uber" not owned by "franchises" so you will not loose them, you can even save by doing self-insurance on them)
im sure Uber can actually save a lot of money compared to right now, and even increase profits a lot using this simple tricks, they should really hire me to give them ideas, and i will work cheap, salary in my country is $500/month so if they offer $700 per month i will switch immediately ...
all that is needed is few good lawyers and few good tax specialists to find ways to go around intent of law and stay 100% legal
The last time I stayed in Manhattan, the Doubletree cost $700/night. The customer paid for that, but it felt wasteful. Since they banned Air B&B and similar, we're not staying in New York city for personal trips. I'd much rather help a local person keep their home than stay in the impersonal people box of some corporation.
In Manhattan, I'll usually take the subway if it's at all possible. But limiting rideshare in the name of the long-obsolete medallion cab system - which promotes cruising around looking for a customer, using up fuel and making pollution for nothing; that can't be a plus.
Bruce Perens.
Artificial limits to create a shortage and demand, government and corruption. Just what NYC need since DeBlasio seems to want to flush it down the toilet for some reason. Maybe he's doing this to finance his imaginary presidential campaign. What a maroon.
The good news is it'll just raise prices for the consumer and eliminate competition. So then everyone votes with their feet.
Movin' on out.
Uber allows tipping — and there is no limit. Whoever feels the drivers are underpaid can pay them extra. No need to compel the rest of us to do the same, whether we agree with it or not. No one goes to work for Uber against their will, and they are all independent contractors — as, by the way, are the small-time taxi-medallion owners and leasers.
Unless, of course, this telling others what to do is how you get off — and the reason you went to work for the government...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Get a load of this guy -- he wants US to fix its infrastructure! US can't afford any investment in itself unless its in the military. US needs money to wage war on everybody. Your infrastructure is the last thing on the priority list. What's better: dropping bomb on women and children in the Middle East or fixing our subway system? Well, if you're involved with the US government, your answer is the former. Now let's go pay some more taxes to make it happen.
How to implement vehicle cap? Will they request drivers to register, and randomly pick who is allowed to drive a given day?
Really. It's a great city - and I say that as a Brit. Don't let your prejudices deter you!
The rational solution is congestion pricing; you want to drive in Manhattan, you pay the government a lot of money. This means that the government gets the excess revenue, not the vultures who own taxi medallions - perhaps the most iniquitous thing I've ever seen in economics; I really thought it was an April Fools joke when I first heard about them.
Is the Mayor retarded? If better jobs existed and these drivers could get better jobs then nobody would be working for Uber- or at least other than temporarily. Uber does the exact opposite of what the mayor is claiming. The reason it is increasing gridlock is because there is an increase number of people employed in that "profession". It's not "driving working New Yorkers into poverty" because without those jobs these people would just be unemployed and even worse off. I get that it increases congestion on the road and maybe there is a solution to that problem. I'm not sure how limiting the number of Uber drivers is a sane or fair way to do it though. There is also the reality that the more congestion there is on the road the fewer the number of cars on the road at least relative to there being more road for more cars. Essentially the free market solved the problem. The only question now is will NYC let the free market solve the congestion problem or will it regulate businesses that try into oblivion. Clearly the government hasn't solved the congestion problem and has no genuine plans to do so- just look at NYC's subway system. It's a nightmare that hasn't seen any major renovations or significant line extensions or new lines in recent history. That is all in spite of the excessive theft (taxation) and control of the state and city of its population.
and what about parking, repairs / maintenance, tolls, for the company cars May need some office over head and maybe even staffers to port cars around.
EXACT hours/schedule for driving jobs? It will happen where some will get an long ride at end of shift + an long return trip to get the car to the drop off point.
OR even just waiting at airport ques or let's say waiting an spotting event that goes in to overtime after overtime.
Lol no, that's not how Union disputes happen in NY.
Letting the blacks out of three ghettos interfered with voting patterns. That got fixed. Sadly, that really was the intent.
Lovely conjectures, unsupported by facts.
Using any number pre 1945 is insane. Secondly there are many factors which changed since 1938, medical care, and over the top housing / rent inflation and the suburb explosion. All those make for a far more than just inflation increase. At 5$ per hour and an average of 180 hours work per month, that's barely 900$ pay *total* without counting insurance and assuming no tax whatsoever. At that amount even eating cheap every day , I count about 1/3 of that total for cheap transportation (so long hours of bus/train - no own car 120$ a month assuming metro card 30 days without reduced fare, otherwise ~$5.50 a day which roughly comes to the same), cheap insurance which pay you back nothing in case of illness (I found number as low as 100$ for new york) , cheap food (assuming 30 days, assuming not missing anything, you can probably get as low as 80$ buying veg,meat on the very cheap and reheating stuff, no restaurants, no fast food, no soda, no alcohol, nothing), that is already 300$ off, so 600$ left you won't be able to rent anything anywhere. Maybe in a barn in Utah. And from that you should never get sick, you cannot buying anything like TV, fridge or car all too expansive, you cannot have ANY entertainment whatsoever, you can't have a family or kids. THAT is YOUR minimum wage from 1938. There is a reason it has been reevaluated between 1938 and 1971. Sigh.
I'm not convinced this is true.
I travel a lot... in spurts. Like one year on, three years off. I use Uber exclusively because it allows me to handle my expense accounts cleanly. If I use Yellow in NY and Black in London, etc... I'd have to manage a bunch of receipts and scan them and all that shit. On the road, I even try to eat at places that accept either Paypal or Apple Pay so that full receipts are sent to my accounts there. On top of that, I only use airlines and hotels that allow me to pay with Paypal.
Taxi drivers and Uber drivers certainly make a large part of their income from locals. But locals who can afford taxis are generally people who are better at managing their money. In addition, people using taxis to get around the city in NY for business are expensing it. In either of these cases, the cleanliness of the payment system of Uber or Lyft is worth higher prices.
I honestly haven't even considered city taxi services in years because I simply don't want the hassle of doing expenses or even the added work itemizing on taxes.
The bad part for the taxi companies is that unless they were to collaborate on a massive international level to offer the same service that Uber or Lyft offers, they have no defense against this. Let's be honest, in a period of 2 weeks, I used Uber in NYC, Tokyo, Oslo and London... I had absolutely no problems and was happy to do it. I wouldn't have the slightest idea how to use a taxi in Japan, taxis in London are REALLY REALLY unreliable outside the two inner zones. And frankly, taxis in NYC are not too bad, but more often than not, my credit card doesn't work in their machines because of the massive amount of anti-fraud tech that is supposed to protect me as opposed to inconvenience me.
I think this will certainly hit Uber, but as you said, it will simply cause a price adjustment which has been needed anyway.
At the same time, if you want privacy, the DIRTINESS of the taxi payment system (i.e. cash) can be a big advantage.
There's already a rule: All employees are entitled to the federal minimum hourly wage, less tips. This is another reason why corporations pretend their employees are self-employed.
Unsupported by facts? You mean, facts like those contained in the study being cited?
Maybe you'd have more credibility if you weren't making a totally unsupported statement in opposition to a reference to actual facts...
The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
Typical demagoguery solution by a leftist mayor. That's all there is to it. Between libertarian imbeciles on the right and corrupt demagogues on the left there is no one left to actually make thoughtful working government regulation that actually works for the common good, not only for corporations or for politicians elected by degenerate voters.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
and eliminate competition
No, more like levels the playing field and helps to protect drivers and passengers. Uber and Lyft have been avoiding standard transport fees and regulations for years, eliminating the fair playing competition. You may call it "fixing an antiquated business model" like most young people would, but you fail to see the reasoning behind the rules and regulations of transportation. Those rules and regulations are there for the protection of consumers and employees.
Would the drivers get min wage for the time they spend driving? Or are they supposed to get paid as long as they are in ready state? Even if they decline ride requests from low rated people?
DeBlasio pushed this because the taxi cartels pay far more in bribes than Uber or Lyft ever will. He couldn't care less about the drivers or the customers.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
If there's a cap on the number of drivers, then they're going to be more than busy enough for a minimum wage to be irrelevant. Not that a minimum wage for them makes any sense to begin with. Unless you want to encourage people to defraud Uber.
54.5 cents per mile + NY MINWAGE + full insurance will hurt them big time.
Which is why the Taxi Companies pushed so hard for this.
How dare they push for a level playing field... The nerve.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
It would only seem fair to have to meet the same requirement.
Does anyone see this as anything other than anti-competition regulation promoted by the traditional cab industry?
It was the artificial limitation on the number of taxicabs that drove up the price of "medallians" and created the conditions which incubated Lyft and Uber
and eliminate competition
No, more like levels the playing field and helps to protect drivers and passengers. Uber and Lyft have been avoiding standard transport fees and regulations for years, eliminating the fair playing competition. You may call it "fixing an antiquated business model" like most young people would, but you fail to see the reasoning behind the rules and regulations of transportation. Those rules and regulations are there for the protection of consumers and employees.
I'm all against Uber and Lyft operating in contravention of laws and regulations, and all for them respecting all the current laws and regulations, whatever those might be.
However I'm also for new business models being a chance to have a debate about those laws and regulations. How many of them are really protecting consumers and employees, and how many are just protecting someone's monopoly? No one will ever sell you a law or regulation by saying that it's supposed to eliminate someone's competition, but it happens a lot. Also, if a law or regulation made sense in 1935 or 1965, does it still make sense today?
I'm not saying the conclusion has to be that the laws must change. However, if there is a way of doing things in a different way today, why not talk about if the laws need to change.
Is there something in the article that makes you assume there's an addition in there? My gut expectation would be that, like several other such laws around the country in various service industries such as table-waiting, that this would protect against being paid less than minimum wage. i.e. if $0.x/mile for a fare works out to less than minimum wage, they still have to pay at least minimum wage, but if it works out to more, then they just pay mileage.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
You literally do nothing to use a taxi in Japan. The doors open and close automatically so your only jobs are expressing where you want to go and paying...the same as in any country. Add in 3 Japanese words and the word "taxi" and you can ask any Japanese person to call you a cab....'taxi wo yonde kure'.
Gee real hard....so hard that you'd have no choice but to not spend the 2 minutes you'd need to learn this process and instead use Uber.
If the market is truly saturated, as you say -- then it's only logical that the total number of vehicles on the road to service customers will shrink or grow to match the actual need. With Uber and Lyft around, maybe those taxi medallions are obsolete? (With several options for transportation, you no longer need government putting artificial limits on how many cabs they'll allow. The cab services will naturally decrease in number as they get less fares vs. Lyft or Uber alternatives -- since there's no money to be made driving around an empty cab.)
Once you add Uber's profit, their charges will need to be pretty close to the $2.50 per mile that "regular" cabs charge.
Uber's what? Half the reason they have been so successful is they sell rides way below cost. It has been said they subsidize $.40 of every dollar charged to riders. It's no wonder taxis can't compete with a company that loses money on every ride.
I'm really curious to see what happens with Uber over the next 5 to 10 years. They burn through cash at an historic rate. Their CEO recently claimed that is by choice, which may be the case. But considering they already pay their drivers a pittance, and autonomous cars are still many years away, it seems they will have to raise their prices quite a bit in order to turn a profit, as you point out.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
The mileage covers the cost of car and then you have the workers min pay on top of that. When you are table-waiting you are not driving your own car around
easy to solve, employ all drivers for exactly legal minimal wage and not a cent more,
don't employ them in Uber directly instead employ them in small companies containing each 9 workers or so that provide "driving service" to Uber itself so that all those overhead laws regarding ADA, healthcare, pension ... do not get fully activated (something similar to "virtual franchise" i guess, i don't know what are laws like in USA but i'm sure good team of lawyers will find holes in letter of law needed, intent of law is not really that important),
employ each worker for exactly 29 hours so full time and other laws don't get activated ( like target and other big stores do)
provide each driver with company car and company gas card so that those "54.5 per mile laws" for using personal vehicle don't get activated
require workers to come and work on EXACT hours/schedule during exact days where "surge service" is most needed so that most value for company is extracted from each employee's 29 hours per week limit instead of letting them decide when to work, remember you can legally require employees to come exactly when you need them instead of when they would like unlike contractors
if need for workers is reduced just fire few "franchises" by not renewing their contracts, no need to fire each employee separately, also this way no need to pay any severance, franchise that should pay severance will simply go bankrupt and unable to pay for severance, you might not even have to pay last salary this way (remember those cars are rented from "real Uber" not owned by "franchises" so you will not loose them, you can even save by doing self-insurance on them)
im sure Uber can actually save a lot of money compared to right now, and even increase profits a lot using this simple tricks, they should really hire me to give them ideas, and i will work cheap, salary in my country is $500/month so if they offer $700 per month i will switch immediately ...
all that is needed is few good lawyers and few good tax specialists to find ways to go around intent of law and stay 100% legal
So, if Uber changed everything about the company, then? They can't even make a profit now, but you expect them to with this Rube Goldberg structure you cooked up?
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
The goal that many are working toward is self-driving cars, a subset of which will be robot taxis. When those arrive, they'll eliminate the poorly-paid, "exploited" human beings, so yay, right? What do you want to bet that they'll be banned before they even get to the road? For the usual reasons of course: safety and congestion.
The point where traffic increases sufficiently to reduce incomes enough to limit the number of rideshares may be past the point where increased traffic causes pollution and restricts emergency vehicles from responding. Mr. Market isn't always right.
Here's another point for y'all: when I drove for Yellow in the mid-seventies, we got first 46% of the meter, NOT COUNTING the flag throw. Then (don't ask) we got shafted, and it was down to 42% of the meter.
We *really* depended on tips.
But I suppose most of you didn't realize that tips made up a good part of driver income. Adding a minimum wage would do a great deal to making sure that the drivers could actually have a reasonable (I didn't say well-off) living.
But there's too many of you who only think of how cheap you can get away with, and don't give a flyin' fuck about the drivers for whom this is how they pay their bills.
I won't use the "ride sharing", on the rare occasions I take a cab.
Level playing field? In NYC? It's about the graft. Taxi Medallions cost a fortune, both legally and in bribes. The Mayor is just protecting his income stream.
Yeah, it's not like we care what happens to the customers, after all.
Good for you for exercising your right for the cheapest option! I trust you eat at soup kitchens exclusively as well?
well do you want to be the one in the hospital after being hit by uber with bills racking up as there is a big fight over who will pay.
However I'm also for new business models being a chance to have a debate about those laws and regulations
Good thing there is a system for that. If it's important to you, you change those things through becoming politically involved and fighting for them. Is it difficult do do it this way? Hell yeah, but if you want to proceed in a fair way that achieves a public consensus, then it's what you have to do.
Commercialism only allows two options: Allow a free for all with no cost, or induce a scarcity in which case there will always be a money value. The first option has been proven to be a very bad idea.
Uber/Lyft are a tiny fraction of the vehicles on the pavement in NYC. Unlike traditional taxis, however, you can get one to stop for you without having to jump in front of it on the street, the driver doesn't pretend he doesn't know how to get where you need to go, the seats aren't sticky, and the car doesn't smell like vomit.
This is protectionism for the antiquated taxi industry, nothing more nothing less.
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/07/12/capitalism-needs-a-welfare-state-to-survive
Casteism
This is strange to me. I think losing money would be a good place to start in order to get people on board with Uber but they're way past that now.
If Uber cost the exact same as a normal Taxi in my area I would still go with Uber. The app is 10 times more convenient then phoning a taxi company and waiting 30 minutes for someone to show up but then they don't show up and I have to phone again where someone will assure me that they're coming but then they don't and I've missed my appointment.
With Uber I usually get a ride at my house in less than 10 minutes and I can see on my phone how far away they are.
It wont matter if Uber end up costing the same as a normal Taxi, I'll still take the convenience of the service every time.
Crap, I have a levitation class at 25:131. Better set the alarm to 'cinnamon'.
Do those four words result in the itemized receipt being automatically logged to the same account as the NYC, London and Oslo receipts or were you unable to read the whole post?
I also travel intermittently on business and agree that having Uber automatically produce a report of all my trips is much more convienent than the mix of:
- generic paper receipts with no business name
- blank "receipt" that I'm supposed to fill in myself
- no receipt at all, just a blatant lie "my credit card reader is broken, you have to pay cash"
That I've received from taxis in various cities
With the blank "receipt" I guess the idea is that I'm supposed to lie and pad the amount get my employer to "reimburse" me for more than the ride actually costs, but I'm honest so I don't submit false expense reports.
I've even had a taxi driver flat out tell me "I really need some cash, if you pay me X in cash I'll give you a receipt for X+Y". Look, I'm honest, I want no part in your scam to defraud either your employer or mine or to cheat on taxes or whatever other reason it is that taxi drivers lie about their credit card readers.
It's much easier to just use Uber in each city and automatically receive a single list of all trips with start and end locations and times and cost all conveniently read to be added to my itemized expense report.
In Japan, you also have to give the cabbie directions on how to get to your destination. For newly arrived business people who do not yet speak the language , this means having your secretary (Japan still has these!) write down the instructions in kanji.
taxi drivers don't like the credit cards fees
The taxi business is burdened by regulations requiring purchase of an expensive medallion for their taxi. Medallions run $800,000 to over a million. Uber & Lyft have no such regulation, but they are basically in the same busines. How is that fair? How is requiring a minimum wage hike for Uber/Lyft ever goint to level the playing field?