# Uber major threat to taxi industry



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

The taxi drivers are up in arms protesting the takeover of their livelihood by Uber.

Some have been saying on TV that the taxi plates they paid THOUSANDS for a few years ago, will no doubt become next to worthless, if Uber gains a strong foothold in every major city that is allowing them to operate legally. 

One taxi driver mentioned that he was counting on the taxi plates being sold to another driver when he retires, and that could be "considered his pension."

I remember a few years ago, when these taxi plates issued by the city of Ottawa were in short supply and any new taxi operator
could buy these city taxi plates on their internal "black market" for whatever the current price for those plates were at the time.
$100,000 to $150,000 was some numbers tossed around, but this was all hearsay, since the transfer was done between one
taxi operator and a buyer for the plates.



> Unlike some of his colleagues who left the cab industry for other jobs, <a taxi driver> is stuck paying off the $200,000 for his own taxi licence, which he financed with a second mortgage on his home. He still has $160,000 left to pay. He can’t sell his licence because its value has dropped due to the unstable climate he says was created by Uber. “Nobody will buy it,” <a taxi driver> said.
> “If you give it for $50,000, nobody will buy it.” Business has become so bad for cab drivers in Ottawa that < a taxi driver> knows of at least 10 who have left to work for Uber.





> Right now, Uber has a competitive advantage, but only because it chooses to ignore the rules other taxi companies operate under, and mostly gets away with it. Uber can offer lower fares because it doesn’t have to bear the cost of HST on the fare, or city-imposed safety and licensing standards. That’s not fair competition.


http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/patni-dont-let-uber-keep-flouting-taxi-industry-rules


----------



## Ag Driver (Dec 13, 2012)

Those thinking the competitive advantage is due skirting around paying for licensing....they are entirely out to lunch. It's about time there was some competition out there. Uber brought convince and speed into the palm of the users hand. Fast arrival, jump in, and jump out. Taxi company's are wondering why this is such a big hit. It's not the lower fares, I'll tell you that much! 

Not once have I ever called for a taxi and had one arrive within 20 minutes of calling. If you're looking for a cab on New Years.....good luck. Try a couple hours! I have used Uber quite often and the response time is between 2-5 minutes. I am tracking them in real time and it removes the guessing game of if/when the cab will arrive. There is no swiping of cards, no cash exchanged, no waiting for receipts.

I hope Uber changes the way Taxi Company's operate. I think it has had a positive influence on some companies in my town already. I was in line at the car wash behind a cab, and notice a "Download our App" sticker on the bumper. Hopefully they are moving towards this new business practice and maybe they will re-gain some customers. Until then -- if there is a better service provider out there, the consumer will flock to that.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Problems that Uber needs to address.

There is no licensing or background checks of Uber drivers for the safety of passengers.

The majority of Uber drivers don't have commercial insurance. If an accident occurs, the insurance company won't pay accident benefits to passengers.

There are no vehicle safety inspection requirements for the vehicles used by Uber drivers. 

There are no checks to insure Uber drivers still hold a valid drivers licence. 

Uber drivers are not classified as employees and cannot collect EI, Workers Compensation, vacation or holiday pay. The behavior of Uber drivers is not a liability for the Uber company.

Uber is a business that basically skirts current laws to offer a "cheaper" alternative. There is nothing that makes Uber any more legal than putting a taxi sign on a vehicle and picking up passengers.

Why pay a fee to Uber for every ride, when someone can just park at the airport or train station and offer fake taxi rides ?

I am not opposed to Uber and similar companies, but skirting around laws (that are in place for legitimate well founded reasons) is not an acceptable way to do business.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

sags said:


> Problems that Uber needs to address.
> Uber drivers aren't earning much money, but that is not a big issue for the public if people want to work for almost nothing.


A US study says they make more per hour ... but that could be because the driver chooses to do other things in slow times versus a taxi driver who is working set hours.




sags said:


> There is no licensing or background checks of Uber drivers for the safety of passengers ...


Uber says it is doing background checks. That said, from what a San Francisco man reports - Uber was interested when the app license plate didn't match the one in their computers, when the rider was creeped out and insulted. Once it was determined that a partner firm has changed cars so that the driver was registered - just the car info was wrong, they seemed to lose interest in the abuse of the rider.




sags said:


> ... There are no vehicle safety inspection requirements for the vehicles used by Uber drivers. That is an issue for the general public.


This might be changed by the particular city.




sags said:


> ... Uber drivers are not classified as employees and cannot collect EI, Workers Compensation, vacation or holiday pay. Not a big issue for the general public if people are willing to work for nothing ...


Depends on what happens in the long term ... then too, California seems to be re-classifying Uber drivers as employees instead of contractors, similar to CRA re-classifying "one client for decades" contractors as employees.


Cheers


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The city of Edmonton is moving ahead to deal with some of the legal problems with Uber.

_Edmonton city council is working on a vehicle-for-hire bylaw it hopes will strike a balance between allowing a free market and making sure those taking Uber are protected in case of a collision.

It would create a special class of licence for private transportation providers like Uber, making them very similar to taxi drivers. The bylaw would require Uber drivers to have a city licence, undergo a criminal record check, have their vehicle inspected annually and pay for commercial insurance._

Still, there are hundreds of lawsuits against Uber drivers for accidents and other legal problems. The Uber company has stated it provides liability insurance, but it was found to be liablity insurance for the company against lawsuits..........not the drivers.

Edit.........I removed portions of my post that related to employee (driver) compensation. If people want to work for nothing, I don't think of it as a public issue.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Everyday thousands of drivers deliver everything from pizza to pharmacy drugs, without any commercial insurance and often not declaring the income.

The problem has been known for a long time, but ignored by law enforcement and government.........until something happens.

I worked for a few weeks for a "delivery company". A regular pickup and delivery was for a big pharmacy. 

One of the other drivers was on a run and was involved in an accident. It was discovered his drivers licence was suspended due to several DUIs and he had outstanding warrants on drug charges.

And there he was...........ferrying around prescription drugs to the homes of seniors. He could easily have popped the tops of the plastic bottles and took a few pills.

I quit the company after I learned I was the only driver for the delivery company that didn't have some kind of legal "problems".

I called the RCMP and told them about the situation and asked if there were regulations on the transportation of drugs..........and they said...........nope, but it is an interesting question.

So there you go. Anyone can legally transport drugs as long as they are doing it for a delivery company for a pharmacy.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

What happens to a Uber driver if they are pulled over by the police and the passengers are found to be carrying drugs ?

What if the passenger ditches the drugs under the seat ?

Personally, for the little money people can earn from driving strangers around in their car..........I don't know why anyone would want to.


----------



## Prospector (Jul 25, 2014)

sags said:


> Everyday thousands of drivers deliver everything from pizza to pharmacy drugs, without any commercial insurance and often not declaring the income.
> 
> The problem has been known for a long time, but ignored by law enforcement and government.........until something happens.
> 
> ...


Similar here Sags - I had a great time last summer running around fast food, flowers, etc. The guy running our show was definately shady. The drivers we had were mostly decent though - some college kids, a couple of small business people struggling in the early days of their business. Stuff like that.

It was hard on my car, but since I was driving a hunk-o-junk I wasn't too concerned. 

I made around minimum wage most nights. Some nights more, some nights less. 

It was an eye opener though, and a good way to peek into the lives of people around the city. Amazing the ways some people live. 

I see the whole Uber thing similar to how I see old timers in manufacturing. If you aren't willing to learn CNC and keep up with the changing tech, then yeah, you're obsolete and will be moving along shortly. Whatever you have invested in your field means very little - keeping up with where it is headed... that matters a lot.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Ag Driver said:


> Those thinking the competitive advantage is due skirting around paying for licensing....they are entirely out to lunch. It's about time there was some competition out there. Uber brought convince and speed into the palm of the users hand. Fast arrival, jump in, and jump out. Taxi company's are wondering why this is such a big hit. It's not the lower fares, I'll tell you that much!


Which conflicts with the Uber users at work who consistently say it is price first. They do value the speed but so far, none have listed this as their first priority. It will be interesting to see if it changes over time.


I do agree thought that thinking the licensing is the only advantage for Uber may be out to lunch.

From what I have read, depending on one's city ...
Uber sets their fairs lower than the city mandated taxi fairs - except for prime time (ex. New Years - when some have paid the price of an airline flight to get across town).

Uber drivers do not have to have their cars inspected or an age limit on the cars, until new by-laws come into effect. Even when they do, in some cities - the Uber drivers are to be inspected half as often as the taxi vehicles plus don't have to go to a city run garage.


So yes, skipping the licensing fees is not the only advantage.




Ag Driver said:


> Not once have I ever called for a taxi and had one arrive within 20 minutes of calling ...


Interesting ... I have had issues at times but generally have had the taxi arrive in pretty much twenty minutes or less.
Of course when I know there are timing issues, I have tended to book ahead for a specific time. Or for the company Christmas party, find the closest taxi stand.




Ag Driver said:


> I hope Uber changes the way Taxi Company's operate ...


Question is ... will the municipalities line up their regulations?

Where the municipality maintains a two tier pricing model ... I don't see how there can be anything but a shift, unless safety issues or problems with part time drivers turn people off of the cheaper alternative.




Ag Driver said:


> ... Hopefully they are moving towards this new business practice and maybe they will re-gain some customers. Until then -- if there is a better service provider out there, the consumer will flock to that.


I don't know if those who have had problems with their driver (or for that matter, Uber driver's with abusive riders) will think a rating system is enough of a deterrent.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Prospector said:


> ... I see the whole Uber thing similar to how I see old timers in manufacturing.
> 
> If you aren't willing to learn CNC and keep up with the changing tech, then yeah, you're obsolete and will be moving along shortly. Whatever you have invested in your field means very little - keeping up with where it is headed... that matters a lot.


Where there are two tier regulations (ex. city set higher fare rates) - this comparison seems bogus, IMO.


Cheers


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I always use Uber or Lyft when needed and possible. I don't really care about price, I like that the car is newer and no vomit/bo/ other fluid odors, drivers are clean,courteous,and don't expect/require a tip,no stupid "My credit card machine doesn't work,cash only" BS, and so far they are all fluent in my language.

I don't think cabs can ever match that and now as a customer I require that, as the bar has been raised.


----------



## Prospector (Jul 25, 2014)

Eclectic12 said:


> Where there are two tier regulations (ex. city set higher fare rates) - this comparison seems bogus, IMO.
> 
> 
> Cheers


Tell that to china coming with a lower labour rate. Its exactly the same. lower wages, differing regulations and new tech. If you can't compete, you can't compete. Period. The buyer doesn't care about the reasons, they care about the product and the cost.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Ag Driver said:


> T
> I hope Uber changes the way Taxi Company's operate. I think it has had a positive influence on some companies in my town already. I was in line at the car wash behind a cab, and notice a "Download our App" sticker on the bumper. Hopefully they are moving towards this new business practice and maybe they will re-gain some customers. Until then -- if there is a better service provider out there, the consumer will flock to that.


No argument there from me. Currently I'm using subsidized para taxi so the turmoil in the taxi industry does not affect me. 
I was just commenting how fast things can change. The winners are the drivers that got in on the ground floor and got the plates from the city
at a very low business charge. Then greed took over when the city didn't want to issue new plates.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

I don't take taxis often and have never taken Uber, but based on the debate in Ottawa, I would say that I would be on the side of the taxi drivers. 

If you want to allow Uber to operate legally, then you have to give the taxi companies some sort of incentive. Right now, other than the fact that taxi companies or certain cab owners have taxi plates, there is no reason for them to work as taxis, i.e. there is no advantage for taxis in this type of environment. The only advantage they have is that they can pick up fares by people hailing them on the street or they can wait in certain areas for fares. But, given that the same potential consumer can easily use Uber to call up a driver with minimal convenience negates that advantage.

The disadvantages for cab drivers are numerous: fares are regulated by the city, they have to have their cars inspected on regular basis, need to be newer than those required by Uber, need to install video cameras, they need to take the Taxicab Driver Education course, need to accept all passengers, etc.

But for Uber, the recommendation was pretty much a buyer-beware: no city enforcement of any sort other than ensuring the driver has insurance coverage.

Given that, why would one be a cab driver? So if we take it to the end state, pretty much all the cab drivers should switch to Uber at which point is that a win for consumers?

Funny enough on the talk radio they mention that Uber has been criticised for surge pricing and that if you don't like it, then you should stick to a cab for those instances. Well that's hardly helpful for the infrequent times that surge pricing would occur as I doubt any taxi company can live on those fares alone.

Furthermore, given the advances in self-driving cars and the fact that Uber is quite interested in it, wait until they become more common and then we'll see the Uber drivers taking to the streets to protest.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

sags said:


> Uber is a business that basically skirts current laws to offer a "cheaper" alternative. There is nothing that makes Uber any more legal than putting a taxi sign on a vehicle and picking up passengers.
> 
> Why pay a fee to Uber for every ride, when someone can just park at the airport or train station and offer fake taxi rides ?
> 
> I am not opposed to Uber and similar companies, but skirting around laws (that are in place for legitimate well founded reasons) is not an acceptable way to do business.


Uber acts like a contractor and the private owner/operator has to have his/her own insurance. I wouldn't think that the owner/operator would be so naive as not to inform their insurance company that they are operating a commercial vehicle and pay the extra insurance fees. 

From what I've been able to glean from the media in this fight between Uber and the established taxi companies, is that the city has to come up with licensing scheme that is fair to both parties. This means background checks and insurance requirements.

Now as far as collecting the HST that is another matter..until the private individual registers with both govt's to collect the HST , there is a further 13% saving on the fare in Ontario at least.

For those that got caught up in the greed when the City of Ottawa wasn't issuing any more taxi plates and had to pay
$200K (as one taxi driver mentioned) (what was he thinking?) and had to mortgage his house,,his plates will become worthless to resell again to make a profit off them, but at least he may be able to use them contracted out to Uber. 

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/uber-vs-taxis-what-ottawa-drivers-say-about-each-other


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

bgc_fan said:


> Furthermore, given the *advances in self-driving cars* and the fact that Uber is quite interested in it, wait until they become more common and then we'll see the Uber drivers taking to the streets to protest.


Reminds me of that movie Total Recall with Arrnold S. ..JonnyCab...:biggrin:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGi6j2VrL0o


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Prospector said:


> Tell that to china coming with a lower labour rate. Its exactly the same. lower wages, differing regulations and new tech. If you can't compete, you can't compete. Period. The buyer doesn't care about the reasons, they care about the product and the cost.


Let's see ... because nothing can be done about China's labour rates, local city should stick to a two tier system that will drive one competitor out of business?

That seems a recipe to reduce competition as I suspect the driver fees/set fare rates are not going to make or break the the city budget.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

bgc_fan said:


> ... But for Uber, the recommendation was pretty much a buyer-beware: no city enforcement of any sort other than ensuring the driver has insurance coverage.
> 
> Given that, why would one be a cab driver? So if we take it to the end state, pretty much all the cab drivers should switch to Uber at which point is that a win for consumers? ...


I suspect it means that until the taxi industry dies, it will work in the consumer's favour. As soon as it is a monopoly, the same issues will resurface. Or the safety issues might send people back to using taxis.

I don't get why some cities that say they want the competition aren't ensuring the requirements are reasonably close.


Cheers


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Eclectic12 said:


> I don't get why some cities that say they want the competition aren't ensuring the requirements are reasonably close.


That is the issue that I have with the situation. If the cities want to allow Uber to operate and compete with taxis then they should be on an even playing field. They shouldn't be subjecting taxi cab drivers with extra regulations and costs and feel that Uber drivers don't need to worry about these. Otherwise, it is lopsided in favour of Uber and there is no competition. I believe most in the taxi industry feel this way and I can see why they get frustrated when cities just gloss over these issues.


----------



## wendi1 (Oct 2, 2013)

I think comparing Uber to taxis is a mistake - you should compare Uber to ride-sharing programs. In that case, Uber is safer (you know who is behind the wheel and who is in the back seat, as they have both been identified by the app). In neither case do you need a commercial licence, or a newer vehicle, or cameras, or meters, or commercial insurance. Nor do the drivers in a ride-sharing program make a living wage or get EI or benefits. 

Taxis might end up being just for people whose businesses are paying the tab. 

I have no interest in supporting my local buggy-whip manufacturer, nor do I think I have to make whole someone who overpaid for a taxi plate.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

wendi1 said:


> I
> Taxis might end up being just for people whose businesses are paying the tab.


I have to use para-taxi, even though the coupons for the fare are subsidzed by the city, 925%), a one way trip of about 15km costs me about $33 in subsidized coupons each way. [/quote]

That's$66 minus $16.50 subsidy, so it still costs me abbout 50 for the round trip because i need a wheelchair van. Uber so far, is not providing those.



> I have no interest in supporting my local buggy-whip manufacturer, nor do I think I have to make whole someone who overpaid for a taxi plate.


You have to wonder what that taxi driver was thinking...not too smart coming from a ME country and paying $200K for a taxi plate then having to mortgage his house.
That whole scheme was a reverse pyramid scheme set up by the original plate owners to take advantage of newbies.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

wendi1 said:


> I think comparing Uber to taxis is a mistake - you should compare Uber to ride-sharing programs.


Trouble is ... people are using Uber to replace taxis, where for the few places I can find numbers, a surprising number of cities seem to be mandating minimum rates above Uber's.

Where I have used informal ride-sharing - there has been nowhere near the profit - it has been more about expense splitting.




wendi1 said:


> In that case, Uber is safer (you know who is behind the wheel and who is in the back seat, as they have both been identified by the app).


Does one though?

I can find at least one abusive/creepy question repors from the US that says that the car/plate number did not match the Uber app. For the various offenses committed by either the driver or rider - having the Uber info exactly match seems to have made no difference. 

To be fair, having the taxing background checks, pictures etc. has not stopped taxi drivers from similar offenses. Without numbers, I can only suspect but not be sure that being blocked from a part time gig is less of a deterrent than the potential of being barred.

Then too, I wonder about how serious Uber is about dropping offending drivers as a San Fransisco rider that complained was surprised at the lack of an apology and Uber losing interest when they were able to confirm that a delay in entering data was causing the plate/driver mismatch in the app.

He thought that the racial slurs and abuse should have some sort of repercussion.




wendi1 said:


> ... I have no interest in supporting my local buggy-whip manufacturer ...


How is forcing a higher price on one group "supporting"? 




wendi1 said:


> ... nor do I think I have to make whole someone who overpaid for a taxi plate.


I don't recall anyone talking about compensation for taxi plate fees but have not been following all of the discussion in the different areas.

If you started a business from home, were required to charge a minimum of $10 a widget then discovered your neighbour was using an electronic system get orders to build "wudgets" on demand, for any price (how the orders arrive and the name charge are the differences) ... would you be okay with that?

Why or why not?


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

carverman said:


> ... You have to wonder what that taxi driver was thinking...not too smart coming from a ME country and paying $200K for a taxi plate then having to mortgage his house ...





> People always make money from Niagara variety grapes ...





> Too bad you bought a grape farm the year the buyers for Niagara variety grapes decided to band together and slash prices by 50%


Changes, particularly when the city is more of a hindrance than help are not always predictable.


Cheers


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

My prediction is that the regular taxi industry will be permanently changed within 2 years, at least as far as pickups from the street or home.

Some cab companies (like Blue Line in Ottawa) will still have contractual arrangements for pickup at the airport, (maybe train and bus station), but as far as dropping off passengers, it will be no different than dropping someone off with your car anywhere, including the airport. 

The taxi "teamsters union" will be busted up and gone for good. The taxi plates that some paid a "kings ransom" for a few years ago, will be worthless for any possible future resale to other taxi drivers. In fact, if some of the current taxi drivers go over to
Uber as independent operators, the special taxi plates will be useless.

However, what is not known is the fallout with the Uber owner/operators....

Yesterday, on the local news, one driver that will no doubt have some issues with Uber, mentioned that driving an Uber "shared mode of transportation" has not been that profitable for him. 

In fact after gas, extra insurance and other expenses, he is only clearing a bit over $9 an hour on regular days.
If that is true, it is below the minimum wage here in Ontario which is currently $10.70 an hour. 

I see that there is going to be a fallout coming up for both the Uber contracted drivers and the existing cab companies that may have to deal with competitive fares and include the HST? which currently Uber does not charge.

Without tips, neither one has a future ahead where they will survive.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Read the Citizen article on the taxi plate fiasco..



> Drivers need a city-issued plate to drive a cab. *There are 1,188 plates in Ottawa.* If the city sold a new plate today, it would cost the owner *$584.*
> 
> But no new plates, except for accessible ones, have been sold in many years, and the plates are held by a small group of owners, many of whom lease the plates to drivers. Those who own plates consider them equity that appreciates over time.


That was the mindset of taxi drivers until Uber came along to upset the apple cart.

Just like the video stores a few years back that the city attempted to regulate, the same thing is happening now to the taxi industry..
you cannot regulate changing times.


> The city used to regulate video stores, for example, but had no role to play in their survival when on-demand video services appeared.





> $3,954: Fee to city to transfer a plate to a new owner


 + the residual value of the plate that some taxi owners are charging many thousands of dollars for...so for any new
taxi driver wanting to get in on the city regulated side..it will cost them a mortgage on their house..and the chance of
paying off that mortgage at a monthly payment rate is questionable..as Uber doesn't have to buy taxi plates. 

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...industrys-room-value-of-plates-is-evaporating


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

carverman said:


> My prediction is that the regular taxi industry will be permanently changed within 2 years, at least as far as pickups from the street or home.
> 
> Some cab companies (like Blue Line in Ottawa) will still have contractual arrangements for pickup at the airport, (maybe train and bus station), but as far as dropping off passengers, it will be no different than dropping someone off with your car anywhere, including the airport.
> 
> ...


Let's face it, people like Uber mainly because of price. If you recall after the surge pricing issue after New Year's, there was some backlash.

Tips is one of the reasons why Uber doesn't want to be considered Taxi service. If they allowed drivers to accept tips, then it becomes a Taxi company. Plus you've removed one argument that people have against taxis that they hate tipping.

Also, good on the councilor on calling BS on the characterization of Uber as a ride-sharing service. There is no fundamental difference between Uber and a Taxi, you call someone to pick you up and drive you somewhere for a fee. When I first heard about Uber being a ride sharing service, I thought it was like a car pool app where people going to a specific destination can organize their travel. Then when I understood what it was, I realize that it was an illegal taxi service. And just because you throw in an app, doesn't make it high tech, or new. Ottawa taxis now have the eCab app which essentially does the same thing. 

What Uber did do was make gouging acceptable with its price surge. Oddly enough, I would say the reason why the taxi industry is regulated is to prevent that sort of thing. But I guess you never know what you miss if you don't use it.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

bgc_fan said:


> What Uber did do was make gouging acceptable with its price surge. Oddly enough, I would say the reason why the taxi industry is regulated is to prevent that sort of thing. But I guess you never know what you miss if you don't use it.


Uber got a lot of backlash over the gouging at New Years...however, from what I recall from a few months ago, the iphone users that used 
their app were warned that premium fees (surge pricing) would apply to their fare. It was up to the customer to find out how much it would
cost for the ride home or rent a hotel room. Taxis were not available at the time. 



> CTV technology expert Carmi Levy said the smart phone app warns consumers before they accept the fare and it is up to consumers to understand the terms of agreement.





> Uber said New Year's Eve is its busiest time of the year, offering millions of rides around the world.
> But early in 2016 many of those customers took to social media to complain, some claiming they paid more than $1,000 for a lift home because of surge pricing.
> Uber said it uses surge pricing during periods of high demand as an incentive to keep more of its drivers on the road. Customers are informed of increased pricing by notifications through the Uber app.


http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/price-go...w-year-s-eve-rates-anger-passengers-1.2721323


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

carverman said:


> Uber got a lot of backlash over the gouging at New Years...however, from what I recall from a few months ago, the iphone users that used
> their app were warned that premium fees (surge pricing) would apply to their fare. It was up to the customer to find out how much it would
> cost for the ride home or rent a hotel room. Taxis were not available at the time.


Yes, you had to type out the price when you accept the surge price, but if one were drunk, or not completely aware of what is going on, they would just type away not realizing the implications. I would say that would be particularly true if it is the first time that it pops up and you've never seen this before.

Also, some may not have taken it seriously when they see a possible $500, or $1000 fare.


----------



## lonewolf (Jun 12, 2012)

I like Uber I have seen most Taxi drivers parked sitting in their car or driving around smoking. These taxis are then not suitable for use.


----------



## Ag Driver (Dec 13, 2012)

bgc_fan said:


> Yes, you had to type out the price when you accept the surge price, *but if one were drunk, or not completely aware of what is going on, they would just type away not realizing the implications*. I would say that would be particularly true if it is the first time that it pops up and you've never seen this before.
> 
> Also, some may not have taken it seriously when they see a possible $500, or $1000 fare.


When has being drunk ever held some grounds in the court of law?

On another note: If everyone thinks low fare are here to stay, they are out to lunch as well. I think you will see Uber fare increases on the horizon. Undercutting is just one way to get established in the market. Consider it nearly the same as establishing your portfolio. It merely gains you traction in the industry for your initial start up. 

When fares equal taxi's, I will still continue to use Uber because it is an all around better service.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Ag Driver said:


> When has being drunk ever held some grounds in the court of law?
> 
> On another note: If everyone thinks low fare are here to stay, they are out to lunch as well. I think you will see Uber fare increases on the horizon. Undercutting is just one way to get established in the market. Consider it nearly the same as establishing your portfolio. It merely gains you traction in the industry for your initial start up.
> 
> When fares equal taxi's, I will still continue to use Uber because it is an all around better service.


I'm not saying that being drunk was a good excuse or should excuse them from paying the fare. The criticism I see people making is that the customer agreed to it, so they shouldn't complain. I am pointing out there are some reasons why they may not have realized that their fare would have been so much.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

The point of surge pricing is that on days like NY eve, if you have money and would like to hire a ride, you can. Quite frequently you just cannot get a ride at any price. I'd rather have the choice to pay the surge price rather than have no choice since there are no available taxis.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

bgc_fan said:


> ... What Uber did do was make gouging acceptable with its price surge. Oddly enough, I would say the reason why the taxi industry is regulated is to prevent that sort of thing. But I guess you never know what you miss if you don't use it.


I'd say it's more complicated than strictly gouging as during periods where drivers are readily available, the rates are lower than the regulated taxis. The higher prices are at the moment, limited to periods when few drivers are available. I say at the moment because the past as well as the complaints about the current taxis suggests that pricing can change dramatically when a monopoly is in place.

As for regulation to prevent gouging ... it would be interesting to dig up the history. Certainly the wording in NA about the fare rates seems clearly set to make sure the passenger is reporting any gouging. so the point may well be true.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

carverman said:


> Uber got a lot of backlash over the gouging at New Years...however, from what I recall from a few months ago, the iphone users that used their app were warned that premium fees (surge pricing) would apply to their fare.


Some acknowledge that they had been notified and at least one I recall complained that the higher price shown on the app was less than the final bill and another that there was no estimate received. It is technology, right? Is it hard to believe that a few didn't receive the estimate?


Then too, I seem to recall some complaining they expected a bit of a higher amount but wished they had looked more closely as the final bill was 8 to 9x the less busy rate.




carverman said:


> Taxis were not available at the time.


I doubt this. These types of times are when taxis do a great business. More likely taxis were hard to get.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

bgc_fan said:


> Yes, you had to type out the price when you accept the surge price, ...


If so, it should be easy for Uber to contradict the Canadian who said he never received an estimate.
Or maybe because it was multiple stops, the estimate was for only a portion?


Cheers


----------



## wendi1 (Oct 2, 2013)

> If you started a business from home, were required to charge a minimum of $10 a widget then discovered your neighbour was using an electronic system get orders to build "wudgets" on demand, for any price (how the orders arrive and the name charge are the differences) ... would you be okay with that?


I would go out of business, of course. But that is a hazard of capitalism. To whom would I appeal to get my "guaranteed" profit and markup? Even buying out the licenses would not be sufficient recompense - those folk thought they were buying a job for however long they wanted it, followed by a prosperous retirement when they sold the license to the next up-and-comer. 

Simple email is putting thousands of postal workers out of work: companies get by with a fraction of the accounting clerks they used to have. Pity the poor iceman.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

wendi1 said:


> I would go out of business, of course. But that is a hazard of capitalism.


No it is not a hazard of capitalism ... it is stupidity of a two tier price system for essentially the same thing.

You really would give up on a profitable business simply because city hall puts a barrier in your way that other providers are exempt from? There are all sorts of cases where the city, province or state has done similar where the business has lobbied for a change, if not sued.

Come to think of it ... isn't the Canada/US softwood lumber dispute similar?
The US lumber industry and US gov't sees the Canadian stumpage fees as a subsidy for Canadian lumber companies.

To your way of thinking - shouldn't the US companies just give up as it is a "hazard of capitalism" instead of what they are doing?




wendi1 said:


> To whom would I appeal to get my "guaranteed" profit and markup?


This is a red herring as I have previously said all I was looking for was the rates/requirements be adjusted to be more fair.




wendi1 said:


> Simple email is putting thousands of postal workers out of work: companies get by with a fraction of the accounting clerks they used to have. Pity the poor iceman.


I don't see the comparison as AFAICT, the affected companies do not have a two tier pricing.


Now if you are suggesting city hall put a $15 fee for the first five hundred words then $0.10 per hundred words thereafter for each text email while letters have no fee - then there's a comparison to talk about. 


Cheers


*PS*

Or how about if the Feds introduced a capital gains tax rate of 100% for retail investors versus incorporated companies? :biggrin:

Would you stop investing as "it's a hazard of capitalism"?


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Eclectic12 said:


> I doubt this. These types of times are when taxis do a great business. *More likely taxis were hard to get.
> *


well this was what I meant..."not available" when called for ;
and "hard to get" because they were in use.... and not available is the same thing..

now....why do you have to nitpick every thing I said???


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I would venture a guess that most Uber drivers aren't claiming their income from rides on their tax returns.

If so, they are unable to deduct legitimate business expenses such as car depreciation, gas, and insurance.

My experience with "delivery" was to do it all legally was that I lost money each year for 3 years. The losses helped offset my other income from pensions but the kilometers added up quickly and destroyed the value of my car.

I also had major repair expenses that I probably wouldn't have had...........complete brake job and tires, had I not been driving all those kilometers. (25,000 per year extra)

I also figured that sooner or later the CRA would disallow the business expenses since I would never have made an actual profit on the business.

I think Lyft is working towards a better business model. They have partnered with GM to supply new cars at a "hub" and drivers will "rent" them for $99 a week.

That would alleviate some concerns on driver licenses and insurance, as it would work like a car rental agency.

Eventually the plan is for driver less cars to provide the rides in the future.

It must be hard for businesses to get delivery drivers. I have been asked lately by 2 local business to drive for them. 

Their option right now is full time delivery service who charge 4 times the rate that I was paid. ($7 per stop or each way = $14 to deliver to customer and return the money to the business)

I tell them to provide the vehicle, gas, insurance and a $4 delivery charge both ways for my labor and I would consider it.

They aren't interested in that. They only want to pay the $4 and have me pay all the expenses. Basically, I would be subsidizing their business.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

sags said:


> I would venture a guess that most Uber drivers aren't claiming their income from rides on their tax returns.
> 
> I also figured that sooner or later the CRA would disallow the business expenses since I would never have made an actual profit on the business.
> [read somewhere that after 3 years of losses without a profit, CRA will disallow reported business expenses. They understand that a startup business would have show some loss in the first year of operation, maybe even the second, but after the 3rd year, they probably don't see it as a viable business.
> ...


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Looks like Uber is inviting more competition.

http://www.vrtucar.com/en/about-us/news-articles/ridesharing-in-the-news-821.html

and how it works..you can rent a car by the hour and return it their predetermined rental locations.
Of course this is assuming you are not drinking and driving..like on New Years Eve, or other times of the year
where drinking may be popular at bars..like St. Patricks day. 

http://www.vrtucar.com/en/how-it-works/overview/


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Having seen Vrtucar pamphlets in 2008 ... I would say Uber is the new kid on the block.

Unless Vrtucar has added drivers, it is more of a competitor with car rental agencies. Uber is more of a competitor for taxis.



Cheers


*PS*

The web site says 15th anniversary so it looks like they go back to 2001.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

carverman said:


> well this was what I meant..."not available" when called for ;
> and "hard to get" because they were in use.... and not available is the same thing..


YMMV ... co-workers complained they had to try for about an hour and a half to flag down a taxi cab. They were complaining about how difficult/ridiculous it was during the mid-Dec timeframe.

What they weren't mentioning to those they complained to is that when I suggested we walk up a block to the hotel taxi stand that had a long line of taxis - they preferred to hope one was passing by.

I did have to wait my turn but once I was at the stand but I was in the cab in less then twenty minutes.




carverman said:


> now....why do you have to nitpick every thing I said???


No picking on you ... identifying what my experience is. Most cab drivers I talk to prefer when they don't have to kill time between fares. So unless the cab is mechanically unfit ... it is far more likely to be on the road for NY or basically all Friday/Saturdays in Dec.

The wording makes is sound like there are physically no cabs on the road, which could have other solutions (ex. expand the number of licenses). 


Cheers


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Eclectic12 said:


> If so, it should be easy for Uber to contradict the Canadian who said he never received an estimate.
> Or maybe because it was multiple stops, the estimate was for only a portion?
> Cheers


Well, I see two possibilities:
1. The person lied to cover her tracks or
2. Things did go as described, but I would speculate what may have happened. The person may have used Uber and was not familiar with surge pricing. When she saw the $600, she thought it must have been a mistake, but went ahead with it. The Uber driver showed up and she asked what the fare would be. Not aware of the surge pricing, the driver may have just provided the normal estimate of $100.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

^^^^

For the instance I am thinking of, it was a he.

As the ride is described as having something like five stops, I can see another possibility is that he received an estimate based on one stop. He assumed price x 5 would be a reasonable estimate but prices rising over the different stops threw it out of wack.


Cheers


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Eclectic12 said:


> ^^^^
> 
> For the instance I am thinking of, it was a he.
> 
> ...


I was thinking of the CTV News article that Carverman had linked:

Quote:

Without any luck hailing a cab, Miria Blanco and Veronica Iafrancesco tried to use Uber for the first time. They noticed a message telling them it was surge pricing.

“We saw a surge, but we didn't know exactly what it was, so we just asked the guy, ‘We said how much would the estimate be? And he said, ‘It’s around $100,’” said Blanco.
The surge was 7.5 times the normal price, costing almost $630 to go from downtown Montreal to Laval.

“$600 dollars for a taxi,” said Iafrancesco. “We might as well have just rented a room at that point.”
~~~~~~

So I guess it was their first time and they were unfamiliar with the surge pricing process.

You know, I can accept a 2x peak fare, but over 6x strikes me as too much. I believe an Ottawa councilor did ask Uber representatives on their algorithm for surge pricing, but they said it was proprietary and can't be divulged. Basically, it can be someone pulling out random multipliers to the ride cost and you would never know.


----------



## Bowzer (Feb 25, 2015)

A friend of mine drives for Uber, and he doesn't work *unless* there is surge pricing. He can't be the only one. So it would seem it does help with getting additional cars on the road.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Bowzer said:


> A friend of mine drives for Uber, and he doesn't work *unless* there is surge pricing. He can't be the only one. So it would seem it does help with getting additional cars on the road.


So he only works NY eve and St. Patrick's day and office parties around Christmas time? How can he make a living that way.
I can never understand this surge pricing they have going.
So you are saying in low peak demand...the fare is below the normal taxi rate for the same distance and passengers,
but in high demand it can go 6 to 7 times higher because..

"if you can't call Uber..who ya gonna call?"
What other options..the bus or walking? On qa cold January night..neither one is a good option.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Bowzer said:


> A friend of mine drives for Uber, and he doesn't work *unless* there is surge pricing. He can't be the only one. So it would seem it does help with getting additional cars on the road.


That seems a little odd. I was under the impression that to be an Uber driver, you had to work, or at least be somewhat active on a continual basis, i.e. you had to accept a minimum amount of fares per week/month to be an active driver.

I remember the California lawsuit noted this as a reason why Uber should be considered an employer because it was dictating hours of work.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

bgc_fan said:


> ... So I guess it was their first time and they were unfamiliar with the surge pricing process.


Technology and reading the details ... :biggrin:

My co-worker read the details, warned his girlfriend but she was sure that he was wrong. The estimate with surge pricing showed her otherwise but she had him to provide another source.




bgc_fan said:


> ...You know, I can accept a 2x peak fare, but over 6x strikes me as too much. I believe an Ottawa councilor did ask Uber representatives on their algorithm for surge pricing, but they said it was proprietary and can't be divulged. Basically, it can be someone pulling out random multipliers to the ride cost and you would never know.


From what has been reported in the US, surge pricing can be as high at 9x. Weather is listed as another source of surge pricing as a NYC snow storm was reported to end up with an 8.25x multiplier.

Apparently Swedish riders declined paying 50x.
http://www.businessinsider.com/ubers-highest-surge-price-ever-may-be-50x-2014-11


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

carverman said:


> So he only works NY eve and St. Patrick's day and office parties around Christmas time? How can he make a living that way. I can never understand this surge pricing they have going.
> So you are saying in low peak demand...the fare is below the normal taxi rate for the same distance and passengers,
> but in high demand it can go 6 to 7 times higher because...


Probably due to a software glitch, 50x was used in Sweden where US reports are as high as 9x.

He doesn't have to limit himself to only the holidays as NYC reports that a snow storm was all it took to hit 8x.




carverman said:


> What other options..the bus or walking? On qa cold January night..neither one is a good option.


Depends on the situation/location as well as the passenger's capabilities.

I've walked, rode the bus but more often - found a taxi stand that is within a block or two.

If I have been at home, I have called in advance to pre-book where no doing so meant an hour wait.


Cheers


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

bgc_fan said:


> {Driving only during surge pricing} ... That seems a little odd. I was under the impression that to be an Uber driver, you had to work, or at least be somewhat active on a continual basis, i.e. you had to accept a minimum amount of fares per week/month to be an active driver.


Depends on how often surge pricing happens ... with a snow storm being enough to trigger 8x fares. I know I have had problems getting a taxi in bad rain storms.

So in some areas one could do this and probably could met the minimums. I'd have to check the minimums though to have a better idea.


Cheers


----------



## Bowzer (Feb 25, 2015)

carverman said:


> So he only works NY eve and St. Patrick's day and office parties around Christmas time? How can he make a living that way.


More like Friday nights, Saturday nights... when bar hoppers need rides to and from bars. Stuff like that. Basically he's learned when the surge comes on and he plans to work it.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

bgc_fan said:


> I was thinking of the CTV News article that Carverman had linked:
> 
> Quote:
> 
> ...


You always know when you agree to the ride. And you always have the option of ordering a taxi (which likely is not available at any price).


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

^^^^

That's where it would be interesting to get a better gauge on when not available at any price is really in effect.

As I say, I've had co-workers on the same night/time complain about long waits when walking an under two block meant a short wait as a steady stream of cabs pulled up at the taxi stand.


Cheers


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

The great thing is that Uber is not a regulated monopoly. Lyft competes with them, and nothing is stopping other firms from competing as well (in addition to taxis). There are network effects at play, but they are not overwhelming.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Uber becomes legal in Ottawa this September. So much for the taxi industries protest and ongoing fight against Uber.
Now those taxi plates issued by the city years ago are worthless on the taxi "black market".

www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/council-allows-uber-but-not-through-planning-1.3534402



> And when councillors finally did make one minor positive change — issuing 186 accessible non-tradeable plates over a decade — Watson and some of his council supporters undid that bit of good in 2012 by making those plates tradable under pressure from the taxi industry.


Typical of Ottawa city council, this is not the first time they have made compromised decisions..but then, they don't get along on a lot of issues.



> Why that move was controversial is a long story (and includes the previous *CPS chair Coun. Mark Taylor accepting a $750 donation from the taxi union* after becoming the industry's regulator), but suffice it to say that decision further ensconced the taxi industry's status quo instead of opening the market.
> 
> And giving into the taxi plate owners' demands to make those plates tradable *would have re-enforced the taxi industry's perception that the city was supportive of the tradable-plate practice*.





> It's a point that the taxi-plate owners are sure to make should they *sue the city for the loss in value of their plates*, which they are currently discussing.
> 
> Council may have ended at the right decision for the time. But we got here because of the appalling tenacity of a deep-pocketed bandit cab company, and* not through the vision of our civic leaders, but rather, in spite of it.*


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The next logical progression is..........who needs Uber to work as a ride sharing driver ?

Anyone can create a website or app and operate a one person ride sharing service.

Why bother even doing that really. Just put a plastic sign on the roof and sit at train stations, in front of bars downtown, and other busy places and pick up fares when you feel like it.

Or how about somebody buying a bus and picking up and dropping off passengers along a busy transit route. That could be pretty lucrative.

After decades of improving personal safety for customers and drivers with safety inspections, licencing, regulations, and cameras...........we are back to square one.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Saw an interesting news article ... when I find it again I'll post the link.

The first part didn't surprise me. It said some Uber drivers are under the mistaken impression that Uber fares are exempt from income tax.

The second part did surprise me. It said that where one was working multiple jobs (ex. regular day job plus Uber income), as soon as the *combined* income hit $30K, depending on province - the Uber drive has to register for GST/HST and collect. Since Uber does not provide a mechanism to collect GST plus expects the driver to cover all taxes, the take home pay is misleading.

The fare gets reduced by Uber's fee then the driver gets the remainder. Out of the remainder, the over $30K crowd has to pay the GST/HST (13% in Ontario) then report the remainder as income. If the other job baselines income at $50K for example, income tax (29%) plus HST (13%) means that 42% is gone. 

Surge pricing will increase the $$$ but as everything plus I believe Uber's fee are all percentage based, the $$$ go up but the percentages stay the same. It seems the only way to get a better percentage is to make sure one's income (either low enough to skip the GST/HST or other deductions reduce the income).

I wonder if the profiled Uber drivers who are well into their careers so that the other income is high are eventually going to complain that it isn't worth it. Sort of like high income workers complaining that overtime isn't worth it.


Cheers


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I remember in the past, people getting arrested and charged with illegally operating a taxi or limo service.

The only thing that stopped people from operating these services was the threat of charges against them.

Remove the threat, and they will exploit the vacuum in regulation.


----------



## a66y (Apr 5, 2016)

*...*



Eclectic12 said:


> The second part did surprise me. It said that where one was working multiple jobs (ex. regular day job plus Uber income), as soon as the *combined* income hit $30K, depending on province - the Uber drive has to register for GST/HST and collect. Since Uber does not provide a mechanism to collect GST plus expects the driver to cover all taxes, the take home pay is misleading.
> Cheers


This would only be the case if the driver is self employed or a contractor under their regular job.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

sags said:


> After decades of improving personal safety for customers and drivers with safety inspections, licencing, regulations, and cameras...........we are back to square one.


If this was all true there would not be the demand there is for Uber & Lyft. It's like when food trucks started to cook delicious food... it was a bit cheaper than a restaurant but most often was much better food and the demand was there.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

sags said:


> The next logical progression is..........who needs Uber to work as a ride sharing driver ?
> 
> Anyone can create a website or app and operate a one person ride sharing service.
> 
> ...


Agree, but taxi rides are becoming very expensive these days. 

I have to take para-taxi (subsidized taxi coupons purchased from the City of Ottawa para-transpo at a 25% discount from the face value of each coupon book), and even a short ride is still reasonably expensive.
A short ride to my doctor each way costs me $15.

A longer (22km) ride to the Ottawa Hospital, about $33 each way. I'm on a fixed pension. If there is more than one round trip per month (dental/doctor/hosp), it can cause quite a dent in my net pension income.

UBer just pushed their way through in Ottawa..the fines did not seem to deter them. 

If you watched the video embedded in the Ottawa Citizen (above in my post), you will hear the reaction of ONE angry taxi driver at city hall when city council passed the vote to make Uber legal in Ottawa. 

He mentioned "2000 taxi drivers..taxpayers to the city of Ottawa (property taxes etc) will have to put their homes up for sale."


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Eclectic12 said:


> S
> 
> The fare gets reduced by Uber's fee then the driver gets the remainder. Out of the remainder, the over $30K crowd has to pay the GST/HST (13% in Ontario) then report the remainder as income. If the other job baselines income at $50K for example, income tax (29%) plus HST (13%) means that 42% is gone.
> 
> ...


In Ontario, IF you are going to operate a taxi as a business, the business income should be separated from any other income the driver may have (regular job).

Once it is registered with the federal/Ontario gov't as a small business,the HST needs to be collected separately, or built into the fare,like the taxis do and submitted to the govts on a quarterly basis.

This way, the UBer driver's expenses operating the taxi service can be deducted based on "taxi mileage subtracted from personal use mileage. Same for gas, wear and tear items (brakes/tires), insurance.
Otherwise,the UBer driver will soon learn that being a Uber driver is not as lucrative as first thought.

One Uber driver on Ottawa news TV, mentioned that after his expenses, his take home pay is about $9 an hour..less than the minimum wage in Ontario,

and he is at risk to himself and his vehicle driving people around..especially in winter months, when freezing rain or black ice is on the roads.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

People have short memories.

The in taxi cameras were brought in after a rash of violent robberies, assaults and murders of taxi drivers. 

Regulation is pretty much always the solution offered to address problems after government action is demanded by the public.

Less regulation is touted by some as a solution, but it is regulation that stops a neighbor from building a 40 foot bonfire on his front lawn right next to your house.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

sags said:


> People have short memories.
> 
> The in taxi cameras were brought in after a rash of violent robberies, assaults and murders of taxi drivers.
> 
> ...


I'm thinking that the September time frame to legalize Uber as a contender in the taxi business for the city of Ottawa, was done to give the legal and taxi licensing dept at city hall, more time to work out the new rules that will be fare (pun intended) to both the existing taxi companies and UBer. 

It has to be a level playing field..otherwise the taxi companies will launch lawsuits against the city..and guess who will be paying for the legal battles?

It seems like the city didn't want to continue the fight of fining them, since the public is in favour and UBer seems to be operating in a "gray area" when it comes to running a business in the city.

The city approves taxi company operators and issues taxi licences (plates) to legitimate taxis. What has happened in the taxi black market (taxi plates being sold for ridiculous speculative prices) should never have happened in the first place.

Years ago, councillor Andy Haydon put a motion to make the taxi plates returnable back to the city, if the owner of the plate didn't want to continue in the business.

But just like any level of gov't, once you pay the price for a set of plates and return them because you are no longer interested in using them (like sales taxes), you don't get your money back for the taxes paid or the city licencing fees.
The taxi union didn't like that proposal, since they couldn't profit from the sale of the plates, which the individual driver to whom it was issued to, considered that plate to be their property..purchased one time from the city and perhaps their retirement income
bonus. 

Now that has pretty much evaporated, since the city was not involved in those transactions and in fact turned a blind eye
to the practice when *they had to have known it was happening. 
*
For whatever reason, back then, the taxi union or other (councillor bribes?etc) that motion was never passed creating a pandora's box for the city and new taxi drivers. 

It is (or was), what I would call a pyramid scheme gone out of control. Everyone was happy for a while until a game changer came along..Uber.

The real suckers losers are the ones that came along from different countries in the last few years and borrowed heavily to finance their purchase of existing taxi plates when the city was not issuing any new plates for a while..encouraging hoarding and the black market.

sidetrack here:
This is wrong, and those that were coerced into paying those ransoms for existing plates may just have a case in court. The city should have acted on the Andy Haydon proposal right away..but they didn't....and now..just like the OC transpo-Via rail accident, where the city has to quietly settle the lawsuits launched by the families of the victims..and NOW co-operate to build an underpass at that spot like they should have done in the first place. So far it's just another study..a few million more wasted.


----------



## Bowzer (Feb 25, 2015)

Eclectic12 said:


> The first part didn't surprise me. It said some Uber drivers are under the mistaken impression that Uber fares are exempt from income tax.


My friend has regularly talked about the money being "tax free". What he really means is "undeclared income". I'm not going to get in an argument with him about it, but obviously if you are receiving money by direct deposit, and choosing not to declare it, that is a pretty clear paper trail. It's all good until CRA starts checking.

With what is going on in the news about tax cheaters lately, I wouldn't be surprised to hear about CRA investigating uber payments.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Bowzer said:


> With what is going on in the news about tax cheaters lately, I wouldn't be surprised to hear about CRA investigating uber payments.


Direct deposit or check, it's still a paper trail. if there is substantial lost income to the Federal and Provincial gov't on the 13% HST, they will investigate the UBer drivers, unless of course Uber refuses to disclose the names of their drivers, which will lead to another court case..and eventually PENALTIES from CRA to those individuals that chose to hide their additional income and perhaps taxes that were not collected as part of the fare.

While CRA may have some difficulty bringing Uber to court, they won't have any trouble bringing Canadian individuals (that are
filing tax returns) to tax courts, which are set up to deal with income tax situations. 

it all depends on how the cities legitimize UBer as a taxi operator..since UBer is responsible for collection of the fares and paying the taxi drivers.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

I thought this is worth bumping up in light of a recent change that Uber is going to allow tipping.

It is a big deal since people who advocate Uber always pointed out that there is no tipping, i.e. cheaper and you don't need to carry cash unlike taxis. I wondering if people will start changing their tune and realize that Uber isn't this "ride-sharing" company and an illegitimate taxi service. Sure, you'll say that you won't tip, but then the drivers will just downgrade your score and you'll never be able to get an Uber and be stuck with public transport, or taxis, if they haven't gone bankrupt.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Here's a solution for Uber: add a feature to the app that allows drivers to indicate whether they expect/accept tips, and allow users to indicate whether they are willing to accept rides from these drivers.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

andrewf said:


> Here's a solution for Uber: add a feature to the app that allows drivers to indicate whether they expect/accept tips, and allow users to indicate whether they are willing to accept rides from these drivers.


Lyft does have an option of paying a tip via app, so it isn't a technical issue. It is more of an expectation issue, I.e. no tips by customers. But let say that something like this was implemented and ALL the drivers expect tips. Especially during a surge event. What do you then?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

You make a decision about how opposed you are to paying tips.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

I figure this might be worth bumping up. I wonder how soon all those Uber drivers are going to be up in arms when Uber rolls out the self driving cars.

They are currently experimenting in Pittsburgh. I imagine it is only a matter of time, years as opposed to decades, when this happens.

It would be interesting to see how all those Uber drivers who were proclaiming how Uber should function legally because they provide jobs react to this development. Essentially Uber bought the goodwill to get the foot in the door, kill the taxi industry and then have a monopoly on the taxi service industry. Impressive.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

We used to have elevator operators, too. Eventually, paying someone to 'operate' a car for you will seem as absurd.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

andrewf said:


> We used to have elevator operators, too. Eventually, paying someone to 'operate' a car for you will seem as absurd.


Sure. But I am just wondering if all the drivers defending Uber realize what the end game will be and what they will do when it occurs.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Uber has made it no secret that they intended to move to driverless vehicles when they become available.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The picture painted of Uber in the Canadian media has been way off. This is not a matter of a company being more efficient or technologically advanced, nor "progress".

Right-leaning economists have been in the Canadian media talking about how Uber brings efficiency etc. This really is not what's going on; they're lying. The economists who are sympathetic with these kinds of businesses also under-state the operating costs of the employees. This is an easy game to play for an economist... please don't believe their numbers when they say Uber drivers are making good wages. I've spoken with several Uber drivers in the US and they are unanimous: they hardly make any money driving for Uber, once they factor in fuel, insurance, and all expenses. Because they have to use their own equipment, it's also very hard to properly evaluate their personal net income. You have to factor in not only fuel & insurance but also depreciation on your equipment, repair costs (which are sporadic, etc). Not to mention liability events, which are rare -- not fully covered by Uber of course -- and impossible for a driver to take into account.

Think about a case like this where an Uber driver kills someone, an event with tremendous liabilities, into millions. Uber washes its hands of it and the driver is stuck with the liability. Does this Uber driver have a degree in actuarial sciences? Sure as sh*t, the driver did NOT model this liability when calculating his wages.

Nor do the right-leaning economists, of course. They fib with the numbers to make it sound like Uber drivers make good money.

The corporation takes advantage of that complexity. Uber _cons_ their drivers by using an information advantage over them, since drivers will never calculate their all-in costs. By information advantage, I mean that Uber has the actuaries and statisticians to calculate the true income vs expense situation. Drivers are amateurs, and are automatically losers in this economic calculation vs their employer. *Drivers are the losers and are unable to make an informed decision about the attractiveness of wages offered by Uber.*

On top of that, Uber cons their drivers with marketing hype of "apps"

Uber's business model is simple:

They simply don't pay the licensing and business overheads as other companies. They deliberately violate employment laws and _pretend_ they don't have employees. They set up a complex wage/expense model, that employees can't possibly properly assess, and exploit their labourers. They're just a more aggressive corporation which is pushing the bar lower on labour. This is very old fashioned capitalism, possibly the most aggressive so far. Lowest wages and benefits possible.

Naturally, right wing economists and business people love this... which is why you hear a lot of positive things about Uber. These practices are depressive on wages and depressive on labour standards, which many business owners think are good for them too. It erodes general wages.

Uber violates local laws and regulations (deliberately -- it's their M.O.), takes advantage of impoverished and desperate employees, makes employees bring their own personal assets to work, and pays the least possible wages. Uber employees do not make good money.

I could also run a business where I deliberately violate local laws, ignore licensing & standards, use lobbying pressure to get away with it, and con my employees into deploying their personal assets and shouldering all the expenses I normally would. More profits for my corporation. Does that make me a good business? It _should_ land me in jail.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

carverman said:


> UBer just pushed their way through in Ottawa..the *fines did not seem to deter them*.


That's because Uber's business strategy is to deliberately violate municipal laws. The corporation aims to break the law, and figures they will either get away with it or be able to buy influence using lobbying and marketing campaigns to sway public opinion.

The push in the Canadian media I observed in the last couple weeks shows that a strong lobbying & marketing campaign is underway in Canada. Don't be fooled... they are a deceptive and immoral corporation.

Look past the hype of "apps". This isn't about apps. It is extremely aggressive capitalism, and a giant corporation that has decided to violate laws that are meant to protect Canadians.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> I think Lyft is working towards a better business model. They have partnered with GM to supply new cars at a "hub" and drivers will "rent" them for $99 a week.


Lyft is a more honest corporation and uses better practices, and is better to their employees. I exclusively use Lyft.

When I talk to drivers (they usually drive for both) they say that they are much happier with Lyft.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

sags said:


> What happens to a Uber driver if they are pulled over by the police and the passengers are found to be carrying drugs ?
> 
> What if the passenger ditches the drugs under the seat ?
> 
> Personally, for the little money people can earn from driving strangers around in their car..........I don't know why anyone would want to.


What happens if the Uber driver pulls a knife or decides to sexually molest a female passenger?


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

andrewf said:


> Uber has made it no secret that they intended to move to driverless vehicles when they become available.


Yes, however, a lot of the Uber drivers who seem to fervently defend Uber are either ignoring this reality, or are going to be in shock when this happens.

Then again, from what I gather, this would only affect those drivers who are depending on Uber to make a living, not those who see it as a potential to pick up a few bucks. Given the high churn rate of Uber drivers, the former is probably a small portion of the drivers; however, a lot of the stories you see brought up in the media are the drivers who say they can't get work for some reason or another and depend on Uber giving them this opportunity to work, even though at the end of the day they probably make very little.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I guess I am in the camp of people who think drivers who choose to work through Uber are adults with agency and have the ability to decide for themselves whether to continue to do so. If it is not lucrative enough, drivers should leave the platform. Uber would have to respond and raise the compensation of operators. 

I don't complain that my employer doesn't pay me as much as I could earn elsewhere. If it's the case, I have the agency to make the decision to stay or leave.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

andrewf said:


> I guess I am in the camp of people who think drivers who choose to work through Uber are adults with agency and have the ability to decide for themselves whether to continue to do so. If it is not lucrative enough, drivers should leave the platform. Uber would have to respond and raise the compensation of operators.


One would think that, and one would wonder why they continue being drivers. If Uber pays so little, why "work" for Uber at all? Well, James had provided some links and one of them pointed out the "bait-and-switch" aspect which caught some of the early drivers. They had originally offered higher compensation, but then cut it in half when Lyft and other players entered the market. The problem is that some of the early drivers may have done the math and were able to make $20-30 / hour at the original rate and bought cars to work as Uber drivers. However, when they reduced the fares, now they are looking at significantly less pay. The drivers are still stuck with paying off their cars, and I guess don't have any other marketable skills, or no one will hire them for whatever reason.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> I guess I am in the camp of people who think drivers who choose to work through Uber are adults with agency and have the ability to decide for themselves whether to continue to do so. If it is not lucrative enough, drivers should leave the platform.


But Uber is side-stepping various employment and regulatory laws that normally make that easy to assess. They have created a very complex situation for their employees... even a reasonably educated adult can't make an informed decision in the scenario Uber has architected. Their employees don't operate within conditions that normally provide some assurance of fairness to labourers.



> I don't complain that my employer doesn't pay me as much as I could earn elsewhere.


But you're ignoring that your employer is operating within constraints imposed on them to create a level playing field for you the employee. You're forgetting about the decades of labour law and hundreds of court cases that went into creating this scenario that you work in.

That's why you and I, at our regular white collar office jobs, are able to make an informed decision about whether we're compensated well enough.

For example, does your employee insist that you haul your own computing equipment, staplers, and toner to work? And I'm guessing that you don't work in a hazardous area that has many hidden liabilities.

I'm saying that it feels obvious to you and I whether we're paid well enough. But we operate within a system that helps us make that evaluation. Uber, by design of their corporation, tries to evade those constraints... which in my view makes them an immoral player in the labour market, especially because it's not accidental omissions. They have tuned their system specifically to screw their employees.

Uber is a very good deal for the riders, by the way - but that's beside the point. If someone set up a company where all the drivers were slaves, those rides would cost even less.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I think it's easy for us to forget how many aspects of our work lives are actually the consequence of decades of labour activism, lawsuits, and unions. Our modern situation that's pretty fair for labourers didn't emerge out of the goodness of business owners hearts.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

It looks like Uber does some even worse things. They also entice potential drivers to get car leases and subprime auto loans - predatory lending, with terms even worse than usual subprime loans
http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...prime-auto-loans-to-increase-driver-pool.html

This is also part of the scheme I described where Uber misrepresents the net profit a driver will make. They deceive the drivers into thinking they will earn a high income and therefore can afford a car loan. The driver ends up with a lease and loan they can't afford, they inevitably make worse NET wages than they thought, and therefore end up as debt slaves to Uber. The company actually helps push them into poverty, knowing that the resulting desperation makes for a better employee (cashflow troubles = desperation = willing to accept low wages)

Make no mistake, Uber executives are scumbags

Here also is the text of a class action lawsuit against Uber misrepresenting expected income and hiding the expenses the employees get stuck with


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Uber has lost their license to operate in London, UK
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...don-s-transport-regulator?srnd=premium-canada

Because their app wasn't sufficiently well designed, there were at least 14,000 trips with drivers who were imposters. Other people could pose as licensed drivers and the passenger would have no idea who the driver really was.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ Wonder when will this happen in North America?


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

I really don't care if someone chooses to work for Uber or someone chooses to use Uber instead of a taxi. That's up to them to decide. But I do think it is worth noting that what started out as a 'sharing economy' and 'ride sharing' idea has simply become a business with workers and customers like any other business intended to make profit.

The original idea was that someone who owned a car could post on their App that they were available to give someone a ride at certain times. In other words, 'I'm sitting home doing nothing this Friday evening, couldn't get a date, so if anyone needs a ride home from the bar because they don't have a designated driver, I'll come and pick you up, drive you home and you can pay me for my time.' Like AirBnB when it started, it was intended to be a sometimes thing, not a full time job/business. 

Of course like everything else, there were unintended consequences to this 'sharing' idea. instead of being an occassional (when you couldn't get a date), casual thing to 'help' out others who needed a ride, Uber quickly became something that some drivers saw as a full time job they could do and the platform(Uber) facilitating the 'sharing' equally as quickly changed into a profit driven company.

In a true 'sharing economy' model, the platform simply allows the buyer and seller to get together to 'share' whatever it is. ie. a car sitting in a driveway doing nothing or a spare room in your house sitting empty (AirBnB). Most people don't really understand what the 'sharing economy' is supposed to be about.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/...sharing economy is an,-based on-line platform.

In what I would consider a TRUE sharing economy model, the platform would make nothing from the transaction at all other than perhaps some advertising revenue from companies advertising other products on the sharing app's platform.

The sharing economy today bears little resemblance to the original intent and philosophy. Uber and AirBnB have simply turned into businesses like any other with employees and shareholders. So now we see all the other unintended consequences that result when they turn into a business. Employees going to court to argue they should be recognized as being employees and therefore get employee benefits like pensions, paid sick days and paid vacations, CPP contributions by the company, etc. ; shareholders demanding higher profits; users discovering that doing business that is unregulated by government can have disastrous results. 

I always believe that the people get what the people DESERVE. If someone chooses to use or work for a business that skirts the laws as Uber and AirBnB do, then any downside they fall victim to is their own fault.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> ...
> 
> I always believe that the people get what the people DESERVE. If someone chooses to use or work for a business that skirts the laws as Uber and AirBnB do, *then any downside they fall victim to is their own fault.*


 ...+1 as well as users.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

If you look at it from Uber's perspective, they are on to a good thing. They're making money and doing none of the actual work or incurring any of the actual expenses themselves. That's all on the Uber driver's shoulders. If you look at it from the driver's perspective, they are doing it for around $10 an hour net pay and that's without any kind of benefits. they are also controlled by Uber unlike what many people think. They can't just do what they want, when they want. If they do, they get 'deactivated'. For someone to drive for Uber under those conditions, they have to be desperate or have no other means of earning money.

Some relevant info worth reading can be found here: https://www.epi.org/publication/ube...Uber also exerts control,them when they don't.

And some more detail here: https://www.epi.org/publication/ube...his means that an Uber,time, full-year worker.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

The unintended consequences of using Airbnb (and Uber) ad the likes:

https://ca.yahoo.com/news/toronto-mansion-party-shooting-victim-232525639.html



> A 19-year-old who was shot at a Toronto "mansion party" hosted in an Airbnb rental is now suing the company, the property owner and the event's alleged organizers. ...


Hmmm ... great business for the legal system.


----------

