Cabbies paralyze London in Uber rebellion London’s black cabs went ahead with their protest against the Uber taxi-getter app today, bringing traffic around the centre of the city to a standstill (at times anyway). Black cabs crawl along Whitehall Black cabs crawl along Whitehall. Credit: Andrew Orlowski The cabs have parked up around Trafalgar Square in an …
I actually agree with them that vehicles and drivers designed to convey the public for money should be licensed and regulated.
I certainly wouldn't get in some geezer's Passat just because he rocked up to the door and offered me a lift, but that's essentially what users of Uber are doing.
However, knowing a couple of cabbies as I do, I can confidently say that if they don't get with the program, they are going to be utterly crushed by this kind of technology.
From the article:
"The Licensed Taxi Drivers’ Association argues that the mobile app is basically just a form of taxi meter, which private cars and minicabs aren’t legally allowed to have."Is this just a London thing? All the private hire firms where I live (Staffordshire) have integrated meters in the little GPS enabled devices that the drivers can accept jobs and recieve short messages (amongst other things) through. The same firms now use automated telephone lines (which remembers the last few pickup points if you've used them before) or Apps with which you can book a taxi, then see where it is, and it tells you what the car is, its reg and the drivers name (or the same info is sent to your mobile as an SMS if you booked via a call).
Perhaps London cabbies should try moving with the times instead of bringing things to a standstill?
"The Licensed Taxi Drivers’ Association argues that the mobile app is basically just a form of taxi meter, which private cars and minicabs aren’t legally allowed to have."
This point puzzled me. The private cars and minicabs don't have the meter: the customer who wants the taxi has the meter, in the form of the app on their phone.
Colin
So what we have always had to do, unless in the City, is ring a random mini-cab company, agree a price, then hope the car turns up and it and the driver are reasonably respectable.
With Uber, you get on line, say where you are and where you want to go, ask for a price, agree it, and watch on the screen as the cab approaches. The company guarantees the driver and car are insured and vetted, etc, etc.
And you can log feedback on the site for your ride.
I see no downside for the customer, only for the old fashioned cab driver
Agreed. Having used one of these services (Lyft) with a friend in San Fran a few weeks ago, it was an eye opener. The app shows the cab, the operator, their position, and you get instant feedback. No cash changes hands. The driver was courteous, clearly looked after the car (I believe required to be <4 years old? ), and this was not their day job. Regular bloke, working when possible on the side.
As one of the comments above mentioned, I too was ripped off by a black cab from Heathrow to Hounslow. The cabbie thought I was a tourist mark, and was on the M4 heading for Hammersmith (I guess roundabouts confuse foreigners, eh? ) before you could say "pull the other one".
I have some sympathy for the "well the regulations make for a safer ride", only in London I don't. The bloody MOT is already a check the vehicle is on good working order.
( Mentioned here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/212554/taxi-private-hire-licensing-guide.pdf). The one advantage of a black cab is it takes 5 people and can turn around in one go.
Here in TN, Uber is in Nashville. TN has NO mandatory vehicle inspection, so perhaps it would be a greater risk. However, if the vehicle is only 4 years old, it is probably a lower risk. Uninsured motorists over here are a problem, so their corporate insurance is a necessity I imagine...
And don't get me started on cab drivers in Poland that will take any group of men directly to the nearest strip club....
P.
And a taxi strike, the drivers with the the official medallions are protesting about Uber in Paris as well. Uber reckons business this evening was 9x normal. How will the licensed drivers cope, it's hard to drive when you've shot yourself in both feet.
I felt Uber was a good benefit to MN. My friends and I started using them (even though they had cost more), because of the cleaner / safer driving. We're likely to get a cab to our favorite pub and than get one back. It didn't take long for the other companies to clean up there act. I'd say with the shift more and more of us look around for best fair/ times since word spreads quickly if a cab company (even if its just a few driver) are shit.
Booking a taxi via Uber is no different from booking a taxi via telephone, email, SMS, website. In civilisation outside the M25 many taxi firms already allow you to book a taxi via email/sms/web/carrier pidgeon/whatever. The only problem with Uber is it insists it is not a taxi dispatcher (which requires a license) and that its drivers are not private hire taxis (which require a license). Prosecute Uber for being an unlicensed taxi dispatcher, and their drivers for unlicensed private hire.
Parliament is currently examining a review of UK-wide taxi regulation legislation (http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/areas/taxi-and-private-hire-services.htm). Contact your MP and make your concerns known.
"The only problem with Uber is it insists it is not a taxi dispatcher (which requires a license) and that its drivers are not private hire taxis (which require a license)."
Err, no they aren't. To be an Uber driver in the UK you need to hold commercial insurance for private hire duties and be a licensed private hire driver, Which includes vertting.
They also have to have a certain type and class of car.
There is a law in the UK restricting the use, you can't just flout it by saying your drivers are contractors. i.e. in exactly the same way that you can't just ask people to ring your mobile and you'll take them home for a fiver.
Uber London itself is also licenced and has complied with all the necessary legislation. The only question mark from anyone is whether their app is a meter, TFL who are in charge of the licensing for them say no but it has been referred to the high court. There is no question mark over their licensing status.
Yes, but it would usually be the last, not the first resort. Going straight to a protest without having first exhausted the other options such as petitions and dialogue is counter-productive, you don't get far by pissing off the very people you are trying to win over to your side.
Besides there's a difference between a protest which can take various forms and what taxi drivers are doing today which is in my opinion extortion (and deliberate obstruction* of the public highways, a criminal offence.)
* Cabs are parked at 90 degrees across lanes of traffic ...
Does anyone here remember the term Gypsy Cab?
Here's the problem.
You get in to the car and the car is in an accident, you're SOL. Better get a good lawyer who is willing to work on a contingency basis. Driver's insurance company won't pay out on a claim. Driver is on the hook because he was using personal insurance while driving commercially. Sue Uber? Unless they've changed their insurance policy, they won't pay out until after the driver's insurance pays out. So if the driver's insurance refuses to pay, Uber's insurance won't cover it.
Which means you have to go to court against the driver and then Uber.
To me, that's the real issue.
There's more because you have the issue of redlining.
http://driveuberlondon.com/faq
What are the licensing requirements to drive with Uber in London?
Uber works with Public Carriage Office (PCO) licensed drivers. At the time of onboarding, you will need to bring with you all up-to-date legally required documents. For yourself this includes:
a valid driver's license
driver's license counterpart
PCO license.
For your vehicle you will also need to bring:
a valid MOT
logbook
commercial insurance certificate
PCO license.
If you are a PCO Operator yourself, just bring your operator's license.
So yes you need insurance
I said when this was being talked about - that this is exactly what would happen - the black cab strike has now significantly raised the public awareness of Uber.
For those spouting out all kinds of crap about unlicensed drivers, problems with insurance and everything else - I'd suggest you actually first look at what is required to be a driver for Uber.
UberEXEC -
You Are...
An experienced professional driver with a private-hire license and commercial insurance.
Your Vehicle Is...
An executive-level, new shape E-class or equivalent vehicle that comfortably seats 4 passengers.
uberX -
You Are...
A professional driver with a private-hire license and commercial insurance.
Your Vehicle Is...
A mid-size or full-size saloon that comfortably seats 4 passengers.
and all the other options
as you can see - you CANNOT sign up to be a driver for Uber in the England (since it appears no cities in Wales or Scotland are listed - I assume the service is not available there) unless you have at minimum - a Private Hire license AND commercial insurance.
What the Black Cab drivers should have* done is to give free rides to anyone that flagged them down. They didn't get any fares during the protest. Free rides could have made them the good guys, but they blew it.
*Pedants corner. Did you notice how I didn't write "of"? Some of us still write English!
I hear so much about how the 'black cab' taxi drivers need to get with the times and realise that this is a new age of technology, etc . . .
I agree that technology can't be ignored but the problem is the inherent contradiction in embracing smart phone-based booking and metering but not accepting that such metering is metering all the same.
If you are going to embrace technology then you have to accept that a smart phone app must count as an installed meter. That is the fundamental problem here - TfL should man-up and accept that the same technological advances that make Uber possible also justify a broadening of the definition of what constitutes an installed meter for the purpose of falling under taxi regulations.
I am not saying Uber is a bad idea, just that the playing field must be level. If the regulations insist that to have an installed meter, the taxi and driver must meet X, Y and Z requirements then Uber drivers must meet those requirements.
If that is unacceptable from a competition standpoint then you must alter the regulations but, whatever those regulations are, they must apply equally to anyone with a meter, regardless of if it is a 'normal' meter or a smart phone.
Whatever definition allows smartphones to be exempt should be widened to represent the PURPOSE of the regulation. A meter is simply any device used to calculate a fare based on a combination of trip time and distance traveled.
The short version: it is TfL that needs to embrace technology and update their definitions to include smart phone apps as meters.
"I am not saying Uber is a bad idea, just that the playing field must be level."
Then the London-specific legislation that created the 'closed shop' Black Cab sector should be deleted. The London Black Cab regulations tip the playing field heavily in the Black Cabs' favour, not Uber's.
Although The Knowledge requires drivers to learn every single road and point of interest it covers, that coverage is actually only a 6-mile radius around Charing Cross (technically, a statue at the southern end of Trafalgar Square – the point from which London's distances are measured).
Last time I checked, London is rather more than 12 miles across.
The Knowledge test therefore doesn't cover most London's suburbia in any great detail. It only requires knowledge of the major trunk roads, for example. Nor are points of interest covers much outside that central core.
This explains the tourist-centric approach of so many Black Cab drivers: their much-vaunted knowledge only makes them useful to people visiting the centre of London. If you want a Black Cab to take you from Heathrow to a south London suburb, their "Knowledge" will be of negligible benefit.
@Sean
Absolutely.
My suggestion would also involve allowing other operators to pickup 'hails', which is currently the purveiw of Black Cabs.
What I am saying is nothing more than if you want competition, there must be a level playing field. Differentiation should not be enforced by regulations or enabled by loopholes.
I am not a Londoner but I have spent long enough living there to know exactly what you are saying. I apprecate the standard of the Black Cabs but always felt that a lack of competition did nothing to benefit the average Londoner.
BUT, competition MUST be on equal terms. Either Uber services are to be considered taxis or not. If they are taxis, then they must follow taxi regulations. If they are not taxis then they cannot use metering - in any guise. That's it.
@Tom 13
It's simple - if you have a meter, you must adhere to one set of regulations and if you do not have a meter, you must adhere to a different (though partially-overlapping) set.
My main point was just that phone apps should be considered to be meters because for all intents and purposes, that's what they are. Here is the relevant part of the Act:
Prohibition of taximeters.
(1)No vehicle to which a London PHV licence relates shall be equipped with a taximeter.
(2)If such a vehicle is equipped with a taximeter, the owner of that vehicle is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.
(3)In this section “taximeter” means a device for calculating the fare to be charged in respect of any journey by reference to the distance travelled or time elapsed since the start of the journey (or a combination of both).
The wiggle-room is presumably around the word 'equipped' and, perhaps, the phrase 'device for'.
The problem is that the legislation was made before the advent of smart phone apps and personal GPS so the idea of a taxi meter on a telephone was not specifically in the minds of the authors of the Act. Nevertheless, it is my view that sub-section 3 covers it and the reasoning from TfL seems to support that.
After all, they are not claiming that a smart phone is not a meter but that it is not installed in the car.
This post has been deleted by its author
Not just that but where is the fare calculated?
"(3)In this section “taximeter” means a device for calculating the fare to be charged in respect of any journey by reference to the distance travelled or time elapsed since the start of the journey (or a combination of both)."
If the fare is calculated away from the vehicle (i.e. on the servers of Uber Europe HQ in the Netherlands) which I think may be the case then the device is just recording time and distance and the server is what calculates the fare which is definitely not equipped in the car.
Any argument against this would also state that a driver may not have a watch and an odometer in the car as these can be used to calculate a fare (especially if they had a fare chart on paper in the glove box or rang their cab office to ask the price).
Haha. you've gotta laugh.
What on EARTH did they think they were doing ? How on EARTH did they think this was not going to simply lead to:
1. inside london: backlash against black cabs, increased uber visibility (I for one have just downloaded it, and didn't realise they are licenced minicab drivers, etc)
2. outside london - massive/uber(sic) uber downloads commence and great awareness.
3. educated awareness of the public at the weirdness of how london has taxi laws unlike any other place in the UK - and opening the doors, perhaps, to them being standardised at last (even the way the black cab unions talks about 'only they have meters' - it's like they don't realise there is a world outside of london.
way to shoot yerself in the foot.
But also, another great demonstration of the power of a union used to protect it's own interests rather than for what they were originally intended.
Innovations in technology must be embraced if we are ever to move forward. There's not much to counter that argument. I feel the majority of black cab drivers are pissed off because what was essentially a qualified job (by legislation) has become open to practically anyone. If two groups of people are doing the exact same job in the exact same place, how is it remotely fair that one group has to do an equivalent of a degree and be subject to more rigorous regulation than the other?
If the consumer is to benefit in the long run, competition should be strong but also fair. In this case, it is certainly not the latter. This is why Addison Lee is also standing shoulder to shoulder with the LTDA, who are usually (far) more opponent then compartriot.
I hope these black cabs either clean-up their act or go under.
They are frankly a nuisance and I for one would not miss them.
I want to travel from A to B in comfort, I do not want to be slung about the cab or have to worry they are going to take out pedestrians or bikes as they duck and dive and frankly take the "micheal" when it comes to other road users...
As for Addiscum Lee, don't get me started!
This sort of action just confirms that there are far too many idiots driving cabs.
.
Yep, they've generated just as sympathy much as the tube drivers who are already paid more than most people for sitting in their cabin, pushing buttons and occasionally ranting at the paying passengers. The same tube drivers who decided that on top of their ordinary and extraordinary overtime they would also need further extra money during the olympics because, err, honestly: the excuse was so wafer thin I can't even recall it now.
I live in zone 4 - 10 miles to the centre for those outsider of London.
The chances of finding a black cab willing to take me home after a night out? Slim to none, unless he happens to feel like making this his last job and his drive home from where I live isn't too far, or at least in the right direction.
Uber is far more likely to get my business, though I have that, Hailo and Addison Lee apps installed - I'm also likely to check price and arrival time on each before I commit to the order.
Addison Lee doesn't have the same problem.
It quotes the whole price for a job upfront - based on distance from pick up to drop off and current traffic times (I wouldn't be surprised if it asks google maps for the answer)
There is no GPS metering, no physical metering. The only extras are if you add new pick up or drop off points or keep them waiting.
Uber could quite easily change to the same model - as long as the drivers were willing to take the fares. I suspect it would lead to slightly increased fares for customers, but probably not by much.
And historically speaking, held to ransom by black cabs. I've lived here for nearly 40 years and I've learned to avoid using black cabs whenever possible. Yes, there are a lot of nice cab drivers out there, but I cannot stand the back-breaking discomfort of those older cabs, plus getting thrown around, not being able to see through the misted up windows...
That's even before we talk about the cost. For me the killer blow was the rise in fares after 20.00, Boris's Big Idea to get more cabs out and about in the evening. Can someone explain the logic?
Quite honestly I've never had a problem with a mini cab driver, with or without satnav. Strange I note some down votes on Addison Lee, personally never once had a problem. Clean, recent model cars or MPV's, clean well-dressed and pleasant drivers. GLH is another excellent London-wide company.
As several others here have said, the cabbies have seriously shot themselves in both feet by this action, but the real problem is that it's London's problem and the law needs to be changed. There's plenty of room for all these cabs and the black cabs would still have the advantage of kerbside hailing.
I signed up to Zipcar (car club) about 2 years ago. Totally brilliant, I've rented several. On one occasion I rented a car to pick someone up from Kings Cross to bring back to Chelsea. 1.5 hours - it cost me £9.00. No contest as far as I'm concerned!! Another time delivering 3 computers round west london, took 3 hours - £18.00. No congestion charge, fuel included.
There are two linked but distinct issues here.
One is whether Uber are breaching the relevant law, the other is whether the law ought to change.
And, for my money, on the first at least, things are quite clear - these apps are most definitely in breach of the intent (at least, and maybe even the letter) of the law as it stands. They're a classic instance of something coming along that the law, possibly, doesn't explicitly forbid, only because the technology in question simply wasn't envisaged when the law was framed. If I were a London black cabbie, I'd be up in arms as well, looking to get the spirit of the law enforced.
The second issue is a perfectly valid one to discuss, and not one I have any great opinion on. But right now, the law is what it is, and its intent is perfectly clear. If that's to change, that should be through proper legal process - not from simple force majeure on the part of interlopers exploiting legal technicalities.
Black cabs out competed by Uber; Uber out competed by - oh, I don't know, no more than a million apps?
Black cabs are taking a stop the world position which will do for them but if Uber think they've got it all their own way, just give it a few months.
The idea that a hopelessly Americanised service can sustain against home market tweaked opponents can't stand. Uber is an aggressively, off puttingly, frankly unlikeably US product and I expect Addison Lee and others are already planning its demise.
It will be Pyrrhic but the black cabs will have their revenge on Uber.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
