Bush Rank, A Rank Too Far For Compliance? Plus Another TfL Manager Gone?

Night time ranking on the Bush Rank, is getting to be a nightmare. I have to regularly compromise my safety, by getting out of my cab to move Minicabs off. These cars  constantly use the rank as a rendezvous point for their customers. And when you ask them to move, you get nothing but abuse.

Click this link to see what we have to put up with:

https://twitter.com/taxi_leaks/status/916707756136108032

Arriving back at the rank later, there were cars there that had to be ejected ....not always as easy as it sounds, over the last three to four years, they've become extremely more aggressive....even threatening violence. Friday night was no different, I could have been bang in trouble with a couple of PHV drivers were it not for the two Cabbies who saw I was having trouble and pulled behind me, got out and backed me up.

This Minicab threatened to run me over and aimed the car in my direction, when I stood in front of him to take a photo. 

He then backed up,stopping me from getting back into my cab. Eventually he pulled forward to let his passenger in, but then reversed and shouted a volley of four letters words at me, even though he now had passengers on board.

It's a regular occurrence, when they do eventually move, they just pull over and double park, blocking the exit of taxis from the rank.

There is a camera pointed at the rank be it appears not to be used. If it were, the word would soon filter through to the Minicab fraternity. 

What is it about the words TAXI RANK....don't these Minicab drivers understand?

Every night, there are posts on social media complaining about the situation and yet, all the years I've used this rank....I've never once seen a TfL Compliance officer at this rank. And yet they regularly turn up at Westfield to Badge and Bill the drivers ranking there!

The side entrance to Westfield in Wood Lane has also become a private hire rank and often causes congestion with Minicabs parked along Wood Lane. Again, never see a CO here either. 

Perhaps the McDonald's on the Green isn't up to compliance standards. Funny though, a tream of TfL COs were seen leaving the Mc Donald's in Queensway, Friday night.

Taxi Leaks Extra Bit:

There has recently been a change of attitude on the TFL-TPH Twitter account. Every complaint used to be passed on to the appropriate department, but it now appears they are not responding to many policy questions! 

Last month, I asked a question 70 times over the course of a week. I never got one answer. 

More recently we've seen PHVs with supersides and rear windscreen adverts. I asked TfL when the legislation was changed to allow this. They decided to ignore the question but then devised to dip into the conversation that followed. 

This just goes to show the arrogance we have to put up with from the management of TfLTPH. 

How can you have any respect for this licensing authority, when it's clear they have no respect for us as a trade.

Taxi Leaks Extra News.

                           Gone, but not forgotten 

So it's goodbye from him, goodbye from him....and now it's goodbye from her....with more to come I'm told.... But who will be next as TFL's house of cards collapses ??? 

Seems TfL are having a much needed clear out, not before time, as they say!!!

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2hWsuNL
via IFTTT

When will Transport for London challenge Uber on exploiting drivers?

Uber lost its London licence – but not because of its treatment of workers.

London's mayor Sadiq Khan made headlines in September, after Transport for London decided not to renew Uber's licence (it continues to operate freely in other cities). The Trades Union Congress hailed Uber’s delicensing as a "big win for workers' rights". Yet for many members of the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain, the prospect of losing their livelihood and facing unmanageable vehicle debt doesn’t seem like something worth celebrating.

Uber now has two quite separate existential legal battles on its hands, one to keep its licence to operate and the other to maintain a business model entirely dependent upon the exploitation of workers. The two legal battles are too often conflated. 

I was one of two former Uber drivers who took the company to court last year in an attempt to win workers' rights. Myself and fellow driver Yaseen Aslam returned to court last week to fight Uber’s appeal of an earlier ruling in our favour, which confirmed our status as self-employed “limb (b) workers”. This is a technical term which means we have the right to earn the minimum wage and get holiday pay.

It’s a must-win battle, because if we lose there will undoubtedly be a rush to ape Uber style "partnerships", with workers bearing all the risk in return for the notional flexibility of "being your own boss". Too often, workers are confronted with an unfair and false choice between flexibility and fairness.

Uber’s market valuation is close to that of Unilever or Vodafone. Is guaranteeing the minimum wage really too much to ask? As for holiday pay, I never knew the true value of it before reaching the point of not being able to afford to stop working.

Consider, too, the plight of my friend whose child is critically ill in hospital. He is struggling to keep the family unit together in a crisis, while knowing every minute he stays off the road his vehicle rental costs just keep racking up. For the very low earning, holiday allowance can provide much needed respite.

In a remarkable volte-face last week, Uber argued at the Employment Appeals Tribunal that it is not the gig economy’s poster child, but a traditional minicab operator after all. Yet in 2014, Uber testified to the London Assembly that the traditional minicab business model is "brutally exploitative", characterised by drivers who are "very low paid" working "long hours to earn a suitable" salary. I find it hard to disagree.

Uber’s runaway growth has coincided with a spectacular fall in driver earnings. Many drivers work up to 90 hours per week and earn little more than £5 an hour after costs. Drivers must spend ever more hours on the road just to make the same money. Labour MP Frank Field, in his own independent report, compared Uber workers to "sweated labour" of the Victorian era.

The market is now flooded, which has led to increased congestion and a shift of passengers away from public transport attracted by unsustainably cheap minicab fares. Uber benefits greatly from the network effects of a driver waiting on every corner. However, the external costs of this inefficiency are paid for by us all.

TfL stripped Uber of its licence after finding it "not fit and proper" to hold one. It cited several major reasons: a failure of process in medical  and criminal background checks, a failure to effectively co-operate with police in reporting passenger sexual assaults, and the use of a software tool called greyball to evade regulatory inspection by identifying known compliance officers and likely locations of pick up (Uber says that it does not use greyball to avoid UK regulators). 

While I agree that TfL is right to raise these important issues, it has singularly failed to challenge Uber on its exploitation of drivers and the negative knock-on effects this inevitably has on public safety. This sends all the wrong signals with competitors now poised to compete with or take Uber’s place. Taxify is expected to return to London soon and Lyft is planning its debut in the capital. Both app-based operators offer similar driver terms to Uber.

We believe TfL has made the wrong decision for the wrong reasons. In doing so, it failed to tackle the excesses of the gig economy’s most famous protagonist. If TfL sends Uber packing, it leaves drivers with a terrible choice: debt-burdened unemployment or a quick trip out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Things might have been different if the voice of minicab drivers was stronger at TfL. Today, 120,000 minicab drivers, of whom 80 per cent hail from London’s minority communities, pay in £20m per annum or 73 per cent of TfL’s total licence revenue. Yet these drivers are denied dedicated representation in TfL’s stakeholder process. In contrast, 23,000 taxi drivers have five recognised representative bodies. Operators have two, while Addison Lee and Uber are approved for direct access.

There are signs that tensions are easing, the mayor is softening his approach and Uber’s CEO jetted into town to patch things up. While things remain in flux, progress can still be made. However, the heavy lifting required to clean up the entire minicab industry should not be left to workers alone. Londoners deserve a transport system free of sweated labour.

Uber should stay in London and be forced to obey all employment and transport regulations, as a condition of licence renewal. In a market where labour abuses have festered for decades, there are few better alternatives for drivers and many much worse. In many ways, Uber’s poor record on compliance and workers' rights is the logical outcome of a regulatory breakdown as much as it is the cause of it.

It’s not too late for the mayor and TfL to stand up for workers' rights and, in doing so, forge a new model for the gig economy – one that finally reconciles flexibility with fairness.

James Farrar is chair of the Private Hire Drivers branch of the Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain’s and the co-claimant in Aslam & Farrar vs Uber. 

As expected Uber made this unbelievable statement in response to the article. Not forgetting they have a policy of if you tell a lie long enough, people will believe it’s the truth !

“Almost all taxi and private hire drivers have been self-employed for decades before our app existed. With Uber drivers have more control and are totally free to choose if, when and where they drive with no shifts or minimum hours. The overwhelming majority of drivers say they want to keep the freedom of being their own boss. 

“Last year drivers using our app made average fares of £15 per hour after our service fee. We’ve recently invested in a number of changes, including discounted illness and injury cover, paid waiting time and the ability to cash out fares at any time.” 

Again, their figures don’t add up 

See Taxi-Point : http://ift.tt/2y42q8U

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2hSlIZp
via IFTTT

Tim Cook reportedly threatened to pull Uber from App Store

Apple's CEO was upset over the app secretly identifying iPhones, even after the app had been deleted, The New York Times reports

It should come as no surprise to anyone that Apple takes the privacy of its iPhone users very seriously.

This is after all the company that famously resisted FBI demands for a backdoor into a terrorist's iPhone. So it was understandable that Uber CEO Travis Kalanick might have been a bit anxious before a 2015 meeting with Apple CEO Tim Cook.

The reason? Kalanick had been directing his engineers to camouflage a feature in the ride-hailing app that allowed Uber to secretly identify and tag iPhone users, even after the app had been deleted from users' phones, according to a wide-ranging profile published Sunday by The New York Times. But Apple was on to the ruse, which violated Apple's app privacy rules.

"So, I've heard you've been breaking some of our rules," Cook reportedly told Kalanick in a calm tone. Cook then demanded Uber stop the deception or face getting yanked from Apple's App Store.

Losing access to millions of iPhone users would destroy Uber's business, so Kalanick complied with Cook's demand, the newspaper reported.

Uber denied using its app to track individual riders' locations, saying the feature was used for fraud detection.

"We absolutely do not track individual users or their location if they've deleted the app," Uber said in a statement. "As the New York Times story notes towards the very end, this is a typical way to prevent fraudsters from loading Uber onto a stolen phone, putting in a stolen credit card, taking an expensive ride and then wiping the phone -- over and over again. Similar techniques are also used for detecting and blocking suspicious logins to protect our users' accounts. Being able to recognize known bad actors when they try to get back onto our network is an important security measure for both Uber and our users."

This isn't the first time Uber has been accused to using software for nefarious purposes. The company was recently caught using a secretive tool called Greyball to thwart efforts by local authorities to catch the ride-hailing company violating local regulations. The company has since said it would stop using the tool for that purpose.

In 2014, an Uber executive allegedly used an internal feature known as "God View" to track a reporter's location without her knowledge. Uber's use of the tool, which allows employees to see logs of Uber customer activity, suggested "a troubling disregard for customers' privacy," Sen. Al Franken, chairman of the Subcommittee On Privacy, Technology and the Law, said in a letter to the company.

The resulting backlash led the company to hire a third-party data-privacy expert to review its policies and provide recommendations.

It wasn't immediately clear if Kalanick's meeting with Cook in 2015 was about the "God View" tool.

Representatives for Apple didn't immediately respond to requests for comment

Source : CNet/New York Times.

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2ggkvaK
via IFTTT

CILT urges policy review for London Mayor’s transport strategy

The Mayor of London’s Draft Transport Strategy (DMTS) lacks realism and risks unintended consequences, according to a report from the Charted Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILT). 

Proposals on bus priority require a fundamental review as  speeds on a third of London’s bus routes have fallen more than 5% in the past year, including a reallocation of road space, construction works (with resulting congestion) and an increase in the volume of private hire and van traffic. CILT calls for bus corridors to be redefined, expanded and upgraded, and a review of how to reinstate bus priorities as a core aspect.

Meanwhile, funding for Crossrail 2 remains unclear and the draft’s does not include assessments of London’s railways’ ability to manage load distributed within London or consider rail heads’ potential to transfer goods for last mile deliveries by road. Furthermore, it says the DMTS focus on freight vehicle movement, rather than logistics, risks increasing traffic volumes, higher costs and constraints on the economy - CILT proposes eliminating freight journeys by a consolidation of loads.

CILT proposes permitting certain zero-emission electric freight vehicles to share bus priorities, to investigate the use of off-peak capacity at passenger railway stations to move roll cages or totes on trolleys and examining a permit scheme to kerb space for deliveries.

A full copy of the report can be viewed here 

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2fMtOhQ
via IFTTT

Taxify has launched in Paris after being kicked out of London

Ride-hailing service Taxify has launched in Paris, one month after being banned in London.

The company said it was "fully committed" to complying with local regulations around private hire cab firms.

A rival to Uber, Taxify is trying to attract drivers by offering a lower commission fee on fares of 15%. The company is also offering 50% off fares for the month of October.

Taxify claims it has 2,000 Parisian drivers on its platform already, according to local newspaper Le Figaro.

It isn't clear yet whether Taxify might run into the same regulatory issues in Paris as in London. But France's taxi union, the UNT, is already gearing up for a fight, according to local media, saying that the "name of the app will create confusion in the mind of the consumer."

The argument is one similarly made against Taxify by black taxi drivers in London - that the word "taxi" can only be used to describe taxicabs, as opposed to minicabs. The UNT said it had appealed to France's competition authority.

Taxify is fighting to re-establish in London

Taxify launched to much fanfare in London on 4 September, but had to stop operating three days later after the capital's transport regulator launched an urgent investigation.

Transport for London (TfL) said the company was not a licensed operator. The issue stemmed from the fact that rather than obtaining its own operator's licence, Taxify took a shortcut and bought a local company which already had a licence, called City Drive. Taxify also warned its drivers not to tell regulators that they were employed by Taxify.

The company is appealing the loss of its licence and says it will relaunch in London.

Taxify told Business Insider that the regulatory environment was different in Paris, and that it did not require an operator's licence.

Still, the French capital has a strict regime around private hire, and Taxify's biggest rival Uber has already run into trouble there. Uber had to suspend and was fined over its UberPop service in June last year, which connected passengers to non-professional drivers. Local startup Heetch was fined for running a similar service.

Taxify is backed by Chinese ride-hailing giant Didi Chuxing.

Source : Business Insider. 

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2fL9QE4
via IFTTT

Manchester Taxis In Protest Over Out Of Town Taxis

Hundreds of protesting taxi drivers bought traffic to a halt in Manchester city centre yesterday afternoon.

The drivers made their way through the city centre demanding action against cabs they say are illegally operating in Manchester. Many of the Illegal cars working in the area are licensed by TfL.

Over 1,000 Taxis journeyed from Manchester United’s Old Trafford ground via Deansgate to Salford at 1pm yesterday afternoon.

They say that other drivers are illegally working in the Manchester borough without the relevant licence and taking their custom.

Instead of securing a Manchester licence up to 6,000 drivers are getting one elsewhere - where they say the process is quicker and easier - and then coming into the city to find fares.

Luckvear Singh, 47, a Manchester driver of five years, said: 

"This is having a big effect. They are coming into Manchester because there is more business but they need to have a Manchester licence.

"We have lost a lot of revenue, 30 to 40 per cent, a lot of drivers are now struggling to make ends meet and some are giving up.

"Manchester City Council needs to take action against this and take our protest seriously. The public also needs to be aware what is happening".

Finally, the last taxis involved in the protest made their way out of the city towards Salford and MediaCity. 

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2kmvqnD
via IFTTT

Lord Alan Sugar Supports London's Taxi Drivers And Refuses To Support The Call To Keep Uber.

Lucy Siegle's report on 'The One Show' -in regards to Dara Khosrowshah's visit to London to sort out Uber's revocation- was biased beyond belief. Not once did she mention last year's 48 Uber drivers convicted of serious sexual assaults including rapes, a 50% increase on the previous years 32.

#UberRape is presently running at one every eleven days....that's just from the 10 percent of reported attacks. In reality it could be as high as one actual attack every fifteen hours.

The One Show presenter touched very lightly on "a problem with background checks and medicals" but didn't give any details. She didn't mentioned the 13,000 Uber drivers who have fake DBS certificates with about the same again, having fake medicals. No mention either about Fake topographical pass certificates.

But things took a dramatic turn when Lord Alan Sugar was asked, "would you support he call to keep Uber? "

To the presenters surprise he answer... "Not at he moment, I have to think about our friends the black taxi drivers that have gone through a lot of training and testing before...." He was then cut off by guest presenter Amol Rejan, who then moved on.

https://twitter.com/thomasthetaxi/status/915288023973203968

   Presenters Amol Rejan, Alex Jones and Lucy Siegle.

The BBC -itself riddled with staff who have a history of collusion and suppression of stories about rape and Paedophilia- have tried repeatedly to muddy the waters between Taxis and Private Hire. 

They insist on calling Minicabs/Private Hire Vehicles 'Taxis' at every possible opportunity and continue to call Minicab drivers 'Taxi drivers' or 'Cabbies', even after complaints from the Licensed Taxi trade. Presenter Jeremy Vine, aggressively attacks the Taxi trade and supports Uber at every opportunity.

   

Worst of all....TfL knew about all of this since January and was going to sweep it under the carpet until inspector Neil Billany wrote to TfL demanding action. His letter was subsequently found by DBS check and past to the Sunday Times  by the LCDC. 

Now we find that the Inspector, who suddenly went in garden leave, is leaving his job???

Was he pressured into leaving?

Well the London Taxi trade would like to take this opportunity of suggesting Mr Billany for the role of Director of On Street Compliance at TfL. It would be so refreshing to know that we would finally have someone in TfL who would do the job without bias against the Licensed Taxi trade and would put public safety above all else. 

Taxi Leaks Extra Bit:

Drivers at London airport have alleged that BBC reporters were seen trying to get Licensed Taxi drivers on the rank to refuse to take Mr Khosrowshah into town. But had to abandon the set up when every driver agreed to take him regardless of who he was. 

We recently saw a film crew from ITV news company try to fix a news item which purported to show Taxi drivers not stopping for a wheelchair passenger. 

http://ift.tt/2yY5HFz

Fortunately for the Taxi trade, it was quite evident that all the Taxis 'Hailed' had their lights off or had passengers on board. When this was pointed out, the disabled actress in the sting attempt apologised to the Taxi trade saying she didn't realise what was happening and that she always uses black cabs and has had no problems in the past. This was reported on Taxi Leaks. 

A question that would be interesting for The One Show:

Is TFL's continuing licensing of Uber, illegal state aid...as all other PH operators have to pay VAT?
http://ift.tt/2fJCy8J

Over to you Lucy Siegle.

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2xRyZHX
via IFTTT