After NYC Announce Cap On Ride Share Numbers, More Bad News For Uber As Study Backs Pay Rise

Ridesharing companies such as Uber in New York City are facing more pressure than ever to increase pay for their drivers. The burg's Taxi and Limousine Commission has released a study recommending raises for drivers with companies like Uber and Lyft. 

Economists James Parrott and Michael Reich suggest workers should receive $17.22 an hour after expenses, a roughly 22.5 percent boost to the net pay. That would give them an effective $15 per hour with paid time off.

About 85 percent of drivers don't make this kind of pay, Parrott and Reich said. And that's notable given NYC's relatively uncommon market: unlike in most cities, ridesharing drivers need a license, plates and commercial insurance to operate. They're more likely to be full-time or committed part-time drivers who depend on ride hailing for their living.

The economists suggested multiple ways to raise pay for drivers beyond simply charging more per ride (a typical fare might increase by 3 to 5 percent). They suggested an additional charge for shared-ride services like UberPool and Lyft Line, which might see an uptick in demand if customers shied away from solo trips.

The Commission requested the study as part of a bid to develop new rules for ride hailing services that could include a minimum wage. It hopes to publish draft rules for public comment soon, and the study could play an important role in those early rules.

In response, a Lyft spokeswoman unsurprisingly objected to early details of the report, claiming that it would provide "financial incentives to provide less service," reducing the number of rides and ultimately hurting driver pay, not helping it. Uber shared a similar response to Engadget, but noted that the study's approach would "shrink the transportation pie" and "severely" restrict the amount of time existing drivers could access the services. The report's assertions about the industry were "over-simplified to the point of being flawed," it said. You can read both statements below.

Ridesharing companies have typically resisted attempts to detail real-world pay, and have faced lawsuits over allegations they underpaid workers. And it's no mystery as to why: they're concerned that higher pay would lead to fewer rides, reduced income per ride or both. Uber and Lyft are still losing money, and this might not help their chances of turning a profit.

Lyft made this comment:

"Lyft is proud to provide valuable, flexible earning opportunities for so many drivers in New York. We have not yet reviewed the full report, but the new proposed policy appears to create financial incentives for drivers to provide less service. As a result, there will be more empty cars, more congestion, longer wait times for passengers, and, over time, less pay for drivers in New York City. This would be a bad outcome for all New Yorkers, and Lyft is committed to working with policymakers to find a better solution."

"We share the goal that all full-time taxi and Uber drivers in NYC should earn a living wage, but the report's proposals would get there by shrinking the transportation pie; hurting riders through substantially increased prices and reduced service; and severely limiting the amount of time existing drivers can access the platform. We are concerned about the unintended consequences of implementing the findings in this report and believe many of the assumptions made about our industry are over-simplified to the point of flawed."

So far Uber have remained silent.

Taxi Leaks Extra Bit : 

This is of course major bad news for Uber's investors as the company has just surpassed $6bn in company losses.

As we reported earlier...After six Taxi drivers committed suicide, NYC regulators have decided to put a cap on ride share numbers. 

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2LwPcKw
via IFTTT

Another Sexual Predator Who Slipped Through TfLTPH's Vetting Process Jailed.

For anyone who is under the illusion that Uber are safe a safe form of transport!!

This is Dorin Visanu above. He is a 29 year old TfL registered Private Hire driver from Harlow working on the Uber platform. 

On Thursday this week, he was sentenced at Central Crown Court to 7months jail for committing sexual assault on passengers in his mini cab.

The assaults took place in Clapham and Shoreditch. 

Visanu was also given a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) which will stay on the police national computer for 10 years and he's details will be added to the sex offenders register.

Is this yet another case of lives shattered by a perverted sexual predator, because TfLTPH didn't do their job properly, because they put revenue in front of public safety!!!

Again, we wonder if this was one of Helen Chapman's 13,000 drivers with a dodgy DBS check, that she personally vouched for ???

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2vcmxiS
via IFTTT

What a waste of money: hundreds of taxi drivers wrongly sent warning letters for using bus lanes

Graham Foley, with a bundle of warning letters sent to taxi drivers, by the bus lane camera on the A40 in Cheltenham(Image: Copyright Unknown)

Hundreds of warning letters have been sent to taxi drivers because they drove in Cheltenham bus lanes - even though they are perfectly entitled to do so.

A mix-up means the letters have been sent to drivers of taxis and private hire vehicles by APCOA, the company dealing with traffic enforcement matters on behalf of Gloucestershire County Council.

So even though those vehicles are exempt from a ban on general traffic using the bus lanes, and also Boots Corner, newly-installed cameras have captured their registration details and letters have been sent out. They have warned the owners of the cars that they were illegally driving in the areas and would be fined £60 if they did it again

Graham Foley, owner of Dial-a-Cab in Cheltenham, said it had been alarming for his drivers to receive the letters, which must have cost the tax payer a lot of money.

The new camera overlooking the bus lane on the A40, by the Benhall roundabout, has been in use since late last month. A new camera monitoring traffic at Boots Corner has also been operating since then.

Mr Foley said it seemed APCOA had sent out letters to hundreds of taxi drivers, telling them they had been spotted driving in the bus lanes at Benhall and in Albion Street.

He said drivers working for his company had been sent 100 and therefore he thought the total number sent out had been about 1,000.

The new traffic enforcement camera in Clarence Street, Cheltenham(Image: Rob Jenkins)

He said: "The biggest thing about this is the phenomenal waste of money and that is council tax payers’ money."

He said APCOA should have been sent a comprehensive list of taxis that are allowed to use the bus lanes and Boots Corner.

And he believed the county council could easily have got that information from the district councils in Cheltenham and surrounding towns and cities, which are responsible for issuing taxi drivers with their licences.

A spokeswoman for the county council said: "APCOA now has a full list of exempt vehicles from all district councils across the county and is working hard to upload them on to the system.

"We’re sorry for this delay and would like to reassure taxi drivers that this was a short term mistake and will not be happening moving forward."

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2mOrbjm
via IFTTT

Memo To Mike 'On Side' Brown And Sadiq Khan....If NYC Can Do It, So Can't You ???

New York City officials are moving to cap the number of vehicles driving for Uber and other ride-hailing services as part of an aggressive move to address mounting concerns that their explosive growth has led to worsening congestion and low driver wages.

The legislation being considered by the City Council would make New York the first major American city to set a limit on ride-hailing vehicles, which in a relatively short period of time have transformed the transportation networks in cities across the world. Mayor Bill de Blasio, while stopping short of fully endorsing the proposal, suggested that the time had come to rein in the industry.

The proposal supported by the City Council speaker, Corey Johnson, would halt the issuance of new for-hire vehicle licenses, except for vehicles that are wheelchair accessible, while the city conducts a yearlong study of the industry.

It is the second attempt by New York City — Uber’s largest United States market — to cap the company’s vehicles after a failed effort by Mr. de Blasio in 2015. Since then, the number of for-hire vehicles in the city has surged, rising to more than 100,000 vehicles, from about 63,000 in 2015, according to the city.

Mr. de Blasio, Mr. Johnson and other elected officials have raised concerns about the decimation of the once-thriving taxi industry and the increasing gridlock on city streets. Questions over the impact of ride-hailing services have also become more visceral: Six professional drivers have killed themselves in recent months, including three taxi drivers.

New York’s strong stance toward Uber comes at a time when other cities are grappling with how to respond to the challenges posed by the remarkable rise of ride-hail apps. Last month, Uber won back its license to operate in London after agreeing to stricter regulations.

A series of proposals before the City Council — all seeking to tackle problems in the industry — would also move to set minimum pay rules for app drivers, a step that would make New York the first major American city to establish a pay minimum for drivers. The City Council could vote on the measures as soon as Aug. 8.

Mr. Johnson, a Democrat who became City Council speaker in January, said that it was clear that something needed to be done to grapple with the disruption in the taxi and for-hire vehicle industry.

“This is the plan that we came up with and in my heart I believe it’s the best path forward,” Mr. Johnson said in a statement. “Our goal has always been to protect drivers, bring fairness to the industry and reduce congestion. That’s what this proposal does, and it represents the broad outlines of what we think our next steps should be as a city to help the industry.”

Uber, setting the stage for what could be another fierce fight, immediately blasted the proposal, arguing that it would hurt its customers, especially those who live in the boroughs outside Manhattan, where the growth of ride-hailing services in neighborhoods ill served by public transit helped them achieve a milestone and surpass yellow cabs in the number of daily riders.

“The City Council’s Uber cap will leave New Yorkers stranded while doing nothing to prevent congestion, fix the subways and help struggling taxi medallion owners,” said Josh Gold, a spokesman for Uber. “The Council’s cap will hurt riders outside Manhattan who have come to rely on Uber because their communities have long been ignored by yellow taxis and do not have reliable access to public transit.”

Mr. de Blasio’s office worked with the City Council on the proposals and Eric Phillips, a spokesman for the mayor, said City Hall would monitor the legislation and hoped that it would help drivers and decrease congestion.

“The mayor was out front on this issue when few people were,” Mr. Phillips said in a statement. “He is pleased it’s getting the attention it deserves from the Council.” Any bill passed by the Council to regulate ride-hailing services would have to be signed by Mr. de Blasio before taking effect.

This week, transit officials said the popularity of Uber and other ride-hail apps had been a factor in the continuing decline in subway and bus ridership. But some transit advocates say the main reason riders are abandoning the subway and bus system is because of terrible service: Uber is just offering an attractive alternative.

The City Council is also moving to regulate Airbnb, another tech company that has upended a long established industry — in this case, hotels. Uber’s leaders have signaled that they were open to discussing new regulations, but they have adamantly opposed any cap.

On Thursday, as city officials began to discuss the cap, Uber released a new ad to oppose the proposal. The ad focused on the difficulty some New Yorkers — particularly people of color — face in hailing a taxi. It shows vehicles vanishing from the app. “If the New York City Council gets its way, all of this could disappear,” the ad says.

Mr. de Blasio, a Democrat in his second term, engaged in a bruising battle with Uber during the 2015 debate over a cap. The company introduced an app feature, known as “de Blasio view,” that showed riders lengthy projected wait times if a cap was approved.

But Uber’s reputation has taken a hit in the years since it successfully fended off the mayor. The company was rocked by accusations of gender discrimination and harassment in its workplace, and its founder resigned last year.

Still, Uber and other apps like Lyft are popular in New York. The City Council’s legislative package would change the way these apps operate, licensing companies that provide more than 10,000 daily trips as high-volume transportation services with separate regulations. Under the bills, city officials could also set standards for how often a vehicle must be occupied by a passenger, to reduce the time spent driving around the city while empty.

Mr. Johnson’s office said that it hoped the proposals would push companies to add more wheelchair-accessible vehicles — a longstanding problem in the industry.

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2NQNVdF
via IFTTT

Victory for anti-CS11 campaigners as judge approves injunction against work starting and grants judicial review

The Mess That Would Be ‘Swiss Cottage’

A High Court judge has passed Westminster City Council’s bid for an injunction and judicial review into CS11, but said he was "exasperated" by both sides.

In a two-and-a-half-hour hearing this morning, Mr Justice Holgate heard Westminster City Council believed Transport for London (TfL) hadn’t properly modelled traffic for parts of the route, including through St John’s Wood.

Tristan Jones, acting for the borough, also alleged TfL hadn’t properly shared documents with Westminster City Council.

But this was rebuffed by TfL, which said it had shared the same information for the plans with consultants from the council as it had on the Oxford Street pestrianisation plans.

The High Court also heard the transport body hadn’t shown why the Swiss Cottage gyratory work and work on the 100 Avenue Road plans needed to take place simultaneously. Mr Jones said: "There has been no explanation why they most be done at the same time."

Andrew Parkinson, who was assisting the claimant, raised campaigners’ concerns that the gyratory section would increase traffic elsewhere in the route.

Meanwhile Timothy Straker QC, representing TfL, said the council’s "sudden" withdrawal was "politically motivated." He alleged that Westminster’s backing of the plans was dropped after May’s local elections.

The Conservative-run authority jettisoned support for the Oxford Street works at around the same time.

As TfL officers ferried information to him from the back of the court, he said: "If you look at Camden’s response to the consultation, they say they welcome the scheme because Swiss Cottage is so awful."

Throughout the hearing, Mr Justice Holgate aired his frustrations. 

At one point he accused Mr Straker of "grandstanding" over the accusation Westminster City Council’s actions were politically motivated.

He also said one authority taking the other to court was "like nothing I’ve seen before".

"Why is the court being troubled by this?" he said.

He urged the two parties to have informal mediation talks, and said they should be working together to agree the scheme.

The approval means work beginning on July 30 is delayed, and a full judicial review hearing will take place on September 6.

It is expected to last one day.

Following the hearing, campaigner Jessica Learmond-Criqui told the Ham&High: "We are obviously delighted that the judge expressly acknowledged and recognised the concerns of residents about ran running and traffic displacement into Hampstead and St John’s Wood.

"We were very ably assisted by the brilliant planning barrister Andrew Parkinson and couldn’t have done it without him.

"TfL will not be able to start work before the final decision of the judicial review full hearing."

She added: "The judge also mentioned there is a real prospect of an error of law in TfL’s decision [in March to begin work on Swiss Cottage]."

Ben Plowden, TfL’s director of strategy and network development, said CS11 was "a vitally important addition to London’s cycle network" and that work at Swiss Cottage would "make it a better place to live and work while reducing road danger for pedestrians and cyclists".

Of the hearing result, he said only: "Construction was due to begin on July 30. This will now be delayed pending the outcome of a judicial review."

Westminster’s environment chief, the rather more jubilant Cllr Tim Mitchell, said: "We are pleased with the High Court’s decision today which supports the council and residents’ right to be heard on CS11.

"We are worried that CS11 will cause traffic displacement, increase congestion and lead to poorer air quality.

"We are glad that the court has granted our injunction to stop works at Swiss Cottage until the very legitimate concerns with this scheme are addressed via a judicial review."

And he insisted: "Westminster City Council fully supports safe cycling and we are making major investments for cyclists within Westminster."

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2K0q4Gh
via IFTTT

Uber Suspend Services In Barcelona After Ciolent Protests From Taxi Drivers

BARCELONA, Spain — Taxi drivers from all corners of Spain drove to Barcelona to join a 2-day strike that started Wednesday in protest of the growing number of cars operating under ride-hailing apps. Uber and Cabify briefly halted service, saying some of their drivers were attacked.

The taxi drivers, who joined a raucous protest in front of the Arch of Triumph, oppose the recent suspension of additional authorization required for ride-hailing companies to operate in Barcelona.

They want a previously agreed ratio of 30 taxi licenses for every authorized ride-hailing car to be honoured. The current ratio in Catalonia, the Spanish region of which Barcelona is the capital, stands at about 6.7 to 1.

Thousands of demonstrators lit firecrackers and honked car horns as they marched to a government building to demand more regulation on the ride-booking apps they claim are taking away their jobs.

Later Wednesday, Uber and Cabify announced they were temporarily suspending service in Barcelona after some of their drivers were assaulted on the sidelines of the pro-taxi demonstration.

Eduardo Martin, spokesman for Unauto, the Spanish national association for drivers of ride-hailing apps, including Uber and Cabify, said there had been dozens of assaults of Uber and Cabify drivers and passengers in Barcelona, mainly in front of hotels.

Two drivers were hospitalized, he said. One was left unconscious, and the other was taken to the hospital with first-degree burns to his face after an acid attack.

Cars were left with broken windows and wing mirrors.

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2NOCzqT
via IFTTT

Uber Accused Of 'Wage Theft' By It's Own Drivers Down Under.

Uber told its drivers they would get 'more trips' under recent policy changes, a claim which is being disputed.

Uber has been accused of "wage theft" by some of its drivers, who say they have been "deceived" into taking pay cuts under recent policy changes.

As competition intensified with competitors Ola, Taxify and DiDi entering the market, Uber introduced its UberPool and "upfront pricing" policies earlier this year.

The key change was that Uber would provide its customers with "more certainty" by quoting an exact "upfront" price (for example, $40), instead of a range ($35-45).

It's essentially Uber's best estimate of what the trip should cost, and drivers were promised they would get "more trips" as a result.

But several drivers allege they were not given a real choice, as they had to sign amended contracts agreeing to be bound by Uber's estimates, which were "frequently too low".

Otherwise, they risked "deactivation", which means getting blocked from the Uber app without explanation.

After interviewing 40 Uber drivers, the ABC found that an overwhelming majority (35) said they saw a "significant" drop in their earnings, as they were getting "short-changed" on almost every trip.

This was compared to what they would have earned according to the meter.

Only one said he was making more money, and four said their earnings were steady.

Why are drivers claiming underpayment?

Despite the transition to upfront fixed prices, Uber said it would still charge by time and distance, according to its app's meter, in some situations:

"If the trip changes significantly such as with heavy traffic or multiple extra stops, the fare will be automatically adjusted to use the actual time and distance travelled," the company said in an email to drivers.

But several drivers have told the ABC that their worst cases of "underpayment" happened precisely under those circumstances as Uber failed to follow its own policy.

Uber's online support staff told many of them that their 20 or 30-minute delays -- caused by traffic jams, and unexpected demands from customers to "pick up friends along the way" or "pull over at McDonald's" -- were not considered "significant" enough.

Therefore, their pay would remain at the lower figure (the upfront estimate), rather than the higher amount (based on the meter).

The problem was that the company "bases its fares on upfront calculations that nobody is able to explain", said one full-time driver, Jackie (not his real name).

None of the drivers wanted their real names to be published for fear of Uber deactivating their accounts.

On its website, the company said:

"Upfront Pricing is calculated using the expected time and distance of the trip and local traffic, as well as how many riders and nearby drivers are using Uber at that moment.

The company's spokesperson confirmed it uses "historical traffic patterns" to make that calculation.

But Jackie disputed the reliability of this method: "How can traffic jams, especially ones caused by future car accidents, be calculated based on 'historical' data'?"

"It wasn't in Uber's historical data yesterday, and it sure wasn't there 20 years ago."

"It frustrates the hell out of me they can sit in a bubble and make rulings like this."

"That's why I hate upfront pricing with a passion."

The price of the lower-cost carpooling service UberPool is also determined by its "upfront" fare policy.

"In most cases, UberPool trips are likely to undercut UberX trips [the next cheapest offering] by up to 40 per cent," said Max B, an Uber driver who runs an online advocacy group, Ride Share Drivers United (RSDU).

Uber's spokesperson said: "We continue to focus on demonstrating the benefits of UberPool and encouraging further use, including investing in discounts to passengers who share their ride.

"More affordable rides means more trips for drivers and less wait time between trips."

How much worse off are drivers?

One driver, Edmund, who has been with the company for more than two years, said he was losing on average $28 per week.

Among the other drivers, the alleged amount of underpayments varied according to each trip. Sometimes it was low as just a few cents.

But other times, the difference between Uber's estimate and what drivers claim they "should have" earned, under the meter, was as much as 30 per cent.

"This is wage theft -- nearly 90 per cent of the time, the company underpays me by 50 cents per trip, and up to $4," said another driver, Stephen.

Considering the full-time drivers take hundreds of trips each month, the difference can add up quickly.

Uber's spokesperson said: "We want driver partners to be successful which is why we are investing in innovations to encourage more riders to choose the app, and proactively share information about when and where the best times to drive are.

"We also continue to work on improving our driver app in response to feedback from partners so they continue to choose us.

One driver pointed out that there will always be "a loser" in the upfront estimate system.

"If I end up being paid more money under Uber's upfront price [compared to the meter calculation] that means the customer has paid too much.

"They would have been better off under 'time and distance' charging in that case, but that situation is rare."

Fair Work investigation

"This new system may sound sensible on its face value," said Max B.

"But drivers, who Uber claims are 'independent contractors', are kept in the dark and aren't told what the actual 'upfront fare' price is until the trip ends.

"The first rule of thumb to being an independent contractor is to know exactly how much they will get paid for a job, let alone a 'predetermined' job cost.

Some of the Uber drivers who spoke to the ABC have also recently been contacted with the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO), as part of its "sham contracting" probe.

Basically, it is looking into whether Uber is misrepresenting its employees as independent contractors (or entrepreneurs running their own businesses) -- to avoid paying minimum wage, annual leave, sick leave and superannuation.

The FWO, through a spokesperson, confirmed it is currently investigating Uber "to determine whether the engagement of Uber drivers is compliant with Commonwealth workplace laws", but would not comment further.

Bonded to Uber … for now

Drivers like Jackie are trying to minimise their time driving for Uber "as much as possible" in response to the recent changes to its pricing policy.

Despite his personal feelings about the company, he has little choice but to continue driving for Uber in the meantime.

"A driver is very expendable at the end of the day," he said.

"It doesn't matter if I leave -- 100 others would take my place.

"Unfortunately, Uber controls the market in Australia, and at least 90 per cent of my trips are with them.

"But only three-quarters of my pay is from Uber. I earn the rest from Ola and private chauffeuring because they pay better."

Uber takes a 27.5 per cent cut from its drivers' pockets, while Ola's and Taxify's commissions are lower, at 15 per cent.

"But until one of the other competitors gains ground on Uber, we have no choice but to tolerate the conditions of the dominant player."

from Taxi Leaks https://ift.tt/2v9DJ8s
via IFTTT