Coventry-Made London Taxi Heads For Capital To Say Farewell.

Why Didn't The Mail Print The Whole Story ?

Why are the Mail refusing to go after a former Mayor and the Directors of TfL who allowed a company that was not fit for purpose to be Licensed by former and present TfL employees?

In an article written by James Titcomb, and published in the Telegraph back in October 2015, Mayor Boris Johnson admits openly that Uber drivers are breaking the law. 

Why didn't TfL revoke the operators licence immediately?

Boris Johnson has claimed that Uber drivers are breaking the law “in lots of minor ways”, to the extent that London’s authorities are unable to keep up. 

The Mayor of London said the minicab app’s drivers are consistently violating laws on loitering and plying for hire, as well as being responsible for “aggravating” the level of traffic in the capital. 

Boris said this in the article and sat back and did nothing.

TfL knew Boris had said this....and then as regulator, sat back and did nothing. 

In a game of smoke and mirrors, TfL help a consultation and announced they were going to introduce 25 tougher regulations. 

To this day they have done nothing other than relaxed regulations to make it easier for uber to operate. 

Read the whole article here : 

http://ift.tt/1l69R6j

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2pQwU8Y
via IFTTT

Something For The Weekend : High Court Orderers Government Strategy On Air Pollution.

Thousands of people have died and will carry on dying every year due to air pollution. The European Commission is finally forcing the UK government to tackle the issue. 

As a first step, the UK will be publishing a strategy outlining how it will deal with the crisis.

But, it is our guess that the strategy will be much watered down, as it will be lobbied against by the big businesses it will affect. As they say, "Follow the money"

The strategy should have been published two years ago, but the government has dodged and delayed, presumably because it knows that the strategies in the policy will not be popular with drivers. 

The most recent delay saw the government claiming that purdah rules now applied to the strategy, due to the upcoming general election.

However, the High Court has now stepped in and ordered the government to publish its draft strategy by 9 May, with the full strategy published by 31 July

Why is tackling air pollution so controversial?

The government seems afraid of the air pollution strategy’s potential impact on votes. However, the High Court judge, Mr Justice Garnham, was clear that,

“The continued failure of the government to comply with directives and regulations constitutes a significant threat to public health.”

So why is the government so worried? Without having seen the draft strategy, we can of course only speculate, but it seems likely that the policy will contain controversial and unpopular measures to cut air pollution.

What we think will be in the pollution plan

We expect the pollution plan to include policies such as clean air zones, which will see motorists who drive heavy polluting vehicles facing city centre access charges. The idea is that the charges will dissuade them from driving into city centres where pollution levels are high. This is likely to apply to several major cities, including Manchester, Southampton and Leeds (amongst others). This measure is likely to be unpopular with small businesses, construction firms and HGV operators, who will see their transport costs increase. This could then be passed on to consumers as higher prices.

These concerns have led to the Freight Transport Association to call for a longer timescale for these changes to be introduced. That would give small businesses time to adapt, as well as time for a market for compliant second hand vehicles to emerge.

In addition to this, there may be incentives such as price and tax subsidies for using public transport and purchasing more efficient vehicles . We also think it’s highly likely that the government will introduce a diesel scrappage scheme.

Not so long ago, the government told drivers to buy diesel. 

Thus it’s hardly surprising that the administration that prioritises removing diesels from the nation’s roads will face backlash from drivers. 

However, the government has reassured motorists that it will help, with recent reports suggesting that the scheme will include paying owners up to £2,000 to scrap older, heavier-polluting vehicles from the most polluted UK cities. The government is yet to confirm any final details.

But then, in the case of the London Taxi, a report from Kings Collage showed evidence that a Mayor Boris with help from disgraced MP Tim Yeo scrapped cleaner older Taxis in favour of newer, more polluting vehicles. 

A big difference could have been made in London by the Mayor insisting on the introduction of LPG and CNG. But Boris wanted to shore up the failing Chinese company by insisting on an electric vehicle which the Taxi trade can ill afford.

Such schemes cost money and revenue of this nature is likely to come from drivers themselves. The 2015 Conservative Manifesto pledge not to increase any taxes looks set to be dropped entirely thanks to the snap election. 

An increase in vehicle excise duty for diesel vehicles and the expansion of charges for diesels to enter city centres across the UK are both distinct possibilities. 

Neither will go down well with the UK’s 12 million or so diesel drivers.

An unpopular move

There is no avoiding the fact that these policies will be expensive to run. The Guardian reports that for London alone the measures could cost more than £500m.

What makes the situation so difficult to swallow for many diesel drivers is that just ten years ago the government was actively encouraging people to buy diesels. Government policy encouraged the purchase of diesel cars by offering cheaper road tax due to their lower carbon dioxide emissions, which led to the number of diesels on Britain’s roads more than doubling.

Now, those same drivers look set to pay for a system under which they will have to scrap their vehicles and replace them with more environmentally friendly ones. Such an unpopular move could well cost the government votes at exactly the time that it is trying to increase its power.

EDITORIAL COMMENT :

Since the article was written on Wednesday, the draft plan has come out today, Friday. As we predicted it’s been massively watered down. 

Client Earth has labelled it “woefully inadequate” (shades of the GLA's opinion of TfLTPH) and “passing the buck to local authorities” ... in other words a complete avoidance of the main issues causing pollution because a General Election is about to happen. The Government’s draft plan is so poor, they may face more court action because of its inadequacy.

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

Uber sues San Francisco over tax collector’s move to obtain drivers’ names

SAN FRANCISCO (BCN) — Transportation network company Uber sued San Francisco this week over an attempt by the city’s tax collector to obtain the names of drivers to get them to obtain business licenses.

Uber filed a petition in San Francisco Superior Court on Monday seeking to quash a city subpoena issued in February, arguing that the demand for the names and addresses of drivers violated driver privacy and exceeded the tax collector’s authority.

“…The Tax Collector’s office is asking us to give them personal information of drivers – including their home address- without their consent and will put that information on a public website,” Wayne Ting, Uber’s San Francisco general manager, said in a statement. “We’ve asked the city to allow us to get the consent of drivers and to remove their personal information from the public website, but they have refused.”

The requirement that drivers for companies such as Uber and Lyft obtain a business license with the city is nothing new, and applies to anyone working as an independent contractor in San Francisco, according to Amanda Kahn Fried, a spokeswoman for the tax collector’s office.

However, it was not until last year that the city began enforcing the requirement.

Since then, the tax collector’s office has mailed notices to around 60,000 drivers and registered around 20,000, Fried said. Another 15,000 have filled out declarations that they don’t need to register for various reasons.

The subpoena seeking contact information of drivers for notifications of the registration requirement is a standard tool the office uses regularly to enforce tax laws, Fried said.

The names of those registered for a business license are posted to a public database, but registrants are allowed to use post office boxes as addresses and register fictitious business names. There are around 130,000 registered businesses in San Francisco and the requirements apply to every one of them, Fried said.

“This is about one particular company and one industry seeking special consideration under tax laws,” Fried said.

Uber also argues that the requirement for drivers to register in individual cities where they operate creates “confusion, burdensome paperwork and takes hundreds of dollars out of the pockets of small business owners.”

The company is backing state legislation, Senate Bill 182, that would instead require drivers to register for a business license in only one city, regardless of how many they operate in. Cities such as San Francisco could not require a business license if the driver was registered in another city.

The bill also prohibits cities from publishing drivers’ personal information on a public web site.

The bill, which is opposed by San Francisco’s legislative delegation, was heard for the first time in committee today in Sacramento and advanced to the judiciary committee with amendments, Fried said.

A court date is scheduled for Uber’s petition on June the 1st.

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2qCxIy0
via IFTTT

The United Taxi Trade Mass Demo, Saved By The ITA and DDD.

"Let's be there to welcome Osbourne on his first day on the job" they said.

It was billed as a 'United Taxi Trade' demonstration. The largest trade org, the LTDA emailed all of its 10,000 members. As did other orgs.  Support was posted online by all other orgs and unions.

In truth, if the militant members of the Independent Taxi Alliance and Dads Defending Daughters members hadn't shown up en masse with their signature placards, there would have been no demonstration.

A spokes person for the ITA said :

"We marched from the All Nations Taxi shelter, to Northcliffe House, down the middle of the road. 

Placards waving high.

"As we turned into Derry Street, there was an ITN crew with camera on a tripod, London Tonight, three or four sets of reporters, with photographers ...

... but no LTDA, except a lone Steve McNamara, not a sniff of the UCG, no RMT members or committee turned up.

But Peter Rose (Unite) did pop in late, to show his face.

"Only the ITA -a mixture of Org and non Org proactive drivers- the same ol' faces, marched left into an empty Derry Street.

"Mc must've breathed a huge sigh of relief, as his blushes and sheer embarrassment was saved by the DDD/ITA boys and girls.

"What the hell would've happened had the ITA not turned up?

"I don't think Trev or Steve will be harping on about "Hijackers." or "Placards." ever again.

"I'd estimate around 250, maybe 300 of the usual suspects brought some dignity back to our piss poor trade of sleepers and shirkers.

"Steve McNamara can thank his lucky stars that the ITA, a group he claims to have never heard of, saved him from facing the press on his own.

"Guy Adams, the Daily Mail reporter who broke our stories in his paper, came down to see us.

"As he came down he spotted Grant Davis Chair of the LCDC.

Grant proceeded to introduce us.

Guy did not recognise Steve. And Steve didn't know Guy from Adam. 

"So all that tosh about LTDA and UCG putting the Daily Mail onto those Taxi scoops, was finally put to bed.

"It's Charlie Crocker (Chris) and Tootles (Mark) who deserve the plaudits.

"No doubt Steve Mc and Co will claim we were their members. But those of us who are in the broil, demo in demo out, know the truth.

"Another resounding success for the trade and the DDD/ITA.

One day we might fail, but not so far".

Also at the demo was Artemis Mercer and the girls from the #SaveTaxi Admin. 

Editorial Comment :

This is the first demo in years that's been in the national press and on all TV news channels....and 99% of the trade couldn't be bothered to turn up. 

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

Tomorrow's SubStandard Headline...Tonight.

Friends and colleagues, we are marching on The Evening Standard in Kensington. 

Meeting up at Kensington Gore at 9am and descending on the newspapers offices for 10am to welcome George Gideon Oliver Osbourne into he's new role as editor. 

This man along with his uber loving bullenden club chum David Cameron, has done more damage to our trade, than any individual in living history. 

He will now attempt to finish the job in he's highly paid role at the cab hating ES. 

This man should be facing a prison sentence for his alleged malfeasance. 

If you are one of my colleagues, please do not mug your fellow colleagues off by being a scab between the hours of 10 and 12ish or in the very least, not in the Kensington area. 

Thanks.

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

Widow of Uber engineer who committed suicide files lawsuit blaming the father-of-two's death on the start-up's toxic work culture

The widow of a Uber engineer who committed suicide last year is suing the company after they denied her and her two young sons workers' compensation. 

Zecole Thomas (back row left) is suing Uber, claiming her husband Jopseph (back row right) committed suicide because of the stress of his job as an engineer at the San Francisco start-up. The couple picture above with their sons Joseph, 9 (center), and Ezekiel, 8 (left) 

Zecole Thomas argues in her lawsuit that she deserves the approximately $722,000 payout because it was the San Francisco start-up's toxic work culture that caused her husband Joseph, 33, to kill himself in August. 

Mrs Thomas says that her husband was happy when he left LinkedIn to start at Uber last April. 

He even turned down a job at Apple because he thought he would have more opportunity to grow at a younger company and profit from stock options when it went public.  

The $170,000 a year salary also helped the childhood sweethearts buy their very first home, a Spanish style dream house in Pittsburg, California where they moved with their two young sons Joseph, 9, and Ezekiel, 8.

But soon, Mrs Thomas started to see the toll her husband's work was taking on him. 

'Uber’s culture was different,' Mrs Thomas told USA Today.  'Here was a man who was very good at what he did, who took care of his family. But within months, he started to tell me that he ruined our life. That he was broken.'

Uber's culture was different. Here was a man who was very good at what he did, who took care of his family. But within months, he started to tell me that he ruined our life. That he was broken.  

Zecole Thomas, widow of Joseph Thomas 

Mrs Thomas says her husband, a self-taught engineer, started coming home, complaining about how his supervisors were constantly calling his skills into question.  

'He would say, "I feel stupid, they’re all laughing at me," and yet this was a guy who was as hardworking, driven and focused as there ever was.

'He only had one year of college, but if there was a coding language he didn’t know, he’d study hard and three months later get certificates saying he knew them. It’s all very heartbreaking,' Mrs Thomas said. 

When her husband grew depressed, Mrs Thomas went with him to see a psychiatrist who recommended he quit his high-stress job. 

But by then he was so run down at work that he couldn't muster the effort. 

'The sad thing is this place (Uber) has broken me to the point where I don’t have the strength to look for another job,' Mr Thomas wrote a friend about a month before his suicide.

Joseph Thomas committed suicide a little less than five months after joining Uber. His wife claims he was happy before the job, but quickly became depressed

One morning in late August, Mrs Thomas had just returned home from dropping her sons off at school when she noticed her husband sitting in his car in the garage. 

She got into the passenger's seat to talk to him, and then noticed the blood - he had shot himself. He was pronounced at the hospital two days later, a week before he would have turned 34. 

After his death, the company denied Mrs Thomas' claim for her husband's workers' compensation. 

Under California law, such insurance doesn't cover psychiatric issues if they occur under six months into employment, and Mr Thomas had only been working at the company a little less than five months when he died.

But there's also an exception to the rule that Mrs Thomas and her lawyer think gives them a case. 

The law doesn't apply if the 'psychiatric injury is caused by a sudden and extraordinary employment condition'.   

'We think it was stress and harassment induced by his job, between him being one of the few African Americans there, working around the clock and the culture of Uber,' Mrs Thomas' attorney Richard Richardson told the San Francisco Chronicle. 'And he couldn’t talk about it to anyone because of nondisclosure agreements.'

If she wins the lawsuit, Mrs Thomas will receive about $722,000 - part of it in lump sum and the other part in weekly checks of $1,100 until both of her sons are 18. 

Mrs Thomas says she also hopes her lawsuit will draw attention to the terrible work-life balance that start-ups force upon their tech employees. 

The way these companies work is they want you to love your job more than your families, with breakfast, lunch and dinner and places to sleep at work. But people in IT want to have families, too.  

'The way many of these companies work is they want you to love your job more than your families, with breakfast, lunch and dinner and places to sleep at work,' Mrs Thomas said. 'But people in IT want to have families, too.'

Since her husband's death, Mrs Thomas sold their dream home and moved her kids to North Carolina, where she is working as a project coordinator with a small company. 

She was close to finishing her master's degree in computer science but said she is struggling due to her husband's sudden death.   

'I’m trying to rebuild my life and generate enough income to provide for my two children.

'I just don’t understand it. He was young, successful, smart; he had everything going for himself. I never in my life thought I would be without him. It’s devastating,' she said. 

Uber has refused to comment on the lawsuit, but they did released a statement saying: 'No family should go through the unspeakable heartbreak the Thomas family has experienced. Our prayers and thoughts are with them.' 

This is far from the first time that details of Uber's work culture have cast a dark light on the ride-sharing company. 

The company has been the center of a string of scandals - from CEO Travis Kalanick storming out of an Uber when a driver questioned his business practices to former employee Susan Fowler writing a scathing blog post in February about the company. 

In the blog post, Fowler described the start-up as a toxic and sexist work place.

Source : Daily Mail.

from Taxi Leaks http://ift.tt/2pNcd0t
via IFTTT