The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Non-Tulsa Discussions => Chat and Advice => Topic started by: davideinstein on May 08, 2016, 07:52:58 am



Title: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: davideinstein on May 08, 2016, 07:52:58 am
http://techcrunch.com/2016/05/07/uber-and-lyft-shutdown-in-austin-after-voters-defeat-proposition-1/ (http://techcrunch.com/2016/05/07/uber-and-lyft-shutdown-in-austin-after-voters-defeat-proposition-1/)


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: AquaMan on May 08, 2016, 11:14:29 am
There were more issues on that ballot that included things like pickup in specific traffic lanes for Uber and Lyft.

My own experience with Uber is limited but telling. I have a CDL with passenger endorsement and 5 years of commercial experience. I have no criminal record, no tickets within the last decade, a late model car and full coverage insurance. My employer requires a background check and fingerprinting as well.

So, it would seem, I was a slam dunk for acceptance as a driver. However, no matter how many times I submitted the requested paper work confirming all this, they never seemed to receive it. Even when I checked my status as a driver and all materials were listed as received. Even my DL was visible in their records. The last straw was when they sent an email to me denying my application because...."you don't have enough driving time since drivers license was issued". 49 years was not enough?? It seems their workers could not tell that my license had been recently renewed, not first time issued. No local office to contact, no humans to talk to on the phone. They still list me as active and still occasionally ask for my verifications.

The drivers I spoke with confirmed they had difficulty in being paid and saw their income dwindle as Uber recruited heavily for new drivers to such an extent that it wasn't worth the effort and risk.

So, am I dubious of their argument that they don't need to do the same background checks as other transportation employees have to do even though in reality they are merely another taxi company using other peoples equipment with shoddy administration? Yes. I would be quite hesitant to use them or taxis unless I knew the driver.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: davideinstein on May 08, 2016, 12:19:47 pm
Uber has issues. I switched to Lyft while in Austin ironically enough.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: rebound on May 09, 2016, 09:43:08 am
We have a corporate account with Uber and I have used it extensively all over the US in the last year and have only had one incident where the guy just couldn't find me (in a crowded area near Times Square) and finally gave up.  Overall, I have been very satisfied.   The one issue I have is with their fare hikes during peak times.  During those times, I do check Lyft and have found that I can often get a Lyft for base price, rather than the inflated price of Uber.  Either way, both of them are quantum levels better than a taxi.



Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: DTowner on May 09, 2016, 03:03:15 pm
So, starting today, stodgy unhip little old Tulsa has Uber and Lyft while ultra-cool hipsters in Austin have to hail a cab.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: AquaMan on May 09, 2016, 07:00:08 pm
The issue isn't how easy they are to use. Or reliable. Its the fact they refuse to yield to satisfying the same requirements other businesses that serve the public have to wrestle with. They don't want to do real background checks, fingerprints, etc. They want preferential treatment for pickup areas and they continue to insist their employees are private contractors. They seem to be the at the same level Napster was.

To put your remarks in perspective, I drove for a decade with no seatbelts in my car. They were only available at extra cost. They were not required even though the industry knew they would save lives. I never had a problem. Corporations rented Pintos for their employees for years with no problems and great reliability.

Would you rent a Ford Pinto with no seat belts and an exploding gasoline tank today?


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: davideinstein on May 09, 2016, 07:48:37 pm
The background checks take too long and their background are good enough. Too much government.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: Red Arrow on May 09, 2016, 08:39:50 pm
To put your remarks in perspective, I drove for a decade with no seatbelts in my car. They were only available at extra cost. They were not required even though the industry knew they would save lives. I never had a problem.
What were you driving?  I started with the family (actually mom's) 54 Buick Special which had no seatbelts.  I doubt they were even available.  Everything after that had seatbelts at least in the front.  When my dad bought a 63 Ford Falcon for my sister to go to college, we installed lap belts for the front seat. (But maybe not right away, I don't remember exactly when we put them in.)

Quote
Corporations rented Pintos for their employees for years with no problems and great reliability.
Would you rent a Ford Pinto with no seat belts and an exploding gasoline tank today?
I thought that Pintos were manufactured after seatbelts were mandatory.  Ford obviously made a bad decision on the Pinto gas tank. I do wonder though how well other cars of similar size of the era would have protected the occupants in the infamous crash.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: Breadburner on May 10, 2016, 06:21:56 am
Good on Austin.....


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: DTowner on May 10, 2016, 08:25:13 am
The Austin city council is so concerned about public safety that in March of this year it passed an ordinance that prohibits employers from conducting criminal background checks on applicants until it is ready to make an employment offer.  In other words, the employer must go through the time and expense of the entire hiring process only to learn at the last moment that its perfect candidate happens to be a child molester, embezzler, etc.

 http://kxan.com/2016/03/24/council-passes-fair-chance-hiring-ordinance-to-delay-background-checks/

The Austin council is selling its Uber/Lyft ordinance on public safety, but it reeks of classic “rent-seeking” to protect the local taxi industry.  That’s Austin and its voter’s prerogative - I just find it funny that Tulsa has ride-sharing services that hipsters everywhere deem practically a fundamental right and Austin does not.  This round goes to Tulsa:  Tulsa 1/Austin 0.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: AquaMan on May 10, 2016, 09:19:02 am
What were you driving?  I started with the family (actually mom's) 54 Buick Special which had no seatbelts.  I doubt they were even available.  Everything after that had seatbelts at least in the front.  When my dad bought a 63 Ford Falcon for my sister to go to college, we installed lap belts for the front seat. (But maybe not right away, I don't remember exactly when we put them in.)
I thought that Pintos were manufactured after seatbelts were mandatory.  Ford obviously made a bad decision on the Pinto gas tank. I do wonder though how well other cars of similar size of the era would have protected the occupants in the infamous crash.

I started with a 55 Plymouth, then a 56 Chevy, my mom's 62 Impala, then a 61 Impala, followed by a 59 Lark and a 63 Nova. It wasn't till the 69 Malibu that seatbelts appeared for me. Still, hardly anyone I knew used them in spite of the overwhelming stats proving their life saving ability. Trucks/vans were exempt until at least 1978.

Pinto's design flaw was putting the tank behind the passenger seats with no shock absorbing protection in case of rear impact. They blew up quite easily because of that and the real tragedy was that Ford knew having been warned by engineers. They ran the cost/benefit of the improvements and decided it was more expedient to just pay off death claims, a practice emulated by many thereafter. They got caught.

My point is that when you put your life in the hands of strangers who have contracted with an internet company who has little exposure but immense profit to be made, you ought to have some knowledge of the mental stability or criminal proclivity or driving record of that "contractor". If someone refuses finger printing or shows up as a wanted felon they can be filtered out. My direct experience is that their claims of background checks being done is probably a sham. I know some of these drivers. You get what you pay for.

Its also a matter of fairness. If they can weasel out of that obligation, then why should a taxi company have to do it. In fact, why would any business that deals with the public? But, maybe that's the new independent, damn the gubmint thought process.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 10, 2016, 10:31:22 am
What were you driving?  I started with the family (actually mom's) 54 Buick Special which had no seatbelts.  I doubt they were even available.  Everything after that had seatbelts at least in the front.  When my dad bought a 63 Ford Falcon for my sister to go to college, we installed lap belts for the front seat. (But maybe not right away, I don't remember exactly when we put them in.)
I thought that Pintos were manufactured after seatbelts were mandatory.  Ford obviously made a bad decision on the Pinto gas tank. I do wonder though how well other cars of similar size of the era would have protected the occupants in the infamous crash.


The government started its regulatory overreach, intruding into people's lives by requiring seat belts installed in cars - at least in front - in about 1960.  Phased in so as to not cause too much trouble for the manufacturers who bought Congress. 

They were available back into the 30's as options on some cars, but few ever bought them.

1957 Chevy - no belts.   1960 Chevy - front seat belts.  Have seen several 1958 Chevy's without belts.





Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 10, 2016, 10:35:53 am
I started with a 55 Plymouth, then a 56 Chevy, my mom's 62 Impala, then a 61 Impala, followed by a 59 Lark and a 63 Nova. It wasn't till the 69 Malibu that seatbelts appeared for me. Still, hardly anyone I knew used them in spite of the overwhelming stats proving their life saving ability. Trucks/vans were exempt until at least 1978.

Pinto's design flaw was putting the tank behind the passenger seats with no shock absorbing protection in case of rear impact. They blew up quite easily because of that and the real tragedy was that Ford knew having been warned by engineers. They ran the cost/benefit of the improvements and decided it was more expedient to just pay off death claims, a practice emulated by many thereafter. They got caught.

My point is that when you put your life in the hands of strangers who have contracted with an internet company who has little exposure but immense profit to be made, you ought to have some knowledge of the mental stability or criminal proclivity or driving record of that "contractor". If someone refuses finger printing or shows up as a wanted felon they can be filtered out. My direct experience is that their claims of background checks being done is probably a sham. I know some of these drivers. You get what you pay for.

Its also a matter of fairness. If they can weasel out of that obligation, then why should a taxi company have to do it. In fact, why would any business that deals with the public? But, maybe that's the new independent, damn the gubmint thought process.


The 61 and 62 and later had belts from factory, but may have been taken out or pushed back under the seat.

Friend had a 61 Rambler American that had factory belts in front. 

Other note I mentioned "phased in".  I think there were options until 1968 when it became mandatory for every car.  Many had belts before then.  Big Chevy and BOP had belts.  Small ones may or may not have....Impala versus Nova.






Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: cannon_fodder on May 10, 2016, 12:10:14 pm
The issue isn't how easy they are to use. Or reliable. Its the fact they refuse to yield to satisfying the same requirements other businesses that serve the public have to wrestle with. They don't want to do real background checks, fingerprints, etc. They want preferential treatment for pickup areas and they continue to insist their employees are private contractors. They seem to be the at the same level Napster was.

This is ridiculous.

Napstert encouraged people to steal music by posting other peoples property for free on the internet. Uber/Lyft will pick you up and drive you to your destination in exchange for a fee.  I think the differences are evident.

They satisfy almost all the requirements of other businesses serving the public. They file with the secretary of state, they pay taxes 9as an entity, gas taxes via their employees, etc.), they advertise, they run background checks (most businesses that serve the public do not. And yes, they do "real" background checks. What they don't do is hire the Austin PD for no reason to rerun background checks. I don't know any employer in Tulsa that uses the Tulsa PD to run background checks), they carry insurance. What they don't do - is pretend to be a Taxi service.  Which is exactly the point.

If they want preferential areas for pickup, then negotiate with whomever the business owner is to have such a space. Same thing Taxi services do with certain hotels/businesses in NYC. Or are you saying that Uber/Lyft drivers should have to wait in the cab line at airports? Because when I call Uber/Lyft, I'm contracting with q specific vehicle to pick me up. Taxi's wait first come first serve to get business - totally different model. You don't want either Taxis or Uber/Lyft sitting around an airport clogging it up - but that isn't an issue with Uber/Lyft because they come in and pick a specific someone up, just like my wife does when she picks me up at the airport.

And how are they NOT private contractors? They determine when, where, how much and how to work - not an employers set schedule or location. They can quit whenever they want and rejoin at will. They use their own vehicle (their own tools of the trade). There are no requirements for assistance or office. They buy their own supplies. They get to choose their own jobs, work order, and sequences. They are paid by the specific job without regard to profit or loss. They are free to work for any other company they want (most Uber Drivers are also Lyft Drivers, they prefer Lyft). They decide how much to invest and how much to work. They decide what their market will be. The written contract is exceedingly detailed spelling out the relationship. The benefits are indicative of a contractor. 

Under both Oklahoma and IRS guidelines, they are almost certainly a contract employee. If Uber/Lyft drivers are not contract employees, the "gig economy" is immediately dead. It's hard to think of regularly utilized contractor who have more freedom than these drivers?

And wildly profitable?  Most business publications surmise that Urber loses money hand over fist. Lots of revenue, not so much on profits to date.

Finally, consumers have chosen. They have chosen Lyft/Uber dramatically over traditional taxis. The contractors have chosen to work for Uber/Lyft. The only people upset by this are the antiquated taxi services that most people hate and government officials who want to regulate to death a system that is fixing itself.

I use Lyft probably once a month and have for the last ~4 years. I've never had the slightest concern anywhere in the country. I've had sketchy cabs, I've had cabs that just don't show up, I've been told they are no longer running, I've had cabs get lost, people who don't speak English to a communicable degree, and been overcharged by a cabby. Lyft is straight forward and easy. Plus, its a $10 drunk ride home from Conan's beer garage.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: AquaMan on May 10, 2016, 12:49:45 pm
Like I said, we're from and exist in different worlds. This world is yours to exploit, enjoy, define and defile. My world is fading. I actually tried to become one of their drivers and their incompetence was obvious and not uncommon. Yet you give them credit for it. Because its always worked so well for you. Yet it didn't work so well for others, like the guy who drove around picking up fares and shooting people along the way. Or the drivers abused by fares. Some of the drivers are diabetics and take insulin. I have to get a physical and can't drive if I am diabetic due to obvious problems or have heart problems. Passing out, heart attack, stuff like that. When a taxi driver shows up loopy from a few lunchtime margaritas he likely isn't going to drive if his supervisor sees him. Not so with an unsupervised contract worker popping a few adderal or oxy's.  I received training in CPR, MANDT, and I receive ongoing updates. I can save your life in more ways than one. Industry associations keep us up to date with issues affecting safe driving. Good luck getting a contract driver for Uber to have satisfied any of these "obnoxious" government requirements. I avoid, without exaggeration, about a dozen accidents with poor quality drivers every day. Texting, eating, unable to understand signs or obey them, speeding, etc. And it isn't poor, ignorant drivers doing this stuff. No correlation whatsoever. Yesterday I witnessed a car hit and run off the road into a ditch. The riders and driver of the car bailed and ran off. Nice. Does the Uber driver's insurance company of the hit car know he's driving for them? If not those damages are on the driver.

Yes, they are defensible in court as contractors. Even though they are in reality people renting out their assets because they can't find legitimate work or have gotten too old for physical labor. And the contract is overwhelmingly in favor of UBER. Take it or leave it. Yes, taxi companies have become the deserved object of ridicule. But you strangely omit that this novel new concept is now world wide and being fought worldwide for the same reasons I list. Profitability is illusory and irrelevant. They want market penetration. Stockholders know the profit will come. They compete unfairly and their security is suspect.

Napster was a pier to pier music sharing platform if IIRC. Avoided all those pesky regs and music rights. The similarities are evident if you look at it dispassionately. They avoided the costs that record stores carried. Been to a record store lately? They screwed the existing and hated music industry record labels. So, they must have been honorable. Except they weren't and disappeared. I am not a taxi driver nor have I taken one in ages. I like that NAPSTER started a new model. I like that Uber started a new model. I hate it that people are so forgiving of the negatives of the model. Like Trumpy says, its going to be negotiated.

Note. I forgot to add drug testing
 Another onerous regulation for cdl drivers at my employment that routinely edits out grass smokers who think it's okay to drive others while high. Now that its legal in some state s Uber drivers can do so without worry.
Then there's mechanical upkeep. My employer makes sure equipment is roadworthy. I recently refused a vehicle that had steel cord showing thru the tire. Uber shifts that to the driver. You been checking that with your drivers?


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 10, 2016, 03:23:45 pm
Last taxi I took was in Ft Worth last October.  It was just like the previous taxi I took about 8 years before that.  Disgusting.  Filthy pigsty - carpets, seats, doors.  And so heavily overwhelming with cigarette smoke it was sickening.  Yellow cab at the Heartland flyer train station.  From now on, someone will have to pick me up, or Hertz can come get me to rent me a car there.

Haven't tried Uber or Lyft for the reasons AquaMan stated - too many uncertainties that haven't been sorted out yet.  Yeah, a lot of people - most of them - that use those have good experiences.  I don't want or need to be a guinea pig. 




Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: AquaMan on May 10, 2016, 04:30:58 pm
The change has already started for Uber. http://gizmodo.com/uber-agreement-will-let-new-york-city-drivers-be-repres-1775789767

California and Massachusetts were part of a class action suit challenging the "contractor" status.

"Uber’s been navigating similar labor issues in several states. The agreement with IAM comes just two weeks after Uber settled class-action lawsuits in California and Massachusetts. Drivers in those states will continue to be recognized as contractors and not employees, but Uber was required to make some changes, including allowing its drivers to ask for tips. Some cities like Seattle have ruled that Uber should allow its drivers to unionize, although Uber Austin’s city council also voted this week to kill Uber, Lyft, and their ilk, due to a disagreement about how drivers should be vetted."

and they know it too, " IAM will certainly help Uber drivers to have some semblance of job security, especially in situations where drivers are being “deactivated” from the app without any warning. Helping its New York City drivers to have some legal recourse, as well as the potential promise of benefits, is smart, and this could eventually help other drivers at companies like Lyft as well."

"As Uber’s policy head David Plouffe said in remarks published by Uber today, “We haven’t always done a great job working with drivers. As our CEO, Travis Kalanick said two weeks ago, that’s not good enough. It’s time for a change."

I suspect the cab companies that survive will do so by upgrading their operations to be competitive.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: Conan71 on May 10, 2016, 07:31:45 pm
The change has already started for Uber. http://gizmodo.com/uber-agreement-will-let-new-york-city-drivers-be-repres-1775789767

California and Massachusetts were part of a class action suit challenging the "contractor" status.

"Uber’s been navigating similar labor issues in several states. The agreement with IAM comes just two weeks after Uber settled class-action lawsuits in California and Massachusetts. Drivers in those states will continue to be recognized as contractors and not employees, but Uber was required to make some changes, including allowing its drivers to ask for tips. Some cities like Seattle have ruled that Uber should allow its drivers to unionize, although Uber Austin’s city council also voted this week to kill Uber, Lyft, and their ilk, due to a disagreement about how drivers should be vetted."

and they know it too, " IAM will certainly help Uber drivers to have some semblance of job security, especially in situations where drivers are being “deactivated” from the app without any warning. Helping its New York City drivers to have some legal recourse, as well as the potential promise of benefits, is smart, and this could eventually help other drivers at companies like Lyft as well."

"As Uber’s policy head David Plouffe said in remarks published by Uber today, “We haven’t always done a great job working with drivers. As our CEO, Travis Kalanick said two weeks ago, that’s not good enough. It’s time for a change."

I suspect the cab companies that survive will do so by upgrading their operations to be competitive.

Unionization will be the end of these carriers.  At least listening to their recruiting ads, they aren’t looking for full-time employees, they are looking for people who want to earn extra income or to have the ability to work around family schedules.  Uber and Lift’s business models sound to me as if they are directed at people who want to work at their own pace and use their own equipment.  I don’t see how anyone could confuse this as being anything but pure contract labor.   Uber/Lyft provide nothing but the customer for the driver to contract for a ride with.

I’m also assuming Uber and Lyft’s ability to dismiss drivers without cause (i.e. being de-activated from the app) helps assure a better customer experience if the driver has been dismissed due to complaints or unreliable service.  Having unions to help protect the lowest hanging fruit is not a benefit for the customer nor the carrier.

My brother owned Mel-O-Dee Ice Cream back in the 1980’s.  The previous owner had always treated the drivers as contractors to avoid having to deal with withholding taxes, worker’s comp, and unemployment insurance. 

Here’s the rub: 

1- Drivers drove company-owned and insured trucks.
2- Had to buy their product wholesale from Mel-O-Dee’s vault.  They were discouraged from selling product from other sources.
3- Had to turn in their sales proceeds at the end of the day to the office. 

Once a week, they would get a check for the difference between what the driver turned in, minus what they signed out of the vault.  At one point, the company even had it’s own gas pump, that was logged and that was deducted from the driver’s proceeds.  At the end of the year, they sent out 1099 forms to the driver’s last known address and Mel-O-Dee had completed it’s obligation to the government.  Drivers who didn’t care to have to cash a check simply estimated how much their daily profit was and kept that rather than turn it in.

Calling the driver in a situation like that a contractor had red flags all over it.  If I recall correctly, a driver tried to file unemployment after they were fired for one reason or another.  That brought the OESC sniffing around and a legal hassle for my brother.  I believe his attorney got them to go away eventually.  Following this, he got a stern admonition from the attorney that what everyone had assumed for years was a grey area in terms of contractors wasn’t really that grey and it would only be a matter of time before it created a major smile storm for him either with the OESC, OTC, IRS or all three.  He got out of the business before he had to find out.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: TheArtist on May 10, 2016, 08:07:05 pm
First time we used Uber was a few weeks ago in California.  Was fantastic.  Super easy and convenient to use.  Downloaded the app, put in some info, then when you wanted to use it you "dropped" a pin on the map that showed where you were or put in your current address, then put in where you wanted to go, then voila you got someone who accepted, a picture of them pops up on your phone screen and it showed how long it would be till they got to you and you could even see their car moving along on the map as it headed your way so you could tell if they were getting close, and it showed how much it would cost.  Amazing technology that even an old, not good with computers, fart like me could easily use and see how it worked.  Once you were dropped off a little thing popped up on your phone screen so you could rate your driver and then the drive was paid automatically.  No fuss no muss.

Drivers were always nice very nice and interesting, cars were always clean. Our first driver was a young professional who was donating the money he earned via a program with the company he worked at to a charity. Others we used did it full time, and some like a lady we used here in Tulsa just this week, was a single mom who used it as extra income.  

I don't know what "uncertainties" or "guinea pig" stuff there is with all this lol.  I told a friend about what some have said on here and they just gave a strange look and laughed. It's just an everyday, ho hum thing like... using e-mail instead of regular mail lol.  But perhaps some are waiting to see how that all works out too. All kinds of things could happen with that you know.  


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: DTowner on May 11, 2016, 08:49:08 am
Unionization will be the end of these carriers.  At least listening to their recruiting ads, they aren’t looking for full-time employees, they are looking for people who want to earn extra income or to have the ability to work around family schedules.  Uber and Lift’s business models sound to me as if they are directed at people who want to work at their own pace and use their own equipment.  I don’t see how anyone could confuse this as being anything but pure contract labor.   Uber/Lyft provide nothing but the customer for the driver to contract for a ride with.

Exactly.  Taxi companies and their financially backed politicians want to force ride-sharing services through litigation, legislation and unionization to become more like the taxi companies.  Make no mistake, the goal is to protect the taxis from having to change their ways and compete for customers through the product offered.  The problem is, enough people have experienced Uber/Lyft and now know how much better it can be than the taxi systems.  It will be interesting to see what happens in cities like Austin that lose these services.  I would not be surprised to see Austin modify its law in some sort of compromise to get these services to come back due to public pressure.

The sweet irony is that in smaller cities like Tulsa, the taxi industry is relatively small and lacked the political clout to block Uber/Lyft from fundamentally changing the market.  Uber/Lyft have changed the way a lot of people behave.  I know a lot of people of all ages in Tulsa who routinely use Uber/Lyft on weekends when they go out who never used taxis before.  For a lot of reasons, that is a good thing.
 


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: Conan71 on May 11, 2016, 10:07:34 am
Exactly.  Taxi companies and their financially backed politicians want to force ride-sharing services through litigation, legislation and unionization to become more like the taxi companies.  Make no mistake, the goal is to protect the taxis from having to change their ways and compete for customers through the product offered.  The problem is, enough people have experienced Uber/Lyft and now know how much better it can be than the taxi systems.  It will be interesting to see what happens in cities like Austin that lose these services.  I would not be surprised to see Austin modify its law in some sort of compromise to get these services to come back due to public pressure.

The sweet irony is that in smaller cities like Tulsa, the taxi industry is relatively small and lacked the political clout to block Uber/Lyft from fundamentally changing the market.  Uber/Lyft have changed the way a lot of people behave.  I know a lot of people of all ages in Tulsa who routinely use Uber/Lyft on weekends when they go out who never used taxis before.  For a lot of reasons, that is a good thing.
 


I find it interesting how industries which have become irrelevant or out-moded will hang on kicking and screaming via legislation and litigation instead of evolving in spite of consumer demand to the contrary.

Oklahoma’s package retail liquor industry is one of those that comes to mind. ::)


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: DTowner on May 11, 2016, 10:57:47 am
I find it interesting how industries which have become irrelevant or out-moded will hang on kicking and screaming via legislation and litigation instead of evolving in spite of consumer demand to the contrary.

Oklahoma’s package retail liquor industry is one of those that comes to mind. ::)

Change is hard and uncertain.  Political cronyism is easier.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: cannon_fodder on May 11, 2016, 02:13:56 pm
Change is hard and uncertain. 

(http://www.anvilmediainc.com/wp-content/uploads/garth.jpg)


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: Townsend on May 11, 2016, 03:41:12 pm
My experience with Taxi services have been horrible.  Awful vehicles (dirty, old, poorly maintained, safety very questionable) and sketchy drivers...(same issues as the vehicles).

My experience with Uber and Lyft?  Fantastic.  I've never had a bad experience.

I'm shocked Oklahoma hasn't outright banned the service.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 11, 2016, 04:32:35 pm
First time we used Uber was a few weeks ago in California.  Was fantastic.  Super easy and convenient to use.  Downloaded the app, put in some info, then when you wanted to use it you "dropped" a pin on the map that showed where you were or put in your current address, then put in where you wanted to go, then voila you got someone who accepted, a picture of them pops up on your phone screen and it showed how long it would be till they got to you and you could even see their car moving along on the map as it headed your way so you could tell if they were getting close, and it showed how much it would cost.  Amazing technology that even an old, not good with computers, fart like me could easily use and see how it worked.  Once you were dropped off a little thing popped up on your phone screen so you could rate your driver and then the drive was paid automatically.  No fuss no muss.

Drivers were always nice very nice and interesting, cars were always clean. Our first driver was a young professional who was donating the money he earned via a program with the company he worked at to a charity. Others we used did it full time, and some like a lady we used here in Tulsa just this week, was a single mom who used it as extra income.  

I don't know what "uncertainties" or "guinea pig" stuff there is with all this lol.  I told a friend about what some have said on here and they just gave a strange look and laughed. It's just an everyday, ho hum thing like... using e-mail instead of regular mail lol.  But perhaps some are waiting to see how that all works out too. All kinds of things could happen with that you know.  


My uncertainty goes to the background of the driver.  Are they licensed?  More tickets than the BOK center?  Warrants for murder (background check)?  Insured - liability in case of wreck.  Various things that Yellow Cab already has taken care of....or is liable for.

Big difference seems to be in what a pigsty the cabs usually are....I really hate riding in a cab.

Now, if we could just get an Uber clean car and the cab company background methods- then it will be best of all worlds.




Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: Conan71 on May 12, 2016, 10:07:38 pm

My uncertainty goes to the background of the driver.  Are they licensed?  More tickets than the BOK center?  Warrants for murder (background check)?  Insured - liability in case of wreck.  Various things that Yellow Cab already has taken care of....or is liable for.

Big difference seems to be in what a pigsty the cabs usually are....I really hate riding in a cab.

Now, if we could just get an Uber clean car and the cab company background methods- then it will be best of all worlds.




Why do you automatically assume the cab company has run more than a simple OSCN or DMV check on any driver? Who is to say that the guy who hired on last week isn't running from officials in LA or NYC?  There's no guarantee that someone who has passed a background check hasn't been silently killing and butchering people for the last decade and just has never crossed paths with law enforcement.

Okay, a bit of hyperbole, but just making the point that a cab company which can't even provide basic hygienic needs for a motor vehicle can't really provide a great background check which is going to assure every driver is safe, competent, and doesn't have psychotic issues any more than Uber or Lyft can.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 13, 2016, 08:00:19 am
Why do you automatically assume the cab company has run more than a simple OSCN or DMV check on any driver? Who is to say that the guy who hired on last week isn't running from officials in LA or NYC?  There's no guarantee that someone who has passed a background check hasn't been silently killing and butchering people for the last decade and just has never crossed paths with law enforcement.

Okay, a bit of hyperbole, but just making the point that a cab company which can't even provide basic hygienic needs for a motor vehicle can't really provide a great background check which is going to assure every driver is safe, competent, and doesn't have psychotic issues any more than Uber or Lyft can.


Which is more than Uber...

Cabbie has to have a CDL with P endorsement.  There is at least some minimal requirement to get that...kinda like a concealed carry permit - up till now, there was at least a class and "test".

And I am not defending cabs at all....they are the grossest mode of transport I have ever run across.  (I haven't ridden an ox cart yet...)  There needs to be increased standards/requirements across the board.



Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: Hoss on May 13, 2016, 08:37:18 am

Which is more than Uber...

Cabbie has to have a CDL with P endorsement.  There is at least some minimal requirement to get that...kinda like a concealed carry permit - up till now, there was at least a class and "test".

And I am not defending cabs at all....they are the grossest mode of transport I have ever run across.  (I haven't ridden an ox cart yet...)  There needs to be increased standards/requirements across the board.



If cabbies have to have CDLs, then doesn't that mean they also have a medical requirement before they can be issued a full CDL?  I know a friend of mine still has his CDL but with restrictions since he never renewed the medical part of the license.  Maybe I'm confused.


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: Conan71 on May 13, 2016, 08:58:44 am

Which is more than Uber...

Cabbie has to have a CDL with P endorsement.  There is at least some minimal requirement to get that...kinda like a concealed carry permit - up till now, there was at least a class and "test".

And I am not defending cabs at all....they are the grossest mode of transport I have ever run across.  (I haven't ridden an ox cart yet...)  There needs to be increased standards/requirements across the board.



There is no such requirement for a cab driver to have a CDL in Oklahoma:

Quote
Taxi Drivers in Oklahoma

If you're a taxi driver in OK, you only need to have a valid driver's license, although local jurisdictions may impose additional requirements. Some municipalities may require you to:
Pass a criminal background check.
Have a clean driving record.
Provide your fingerprints.
Become medically certified.
Pay a taxi licensing fee.
http://www.dmv.org/ok-oklahoma/special-licenses.php

And apparently none in the city of Tulsa either, although the city apparently does the background check with fingerprints:

Quote
City of Tulsa License and Collections (918) 596-7640
How to Apply for a Taxi/Paratransit Service
1. Complete attached application. Each person named as a certificate holder must fill out a separate "Applicant Information" form. Application must be notarized.
2. Requirements, to be turned in with the application:
a. Statement of qualifications and experience for each person named as a certificate holder
b. Copy of Oklahoma Drivers License for each person named as a certificate holder and a copy of the Social Security card. If the Social Security card has the work restriction language, another qualifying document will be required.
c. Fingerprints for each person named as a certificate holder. Fingerprints must be obtained at the Tulsa County Sheriff's Office at 1st & Denver. The fee is $10 for digitally scanned prints, and is only payable by check or money order.
d. Color Scheme Approval Request
e. FCC License (Taxi only)
f. Insurance Policy
g. Certificate of Insurance (with cancellation notice set at minimum of
15 days)
h. Driver Manifest (Taxi only)
i. Schedule of Fares
j. Oklahoma Sales Tax Permit (if applicable)
3. Fees:
a. $75.00 processing fee for certificate application.
b. $19.00 fingerprint processing fee per applicant.
c. If more than two applicants, a $20.00 fee per additional person.
d. Upon approval, the Certificate fee calculated on the basis of Thirty-
Six Dollars ($36.00) per vehicle shall be assessed.
4. After submitting a completed application, a background investigation will be conducted. If the director finds that the application is complete and
that applicant has met the requirements set forth in Sections 105 and 106 of Title 36 Chapter 1 "Taxicab and Paratransit Vehicle Regulations", he shall issue a certificate to the applicant. The Director shall review the application within a reasonable time after its completion. Applicant will then be notified that the certificate is ready to be issued.
5. Please call License and Collections with questions. 1

https://www.cityoftulsa.org/COTlegacy/documents/TaxiParatransitServiceApplication.pdf

Lyft claims to do "extensive" background checks

https://www.lyft.com/drivers

/reading more into this, the city issues a “chauffeur’s” license after successful background check and a driver passing with 60% or better on the written exam.  There’s not even a proven driving skills component to the cab driver testing.  I’m not that impressed:

Quote
written test will be administered to determine basic knowledge of The City of Tulsa Taxicab & Paratransit Regulations (Title 36, Chapter 1, TRO), basic geography of the city of Tulsa, communication skills, and ability to make correct change. The test will not be administered after 3:00pm. A minimum score of 60% is required to pass; it is recommended that the applicant be familiar with this ordinance prior to testing. Applicants failing the test must wait 30 days to re-test and pay a $30.00 re-testing fee.

https://www.cityoftulsa.org/COTlegacy/documents/Chauffeur-NewApplication.pdf


Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 13, 2016, 10:46:34 am
There is no such requirement for a cab driver to have a CDL in Oklahoma:



Whoa!!   Amazing, isn't it?  Well, that is just ignorant.  May be an underlying symptom of why I hate taxi's so much...

"And when we say
Yeow! A-YIP-I-O-EE-AY
Were only say-in "you're doing fine Oklahoma
Oklahoma your OK"




Title: Re: Uber & Lyft just left Austin
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on May 13, 2016, 11:07:43 am
If cabbies have to have CDLs, then doesn't that mean they also have a medical requirement before they can be issued a full CDL?  I know a friend of mine still has his CDL but with restrictions since he never renewed the medical part of the license.  Maybe I'm confused.


No CDL required.  Astounding.


To drive a truck, you have to have a valid medical certificate, renewable every two years.  They will change you back to class D if you don't have the medical cert.


And if you have hazardous materials endorsement, another test is required every 4 years.  Along with TSA background anal probing.  And fingerprints all around.  And the test place takes your fingerprints to verify/compare to the TSA prints on file at time of test.  And proof of place of birth (birth certificate or passport) is required at test time.