It's Time to Welcome Uber to Jacksonville

[ProjectMaximus]

Just figure out what other cities do and adapt it for our needs. I just used Uber yesterday, and it's unfathomably better than the service you get from standard cab companies. It would be ridiculous to crack down on them for having a better service.

In Montreal, the cabs operate under Uber. Or more specifically, Uber's service is executed by the traditional cabs. I never tried out the app there, as there were cabs readily available everywhere we went.

[ProjectMaximus]

This is the wrong place for this question, but maybe someone knowledgeable can offer insight.

Just wondering why so many cities shut down their transit systems just before the majority of their nightlife closes down?

eg, Montreal, Hong Kong, Singapore, Tokyo. I guess generally there just isn't enough ridership to sustain operating the majority of the system, and from a transportation planner's standpoint, the nightlife clientele travels from one central point and disburses in all directions which might be better suited for taxis. But sometimes it seems like it's pandering to the taxi groups as well.

In Montreal it would have been extremely useful for us...and would have required an extension by 2-3 hours.
In Hong Kong some of the cabbies really try to ripoff tourists, and while this is an issue all the time it seems that drunk tourists trying to get home are the easiest victims.
In Singapore there is a 50% premium for riding cabs after midnight. Tokyo's is just 20%.

[finehoe]

    RICHMOND (August 06, 2014) - Governor Terry McAuliffe and Attorney General Mark R. Herring announced today that the Commonwealth of Virginia has reached an agreement with transportation network companies Uber and Lyft that will help ensure the safety of passengers, bring the companies into compliance with Virginia law, provide transparency into their operations, and promote a level playing field for transportation providers. This temporary legal framework, one of the first of its kind in the nation, is the result of extensive discussions between the companies, the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles, the McAuliffe administration, and Attorney General Herring's office following the issuance of "cease and desist" letters to the companies on June 5.

    "In order for Virginia to remain economically competitive, it is important that we welcome innovative companies like Uber and Lyft and provide them with the resources they need to safely and effectively operate in the Commonwealth,"said Governor McAuliffe. "Technology – specifically related to smart phones – continues to advance at a rapid pace, and I am pleased that we were able to work together to find a swift solution that will provide Virginia's workers, students, and families with more transportation options."

    "I knew there had to be a better way to ensure the safety of Virginia passengers," said Attorney General Herring."These companies offer services that Virginians want, but it just wasn't acceptable for them to operate without complying with regulations or other measures to help ensure the safety of passengers and motorists. I'm proud that we were able to get folks back to the table and get them talking again, and now we've shown that Virginia can be responsive to innovative businesses while promoting public safety and the rule of law. Because of this cooperation, Virginians are going to have more transportation options that are safer, more transparent, and appropriately regulated.  I hope other states will look to Virginia as a model for how to safely integrate the so-called sharing economy."

    "Thanks to the leadership of Governor McAuliffe and Attorney General Herring for putting consumers first and embracing innovation, choice and opportunity," said Justin Kintz, public policy, Uber Technologies, Inc. "We look forward to continuing to work together to create a permanent home for ridesharing, providing residents and visitors with safe, reliable transportation options."

    "Today's agreement allows Lyft to continue providing safe rides and economic opportunity to Virginians as we work with state leaders to secure a permanent future for ridesharing, said Dave Estrada, VP of Government Relations for Lyft. "Virginia has led the way in embracing innovative industries and we applaud Governor McAuliffe and Attorney General Herring for their thoughtful work to reach an agreement that maintains the highest level of public safety while expanding consumer choice. In addition to our involvement in DMV's ongoing study on Transportation Network Companies, we look forward to helping craft new rules for peer-to-peer transportation that increase access to safe, affordable and convenient rides for all Virginia residents."

    The Department of Motor Vehicles has informed Uber and Lyft that their applications for transportation broker's licenses and temporary operating authority have been granted, effective immediately, they meet an extensive set of regulations to promote passenger safety, have appropriate insurance, and comply with Virginia law. If at any point either company fails to comply with these terms, DMV can revoke the temporary operating authority.

    These conditions include:

        Extensive background checks of drivers, with immediate disqualifiers including convictions for any felony, fraud, sexual offenses, or violent crimes, or registration as a sex offender.
        A review of driving history, with disqualification for drivers convicted of three or more moving violations in the last three years, DUI, underage drinking, refusal to submit to a breathalyzer, hit and run, or eluding law-enforcement, or a revocation of a driver's license.
        Zero tolerance for the use of drugs or alcohol by any drivers, and a suspension pending investigation of any driver accused of violating the zero tolerance policy.
        Only employing drivers who are properly licensed and over 21, and vehicles that carry a maximum of seven passengers and are properly registered and inspected for safety and emissions, where applicable.
        Rigorous insurance requirements, including requiring drivers to maintain automobile liability insurance, maintaining on behalf of all drivers an additional $1,000,000 of coverage from the moment a driver accepts a trip request until the passenger leaves the vehicle, and liability insurance for drivers who are logged onto the companies' software but not providing services.
        Maintaining documentation for each driver of his or her background check, sex offender registry check, driving record, proof of insurance, valid driver's license, Social Security number, vehicle registration, and proof of vehicle safety inspection. Documentation must be available to DMV on demand to investigate any complaints, and must be available for periodic audits to ensure compliance.
        Paying any previously assessed civil penalties for non-compliance and dropping any appeals, which both companies have already done.
        Features to help customers identify their driver and vehicle, including from the outside of the vehicle.
        Drivers notifying the companies of any change in their license status, vehicle registration, insurance, or any arrest for a crime that would disqualify them from being a driver.
        Rate transparency and documentation.
        Companies advising drivers of their need to comply with applicable tax laws.
        Only accepting rides booked through the companies' mobile device apps, not street hails.
        Companies maintaining a Virginia transportation broker's license.

    Virginia DMV is currently leading a study at the request of the General Assembly to developing a long-term legislative solution that addresses services provided by Uber, Lyft, and similar companies, while also ensuring a level playing field for taxicabs and all other passenger transportation services. The study is scheduled to be completed in time for the 2015 legislative session. This temporary authority agreement can serve as a foundation for potential legislation and will also provide valuable data on the operations of these companies as legislation is crafted.

[simms3]

Uber announced that is testing an option that enables its users to split fares on rides with strangers who are traveling on a similar route.

UberPool works like the regular Uber service, except it pairs users up with another rider, and notifies them of their co-rider's first name. Launched in private beta, users can sign up to get notified when UberPool goes live in certain areas.

http://mashable.com/2014/08/05/uber-announces-carpooling-for-rides/?utm_cid=mash-com-Tw-main-link

Didn't even know this was new.  Been splitting fares with 1 or more people for a while now!  Also, now you can give the Uber driver a destination prior to ordering one (similar to Sidecar).  Convenient for big cities where drivers can't sit in one spot for long or for addresses that are complex and would otherwise require some verbal direction.

[Noone]

I remember at one council meeting it was brought up that you had to have X amount (I think 5) taxis ready to go before even being in compliance with city code. It is one of many arbitrary and maddening issues in there. I think it would be better to simply repeal most of the code concerning taxi/limo services.

Is this still true?

[urbanlibertarian]

http://reason.com/archives/2014/11/14/taxi-deregulation-removes-cabbies-econom

Taxi Deregulation Removes Cab Drivers' Economic Shackles
Steven Greenhut | November 14, 2014

SACRAMENTO — After the Civil War, newly freed slaves and poor whites in the Deep South often became "sharecroppers" who farmed land owned by others and paid a share of the crops. Barely able to eke out a living and unable to buy farms, they became indebted to the owners and locked into a life of poverty.

It sounds strange at first, but San Diego's taxicab system — like such systems elsewhere – has parallels to that antiquated economic model. Eighty-nine percent of the city's cab drivers rent cabs. Because of a city-imposed cap on the number of cabs, these drivers cannot go out on their own.

They pay around $1,200 a month to lease their cabs to pay for those high medallion costs. The results are predictable. According to the 2013 "Driven to Despair" survey from San Diego State University and the Center on Policy Initiatives, "San Diego taxi drivers earn a median of less than $5 an hour. ... Virtually no drivers have job-related health coverage ... ." Drivers are encouraged to "drive when tired or sick."

That all will change. On Monday, the San Diego City Council overwhelmingly approved a proposal from council member Marti Emerald to remove the cap on the number of city-issued permits. The meeting was held at a large auditorium given the high level of interest from drivers and company owners.

The latter have been vocal in their opposition for obvious reasons. As cab owners, they benefit from a cap that eliminates new competition. They often speculate on the value of these city-issued permits, which now are worth up to $140,000. If the system opens up, the value of the permits evaporates, and they no longer have drivers with little choice but to accept their terms and conditions.

"Our drivers want to be owner operators," said Sarah Saez, program director of the United Taxi Workers of San Diego, which represents more than 700 drivers. "They want to be small business owners," she added, noting how excited many of the drivers are to be able to implement new ideas and compete against ride-sharing services. "This is the only way to save the taxi industry."

Whole article here: http://reason.com/archives/2014/11/14/taxi-deregulation-removes-cabbies-econom

[acme54321]

http://reason.com/archives/2014/11/14/taxi-deregulation-removes-cabbies-econom

Taxi Deregulation Removes Cab Drivers' Economic Shackles
Steven Greenhut | November 14, 2014

SACRAMENTO — After the Civil War, newly freed slaves and poor whites in the Deep South often became "sharecroppers" who farmed land owned by others and paid a share of the crops. Barely able to eke out a living and unable to buy farms, they became indebted to the owners and locked into a life of poverty.

It sounds strange at first, but San Diego's taxicab system — like such systems elsewhere – has parallels to that antiquated economic model. Eighty-nine percent of the city's cab drivers rent cabs. Because of a city-imposed cap on the number of cabs, these drivers cannot go out on their own.

They pay around $1,200 a month to lease their cabs to pay for those high medallion costs. The results are predictable. According to the 2013 "Driven to Despair" survey from San Diego State University and the Center on Policy Initiatives, "San Diego taxi drivers earn a median of less than $5 an hour. ... Virtually no drivers have job-related health coverage ... ." Drivers are encouraged to "drive when tired or sick."

That all will change. On Monday, the San Diego City Council overwhelmingly approved a proposal from council member Marti Emerald to remove the cap on the number of city-issued permits. The meeting was held at a large auditorium given the high level of interest from drivers and company owners.

The latter have been vocal in their opposition for obvious reasons. As cab owners, they benefit from a cap that eliminates new competition. They often speculate on the value of these city-issued permits, which now are worth up to $140,000. If the system opens up, the value of the permits evaporates, and they no longer have drivers with little choice but to accept their terms and conditions.

"Our drivers want to be owner operators," said Sarah Saez, program director of the United Taxi Workers of San Diego, which represents more than 700 drivers. "They want to be small business owners," she added, noting how excited many of the drivers are to be able to implement new ideas and compete against ride-sharing services. "This is the only way to save the taxi industry."

Whole article here: http://reason.com/archives/2014/11/14/taxi-deregulation-removes-cabbies-econom

While I think its th right step forward what about the people that own the medallions now worth $140k that will essentially become worthless?  Yikes.

[simms3]

^^^Cab companies actually require a certain economies of scale to operate at a profit.  Not sure how "individual-driven" cab companies will work - will further hurt their own bottom lines and will dilute their image/business if they no longer have to "compete" and can all individually offer the same shitty service.  Everyone will certainly flock to Uber then.

Cab companies are able to buy NEW cars not even available to dealers yet in bulk for bottom barrel pricing (because the car companies actually use cab companies to test durability and it's a benefit to both parties).  Also cab companies are able to insure their business/drivers at reduced bulk rates.  Also cab companies operate with a degree of efficiency.  They also offer platforms that can compete with other platforms, producing ways to distinguish themselves.  There's also the whole concept of a dispatch that gets lost when you go out on your own.  With cab apps, cab companies pay to use the app at the corporate level, not at the individual level (2 main apps - Flywheel and Curb).

Cab companies in many cities that have actual large amounts of cabs (NYC, Boston, Chicago, DC, SF, LA) have clamored for more regulation.  There are ongoing debates as to whether there are already enough drivers or too many (typically there are too many on the road during the day and much of the evening, but then not enough during peak times such as rush hour or when bars let out).  Instead, the cab companies have pushed for more regulation on the Uber/Lyft side rather than deregulation of their own businesses.  I would think cab companies in SF (or most really large cities with extensive cab usage) understand the cab business moreso than cab companies in Sacramento, but each market is different.

[simms3]

http://reason.com/archives/2014/11/14/taxi-deregulation-removes-cabbies-econom

Taxi Deregulation Removes Cab Drivers' Economic Shackles
Steven Greenhut | November 14, 2014

SACRAMENTO — After the Civil War, newly freed slaves and poor whites in the Deep South often became "sharecroppers" who farmed land owned by others and paid a share of the crops. Barely able to eke out a living and unable to buy farms, they became indebted to the owners and locked into a life of poverty.

It sounds strange at first, but San Diego's taxicab system — like such systems elsewhere – has parallels to that antiquated economic model. Eighty-nine percent of the city's cab drivers rent cabs. Because of a city-imposed cap on the number of cabs, these drivers cannot go out on their own.

They pay around $1,200 a month to lease their cabs to pay for those high medallion costs. The results are predictable. According to the 2013 "Driven to Despair" survey from San Diego State University and the Center on Policy Initiatives, "San Diego taxi drivers earn a median of less than $5 an hour. ... Virtually no drivers have job-related health coverage ... ." Drivers are encouraged to "drive when tired or sick."

That all will change. On Monday, the San Diego City Council overwhelmingly approved a proposal from council member Marti Emerald to remove the cap on the number of city-issued permits. The meeting was held at a large auditorium given the high level of interest from drivers and company owners.

The latter have been vocal in their opposition for obvious reasons. As cab owners, they benefit from a cap that eliminates new competition. They often speculate on the value of these city-issued permits, which now are worth up to $140,000. If the system opens up, the value of the permits evaporates, and they no longer have drivers with little choice but to accept their terms and conditions.

"Our drivers want to be owner operators," said Sarah Saez, program director of the United Taxi Workers of San Diego, which represents more than 700 drivers. "They want to be small business owners," she added, noting how excited many of the drivers are to be able to implement new ideas and compete against ride-sharing services. "This is the only way to save the taxi industry."

Whole article here: http://reason.com/archives/2014/11/14/taxi-deregulation-removes-cabbies-econom

While I think its th right step forward what about the people that own the medallions now worth $140k that will essentially become worthless?  Yikes.

Yea, city should buy out the medallions at FMV if they go this route.  Most cities regulate cab companies as a sort of quasi-extension of public transit, hence the medallion system in the first place.

[urbanlibertarian]

I think it's a big mistake to maintain the status quo (crony capitalism) just because some people or companies are heavily invested in it.  If you do you cheat the public out of the benefits of competition and innovation.  One of the features of a relatively free and unregulated market is that business models that don't satisfy customers needs fail and are replaced by ones that do. 

[Noone]

^Good post. Anyone feel sorry for the Baltimore Water Taxis guys who were two seats short from a 350 seat RFP? They had 348 seats. So you are losers. Change the RFP and now it's 120 and immediately the Executive Branch (Mayor) defrauds and circumvents the Legislative Branch (City Council) 2014-412. The Uber and Lyft legislation is 2014-665 and is active. Saw Jack Shad who was there for it at a Finance agenda meeting 11/4/14. I was there for 2014-305 and was sitting next to Carla Miller who was there for 2014-668.

Our new CRA/DIA in the USA  20 square mile zone 2014-560 is active legislation before the city council before it gets sent to the state for approval. Allow opportunity for everyone and not just breaking the law and picking winners and losers. Please.

[finehoe]

[Gators312]

Here's the link to the story for those interested in the graphic's source.

http://www.thenation.com/article/192545/socialize-uber

I'm no Uber expert, but the graphic doesn't mention the support that Uber provides it's drivers, such as advertising / marketing, insurance, and other support such as paying fines levied by municipalities that have yet to come to an agreement with Uber and it's drivers. 

I've only used Uber, never considered being a driver, but I like their product.  Maybe some on MJ have driven for Uber and can give their opinion on being a driver for them?

[urbanlibertarian]

What's stopping the AFL/CIO from organizing drivers to compete with Uber?  Uber is a business model that seems to be working well and making customers happy.  IMO it's more likely that small innovative businesses will form to compete successfully with Uber than co-ops or organized labor.  The main reason that Uber, Lyft, etc have been so refreshing to customers is that for so long taxi companies and government have teamed up to keep rates high and innovation curtailed.

[finehoe]

Maybe some on MJ have driven for Uber and can give their opinion on being a driver for them?

Here's one driver's take:  http://www.wnyc.org/story/hustle-behind-the-wheel-what-its-like-to-be-an-uber-driver/