

Save uberX in Seattle - vertr07
https://action.uber.org/seattle/

======
yajoe
Don't have a dog in the fight, but interesting how the uberX page doesn't
mention specifics of the proposal beyond "put hundreds of drivers out of
business and effectively shut UberX down." Where are the links? The specifics?

The actual proposal may be found on the city's site [1]. It also would help to
provide some context for the types of changes, which both an opinionated
summary from the local newspaper [2] and somewhat impartial summary from a
local tech site [3] do fairly well.

For the tl;dr who don't want to click away:

1\. Seattle defines uberX, Lyft, etc as Transportation Network Companies (TNC)
and declares all drivers as "for-hire" drivers, which is a legal distinction
that means Seattle can regulate them.

2\. TNCs are taxed at $50k for first year. Second year is the greater of $50k
or .35% of gross revenue.

3\. No more than 300 drivers may be associated with each TNC (it's a permit
lottery regime, if you are curious), and each driver can work only 16 hours.

 _Yes, that means that each TNC is limited to 300 x 16 = 4800 hours of work
per week. A previous proposal had a limit of 100 drivers [5]_

4\. Drivers can't double dip: They can't both drive for-hire cars and also do
uberX on the side. They also can't work for both uberX and Lyft.

5\. I can't find a cap on the number of TNCs that will be licensed, even
though that seems to be one of the (perhaps past?) sticking points.

6\. Rates may either be flat-rate between preset zones OR subject to RCW
Chapter 19.94. RCW Chapter 19.94 [4] defines appropriate measurement devices
that may be used with commerce, which I think precludes most cell phones...
uberX would need to install meters it seems.

Details likely only I will find interesting:

1\. TNCs have to have valid insurance for all vehicles, and this insurance
looks like it is stricter than what uberX and Lyft currently have.

2\. TNCs must have an office in Seattle that is open and personally staffed
all business days between nine a.m. (9:00 a.m.) and five p.m. (5:00 p.m.) with
toll-free number

3\. The TNC shall submit to the Director a report detailing all rides that
were requested but not accepted by TNC drivers. The report shall include the
location and zip code of each rejected ride. There are penalties for
discriminating against underserved zip codes.

4\. 30% increase in the total number of taxicabs, including an immediate
increase of 8% "today. "

[1]
[http://www.seattle.gov/council/issues/taxis.html](http://www.seattle.gov/council/issues/taxis.html)

[2]
[http://blogs.seattletimes.com/opinionnw/2014/02/14/seattle-u...](http://blogs.seattletimes.com/opinionnw/2014/02/14/seattle-
uber-taxi-regulations/)

[3] [http://www.geekwire.com/2014/seattle-delays-ride-sharing-
vot...](http://www.geekwire.com/2014/seattle-delays-ride-sharing-vote-council-
member-says-need-time-get-decision-right/)

[4]
[http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=19.94](http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=19.94)

[5] [http://www.geekwire.com/2013/sidecar-uber-express-
disappoint...](http://www.geekwire.com/2013/sidecar-uber-express-
disappointment-seattles-proposed-ridesharing-regulations/)

 _Edit: Formatting and spelling_

~~~
jacalata
I don't remember anyone talking about a cap on the number of TNCs, you may be
confusing that with the very large outcry over a cap on number of drivers.
From memory (of the original bill) the drivers are able to get the full for-
hire driver license with more intensive testing and then the 16 hour cap
doesn't apply? And uber/lyft/etc all refuse to say how many drivers they have
now, so fuck 'em, 300 is probably enough.

edit: there might have been an argument that capping the number of drivers
would de facto prevent new companies from starting because all the slots would
be taken by existing ones?

------
anigbrowl
Hmm, I spoke up for Uber at SF MTA meetings and made strong arguments for them
here against the incumbent taxi monopooly when they were getting off the
ground. Although I have never used the service, I believe it provided much-
needed competition.

On the other hand, I'm disgusted by Uber's bullshit legal argument that
drivers are only employed by Uber during the time they have a passenger in the
back, as a tactic to avoid liability in the case of an UberX driver that hit
and killed a 6 year old child in SF last New Year's Eve. If they're logged
into your app and checking for fares, then it's little different from being
available for despatch in the same manner as a legacy cab (see
[http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Uber-sued-over-
girl-s-...](http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Uber-sued-over-girl-s-death-
in-S-F-5178921.php) for a summary).

Uber is trying to have its cake and eat it here. I'm not inclined to support
them if they're going to build their business model around offloading
externalities onto the public.

~~~
ROFISH
I agree. The insurance situation alone is, well, strange.

* Personal insurance does not cover commercial driving. UberX only requires personal insurance to be a driver.

* Uber's own insurance only covers when a passenger is in the car.

* Most insurance companies would consider being "online" as a commercial event. At the very least, Uber telling the driver to drive to a specific destination to pick someone up is definitely a commercial event.

* Therefore in my view of things, many UberX drivers are driving without proper insurance, a misdemeanor offense.

This can be solved by either making UberX/TNC drivers carry commercial
insurance at the driver's own cost, or making Uber/TNC's blanket insurance
cover the entire time a driver is on-duty as if the driver had full-coverage
commercial insurance.

~~~
rahimnathwani
_many UberX drivers are driving without proper insurance, a misdemeanor
offense_

And if that is the case, then Uber's current business model requires that
drivers do this. I wonder how much it would cost Uber to increase the
insurance coverage such that there is no doubt that a driver is properly
insured at all times, and why they have no done this so far.

------
zobzu
well, i use uber often and i'll say it out loud: fuck taxis. I don't care. I
used to use taxis and buses for anything else than commuting. I don't even
need the later with the price of uberx.

uberx is cheaper, faster, more reliable. cars are nicer, drivers are very
professional, all the time. uberx is always there for you, you don't need to
wave at empty taxis that may or may not take you in, and wait 30min because
you're not at the right place. uber is there in 5. always.

So yeah, fuck regular taxis. Sorry guys. You don't cut it anymore.

~~~
mendicantB
Don't forget to add shake you down for cash vs hit a button on your phone.

------
kadabra9
After all the scummy tactics Uber has pulled, (recruiting and
ordering/cancelling drivers from Gett comes to mind), I really have a hard
time feeling bad for them anymore when it comes to matters like this.

~~~
serge2k
They are still the best service around for the customer (maybe lyft too).

------
doktrin
Uber puts out one of these press releases every time they run up against a
possible regulatory hurdle. They consistently reek of misplaced indignation,
and this one is no exception.

------
grogenaut
Uber is great for getting a lift right away on a friday night. If cab
companies weren't run so dirt cheaply they would have a quality dispatch
system like uber has.

However uber fails for the early am scheduled ride for things like plane
rides. I can't depend that uber is possibly going to get me a lift. Taxis DO
show up on time super early am.

Last two times I've flow early I've tried to get a uber, and both times failed
to see a single one on the app. Told uber about it, they said "we dunno we had
plenty of cars"

------
jmspring
Given this is for commercial interests and uber's prior similar gambits, I
find the use of the .org domain in bad taste.

Maybe that is just me.

------
theophrastus
seattle appears to be the focus of large astroturfing of comment pages and
council meetings on behalf of lyft and uber. the problem of an wild-
west/unregulated for-hire-car industry has a solid history in all major u.s.
cities. in the end, despite some vehement haters of the yellow cab hegemony
(and astroturfers, of which there are many with lots of money backing), some
solid citizen protections must be kept in place or it devolves into hazardous
polluting uninsured lawyer-fest
[http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/goldy/Author?oid=4904583](http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/goldy/Author?oid=4904583)

------
pm24601
Yawn... this is a company that has raised millions. They can do their own
lobbying.

