
Uber car attacked by Paris cab drivers on strike - geekfactor
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2014/01/13/uber-car-attacked-by-paris-cab-drivers.html
======
lewsid
I was in an Uber this morning headed to Charles de Gaulle airport and got to
see this all first hand. Hundreds of taxi drivers stopping traffic and
flipping off the police while stalling traffic for a bunch of unlucky
motorists.

My driver pulled the car over as we approached the airport. He asked me get
into the front seat, and then told me we had to act like friends if we were
forced to stop and end up getting harrassed. He then went to the trunk and
pulled out a pair of his normal clothes and changed right there on the side of
the road (Uber drivers are easily recognizable thanks to their fancy attire).
Upon settling back into the driver seat, with a big smile and a thick French
accent, he said, "I am Batman."

I rated the trip 5 stars.

~~~
thomashapytag
[http://www.rudebaguette.com/2014/01/13/taxi-protest-paris-
tu...](http://www.rudebaguette.com/2014/01/13/taxi-protest-paris-turns-
guerrilla-warfare-uber-car-attacked-freeway/)

------
eloff
How meaninglessly proletarian and small minded. Like the smashing of weaving
machines during the industrial revolution. The impossible fight against change
and the inexorable march of technology. Also shame on France for imposing a
minimum 15 minute delay for picking up a customer. France, where free market
competition is second to politics and special interests. Look at the anti
Amazon legislation.

~~~
Pxtl
> Like the smashing of weaving machines during the industrial revolution

I know, the buggy-whip manufacturers are doomed to be replaced by the...
slightly-more-sophisticated app-supported buggy-whip-manufacturers.

Seriously, Uber's success doesn't come from spectacular disruptive technology,
they succeed by circumventing the absurd regulatory capture that exists in the
taxi market in some cities.

~~~
JulianMorrison
Regulatory capture which exists because, before it existed, taxi drivers used
to riot and attack each other.

With potential supply consisting of "everyone with a car", either prices would
be driven down to bankruptcy, or with prices fixed by law, demand would be
smeared too thin, or (as actually happened) means of limiting the supply would
be created (violence and mob links outside the law, or regulation inside it).

~~~
Sanddancer
The problem is that with the medallion system, you're turning the ability to
drive a cab into property. As such, it becomes a /lot/ harder to reasonably
control supply, because adding medallions will garner protests from the
existing holders, regardless of the needs of the city. Additionally, with the
costs of these medallions, it becomes a lot harder for a middle class person
to get started in the taxi business; you have to join one of the cartels and
curry favor with them in order to have a chance to drive and get decent
dispatches.

I'd argue that the best way to handle the taxi drivers of all sorts is to move
to a licensing system. Give priority to existing drivers, but at the same
time, allow flexibility in setting the supply to give the little guy a chance
to compete. Taxi systems in most city are corrupt from top to bottom, and
these actions in France just show how the drivers are willing to go along with
the broken system at hand.

~~~
streetnigga
I came to realize a system like medallions were needed when seeing taxis clog
traffic after venues with well paying customers were over. Supply is far more
than demand in these cases, and even apps with scheduling won't keep the
streets from being clogged beyond reason.

Humans are a funny bunch who overall suck are cooperation, specially when
trying the role of a worker ant.

~~~
jeffdavis
That sounds like a traffic control problem, a public transportation problem,
and an event planning problem related to specific events rather than a need
for medallions.

Once the people are already there, they need to get home somehow -- what do
you expect? How do fewer taxis help the problem?

~~~
streetnigga
"That sounds like a traffic control problem, a public transportation
problem.."

All those things come into play when regulating how many registered taxis are
allowed on the street. Or the decision to regulate at all. Also its one of the
sticking points for locales as to why they want to regulate operators like
Uber as local planners need to be aware of them and their numbers.

"..and an event planning problem related to specific events"

The venues don't really have a say in who parks out in public streets, they
can raise complaints if it becomes a problem though and often try to cash in
by hiring services themselves. The more monied customers will most likely not
ride the meat bus over to a public transit hub though.

------
harshpotatoes
So I understand that on of the main points of contention is that the paris cab
drivers face steep regulation in the form of requiring an expensive license,
while the Uber drivers require no such license, and that to counter this lack
of regulation they require the Uber drivers to wait 15minutes before picking
up their customer.

But there are still a few things I don't understand: Why do the Paris cab
drivers require such regulations? How come the Uber drivers aren't required to
have such a license? And maybe I don't completely understand the advantages of
Uber (because I've never used a cab before), but at first glance, it seems the
main reason uber is succeeding so well, is that there is an app to quickly
summon a driver. So why doesn't such an app exist to call these licensed
drivers who are so angry?

~~~
maerF0x0
I cant speak directly for Paris, but in my home town, one reason we limit the
number of taxi cabs is because we've decided (as a society regulating itself)
that too many cabs is a social problem. It may sound funny, but imagine a case
where there is a lineup of 200 cabs clogging the airport to get that one
lucrative fare. Alternatively, outside of a office building to aim for CEOs.
They take up a common good that is free (space and to some extent air quality)
and therefore are a tragedy of the commons case.

~~~
nknighthb
Have you experienced "too many cabs"? How do you know the "social problems"
aren't just imagined? How do you know they cannot be controlled in other ways?

You imagine "200 cabs clogging the airport" \-- have you seen how cabs work in
places where they are plentiful? There's no point in having 200 at an airport
at once. They don't take passengers at random, they line up and wait their
turn.

If there are a lot of cabs at an airport, the drivers will be better off going
into the city and finding a fare there than waiting in a line of 200 cabs.

If there is actually such demand that 200 would "clog" the airport at once,
they're obviously solving a problem that isn't being solved by alternative
means, such as cheaper and more efficient busses and trains.

Why would drivers aim for CEOs? Cab fares are regulated, so that just leaves
tips (something not even customary in many places). They'll get more in a
couple hours driving around than waiting for the lottery in the form of an
abnormally generous CEO.

~~~
bunderbunder
This is a good point. In most cities, cabs do not go to the airport unless
they have to.

It just isn't a good use of their time - if you drive all the way out there
with an empty cab, you've just sunk a whole lot of gas and time on a deadhead
when you could have spent the same on picking up several fares downtown. And
even when you have someone who wants a ride out to the airport, it's not
necessarily something you want to do because then for a return fare you've got
to go to the cab stand and take whoever you get wherever they want to go -
which could be somewhere way out in the weeds so you still end up stuck with a
dead head. That's the reason why in most cities there are actual laws on the
books saying cab drivers aren't allowed to refuse to take you to the airport -
without those laws, many of them would.

~~~
maerF0x0
Maybe the specifics of my town are different, it costs ~$60 to go from my
house to the airport, thats really good money for 40 minutes / 25kms. Maybe 60
minutes of spent time? (20 minutes to get to me + 40 minutes to get to
airport). Expenses on a car are < 50c a km. So $12.50 in auto expenses +
$47.50 for 1 hr work.

------
temuze
> France has already instituted a rule that requires a minimum 15-minute wait
> before a service like Uber can actually pick up a customer.

Holy crap. And I thought the "Lang Law" was bad:
[http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/10/the-anti-amazon-law-is-
abou...](http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/10/the-anti-amazon-law-is-about-to-
become-a-reality-in-france-but-its-not-a-bad-thing/)

Apparently, France also fixes the price of all books to keep it 'fair' for
small bookstores.

~~~
rockdoe
Is this circumventable by shipping form another EU country? Amazon UK ships
for free to most of Europe and is AFAIK not bound by these laws, so this is a
really strange situation.

~~~
morsch
Amazon.co.uk seems to charge >5 GBP for shipments to the rest of Europe:
[http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId...](http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=11072981)

~~~
truxs
But [http://www.bookdepository.co.uk/](http://www.bookdepository.co.uk/)
(acquired by Amazon in 2011) offer free shipping worldwide

------
trekky1700
Saw the tweets this morning, a bit terrifying. Humanity always somehow
surprises me in its capacity for meaningless violence.

~~~
tokenizer
Sadly, they probably see the uber drivers as scabs. Even though that's like if
the Police went on strike, and started beating up employed security guards...

~~~
hapless
In this case, they ARE scabs.

~~~
tokenizer
How so? Are they Taxi drivers? Are Taxi drivers in Paris in a _Industrial_
Union or a Craft Union?

Do you feel like their violence against other citizens are justified?

------
Argorak
Protests and aggression are close friends in France.

For example, kidnapping the boss to prevent layoffs (or at least get better
severances) is something that happens regularly.

~~~
brohee
Except it's not really kidnapping, it's more like theater... A real kidnapping
(physically restraining anyone) would be handled by the RAID or GIGN.

Don't get me wrong, French unions are mostly wrong on about everything, but
violence against individuals is still a big no-no. Thankfully.

~~~
vdaniuk
How is it a no-no if the linked article provides a prime example of violence
by taxi union members?

~~~
brohee
vandalism != violence against an individual

AFAIK, no one was hurt. And the union status of the taxi drivers involved got
little to do with the case, pretty sure all taxi drivers, unionized or not,
feel the same about people that chose to do the same work as they do, without
respecting the same rules as they are.

~~~
vdaniuk
Learn your definitions, will you?

Violence is "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or
actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community,
which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury,
death, _psychological harm_ , maldevelopment, or deprivation.

------
icebraining
Previous discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7049545](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7049545)

------
kungfooguru
If they are on strike the Uber driver is a scab.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo70qkxzelA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo70qkxzelA)

~~~
theorique
One presumes that the Uber driver isn't part of their union.

Yes, he's in the same business, but radio cabs are a competing arm compared to
licensed taxis.

~~~
hapless
Not being a member of the union and working during a strike is the definition
of scabbing.

~~~
theorique
Ah, ok. What about if someone's in a business providing substitute goods or
services?

e.g. cafeteria workers are on strike, so the org orders pizza instead - are
the pizza makers and delivery people scabs? Or is that just a work-around?

~~~
kungfooguru
Yes, they are scabs and should decline to make and deliver pizzas.

~~~
theorique
What are the "rules" about this? I often see people arguing against scab labor
with real fervor, but how is this defined? And who decides where to draw the
line?

e.g. continuing with the cafeteria example, if people decide to go off campus
and purchase food at a different establishment, are those food workers then
considered scabs? Or is it only scab labor if it's hired as a temp replacement
by the company against whom the workers are on strike.

And back to the original example, what happens a person needs to get to the
airport, or to work? The challenge with substitute goods and services (e.g.
Uber or gypsy cabs or other app-based car services, in place of licensed cabs)
is that a monopoly gets marginalized and a strike is less effective. But
what's a person supposed to do who needs to be transported from A to B? Not
call Uber?

~~~
kungfooguru
It is a simple definition, a scab is a person who accepts work that undermines
the union. This can be refusing to join the union, accepting less pay or
crossing the picket line and working.

So a restaurant worker not refusing to feed a student off campus would not
undermine the shutdown of the on campus cafeteria. But any attempt to recreate
the cafeteria by the school, on or off campus, would.

You should do the best you can to do nothing that could undermine the strike.
A key is who do you complain about and complain to. If public transit workers
are on strike, which makes your commute worse, do you blame the workers or
complain to the management.

~~~
theorique
_If public transit workers are on strike, which makes your commute worse, do
you blame the workers or complain to the management._

In that case, I'd probably just call Uber. Or a cab. ;)

------
fiorix
Oh, they finally realized there are better alternatives for people and got
angry...

------
jarnix
Yes, I heard that the same thing happened to a driver from "Chauffeur Privé"
at the Orly airport. Wind mirror broken, nothing serious, but it's crazy how
the taxi drivers do not care about the situation and want to keep their
monopoly. The French company "Taxis G7" is a powerful lobby and they still
decide everything for every taxi driver in France. Instead of changing,
ugprading, offering new (and better !) service to their passengers, they try
to scare the new comers. And seriously, it would not be difficult to improve
the service in French cabs : remove the bad smell, remove the racist jokes,
shutdown the loud radio talking about the latest soccer game which not
everyone listens to, learn to say hello/thank you/goodbye, etc.

~~~
nolite
accept credit card payments..

------
linux_devil
I can't imagine the situation when driver-less cars will hit on the roads .

------
brg1007
Try to read the first paragraph in this article[1] to understand better how
technology improvements were handled in the past in France:

[1][http://www.economist.com/node/21524883](http://www.economist.com/node/21524883)

~~~
theorique
_It demanded that for each new computer, Le Monde should pay for one print
worker to type on the keyboard and another simultaneously to watch the screen.
It got its way._

This sounds like a joke made up by a Tea Partier about how unions cut
efficiency. I can hardly believe it.

------
mattyohe
Luddites.

------
dandare
Socialism at it's best.

~~~
legolandbridge
its* best. If you're gonna fight the stupidities of socialism, please
represent well.

------
caruber
While i condemn the violence, i have hard time justifying uber as a new
revolution or advancement of technology.

Medallion owners pay close to 1.0 M $ to get the Taxi license from the city
(NY) and they are not doing that for charity. If a new middlemen like Uber try
to take the market without paying single dime it is bound to cause issues who
have played by rules and invested significant money to acquire the license.

Uber simply tries to aggregate the demand side and demand concessions from the
supply side to get the leads. Portraying Uber as egalitarian is wrong in so
many levels.

~~~
Fomite
It's sad how often "Regulation and taxes are for other people" gets relabeled
as "Disruption". See: Uber, AirBnB

------
hapless
This is one of the reasons that people don't cross picket lines.

Good people won't cross them out of principle. The unprincipled among us may
encounter other obstacles. It is very likely this driver got his just deserts.

~~~
mikeash
> Good people won't cross them out of principle.

Can you explain why? I fully respect workers' right to unionize and strike,
but there's no reason _I_ should be bound by _their_ strike.

~~~
kungfooguru
Do you understand how strikes work? It is _gasp_ a form of DISRUPTION.
Solidarity with the strikes by not crossing the line improves their chances of
success.

~~~
mikeash
Why should I care about improving their chances of success?

~~~
kungfooguru
If you are a worker you should because improvements eventually expand to non-
striking workers in the same field and other fields and because they would do
the same for you if you needed support.

If you are a capitalist, you wouldn't.

~~~
mikeash
It's a big assumption that improvements eventually expand to others. Yes,
_some_ have in the past, but that doesn't mean they all do, or all will.

There's also a massive unstated assumption that there is an improvement at
all.

Surely if I happen to disagree with one or both of these assumptions, I can
cross a picket line without being a "bad person"?

~~~
hapless
If you cross a picket line, you have publicly cast your lot with a particular
class. Whether you are a bad person is in the eye of the beholder.

~~~
mikeash
You previously said that good people would avoid crossing a picket line out of
principle. Now you seem to be saying that the reason to avoid crossing a
picket line is because stupid people with a mob mentality might get the wrong
message.

~~~
hapless
I, personally, would consider you a bad person for crossing a picket line.
You, or some other person, might feel differently. Whether you accept my
assumptions, or the picketers' assumptions, doesn't determine how you will be
judged by others.

~~~
mikeash
Why would you consider me to be a bad person for crossing a picket line in
general?

~~~
kungfooguru
In general you are siding with capital. Assuming it isn't a police strike.

