Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Uber skirts city/state regs; you can't mess with the FDA, among other federal agencies (such as FAA).

And Uber was definitively better for consumers, inaccurate blood tests are better for nobody.

I guess you prefer the old way where taxi cabs had a virtual monopoly, and it was expensive as hell. Uber did the right thing by disrupting this market.

Theranos potentially could have been amazing for medicine, but more and more this looks like an epic disaster.

Unless you want a taxi cab with wheelchair access; Uber utterly fails that market.

The traditional cab companies (who have to cover that market by law) are quite right in crying foul, IMO.

No, the traditional cab companies do not have to cover this market by law. I am aware of only one cab company in the DFW area (Yellow) that offers wheelchair vans as an option. A quick search shows that there are plenty of cab companies around the US that do not have wheelchair capabilities at all.

Also, for the record, small cab companies were allies of Uber here in Dallas.

You are entirely mistaken. It is required my municipal and county code that taxicab companies in Dallas dispatch wheelchair accessible vehicles[0].

The extent to which it is enforced I have no idea but that would be up to consumers to make complaints to the regulatory body.

[0]: http://dallascityhall.com/departments/codecompliance/Pages/T...

The exact wording of the code:

"When a wheelchair accessible vehicle is requested, the operating authority must provide a wheelchair accessible vehicle, or cause one to be provided, without unreasonable delay."

Highlighted for emphasis. The cab company does not need to own or operate the vehicle. They just need to make sure the customer is provided with one at the same rate they would charge a customer who did not require one. This is not the same as what was originally stated above.

The level of hair-splitting you are engaging in is absurd.

Your exact statement was "No, the traditional cab companies do not have to cover this market by law."

That is simply false.

Uber isn't a taxi company, and wheelchair access is a very small percentage of customers. Also, Uber's 5-6 years old, give them a chance to fix that problem in the coming months/years before crying foul along with a bunch of monopolists like the taxi companies. They have done nothing for us, except sit on their monopolies. The number of times I was passed by open taxis on the street, or stuck waiting hours for a scheduled taxi makes me glad they are all going out of business.

I also disagree with things like "taxi medallions", I'm just saying that Uber throws out the baby with the bathwater.

Right now, there's a real risk they'll put legit taxi companies out of business, and then those people in wheelchairs who need transportation are simply screwed. But nobody at Uber cares, of course, because the company is run by complete jerks.

I know many friends and former Googlers who are now at Uber and can tell you that it's not run by complete jerks. The company and the employees take their commitments to the cities they operate in very seriously. There might have been issues pre-2015, but not anymore.

Also, you appear to be wrong about each taxi company requiring to support wheelchairs. As far as I can tell from my brief search, the ADA requires training, not supporting vehicles that allow wheelchairs.

ADA mandates "equivalent service" for transportation.

Most places in US ignore that.


> Sec. 37.103 Purchase or lease of new non-rail vehicles by private entities primarily engaged in the business of transporting people.

> (a) Application. This section applies to all acquisitions of new vehicles by private entities which are primarily engaged in the business of transporting people and whose operations affect commerce, in which a solicitation for the vehicle is made (except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section) after August 25, 1990.

> (c) Demand responsive systems. If the entity operates a demand responsive system, and purchases or leases a new vehicle other than an automobile, a van with a seating capacity of less than eight persons (including the driver), or an over-the-road bus, it shall ensure that the vehicle is readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, including individuals who use wheelchairs, unless the system, when viewed in its entirety, meets the standard for equivalent service of Sec. 37.105 of this part.

As far as I can tell, the taxi drivers need to take people with wheelchairs, as long as you can fold up the wheelchair and it fits in the car. They aren't allowed to tell them to wait for another car if the car they have can accommodate them. But besides training, the ADA doesn't mandate that companies have wheelchair-lifting vehicles, from my searching.

> Uber isn't a taxi company

In what sense?

In the sense that it is not charging monopoly rents on taxi medallions.

Plenty of cities don't have the medallion system.

> Uber isn't a taxi company

That's funny. You must work for Uber PR.

> and wheelchair access is a very small percentage of customers.

Well in that case, fuck 'em. And fuck the ADA too.

Please don't post uncivil, unsubstantive comments. If you'd like to make a thoughtful criticism, that's fine, but dismissive snark is destructive here.



You should probably look up what the ADA requires taxi companies to do.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact