Uber taxis

[Swift]

I'd like to know how services like uberx are such an improvement on taxis. Before long the honeymoon period of nicer pax only using it will pass before the riff raff start using it. What will the drivers do then?
Will uberx pay for an emergency button to be installed for driver safety?
Uberx are only for pre bookings. What about street hails?
Will taxis as we know them still expected to perform that role while work has been eroded by unlawful services?
If taxi type services undergo a revolution through defiance, this bodes poorly as a precedent to future reforms in other areas.
Sanctioning the breaking of regulations to affect change.
I hope governments are able to deal with this.

[user13548]

The taxi industry are going to loose the PR battle. Last night driving home, twice a cabbie stopped dead in front of me in the only traffic lane, once to let out a fare and once to try and get one. An oncoming cab did a U turn right in front of me. Three times heavy braking saved the day. There is an attitude of cabbies that the road rules don't apply to me. The majority of people in this city are private car drivers and it is their views on cabbies that will win the argument.
Bringing it back to bus transport, how many time have you seen a bus unable to move into the stop because a cab is using it.

[boronia]

But if the taxi hadn't stopped, perhaps the pasenger would have complained that the driver refused him.

Some time ago, I worked out that there were a set of special Road Rules for Taxi Drivers:

1. The "Keep Left unless overtaking" rule can be ignored provided the driver maintains a speed of at least 5 km/hr below the posted speed limit.
2. Taxis cruising for passengers must keep in the right hand lane at all times. When a passenger is sighted the taxi must veer suddenly to the left, with or without a signal, and pull up at 45 degrees to the kerb and block at least two lanes to protect the customer as he gets in.
3. Stopping at the kerb to set down passengers is not permitted, irregardless of how much space might be available. The driver must pull up alongside the nearest parked car to the drop off point even if there is only one such vehicle in the whole block.
4. #3 does not apply under "Clearway" or "No Stopping" conditions provided the driver takes at least five minutes to process the fare collection.
4. "No Stopping" also means that taxis may form a rank to wait for passengers.
5. Right/left turns must not be made from the right/left hand lane or other marked right/left turn lane.
6. At night, the right hand park and head lamps should be disconnected. (obviously so that passengers can distinguish approaching taxis from police cars which have similar lights on the roof).

These rules are obviously well promoted in the taxi schools, as there seems to be almost 100% compliance amongst drivers, even those of little English speaking ability. They may not get to learn where the QVB is, but apparently that is not important.

[Bus_fellow]

I'd like to know how services like uberx are such an improvement on taxis. Before long the honeymoon period of nicer pax only using it will pass before the riff raff start using it. What will the drivers do then?
Will uberx pay for an emergency button to be installed for driver safety?
Uberx are only for pre bookings. What about street hails?
Will taxis as we know them still expected to perform that role while work has been eroded by unlawful services?
If taxi type services undergo a revolution through defiance, this bodes poorly as a precedent to future reforms in other areas.
Sanctioning the breaking of regulations to affect change.
I hope governments are able to deal with this.

For me, the main advantages of UberX over taxis (leaving aside cheaper fares) are:
1. Faster response times for bookings
2. More personable drivers
3. More predictable fares and routes - google maps will pretty much show me the route the driver will take. And on the one occasion when I have asked an UberX driver to take an alternative route, no complaints or arguments.
4. Cleaner cars
5. Safer driving - I've never felt unsafe in an UberX.
6. More transparent and rigorous background checks, and more willingness to get rid of bad drivers.
7. Easy to use overseas, especially in somewhat sketchier countries where taxi drivers are some of the worst offenders in ripping off tourists.

And that's not even counting the advantages of booking a taxi through an app like Uber or GoCatch, which let's not forget was also illegal until the government legalised it last year. There are some big advantages here, not least of which are the ability to book through an app, see your car approaching, faster payment with no card surcharge, lower booking fees, emailed, itemised receipts, the ability to rate drivers and no anonymity.

I was a big user of GoCatch early on (again, while it was illegal because it wasn't an authorised network), and for me, UberX feels like a natural progression. I still prefer the GoCatch interface though, and I'd love it if they offered a ride sharing service in competition with UberX.

[Swift]

1. 2km fares included?
2. do you really give a fig that much as long as he or she isn't rude and hostile or do you expect an entertainer to drive you? That counts me out then. 8 years of taxi driving has made me misanthropic. Contact with Sydney people does that.
3. So I take it the fares are set in advance eh? Too bad for the driver if the trip takes twice as long as expected.
4. Cars with 10 years age limit that don't have to have equipment installed and (for now) better grade of passenger makes this easy.
5. How often do you get this snob taxi service?
6. Last point maybe but how do you know the first?
7. Wish I was a jetsetter like you. I might use a service like that whenever I travel overseas. Most Sydney taxi drivers are not that bad.
I am very very uncomfortable with the idea of rating drivers on your mobile phone. Having some hoops makes you think clearer.

I don't know why the government doesn't threaten imprisonment for uberx drivers if fines are rendered ineffectual by the parent company.

[Bus_fellow]

1. 2km fares included?
2. do you really give a fig that much as long as he or she isn't rude and hostile or do you expect an entertainer to drive you? That counts me out then. 8 years of taxi driving has made me misanthropic. Contact with Sydney people does that.
3. So I take it the fares are set in advance eh? Too bad for the driver if the trip takes twice as long as expected.
4. Cars with 10 years age limit that don't have to have equipment installed and (for now) better grade of passenger makes this easy.
5. How often do you get this snob taxi service?
6. Last point maybe but how do you know the first?
7. Wish I was a jetsetter like you. I might use a service like that whenever I travel overseas. Most Sydney taxi drivers are not that bad.
I am very very uncomfortable with the idea of rating drivers on your mobile phone. Having some hoops makes you think clearer.

I don't know why the government doesn't threaten imprisonment for uberx drivers if fines are rendered ineffectual by the parent company.

1. Yes. Last month I had to head home in a hurry one day, and got an UberX from a different train station to the one I normally use. The trip was 2.24km and cost $7.51 (which I know from the itemised receipt in my email), and it arrived about three minutes after I booked it.
2. All I'm looking for is for the driver not to be rude, sleazy, condescending or offensive. That isn't something I've found I can rely on from Sydney taxi drivers.
3. The fares are charged on a similar basis to taxis, with a flagfall and distance rate (though they are cheaper), so you don't know the exact fare in advance. The advantage with UberX is the fare estimator in the app, which is quite reliable because it is based on the route the app will tell the driver to take.
4. As a passenger, I don't really care about safety features for drivers, like duress alarms or cameras. By all means install them, but don't expect passengers to care about them or want to pay more for them. Cleanliness on the other hand is something that I am willing to pay more for. The fact that the taxi industry has traditionally prioritised drivers over passengers (and all other industry players over drivers) says a lot about why the industry needs a shake up, and why passengers are happy to flock to your competitors.
5. I've been in taxis that have been driven quite unsafely - things like running red lights, cutting off trucks/buses, stopping illegally too close to intersections and the like. Never had that experience in an UberX. Sure, I can only speak from personal experience, but my personal experience is what determines how I spend my money, which I'm sure is the case for most other people too.
6. Uber is quite upfront about the background checks that it does - a criminal records check and a driver history check. In comparison, it is quite unclear exactly what the requirements are to get a taxi driver authority in NSW, except that a person must:

Have satisfied Roads and Maritime Services that they:
- are of good repute and in all other respects a fit and proper person to be the driver of a taxi
- have sufficient responsibility to drive a taxi in accordance with law and custom.

.

7. I love being able to rate service providers. I already do it for hotels, restaurants, movies, websites, ISPs - so why not taxi drivers? To me, this is an extension of the informal arrangements many people have with particular taxi drivers, where they make a direct booking.

The reason the government doesn't imprison people for working for UberX is that there is no legal basis to do so. The actual offence being committed currently is breachings37 of the Passenger Transport Act 1990, for which the maximum penalty is a fine of 1000 penalty units (currently $110,000). To introduce custodial sentences, the government would need to amend the Act, and in this case, it is highly unlikely that they could convince the Parliament (or would even want to try to) that imprisoning people to protect a failing business model would be appropriate. Imprisoning people for commercial gain is the stuff of science fiction or the worst excesses of the industrial revolution - it isn't a reasonable response, which is why the law only provides for a financial penalty.

[BDAT]

Hi Guys you are missing the point here UberX is a multi national company trying to force its will upon the government in order to make a profit. The system is taking advantage of technologies now available. The problem is not how we perceive taxi drivers or their bad habits (we have all had our moments with them) but by enlarge they are pretty good. The current system is reasonable on the whole. I have no objections to UberX or others as long as it is a level playing field. The UberX drivers must hold the same authority as a taxi driver and meet the same requirements, the car must have public vehicle insurance same as a taxi. The employment and safety conditions must be as good or better than the current taxi requirements. The UberX company and others must be accredited the same as taxis companies. So as long as it is a level playing field for all then there can be no objections to UberX. however UberX does not at this point in time meet that test. When it does and the government of the people agrees and authorises the services offered then there is no argument against them go for it.

[Bus_fellow]

Cabcharge is also a multinational company that tries to impose its will on governments, resulting in much of the current structure of the taxi industry and the regulation that governs it (or at least, resulting in its failure to change with the times).

[Fleet Lists]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/n ... 7618881885

Uber given the green light in NSW under new deal

Under the move, costs will increase slightly for Uber drivers, with their cars required to undergo safety checks more frequently than regular vehicles, as well as the licence fees

CONTROVERSIAL cab service Uber will be legalised in NSW by the Baird government next month under sweeping reforms to the state’s taxi industry.

The Daily Telegraph can reveal that under the reforms, to be announced by Transport Minister Andrew Constance, Uber drivers will be required to pay a licence fee for the first time, while existing taxi owners will be offered compensation for losing exclusive control of the market.

Taxis will retain the sole right to “rank and hail” services under the new rules, while there will also be a crackdown on who is allowed to get behind the wheel of UberX vehicles and drivers with a criminal record will not be issued a licence.

Government sources described state regulation of Uber as “inevitable”, saying the service would have continued to operate under the radar had it not been legalised.

Under the move, costs will increase slightly for Uber drivers, with their cars required to undergo safety checks more frequently than regular vehicles, as well as the licence fees.

Meanwhile, the cost of getting into the taxi industry will be substantially reduced. At present, taxi plates can cost as much as $320,000 but the legalisation of Uber will see the value of the plates drop dramatically.


It is understood an independent review of the industry commissioned by the government found that taxi owners should not be left “stranded” and needed to be compensated for the drop in plate values.

The report, by former Cabinet Office director-general Gary Sturgess and former Sydney Water chair Tom Parry, did not nominate a specific amount of compensation or how it should be funded. Instead, that decision is expected to be made by Cabinet before the reforms are officially unveiled early next month.

It is understood an independent review of the industry commissioned by the government found that taxi owners should not be left “stranded” and needed to be compensated for the drop in plate values
“All the discussion is around the compensation and how to fund it,” one government source said.

Another added: “In some jurisdictions like Ireland there was no compensation at all; they set up a hardship fund.” The ACT became the first jurisdiction in Australia to legalise Uber in October.

Taxi Council chief executive Roy Wakelin-King said he wanted the government to ensure there was a “level playing field” in the industry.

“It’s not as simple as legalising Uber and everything else will be OK,” Mr Wakelin-King said.

The reform, and local government amalgamations, are the two big items left for the government to finish off the year, together with an announcement on Western Sydney light rail.

A spokesman for Mr Constance said the government had received the report from the Point to Point Taskforce and was considering its recommendations.

[boronia]

It is understood an independent review of the industry commissioned by the government found that taxi owners should not be left “stranded” and needed to be compensated for the drop in plate values
“All the discussion is around the compensation and how to fund it,” one government source said.

Perhaps Uber could fund it, from a licencing fee.

Buts lots of other businesses get devalued as a result of changing technologies, and don't get any compensation. Why should taxi owners be singled out?

[Fleet Lists]

http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/media-r ... sure-fares

A new transport economy: Consumer choice, competition and downward pressure on fares

Minister for Transport and Infrastructure Andrew Constance today announced from midnight tonight, consumers will have more choice, more competition for their business and experience downward pressure on fares with ride-sharing to become legal.

The landmark reforms put taxis and ride-sharing services such as Uber on a more even playing field and pave the way for thousands of new and cheaper service options for customers.

Mr Constance said with more people than ever buying goods and services on their smart phone – it’s time NSW updated its out-dated transport regulations to give customers the services they’re calling for.

“Customers, taxi and hire car operators, drivers and new entrants have all made clear they want change and today we are making it happen,” Mr Constance said.

Today’s changes comprise four main components:

Ride-sharing services will become legal, with a driver authority required in a transition period
The immediate repeal of more than 50 taxi and hire car regulations, expected to generate $30 million in benefits each year for the industry
Safety will be boosted, with a new regulator and Commissioner to oversee the industry
Establishment of a $250 million industry adjustment package for taxi and hire car licence plate owners

Under the new model, taxis will continue to have exclusive access to rank and hail jobs, but customers will have the choice to book taxis, hire cars or ride-sharing services on their smart phone, along with many other services yet to come to Australia.

“These reforms are expected to blow the doors of innovation wide open for ‘booked’ services, where customers can track their driver, provide direct feedback, hold them more accountable and choose from accessible price points,” Mr Constance said.

“All up the reform package equates to $30 million each year in reduced regulatory costs for the industry.

“By taking regulatory and cost pressure off the industry and unlocking more point to point services, we expect to create hundreds of new jobs over the next few years.”

The changes will be rolled out over two stages, including the establishment of a stand-alone regulator and Commissioner to crack down on customer safety and ensure the industry is abiding by the rules.

From midnight tonight, more than 50 pieces of red tape for taxi and hire car drivers will be repealed, creating a more level playing field in the point to point transport market.

“Safety measures are being maintained, to ensure we have strong and enforceable standards across drivers, vehicles and the companies providing the service,” Mr Constance said.

“Once Parliament resumes, I will introduce legislation to provide for the full reform package including a new regulator and Commissioner to hold all point to point services to account, with significant power and penalties.

“These include the ability to name and shame companies, seek court imposed fines of millions of dollars and in the worst case scenario a two year prison term for their company personnel.

“For the first time the buck will stop with the company making profit from the services – not just the driver.”

In recognition of the potential impact these changes will have on existing taxi and hire car licence holders, the NSW Government has set aside $250 million in a structural assistance fund to help licence owners adjust to the new regulatory framework.

“It’s important that we don’t forget those who have poured their savings into taxi licences over the past decades and ensure they get equitable assistance as this industry adjusts to changes in our economy,” Mr Constance said.

The cost of this reform package will be met from consolidated revenue, along with a temporary levy on all point to point transport providers, equivalent to $1 per trip for a maximum of five years. It will be up to service providers to decide whether or not they choose to pass on this cost to their customers. At the same time, costs for taxi and hire car operators are being reduced with lower license fees and other cost heavy regulations removed, equivalent to $30 million a year in red tape savings for the industry.

Today’s reforms are part of the NSW Government’s response to the Sturgess Point to Point Transport Report, which handed down its findings last month following more than 5,000 submissions from industry and the public.

For more information go to http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/pointtopoint

A new transport economy: Consumer choice, competition and downward pressure on fares
Point to point transport fact sheet 1
Point to point transport fact sheet 2
Point to point transport fact sheet 3
Point to point transport fact sheet 4

Also see http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/pointtopoint

[eddy]

Will it now be possible to have a 12 seater Uber bus on a car licence provide a door to door service for multiple passengers cheaper than a bus fare.

[boronia]

The cost of this reform package will be met from consolidated revenue, along with a temporary levy on all point to point transport providers, equivalent to $1 per trip for a maximum of five years. It will be up to service providers to decide whether or not they choose to pass on this cost to their customers.

So taxi owners will be paying a levy to compensate themselves?

[grog]

Will it now be possible to have a 12 seater Uber bus on a car licence provide a door to door service for multiple passengers cheaper than a bus fare.

While you would need to closely study the regulation, it may be possible. It would depend on definition of car in the regulation. If not 12 seater, then at least an 8 seaters minivan. Overseas Uber already have both UberXL (8 seaters) and UberPool (picking up multiple passengers along the way). It should be stressed that this is not an Uber regulation but a ride share regulation so any player is not free to get in to the business if they can meet the requirements. I'm not sure if this is the case but I suspect that ride share probably requires at app to track rides as part of safety regulations. (That is just a guess - haven't had time to look.)

[Swift]

The cost of this reform package will be met from consolidated revenue, along with a temporary levy on all point to point transport providers, equivalent to $1 per trip for a maximum of five years. It will be up to service providers to decide whether or not they choose to pass on this cost to their customers.

So taxi owners will be paying a levy to compensate themselves?

Isn't the answer contained in the last sentence?

[user13548]

So taxi owners will be paying a levy to compensate themselves?

So you don't think the owners will pass on the cost?
It will end up that the passenger (taxi and ride sharing) will pay to compensate the owners.

[eddy]

When overvalued milk runs finished I do not think they got any money so I do not see why taxi plate holders should get any as that is the risk with any investment.

Rather perhaps they should give free rego to minivan Uber drivers in place of subsidizing some inefficient bus runs.

[boronia]

Old taxis with cracked mirrors, torn upholstery, missing door panels and no air-conditioning will now pass inspection after the state government scrapped up to 50 regulations that put rundown cabs out of action.

The move is part of a suite of reforms announced by NSW Transport minister Andrew Constance last Thursday, the same day that ride-sharing service UberX was legalised.

The Point to Point reforms - designed to reduce red tape for the taxi and car hire industries - include an immediate repeal of 50 regulations, and reportedly scrapped the age limit imposed on cabs.

On Thursday Mr Constance said the reforms were designed to reshape the taxi and hire car industry, focus on safety and cut $30 million in regulatory costs for service providers each year.
Advertisement

"For the first time aspiring small business operators will be able to use their own private vehicle to enter the new transport economy and cater to local demand – providing they comply with the safety regulations we've enacted today," he said.

It is understood the changes were designed to allow taxi owners to determine the appearance of their cars and their appeal to customers as they compete with services like UberX.

Transport NSW did not respond to questions concerning the safety of the reforms on Wednesday night.

Taxi driver and motor mechanic John Vergotis was shocked to find the long ream of items deleted from the Authorised Taxi Inspection protocol, the checklist used to approve taxis for service.

"You can now have broken external mirrors, the air-con and interior lights don't have to work," Mr Vergotis said.

"You don't need safety screens, the seats can be torn, the floor coverings and interior door panels can be missing," he said.

"The first deleted item listed was the age limit of the vehicle, which used to be five years for [Sydney] city cars," Mr Vergotis said.

"I think that's a pretty poor rule. These cars start to fatigue pretty quickly with the huge amount of kilometres they clock up.

"You are going to have people run these cars until the doors are falling off," he said.

"People are going to run taxis into the ground and ruin the industry. Who's going to want to get into a car that's falling apart," he said.

The reforms package also stipulates 'rank and hail' jobs will remain the sole domain of taxis, a $250 million assistance package for license owners, and a new regulator that will hold companies accountable for the safety of their service.

The NSW Taxi Council responded to the reforms on Thursday saying they would have a profound effect on the industry and passengers.

The magnitude of these changes means there are significant implementation issues for consumers and industry participants.

The Council said it would continue to review the changes, "however there is concern about attempting to rush these changes through at the end of the calendar year," it said in a statement.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/old-taxis-wit ... z3v8v841hE
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook

[Frosty]

Old taxis with cracked mirrors, torn upholstery, missing door panels and no air-conditioning will now pass inspection after the state government scrapped up to 50 regulations that put rundown cabs out of action.

The move is part of a suite of reforms announced by NSW Transport minister Andrew Constance last Thursday, the same day that ride-sharing service UberX was legalised.

The Point to Point reforms - designed to reduce red tape for the taxi and car hire industries - include an immediate repeal of 50 regulations, and reportedly scrapped the age limit imposed on cabs.

On Thursday Mr Constance said the reforms were designed to reshape the taxi and hire car industry, focus on safety and cut $30 million in regulatory costs for service providers each year.
Advertisement

"For the first time aspiring small business operators will be able to use their own private vehicle to enter the new transport economy and cater to local demand – providing they comply with the safety regulations we've enacted today," he said.

It is understood the changes were designed to allow taxi owners to determine the appearance of their cars and their appeal to customers as they compete with services like UberX.

Transport NSW did not respond to questions concerning the safety of the reforms on Wednesday night.

Taxi driver and motor mechanic John Vergotis was shocked to find the long ream of items deleted from the Authorised Taxi Inspection protocol, the checklist used to approve taxis for service.

"You can now have broken external mirrors, the air-con and interior lights don't have to work," Mr Vergotis said.

"You don't need safety screens, the seats can be torn, the floor coverings and interior door panels can be missing," he said.

"The first deleted item listed was the age limit of the vehicle, which used to be five years for [Sydney] city cars," Mr Vergotis said.

"I think that's a pretty poor rule. These cars start to fatigue pretty quickly with the huge amount of kilometres they clock up.

"You are going to have people run these cars until the doors are falling off," he said.

"People are going to run taxis into the ground and ruin the industry. Who's going to want to get into a car that's falling apart," he said.

The reforms package also stipulates 'rank and hail' jobs will remain the sole domain of taxis, a $250 million assistance package for license owners, and a new regulator that will hold companies accountable for the safety of their service.

The NSW Taxi Council responded to the reforms on Thursday saying they would have a profound effect on the industry and passengers.

The magnitude of these changes means there are significant implementation issues for consumers and industry participants.

The Council said it would continue to review the changes, "however there is concern about attempting to rush these changes through at the end of the calendar year," it said in a statement.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/old-taxis-wit ... z3v8v841hE
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook

Goodbye Taxi Industry. The taxi industry has essentially lowered the bar. At this rate a old STA gassie might be better than some of these cabs. The taxi industry should be innovative, move forward and not go backwards. This industry of taxis needs to improve service that's what Uber has done in many people's view.

[Swift]

I wonder if the apparent repeal of the six year age limit could see one of these make a comeback as a taxi on our roads?


Looks like we will be going back to the good old days of older vehicles being used as taxis. Dropping the age limit will mean more flexible vehicle replacement of high kilometre taxis with less financial pressure.
We may see some roadworthy classics used as cabs. I hope among the 50 repealed rules, the blasted uniform requirements have been abolished.
In the late 1980s, there were many cars dating from the early 1970s being used as cabs and I was even told of a mid 60s AP5 Valiant in use as a cab back in 1985.
This is exciting stuff. I think most taxi owners will keep their cars under 10 years old with a few exceptions as it is in their own interests to run a reasonably modern and presentable vehicle. It will now be more affordable to replace the car more frequently.

[eddy]

And it is coming to trucks too
http://www.progresscouriers.com/uber-utes/
http://www.truckandbus.net.au/the-disru ... -trucking/

[Fleet Lists]

Uber does not seem to be doing as well in Germany http://techcrunch.com/2015/11/02/uber-r ... n-germany/

[eddy]

It seems to me the regulated cabs are no more expensive than Uber cabs there.

Perhaps it is because everybody is not putting their hand into the cab fare.

[Swift]

There has been media coverage on some very expensive trips . One from the city to Wilberforce cost a client over a grand and it could have been double that if the surge rate was higher!!
Here is a very good comment article I found regarding that $720 fare from Nth Sydney to Blacktown.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/comment- ... lyp8n.html

[boronia]

It seems the confusion about surcharge pricing notification has been the complaint with 7x factors being mentioned.

It is illegal for a restaurant to just put up notices on its menus, or signs inside, that "a 10% surcharge applies on Sundays or public holidays"; they must provide menus with the actual prices shown. I wonder if the same restrictions should be applied to Uber?