Uber to Resume in Calgary December 6 2016

[HotHotHeat]

Apparently Nenshi's now going to arrest 45 Uber drivers.

Calgary: You can do it anywhere but here.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Apparently Nenshi's now going to arrest 45 Uber drivers.

Calgary: You can do it anywhere but here.

The mayor can arrest people? This I gotta see...

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Apparently Nenshi's now going to arrest 45 Uber drivers.

Calgary: You can do it anywhere but here.

Edmonton failed in attempting the get the same injuction in April of this year, any reason Calgary will be more successful or is this just the city going through the motions they need to to cover their ass.

in related news

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...ange-1.3312035

The City of Calgary's taxi committee has green-lighted a change that would allow Uber and other ride-hailing services to operate legally in the city.

So although they appear to be moving towards allowing uber there is still the insurance concerns.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Some of them don't like taxi chits either. I had a full on argument with one in my driveway who first refused my taxi chit, than refused my visa card, and demanded cash. My wife came out and defused the situation by giving cash to the piece of thrash because our arguing woke her up. Had my wife not came out, I'm sure I would have ended up on the news the next day that I had assaulted a driver over the fare completely ignoring what had started it. I complained to our office manager that he refused the chit, and she was livid as they are personally responsible for getting you home after they have served you alcohol. She lodged a complaint, but it was pointless as they did nothing and basically said "Hey, you don't have to use our chits if you don't want to".

I dunno, that just seems crazy to me. If your company spends a lot on taxis exclusively on the company you're getting the chits from (which is generally the case in this city), you'd think they'd be responsive to those kinds of issues.

Also, in your situation, you're already home. I'd have just gotten out and gone inside, at that stage. He has your chit; he's been paid.

My work has happy hours once every couple of weeks and we get taxi chits on the regular. That's the only time I've had someone reject a chit, but routinely they tell you to "Put a large tip, your work is paying" and are not happy when you don't.

Also never experienced this, though I usually tip $2 on a fare that's less than $10.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

I find it funny that there's 46 pages of people sharing the ridiculous experiences they've had with cabs in Calgary, yet there's a couple of people here saying that these can't be happening as it's never happened to them.......

Yeah, there's 46 pages of lies with 3-4 posts of truth.... Give me a break.

I'm not accusing anyone of lying, I just find it strange that I've caught many cabs downtown late at night on a weekend and never experienced the problems that so many other people have had.

I wonder if it's an age discrimination thing? I never really took cabs during my young drunk days, only in my old drunk days. That's their mistake if they think I'm less belligerent in my 40s than I was in my 20s.

[para transit fellow]

So it appears that Airdrie is now concerned about how Uber fits in with their local taxi bylaw..

(To my knowledge, Cochrane and chestermere do not have taxi bylaws... uncertain about bylaws in Okotoks )

http://www.discoverairdrie.com/index...221&Itemid=176

"Airdrie's current Taxi Bylaw was implemented in April 2010 and requires taxis to have a business license while taxi drivers specifically need a chauffeur license to be able to operate in Airdrie. The chauffeur license encompasses that the driver disclose their driving record, criminal record, and state of health and prohibits any driver from acquiring a chauffeur license if convicted within 5 years of the application date. "

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by para transit fellow

So it appears that Airdrie is now concerned about how Uber fits in with their local taxi bylaw..

(To my knowledge, Cochrane and chestermere do not have taxi bylaws... uncertain about bylaws in Okotoks )

http://www.discoverairdrie.com/index...221&Itemid=176

"Airdrie's current Taxi Bylaw was implemented in April 2010 and requires taxis to have a business license while taxi drivers specifically need a chauffeur license to be able to operate in Airdrie. The chauffeur license encompasses that the driver disclose their driving record, criminal record, and state of health and prohibits any driver from acquiring a chauffeur license if convicted within 5 years of the application date. "

Won't Airdrie just thieve and parasite off of Calgary like they do everything else?

[Ducay]

Not sure how Airdrie Uber drivers will earn any money considering the highest fare, a trip to downtown Calgary, would only be 10 minutes and thus $13.00.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I dunno, that just seems crazy to me. If your company spends a lot on taxis exclusively on the company you're getting the chits from (which is generally the case in this city), you'd think they'd be responsive to those kinds of issues.

Also, in your situation, you're already home. I'd have just gotten out and gone inside, at that stage. He has your chit; he's been paid.

Also never experienced this, though I usually tip $2 on a fare that's less than $10.

What is my company going to do? There's only one company in Calgary that provides the taxi chits, and the company has to make them available because if they told someone just to expense it, they run the risk that someone says that wasn't what they were told or didn't have a credit card if they were to get into an accident or drive home impaired.

Taxi companies would prefer that people coming from work events paid for it themselves. Reason being that it takes them likely two months to get paid versus instantaneously when someone pays them directly. Taxi company sends the bill (takes about a month), company will not pay until 30 days of invoice date at the last second (or whatever the terms of payment are on those chits). As a result, taxi companies could care less about taxi chits and whether a company turfs them or not.

[Buster]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Some of them don't like taxi chits either. I had a full on argument with one in my driveway who first refused my taxi chit, than refused my visa card, and demanded cash. My wife came out and defused the situation by giving cash to the piece of thrash because our arguing woke her up. Had my wife not came out, I'm sure I would have ended up on the news the next day that I had assaulted a driver over the fare completely ignoring what had started it. I complained to our office manager that he refused the chit, and she was livid as they are personally responsible for getting you home after they have served you alcohol. She lodged a complaint, but it was pointless as they did nothing and basically said "Hey, you don't have to use our chits if you don't want to".

My work has happy hours once every couple of weeks and we get taxi chits on the regular. That's the only time I've had someone reject a chit, but routinely they tell you to "Put a large tip, your work is paying" and are not happy when you don't. Our office has a 15% max on taxi chits, and I have to explain otherwise.

And you didn't just get out and leave? I would have.

[Otto-matic]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Apparently Nenshi's now going to arrest 45 Uber drivers.

Calgary: You can do it anywhere but here.

The amount of corruption being exposed is astounding.

[V]

I miss ranty fourby. I feel like we don't get to see him often enough anymore.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Apparently Nenshi's now going to arrest 45 Uber drivers.

Calgary: You can do it anywhere but here.

I think the city's actions are actually helping Uber. The tone in the comments on the news articles has changed pretty drastically and not in the city's favor.

Id say that threatening to jail people unless they stop driving for Uber will turn out to be a huge mistake on the city's part. Both from a PR perspective for the mayors office and in achieving the exact opposite effect on support for Uber.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by V

I miss ranty fourby. I feel like we don't get to see him often enough anymore.

Hah. Sorry, I had to give up rage. I growled at a traffic struggler one day, and my daughter asked me about it. Her solution was that "those people should go live on another planet".

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by 4X4

my daughter asked me about it. Her solution was that "those people should go live on another planet".

Well she's not wrong...

[Amethyst]

Originally Posted by darklord700

Maybe I'm paranoid but I'll need to take one taxi/Uber trip to the airport for my Christmas trip next month.

Do you think taxi or Uber is the safer option? In that I mean the driver won't tip off people that our entire family will be out of town.

I knew someone who had this concern and she always had the taxi pick her up at a neighbour's instead of at her place. Of course, this doesn't help if you also don't trust your neighbours...

[para transit fellow]

It is not just the drivers collecting information.

Information from your booking request can be bought and sold for marketing purposes.

Does anybody remember uber and "rides of glory?"

http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/25/tech...r-prostitutes/

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Otto-matic

The amount of corruption being exposed is astounding.

The City targeting drivers that are illegally driving without valid insurance is corruption?

Assert your right to civil disobedience, sure. If driving for Uber is something you feel that strongly about, then (and I'm not being sarcastic, I am dead serious) take your stand and try to force change, but don't expect it's going to happen without people getting arrested and possibly jailed along the way.

This isn't the cheap CBC reboot of Dukes of Hazzard, though, ol' Boss Nenshi-Hogg isn't sitting around a backroom with his cronies and a gallon of hooch plottin' how he's gonna finally take down those Uber boys to protect his taxi racket. Come back to the real world, the whole conspiracy angle is ridiculous.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by jammies

The City targeting drivers that are illegally driving without valid insurance is corruption?

Assert your right to civil disobedience, sure. If driving for Uber is something you feel that strongly about, then (and I'm not being sarcastic, I am dead serious) take your stand and try to force change, but don't expect it's going to happen without people getting arrested and possibly jailed along the way.

This isn't the cheap CBC reboot of Dukes of Hazzard, though, ol' Boss Nenshi-Hogg isn't sitting around a backroom with his cronies and a gallon of hooch plottin' how he's gonna finally take down those Uber boys to protect his taxi racket. Come back to the real world, the whole conspiracy angle is ridiculous.

The problem is that if the city had something to backup arrests, they would be doing it already. If people get arrested, it will be for violating a court order.

The city hasn't been able to stop Uber, now they have decided to hold a proverbial gun to the heads of drivers. Tell them they will go to jail on a contempt charge and get a record unless they stop driving. Driving without a license and without insurance are things you get a ticket for, not jail time.

[Fuzz]

Ya, if the city didn't do something, I'd imagine the taxi industry would say, well screw the rules, Uber doesn't have to play by them. Then it'd be taxi-geddon out there.