Uber to Resume in Calgary December 6 2016

[para transit fellow]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Do you make sure when you get in a taxi they are fully licensed, registered and following all laws and bylaws?

No, so all this I hope uber follows the rules is just BS. At the end of the day, people just want a ride home. That's all this is about.

One thing about Calgary taxi regs is that they has peace officers checking up on the taxis for those very same items.

Does Ubers follow up their contractors in a similar manner?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by para transit fellow

Wow.. Why have any regs at all?

Because insurance requirements and safe vehicles are important. Whereas I don't see background checks and class 4 licences as necessary I'd be willing to debate the points of what good regulation looks like but their shouldn't be too much but also shouldn't be too little.

If I was adding one more item it would be minimum price to ensure roughly minimum wage for drivers driving 5 year old vehicles but until we see the long term affects I don't think we need to distort the market yet.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by adc

What stats are these? Have they been posted yet?

Also, maybe, although I doubt it, it reduces drinking and driving but that is done but cutting corners elsewhere.

So why are we making one area more unsafe to make a much smaller area safer?

How is uber making things less safe

You would need to demonstrate that the things they don't do cause harm to third parties. And I don't think there is anything conclusive on that yet.

[Addick]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

The biggest challenge and the biggest area that will be exploited, is making it too cost effective for people to do this part time or for the lower Uber rates. If someone wanting to drive for Uber is looking at $10,000 in costs, no one will do it since you probably won't break even.

People are upset at the City for protecting the livelihood of individuals and parties who have invested in Taxi Plates at the expense of road safety at night yet it is okay to reduce road safety to make things feasible for Uber?

Maybe both parties need to improve their game.

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Most people understand that Uber needs to follow some regulations. The reason city hall is getting roasted over this issue is that it has taken them this long to reform and fix the taxi system. They should have fundamentally re-structured the system years ago, instead of waiting until there was a gun to their head. Now they're paying a political price for years and years of foot-dragging. They get no sympathy from me.

Spot on.

[Canehdianman]

I don't know about you guys but I won't accept a ride from a friend unless they provide proof of commercial insurance and a class 4 license.

Seriously though, I think the best solution to this is for insurance companies to offer a reasonably priced rider for Uber drivers. I'm sure they are all on it.

[adc]

Originally Posted by GGG

How is uber making things less safe

You would need to demonstrate that the things they don't do cause harm to third parties. And I don't think there is anything conclusive on that yet.

Uninsured drivers, unregulated drivers, unregulated vehicles on the road.

There are reasons why all 3 are requirements for taxi's and commercial vehicles on the road and they are 3 areas Uber ignores completely.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by adc

Uninsured drivers, unregulated drivers, unregulated vehicles on the road.

There are reasons why all 3 are requirements for taxi's and commercial vehicles on the road and they are 3 areas Uber ignores completely.

Again how are these things making it less safe. You should have uninsured motorist protection on your vehicle. Uber covers 2nd and 3rd party liability so only the driver of the uber is at risk on the insurance side. I do agree that uber needs to fix the insurance side for the protection of the drivers but the public is still protected.

So you would need to demonstrate for the other items how class 4 licences, vulnerable sector checks and safety inspections decrease road safety when all other vehicles on the road don't have these requirements.

[adc]

I don't trust that Uber covers 2nd or 3rd party liability at all. They have shown in the past they are a shady company worried only about money to themselves so I would expect more likely than not they would not pay out.

The reason that commercial drivers need more regulations is because they are different than other drivers. Other vehicles on the road don't need them because they are not doing the same activities as a commercial driver is.

[transplant99]

I just got home from travelling around the city and let me tell you, there is no question the roads are now safer without all those UBER vehicles out there...no doubt about it.

What a load of BS the city is selling and many here are apparently buying.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by Addick

People are upset at the City for protecting the livelihood of individuals and parties who have invested in Taxi Plates at the expense of road safety at night yet it is okay to reduce road safety to make things feasible for Uber?

The city protecting the investment of a few individuals is whole other mess. The main concern of city hall should be to provide the most options for their constituents, not making sure that a taxi plate retains its value by limiting supply at the detriment of consumers.

If this means getting rid of taxi plates and only having a set of overall rules for hired cars, its not the city's problem if the value of a taxi plate plummets. Legislation changing and devaluing your investment is always a risk, one that is carried by the investor.

As far as safety goes, get rid of private license testing and have a mandated inspection every second year or something. There are a lot of ####boxes on the road and making Uber or commercial vehicles get an inspection doesn't get the really bad stuff off the road.

[Amethyst]

Originally Posted by GGG

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/business...licy-1.3218872

It appears uber has been working on the issue to close the gap. Not sure what more they could be doing on it.

Wait until they have the product, IMO. I'm glad they're working on it, and once it comes to fruition, a lot of my objections to Uber will be gone.

I don't have a problem with an "Uber" existing. I have a problem with them operating before these things are taken care of. If there was a version of Uber that had proper insurance and didn't try to fudge things to claim that regulations don't apply to them (ride-sharing is when I give my friend a ride somewhere, not when I use an app to have a stranger pick me up, drive me where I say, and pay them), I would be 100% behind it.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by adc

I don't trust that Uber covers 2nd or 3rd party liability at all. They have shown in the past they are a shady company worried only about money to themselves so I would expect more likely than not they would not pay out.

The reason that commercial drivers need more regulations is because they are different than other drivers. Other vehicles on the road don't need them because they are not doing the same activities as a commercial driver is.

Name them.

What activities are UBER drivers doing that others are not?

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Name them.

What activities are UBER drivers doing that others are not?

The argument people use to support that is that Uber drivers drive more km and in unknown areas.

But at the same time, we don't hear an uproar or the city organizing covert operations over the hundreds of delivery drivers who do the exact same thing.

[Amethyst]

Originally Posted by GGG

Because insurance requirements and safe vehicles are important. Whereas I don't see background checks and class 4 licences as necessary I'd be willing to debate the points of what good regulation looks like but their shouldn't be too much but also shouldn't be too little.

If I was adding one more item it would be minimum price to ensure roughly minimum wage for drivers driving 5 year old vehicles but until we see the long term affects I don't think we need to distort the market yet.

A class 4 license comes with a medical requirement. I want the vehicle I'm riding in to be safe, but I also want the driver to be safe (i.e. not have a medical condition). Same thing for the background check - I don't want to be alone in a car with someone who is a criminal. Yes, the Uber app could track things, but I'd rather prevent something from happening, than knowing who did it afterwards.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Amethyst

A class 4 license comes with a medical requirement. I want the vehicle I'm riding in to be safe, but I also want the driver to be safe (i.e. not have a medical condition). Same thing for the background check - I don't want to be alone in a car with someone who is a criminal. Yes, the Uber app could track things, but I'd rather prevent something from happening, than knowing who did it afterwards.

In that case, you should want every driver of any vehicle in any class to take a medical...cause...you know...safety.

Its a hollow argument at best when you apply it to a regular car level. Yes we all want tanker truck drivers to avoid a heart attack while hauling thousands of litres of flammables. And same with cement trucks, dump trucks etc.

But getting a taxi driver to get a medical doesn't help anyone but the government coffers as there are literally hundreds of thousands of other drivers on the road that are not required to do the same....who are all driving exact same vehicles.

the city is hiding behind the veil of safety in their PR war against UBER, but the bottom line has nothing to do with keeping us safe. Its always about the money and this is no different.

[Amethyst]

Originally Posted by transplant99

In that case, you should want every driver of any vehicle in any class to take a medical...cause...you know...safety.

I want everyone who is driving me, who I don't know, to get a medical. With my friends, I usually have an idea about them to begin with.

No, it won't avoid every possible scenario, but it will reduce my risk. Besides, a driver's medical is $100, every 5 years. If that's the thing that makes driving for Uber impossible, it was never a good job to begin with.

[Amethyst]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Well I'd say there's a material difference between what a doctor does and what the livery business does though so it's not really a fair example.

They could both kill you if they do something wrong.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

The argument people use to support that is that Uber drivers drive more km and in unknown areas.

But at the same time, we don't hear an uproar or the city organizing covert operations over the hundreds of delivery drivers who do the exact same thing.

Nobody (the City) doesn't seem to care about courier companies hiring anybody with a car. Nobody checks to see if they got themselves commercial insurance. And how about tradesmen that drive their truck all over the city, full of tools and pulling a trailer? Half of those guys don't have the proper insurance.

It is abundantly clear that the City is protecting the taxis yet again. These issues that they're citing should certainly be addressed, but it's just so pathetic that they really only bother to enforce it in this instance.

Originally Posted by Amethyst

A class 4 license comes with a medical requirement. I want the vehicle I'm riding in to be safe, but I also want the driver to be safe (i.e. not have a medical condition). Same thing for the background check - I don't want to be alone in a car with someone who is a criminal. Yes, the Uber app could track things, but I'd rather prevent something from happening, than knowing who did it afterwards.

Have you ever driven the streets here? You know how BMW drivers have this reputation for driving like dbags? Well so do taxis. Not all, of course, but for "professional drivers" they sure seem to stick out like a sore thumb. Sometimes it looks like they're having strokes while driving, TBQH. And as for criminals, you mean like that cabbie that got arrested last year for taking a woman to a dark alley? Didn't it take a couple days to pin down whodunit? I doubt the police would have any more trouble following the info path Uber leaves.



But you know, it's true. Uber needs to "follow the rules". The problem is that these rules need to be defined. The fact that it's taken so long is such BS. That is the reason people like me are advocating for these guys, and are a-ok with them breaking the law. I'm sick of it, and so are lots of other people. We need a taxi revolution in this town lol. Seriously.

And I really am disappointed with Nenshi and City Hall on this issue. The guy already lost my vote taking forever with the secondary suites, but this issue has guaranteed that he never gets it back. So much for the younger, forward thinking guy that was supposed to be different than career politicians. Turns out that the ones contributing to his campaigns hold the cards. Just like all the other politicians.

[adc]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Name them.

What activities are UBER drivers doing that others are not?

Driving for money and on the road more than they would be as non-Uber drivers.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Amethyst

I want everyone who is driving me, who I don't know, to get a medical. With my friends, I usually have an idea about them to begin with.

No, it won't avoid every possible scenario, but it will reduce my risk. Besides, a driver's medical is $100, every 5 years. If that's the thing that makes driving for Uber impossible, it was never a good job to begin with.

Fair enough. In that case then you have taxi drivers who are required to do such. so you have zero worries.

I am not worried about such, so is it OK if I want to use UBER without needing medical clearance for the driver?

That way you get what you want and I get what I want and everybody is happy...right?

Well everybody but the corrupt politicians protecting the existing cartel, but truth is, I don't give a flying frick about them making their money off this.