Uber decision

[CropleyWasGod]

Calling all cab drivers.

What's your thoughts on today's decision about Uber drivers?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37802386

[BroxburnHibee]

They've already appealed.

They can't afford this precedent so if they lose the appeal I can see them ditching the UK as being liable for their drivers would wreck their business plan.

That being said they're awash with cash so we'll see how the appeal goes.

[Pete]

A victory for workers and one in the eye for this disgusting "sharing" economy that is taking us backwards.

Über are filth and no doubt they will appeal (and probably win) as they have all that cash from Goldman Sachs, google and the Saudi Arabian government. Yes folks, that's where 25% of your fare goes, right into their pocket.

I wonder what it will mean for the local Edinburgh minicab companies. Right now they fall into the same category.

[lord bunberry]

A victory for workers and one in the eye for this disgusting "sharing" economy that is taking us backwards.

Über are filth and no doubt they will appeal (and probably win) as they have all that cash from Goldman Sachs, google and the Saudi Arabian government. Yes folks, that's where 25% of your fare goes, right into their pocket.

I wonder what it will mean for the local Edinburgh minicab companies. Right now they fall into the same category.
I agree with your first few points, but I'm not sure about your last one. I think the issue with uber is that they're claiming they're not a cab company. Private hire firms in Edinburgh are not making those claims.
I would also echo what you said about uber, utter filth that take advantage of the people that work for them and put zero money back into the local economy. Thankfully they haven't managed to get much of a foothold up here, but in London they're causing chaos.

[Killiehibbie]

If Uber lose the appeal they stop operating. On a similar theme I would love to see somebody get parcel delivery firms into court and force them to employ their so called subcontract drivers.

[hibs#1]

If Uber lose the appeal they stop operating. On a similar theme I would love to see somebody get parcel delivery firms into court and force them to employ their so called subcontract drivers.

Can I ask why?

[Pete]

I agree with your first few points, but I'm not sure about your last one. I think the issue with uber is that they're claiming they're not a cab company. Private hire firms in Edinburgh are not making those claims.
I would also echo what you said about uber, utter filth that take advantage of the people that work for them and put zero money back into the local economy. Thankfully they haven't managed to get much of a foothold up here, but in London they're causing chaos.

I might be wrong but is it not more to do with the status of the driver? They successfully argued that uber control what they do and how much they get paid so is it not the same for those who drive for all the 7's etc...? Unlike the blacks, they are basically bound to their radio company.

The campaign from Uber should be a laugh. No doubt we'll be getting petitions telling everyone that this ruling is hurting innovation and denying people choices. No doubt 100,000 libertarians, thickos and yahs will sign it because they've been convinced that giving workers basic rights is a bad thing. :rolleyes:

[Killiehibbie]

Can I ask why?Because the guys doing parcel deliveries are self employed in name only.

[CropleyWasGod]

Interesting points so far.

2 things come to mind:-

1. I heard an Uber driver bemoaning the decision. It was the usual stuff about self-employment being better than employment. I wonder how representative he is of the overall workforce, or if the Union have a better handle on the general attitudes.

2. The union have said that there may be implications for the courier drivers now. HMRC normally treat each case on its individual merits....there is no acid test for employment vs self employment ...unless there are Court decisions like this. I always did wonder why HMRC viewed couriers the way they do, and presumed that they were in that half-world, along with hairdressers. This decision might harden their attitude.





Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Killiehibbie]

Interesting points so far.

2 things come to mind:-

1. I heard an Uber driver bemoaning the decision. It was the usual stuff about self-employment being better than employment. I wonder how representative he is of the overall workforce, or if the Union have a better handle on the general attitudes.

2. The union have said that there may be implications for the courier drivers now. HMRC normally treat each case on its individual merits....there is no acid test for employment vs self employment ...unless there are Court decisions like this. I always did wonder why HMRC viewed couriers the way they do, and presumed that they were in that half-world, along with hairdressers. This decision might harden their attitude.





Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk The guys I know that work for UK Mail would welcome being employed, I covered for one of them recently for his first week off in over 2 years.

[CropleyWasGod]

The guys I know that work for UK Mail would welcome being employed, I covered for one of them recently for his first week off in over 2 years.
1. The fact that he can provide cover is a sign to HMRC that he is providing a contract for services....ie that he's self employed.

2. That he hasn't had any breaks suggests to me that UK Mail demand when he works. That's a sign that he's employed....it's a contract OF service.

See what I mean about no definitive test? [emoji48]

IMO, the "employer " can't have it both ways. Making demands on when the work is done, whilst saving on holiday pay, pensions and National Insurance.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Killiehibbie]

1. The fact that he can provide cover is a sign to HMRC that he is providing a contract for services....ie that he's self employed.

2. That he hasn't had any breaks suggests to me that UK Mail demand when he works. That's a sign that he's employed....it's a contract OF service.

See what I mean about no definitive test? [emoji48]

IMO, the "employer " can't have it both ways. Making demands on when the work is done, whilst saving on holiday pay, pensions and National Insurance.

Sent from my SM-A510F using TapatalkIf I wasn't available it would cost him far more than he makes for UK Mail to bring in a courier company to cover his run. UK Mail plan your whole day with timed deliveries and don't allow you to pick up other companies work, so you are employed and should be entitled to employee benefits.

[lord bunberry]

I might be wrong but is it not more to do with the status of the driver? They successfully argued that uber control what they do and how much they get paid so is it not the same for those who drive for all the 7's etc...? Unlike the blacks, they are basically bound to their radio company.

The campaign from Uber should be a laugh. No doubt we'll be getting petitions telling everyone that this ruling is hurting innovation and denying people choices. No doubt 100,000 libertarians, thickos and yahs will sign it because they've been convinced that giving workers basic rights is a bad thing. :rolleyes:
You could be right on your first point, I'm not really sure if the 2 points were linked. They're claiming their drivers are self employed, but they claim to not being in the business that the people who work for them are self employed as.
Theres no doubt in my mind that uber is nothing to do with sharing and everything to do with making money and screwing over anyone to make it. The fact that google is so keen to develop the driverless car tells you what it thinks of the people it currently signs up to drive for them.

[Pete]

You could be right on your first point, I'm not really sure if the 2 points were linked. They're claiming their drivers are self employed, but they claim to not being in the business that the people who work for them are self employed as.
Theres no doubt in my mind that uber is nothing to do with sharing and everything to do with making money and screwing over anyone to make it. The fact that google is so keen to develop the driverless car tells you what it thinks of the people it currently signs up to drive for them.

It also doesn't help that Travis Kalinick has one of those faces that you would just never tire of punching.

[CropleyWasGod]

You could be right on your first point, I'm not really sure if the 2 points were linked. They're claiming their drivers are self employed, but they claim to not being in the business that the people who work for them are self employed as.
Theres no doubt in my mind that uber is nothing to do with sharing and everything to do with making money and screwing over anyone to make it. The fact that google is so keen to develop the driverless car tells you what it thinks of the people it currently signs up to drive for them.
What are they claiming they are? An agent or something?

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[lord bunberry]

What are they claiming they are? An agent or something?

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
Along those lines. They are claiming that the contract is between the driver and the customer and that all they are doing is providing software. That would be fine if they weren't for imposing conditions on the use of the software.

[lord bunberry]

It also doesn't help that Travis Kalinick has one of those faces that you would just never tire of punching.
That's true.

[CropleyWasGod]

Along those lines. They are claiming that the contract is between the driver and the customer and that all they are doing is providing software. That would be fine if they weren't for imposing conditions on the use of the software.
OK cheers.

What are the (presumably restrictive) conditions?

And......is there a parallel with the radio fees relationship that black cabbies have with Central or Citycabs?

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[greenlex]

Playing devils advocate here. Are they not just supplying the software and opportunity? As I understand it the drivers decide when they work. There is no one asking them why they didn't work Sat night. Don't they just go on line and say they are available whenever it suits the driver and if they go. Doesn't sound like employment to me

[lord bunberry]

OK cheers.

What are the (presumably restrictive) conditions?

And......is there a parallel with the radio fees relationship that black cabbies have with Central or Citycabs?

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
I'm only going by what I've been told on the conditions, but the obvious ones are that they must have a certain type of vehicle, they need to take an uber training course, there are penalties if they refuse to do a job that has been sent, they have no say in the price of the job, they are paid at the end of the week from uber minus the 25% cut and they can't work for another private hire company.
There isn't really a comparison between uber and a traditional taxi firm as a taxi can pick up work that isn't sent from the radio company. The comparison is more with private hire companies, they are in some ways similar to uber, the only difference is that the driver has a degree of control over what he charges and can negotiate a price with the customer. The driver is also paid in most cases directly by the customer.
When I had my taxi with city cabs I paid them a monthly fee, they then subtracted the amount of account work from that total and depending on how much account work had been done, I either paid them or they paid me. The chip and pin terminal was in my name and that money was paid into my account by the provider of the terminal.
Its hard to say how this ruling will effect traditional taxi and private hire firms, but it will no doubt have some sort of impact.
The thing with the traditional taxi firms is that they can argue that all the people driving with them could continue to do the job without them and aren't forcing people to make a choice.

[lord bunberry]

Playing devils advocate here. Are they not just supplying the software and opportunity? As I understand it the drivers decide when they work. There is no one asking them why they didn't work Sat night. Don't they just go on line and say they are available whenever it suits the driver and if they go. Doesn't sound like employment to me
If that's all they were doing then that would be fine.

[johnbc70]

Playing devils advocate here. Are they not just supplying the software and opportunity? As I understand it the drivers decide when they work. There is no one asking them why they didn't work Sat night. Don't they just go on line and say they are available whenever it suits the driver and if they go. Doesn't sound like employment to me
I saw an Uber driver saying he felt he was employing Uber as he paid them to find him customers.

[CropleyWasGod]

I'm only going by what I've been told on the conditions, but the obvious ones are that they must have a certain type of vehicle, they need to take an uber training course, there are penalties if they refuse to do a job that has been sent, they have no say in the price of the job, they are paid at the end of the week from uber minus the 25% cut and they can't work for another private hire company.
There isn't really a comparison between uber and a traditional taxi firm as a taxi can pick up work that isn't sent from the radio company. The comparison is more with private hire companies, they are in some ways similar to uber, the only difference is that the driver has a degree of control over what he charges and can negotiate a price with the customer. The driver is also paid in most cases directly by the customer.
When I had my taxi with city cabs I paid them a monthly fee, they then subtracted the amount of account work from that total and depending on how much account work had been done, I either paid them or they paid me. The chip and pin terminal was in my name and that money was paid into my account by the provider of the terminal.
Its hard to say how this ruling will effect traditional taxi and private hire firms, but it will no doubt have some sort of impact.
The thing with the traditional taxi firms is that they can argue that all the people driving with them could continue to do the job without them and aren't forcing people to make a choice.
Cheers. Much clearer now.

I don't think black cabbies have much to worry about. The fact that they can pick up anywhere, and can refuse the radio jobs, is a sure sign of self-employment IMO. I can't see HMRC getting excited about them.

Besides....cabbies moan enough anyways. Can you imagine what they'd be like if their self employment was taken away?? [emoji48] [emoji48] [emoji48]

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[lord bunberry]

Cheers. Much clearer now.

I don't think black cabbies have much to worry about. The fact that they can pick up anywhere, and can refuse the radio jobs, is a sure sign of self-employment IMO. I can't see HMRC getting excited about them.

Besides....cabbies moan enough anyways. Can you imagine what they'd be like if their self employment was taken away?? [emoji48] [emoji48] [emoji48]

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
Us cabbies never moan, we just get the head down and get on with things :greengrin

[Colr]

Us cabbies never moan, we just get the head down and get on with things :greengrin

Can afford to turn down a fare from Lily Allen!!

[speedy_gonzales]

Can afford to turn down a fare from Lily Allen!!
Allegedly,,,, LTDA looking for confirmation and for TFL to deal with the driver accordingly. Lilly Allen then goes on about victim blaming,,,,,who exactly is the victim here. Millionaire pop star or adolescent Syrian refugees?

[NYHibby]

Cheers. Much clearer now.

I don't think black cabbies have much to worry about. The fact that they can pick up anywhere, and can refuse the radio jobs, is a sure sign of self-employment IMO. I can't see HMRC getting excited about them.

Besides....cabbies moan enough anyways. Can you imagine what they'd be like if their self employment was taken away?? [emoji48] [emoji48] [emoji48]

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

If I was a cabbie under 60, what I would be worried about would be self driving cars. In about 10 years or so, the technology should be advanced enough that almost all taxi drivers will start to be replaced.

Becoming a professional driver of any kind today is a bit like deciding to become a miner in the middle 70s.

[Colr]

Allegedly,,,, LTDA looking for confirmation and for TFL to deal with the driver accordingly. Lilly Allen then goes on about victim blaming,,,,,who exactly is the victim here. Millionaire pop star or adolescent Syrian refugees?

Black hacks aren't allowed to turn fares down. Doesn't stop them.

Of course, night tubes must be affecting their business.

[RyeSloan]

If I was a cabbie under 60, what I would be worried about would be self driving cars. In about 10 years or so, the technology should be advanced enough that almost all taxi drivers will start to be replaced.

Becoming a professional driver of any kind today is a bit like deciding to become a miner in the middle 70s.

At least partially I think you are correct. It will be incremental at first but it will come. And for all the ire aimed at Uber and the likes its these companies that are driving the technological change and there is billions of dollars that's says they will achieve it.

I'm still struggling to imagine any self driving car managing to negotiate Edinburgh city centre road works just now though!

[Scouse Hibee]

If I was a cabbie under 60, what I would be worried about would be self driving cars. In about 10 years or so, the technology should be advanced enough that almost all taxi drivers will start to be replaced.

Becoming a professional driver of any kind today is a bit like deciding to become a miner in the middle 70s.

No chance it will start to happen in 10 years time.

[lord bunberry]

No chance it will start to happen in 10 years time.
Agreed, it's 20-30 years way if it happens at all. It will take at least 10 years of it becoming a normal occurrence before people trust the technology.

[lord bunberry]

Black hacks aren't allowed to turn fares down. Doesn't stop them.

Of course, night tubes must be affecting their business.
That's not true, I can turn down a fare if I think the fare is going to be problematic to me.

[Pete]

At least partially I think you are correct. It will be incremental at first but it will come. And for all the ire aimed at Uber and the likes its these companies that are driving the technological change and there is billions of dollars that's says they will achieve it.

I'm still struggling to imagine any self driving car managing to negotiate Edinburgh city centre road works just now though!

These companies are indeed driving this change but to who's benefit? The only thing driverless cars will do is eliminate costs (the wage of the driver) for the big businesses that own them. They go at exactly the same speed, maybe even slower, and they would still have to have insurance as no technology is risk free.

If it eventually happens, it will totally dwarve any situation any Luddite was involved in. In a society where it's all corporations who are only interested in getting their cost down and only really answerable to their shareholders, what will replace the estimated 10 million driving jobs in the UK?

I'm not sure companies like Google or Uber will give a crap about that.

[JON6207]

Agreed, it's 20-30 years way if it happens at all. It will take at least 10 years of it becoming a normal occurrence before people trust the technology.

Wouldnt say its that far away. I work in the Material handling industry and we already have lots of differnt types of automated forklifts replacing drivers just now, I would say if you are leaving full time education soon choose wisely on a career as lots will be getting replaced with automation soon.

[JON6207]

Also would just like to chip in and say have used uber loads in the US and Australia and cant fault the service usually grab an uber now before getting taxi or private hire

[Pete]

Also would just like to chip in and say have used uber loads in the US and Australia and cant fault the service usually grab an uber now before getting taxi or private hire

Who do you grab when they are surging their prices? Probably a private hire or a taxi as you have a choice.

Maybe you're well off enough not to care when that choice is eliminated.

[JON6207]

Generally im in the pub when I get one so I just get the app to notify me when the surge ends and grab another pint 😁

[Pete]

Generally im in the pub when I get one so I just get the app to notify me when the surge ends and grab another pint 😁

This is the sort of attitude and depth of thinking that allows **** like uber to thrive.

It won't be long until all that's left at the end of your pint is a fare that's actually higher than a black cab would have been. I can't speak for you but people will be screaming out for the regulations to come back once they are done away with. 25% of all your previous fares have went to the hedge funds and the lobbyists who insist on free market capitalism in it's most brutal form so I suppose you've no right to complain.

[Beefster]

This is the sort of attitude and depth of thinking that allows **** like uber to thrive.

It won't be long until all that's left at the end of your pint is a fare that's actually higher than a black cab would have been. I can't speak for you but people will be screaming out for the regulations to come back once they are done away with. 25% of all your previous fares have went to the hedge funds and the lobbyists who insist on free market capitalism in it's most brutal form so I suppose you've no right to complain.

Personally, you're overthinking it. IMHO the general public just want a cheap and hassle-free way to get from A to B. Black cab drivers might not like it but Uber and their drivers generally provide that. There is competition is every industry so it's not unique here. Whether you work in a shop, develop software or sell pensions, we all have to deal with it.

Do you rail against all companies (and their customers) owned by hedge funds and lobbyists(?) because there are an awful lot of them?

[JON6207]

Personally, you're overthinking it. IMHO the general public just want a cheap and hassle-free way to get from A to B. Black cab drivers might not like it but Uber and their drivers generally provide that. There is competition is every industry so it's not unique here. Whether you work in a shop, develop software or sell pensions, we all have to deal with it.

Do you rail against all companies (and their customers) owned by hedge funds and lobbyists(?) because there are an awful lot of them?

Good comment. Exactly what I was meaning. I think some cabbies need to catch up or get left behind. Too often in the past I have got a cab in a strange place and been ripped off without any recourse . Now if there is any issue I contact Uber and get a refund, which I have done twice. Plus the route is usually preplanned through google maps so avoids the old long way round trick.
Then in a few years we wont need to debate this as there wont be any drivers 😁

[lord bunberry]

Good comment. Exactly what I was meaning. I think some cabbies need to catch up or get left behind. Too often in the past I have got a cab in a strange place and been ripped off without any recourse . Now if there is any issue I contact Uber and get a refund, which I have done twice. Plus the route is usually preplanned through google maps so avoids the old long way round trick.
Then in a few years we wont need to debate this as there wont be any drivers 😁
If you were in a strange place how do you know you were ripped off? I have never knowingly taken a passenger a longer way than I should and I would imagine the vast majority of taxi drivers are the same. Some people just don't like taxi drivers for some reason. To say there is no recourse if you're unhappy with the route you have been taken is completely untrue, every taxi has identification numbers on them and the majority are gps tracked. There is a phone number in the back of every taxi for you to phone if you are unhappy with any aspect of your journey.
Its also laughable if you think the google maps will always provide you with the shortest and most inexpensive route. I use google maps and it's great, but it isn't always right.
Uber has made no difference to me and I don't need to catch up. They provide another option for the customer and people always have the choice to use them, but they aren't a good thing for the people they employ or the fact that they try and instigate a race to the bottom to wipe out the competition. If uber become the only option do you think they will keep prices low?

[NYHibby]

These companies are indeed driving this change but to who's benefit? The only thing driverless cars will do is eliminate costs (the wage of the driver) for the big businesses that own them. They go at exactly the same speed, maybe even slower, and they would still have to have insurance as no technology is risk free.

If it eventually happens, it will totally dwarve any situation any Luddite was involved in. In a society where it's all corporations who are only interested in getting their cost down and only really answerable to their shareholders, what will replace the estimated 10 million driving jobs in the UK?

I'm not sure companies like Google or Uber will give a crap about that.

Your use of luddite is somewhat ironic.

As a start, self driving cars will be dramatically safer than human driven cars (orders of magnitude) Millions of lives will be saved as a result of self driving cars avoiding crashes otherwise caused by human errors.

Behind that, less crashes, whether fatal or non-fatal, will reduce the cost to the NHS, emergency services, etc and thus directly benefit the British public.

Insurance rates will will be lower for the same reason.

Self-driving cars will also be able to better utilise the existing road infrastructure than human drivers can. Through better analysis of real time information, more efficient driving practices and less crashes, congestion will be less than it otherwise would be. There will be some savings in terms of gas and electricity. But the larger savings will be from being able to delay major infrastructure improvements.

You also seem to be ignoring who benefits from lower priced goods and services.

[Beefster]

These companies are indeed driving this change but to who's benefit? The only thing driverless cars will do is eliminate costs (the wage of the driver) for the big businesses that own them. They go at exactly the same speed, maybe even slower, and they would still have to have insurance as no technology is risk free.

If it eventually happens, it will totally dwarve any situation any Luddite was involved in. In a society where it's all corporations who are only interested in getting their cost down and only really answerable to their shareholders, what will replace the estimated 10 million driving jobs in the UK?

I'm not sure companies like Google or Uber will give a crap about that.

A third of employed people in the UK drive for a living?

[NYHibby]

Agreed, it's 20-30 years way if it happens at all. It will take at least 10 years of it becoming a normal occurrence before people trust the technology.

Having read your posts in this thread, clearly no one is going to convince you otherwise. Particularly because effectively what I am trying to convince you of is that you made a dumb career choice, depending on your age, which is true but also highly offensive.

However, if you genuinely think your job is safe for the next 30 years, for the sake of your family, you might want to read how advanced self driving cars are already. The leap required from today isn't that great comparably.

[RyeSloan]

These companies are indeed driving this change but to who's benefit? The only thing driverless cars will do is eliminate costs (the wage of the driver) for the big businesses that own them. They go at exactly the same speed, maybe even slower, and they would still have to have insurance as no technology is risk free.

If it eventually happens, it will totally dwarve any situation any Luddite was involved in. In a society where it's all corporations who are only interested in getting their cost down and only really answerable to their shareholders, what will replace the estimated 10 million driving jobs in the UK?

I'm not sure companies like Google or Uber will give a crap about that.

So your alternative is to keep costs high and charge the users accordingly? There is also the fact that directly owned cars are an extremely under utilised and expensive thing to own, on average they have something like a 3% utilisation rate. Getting rid of waste and expense on that scale would benefit many many people.

I'll be blunt and say someone driving a cab or a car is largely a waste of an excellent resource (the human). If technology can make the driver redundant (as it has on some train lines) then humanity as a whole will benefit. Transport will be safer and almost certainly faster (it's not difficult to visualise how interconnected cars would be much more efficient at using the available road space) as well as significantly more efficient in terms of resources (human and material)

To rail against this type of change as only good for corporations and hedge funds is rather myopic in my view....there is clearly many benefits beyond those accrued by the businesses providing the service directly.

[Scouse Hibee]

Will unnanned cars be able to replicate a service where the driver carries your luggage to and from the vehicle, identifies points of interest in a strange city, gives advice on where to and not to go A good taxi service is much more than getting from A to B.

[lord bunberry]

Having read your posts in this thread, clearly no one is going to convince you otherwise. Particularly because effectively what I am trying to convince you of is that you made a dumb career choice, depending on your age, which is true but also highly offensive.

However, if you genuinely think your job is safe for the next 30 years, for the sake of your family, you might want to read how advanced self driving cars are already. The leap required from today isn't that great comparably.
I'm well aware of how far down the road we are with self driving cars. I disagree that the leap required isn't that great. As for me making a dumb career choice, that's just a ridiculous thing to say. I have a very clear plan on how I plan to get to the point of retirement and the progress of driverless cars won't impact that in any way.

[danhibees1875]

Will unnanned cars be able to replicate a service where the driver carries your luggage to and from the vehicle, identifies points of interest in a strange city, gives advice on where to and not to go A good taxi service is much more than getting from A to B.

I imagine they could be hooked up to some sort of tourist information feed that was churned out upon arrival to certain places - not dissimilar to a sightseeing bus fairly easily.

Luggage might be less easy though.

[lord bunberry]

I imagine they could be hooked up to some sort of tourist information feed that was churned out upon arrival to certain places - not dissimilar to a sightseeing bus fairly easily.

Luggage might be less easy though.

Will it be able to administer first aid in event of an emergency? I'm sure everyone has seen stories of women giving birth in the back of a taxi. Will it be able to take cash payments from the millions of people in this country who don't have access to any credit facility like a debit card?

[danhibees1875]

Will it be able to administer first aid in event of an emergency? I'm sure everyone has seen stories of women giving birth in the back of a taxi. Will it be able to take cash payments from the millions of people in this country who don't have access to any credit facility like a debit card?
Presumably not the first aid, presumably yes to the cash payment.

Maybe cities should have designated first aid points (mini hospitals) and in the event of first aid being required they can auto drive you to the nearest one. :greengrin

[Pete]

A third of employed people in the UK drive for a living?

My bad, it was estimated that 10 million jobs would be effected directly or indirectly. Still a big change.

[Pete]

Personally, you're overthinking it. IMHO the general public just want a cheap and hassle-free way to get from A to B. Black cab drivers might not like it but Uber and their drivers generally provide that. There is competition is every industry so it's not unique here. Whether you work in a shop, develop software or sell pensions, we all have to deal with it.

Do you rail against all companies (and their customers) owned by hedge funds and lobbyists(?) because there are an awful lot of them?

It's the under-thinking that is the problem. People don't really want Uber, they just want cheap taxis but they rarely question how they can be so cheap and what is being sacrificed (regulations, workers rights etc...). Most people don't have a clue what Uber are, how they are run and how they are funded...and they don't have a clue about the army of lobbyists they employ who's sole purpose is to smash regulations that were developed over time to protect the public.
As for other companies, well I don't rail but I choose to spend my money in places who's business practices I approve of when I can. At least these other companies, unlike Uber, are playing by the rules and offer their workers basic rights.

[Pete]

So your alternative is to keep costs high and charge the users accordingly? There is also the fact that directly owned cars are an extremely under utilised and expensive thing to own, on average they have something like a 3% utilisation rate. Getting rid of waste and expense on that scale would benefit many many people.

I'll be blunt and say someone driving a cab or a car is largely a waste of an excellent resource (the human). If technology can make the driver redundant (as it has on some train lines) then humanity as a whole will benefit. Transport will be safer and almost certainly faster (it's not difficult to visualise how interconnected cars would be much more efficient at using the available road space) as well as significantly more efficient in terms of resources (human and material)

To rail against this type of change as only good for corporations and hedge funds is rather myopic in my view....there is clearly many benefits beyond those accrued by the businesses providing the service directly.

To be honest, my scepticism is down to the practices of the big, tax dodging companies who are behind much of the innovation more than anything else. It just also seems a bit unimaginable, your previous comment about the centre of Edinburgh being an example. It's all a bit "Jetsons".

I've no doubt they will start becoming more frequent on motorways as time goes by but in my lifetime?...I'm not really sure. One thing I would agree with is the comment about driving being a bad career choice but only if you were starting out in the world of work (not something I have to worry about unfortunately)

Maybe these AV's are for a different thread discussing the effect of technology on jobs in the future. A topic that is becoming more important by the year.

[Pete]

Presumably not the first aid, presumably yes to the cash payment.

Maybe cities should have designated first aid points (mini hospitals) and in the event of first aid being required they can auto drive you to the nearest one. :greengrin

:agree: With robot doctors.

One thing you wouldn't get in the back of an automated taxi is the cracking chat.

"Bloody Immigration, eh?"

[RyeSloan]

To be honest, my scepticism is down to the practices of the big, tax dodging companies who are behind much of the innovation more than anything else. It just also seems a bit unimaginable, your previous comment about the centre of Edinburgh being an example. It's all a bit "Jetsons".

I've no doubt they will start becoming more frequent on motorways as time goes by but in my lifetime?...I'm not really sure. One thing I would agree with is the comment about driving being a bad career choice but only if you were starting out in the world of work (not something I have to worry about unfortunately)

Maybe these AV's are for a different thread discussing the effect of technology on jobs in the future. A topic that is becoming more important by the year.

Yeah I'm with you on that...the concept of all cars and transport being fully automated in 10 years seems highly implausible but even the likes of Ford seem to think it will happen at some point.

I'm rather more sanguine about big corporations as someone needs to drive the innovation but I can see why others are not or would be resistant to the change, especially if it impacts then directly. Easy to support such things if I benefit but appreciate that I may have a different view of it was my livelihood at stake.

Whatever the outcome this is but one example of where technology is causing huge disruption and in general I find that quite exciting rather than something to be worried about...maybe too many science fiction stories when I was younger!

[calumhibee1]

Is peoples problem with Uber the fact that they've provided more competition to black cabs and private hires? I really do not see why they get such a bad rep. As others have said I use these services wanting a hassle free service that gets me from A to B. I've never used uber but I'd presume they provide that.

[Haymaker]

Also would just like to chip in and say have used uber loads in the US and Australia and cant fault the service usually grab an uber now before getting taxi or private hire

Uber is absolutely brilliant around me, $6 from the boozer at 1am.

[Killiehibbie]

Is peoples problem with Uber the fact that they've provided more competition to black cabs and private hires? I really do not see why they get such a bad rep. As others have said I use these services wanting a hassle free service that gets me from A to B. I've never used uber but I'd presume they provide that.The biggest problem for me would be handing over 25% of my earnings.

[johnbc70]

Used it a few times in Edinburgh now and great service. Always cheaper than black taxi, admittedly I don't think I am giving money to hedge funds before I order it as I am just looking to get from A to B in the quickest and cheapest way possible, which is exactly what Uber does.

It's disruptive innovation and everyone apart from those with a vested interest in traditional taxi services will probably welcome it.

[CropleyWasGod]

Used it a few times in Edinburgh now and great service. Always cheaper than black taxi, admittedly I don't think I am giving money to hedge funds before I order it as I am just looking to get from A to B in the quickest and cheapest way possible, which is exactly what Uber does.

It's disruptive innovation and everyone apart from those with a vested interest in traditional taxi services will probably welcome it.
The Court decision will probably bump prices by 15% or more, now that Uber will have to fund NI and pension costs.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

The biggest problem for me would be handing over 25% of my earnings.
Presumably, you'd be putting that away anyways [emoji48]

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Danderhall Hibs]

The biggest problem for me would be handing over 25% of my earnings.

Aye taxi drivers like the cash jobs to avoid that I've heard...

[calumhibee1]

Used it a few times in Edinburgh now and great service. Always cheaper than black taxi, admittedly I don't think I am giving money to hedge funds before I order it as I am just looking to get from A to B in the quickest and cheapest way possible, which is exactly what Uber does.

It's disruptive innovation and everyone apart from those with a vested interest in traditional taxi services will probably welcome it.

That's the way that I've always seen it. Never heard a bad word about the actual service from people who have used it.

[Killiehibbie]

Aye taxi drivers like the cash jobs to avoid that I've heard...It was strictly cash if you got in mines, anything over a tenner and it was upfront please.

[Pretty Boy]

Inevitably the world we live in promotes competition and often agrressive and hostile competiton that aims to exploit supposed gaps in the market.

I can certainly see why the black cab drivers have a problem when that competition isn't on a level playing field. The cost, time, assessment and regulation of being a black cab driver is completely different from that of those driving for Uber yet they are, in many instances, competing for the same market. I can see why that is viewed as unfair.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Inevitably the world we live in promotes competition and often agrressive and hostile competiton that aims to exploit supposed gaps in the market.

I can certainly see why the black cab drivers have a problem when that competition isn't on a level playing field. The cost, time, assessment and regulation of being a black cab driver is completely different from that of those driving for Uber yet they are, in many instances, competing for the same market. I can see why that is viewed as unfair.

:agree: apparently the uber drivers don't need to be vetted in the same was a taxi driver is - no criminal checks etc.

That was told to me by a taxi driver and I've assumed he's correct.

[BroxburnHibee]

Inevitably the world we live in promotes competition and often agrressive and hostile competiton that aims to exploit supposed gaps in the market.

I can certainly see why the black cab drivers have a problem when that competition isn't on a level playing field. The cost, time, assessment and regulation of being a black cab driver is completely different from that of those driving for Uber yet they are, in many instances, competing for the same market. I can see why that is viewed as unfair.

Level playing field is exactly the problem. I have no problem with competition but black cab drivers pay for a whole load of training, licenses, modules, exams for the privilege of being able to be hailed on the street.

So when you see these guys trying to steal your work (I caught one guy the other night) when they're not supposed to. When you see them using bus, taxi lanes when they're not allowed. When you hear that the police are encouraging the rank marshals on busy nights to let uber/phc pick up when they are empty (which is against their license conditions) that makes you wonder why you bother.

[Killiehibbie]

:agree: apparently the uber drivers don't need to be vetted in the same was a taxi driver is - no criminal checks etc.

That was told to me by a taxi driver and I've assumed he's correct.
They need a PH licence so must be subject to police vetting procedures.

[Andy74]

Level playing field is exactly the problem. I have no problem with competition but black cab drivers pay for a whole load of training, licenses, modules, exams for the privilege of being able to be hailed on the street.

So when you see these guys trying to steal your work (I caught one guy the other night) when they're not supposed to. When you see them using bus, taxi lanes when they're not allowed. When you hear that the police are encouraging the rank marshals on busy nights to let uber/phc pick up when they are empty (which is against their license conditions) that makes you wonder why you bother.

That's the way it goes - the likes of Paypal have disrupted the payments business and they didn't need to do bank exams either.

Ultimately the users choose what is the best service for them at the best price and they care little about anything else. If it is important to people that their drivers are trained and licenced then they will pay for it, if users don't care about it then it becomes irrelevant.