Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday September 23 2017, @11:14PM   Printer-friendly
from the license?-we-don't-need-no-stinkin'-license! dept.

Uber will lose its license to operate inside London. The issue may be only a temporary setback since the license expires on September 30th and Uber can continue to operate in London while appealing the decision:

London's transportation agency dealt a major blow to Uber on Friday, declining to renew the ride-hailing service's license to operate in its largest European market. [...] "Uber's approach and conduct demonstrate a lack of corporate responsibility in relation to a number of issues which have potential public safety and security implications," the agency, Transport for London, said in a statement.

[...] In issuing its decision, Transport for London, which is responsible for the city's subways and buses as well as regulating its taxicabs, declared that Uber was not "fit and proper" to operate in the city — a designation that carries significant weight in Britain. "Fit and proper" is a benchmark applied across different sectors of business and the charitable organizations in the country to ensure that people or organizations meet the requirements of their industry or specialty. Tests typically assess factors like an individual or company's honesty, transparency and competence, though there is no formal exam. In Uber's case, Transport for London said it examined issues of how it dealt with serious criminal offenses, how it conducted background checks on drivers and its justification for a software program called Greyball that "could be used to block regulatory bodies from gaining full access to the app."

Opinion: London's Uber Ban Is a Big Brexit Mistake


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by zocalo on Sunday September 24 2017, @10:15AM (4 children)

    by zocalo (302) on Sunday September 24 2017, @10:15AM (#572274)
    There are *many* other private hire ride services in London with Apps that already have licenses. Most of the ones that were already operating before Uber came along, in fact, because that was the best - and rather obvious - way to remain competetive in the wake of Uber's arrival. (For those not aware, the only practical difference between a private hire firm and the black cabs from a passenger perspective is that you can simply hail a black cab from the roadside, whereas you need to pre-book the private hire ones via phone, web, App, or walking into one of their offices.) There's now plenty of competition for Uber's style of service, and there is very little to differentiate Uber from any of the other firms other than how is easy it is to book a ride, how soon it can get to you, and how much it costs. For all intents and purposes, there's nothing special about Uber any more apart from the that they managed to get their brandname synonomous with the practice of using an App to book a ride.

    In light of that, plus Uber's well documented shady operating practices, Uber's claims in response seem quite sketchy, e.g. they claim that 40,000 Uber drivers will be put out of work which seems highly unlikely; the number of people requiring rides won't decrease, so it's far more likely they'll just switch employer to one of Uber's competitors. Uber users claiming they can't afford to get around without Uber? Um, no. See above about the *many* other competing services; do your homework and add some to your contacts list. Alternatively, maybe this will push someone into developing the one tool that still seems to be missing from the ride-hire business at the moment; a meta-ride hire app that is an equivalent to all those travel sites that will scan various flight/hotel/car hire vendors and help locate the best options for you.

    I also can't help wondering just how many of the names on the petition are actually legit, and how many might have been faked by hardcore Uber fans, or even Uber themselves - after Greyball, I wouldn't put it past them to think it was worth the risk of being found out. Whatever happens, I suspect there's going to be quite a bit of dirt dug (by all sides, since Uber's competitors will no doubt get involved to try and keep them out of the market) before the inevitable appeal is over, so definitely time to stock up on the popcorn.
    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Interesting=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by TheRaven on Monday September 25 2017, @09:20AM (2 children)

    by TheRaven (270) on Monday September 25 2017, @09:20AM (#572599) Journal

    In light of that, plus Uber's well documented shady operating practices, Uber's claims in response seem quite sketchy, e.g. they claim that 40,000 Uber drivers will be put out of work which seems highly unlikely; the number of people requiring rides won't decrease, so it's far more likely they'll just switch employer to one of Uber's competitors

    One of the dubious practices that Uber has been panned for engaging in involves partnering with a company that offers car loans. You sign up as an Uber driver and you can buy a car with a fairly small downpayment and a large loan with very high interest rates. Don't worry, says the glossy Uber marketing, you can pay back the loan easily with the money you make as an Uber driver. Unfortunately, the income from driving is much lower than Uber advertises and the loan contract means that if you don't pay the interest then they'll confiscate the car and you'll still owe them for the depreciation. Oh, and you can't use the car for any commercial purposes other than driving for Uber, as per the terms of the loan agreement. You're basically locked in to driving for them, with no alternative other than declaring bankruptcy (and then trying to find a job with that on your record).

    I don't know if this scheme operated in the UK, but I wouldn't be surprised if Uber didn't have other similar schemes to attempt to keep their drivers in indentured servitude.

    --
    sudo mod me up
    • (Score: 2) by zocalo on Monday September 25 2017, @12:10PM (1 child)

      by zocalo (302) on Monday September 25 2017, @12:10PM (#572621)
      I'd heard of that, and have no idea if that applies to the UK either, but should Uber lose its license in London post-appeal then I would expect the onus to be on Uber to make suitable arrangements for drivers to opt out of any such deals. Unless Uber is prepared to do a blanket buy-out and termination of the leases (unlikely), then they would probably need to provide some form of opt-in system for their ex-drivers in the scheme to continue with it, but releasing them from the now defunct Uber lock-in clauses - or no one is going to want to opt-in (assuming they haven't already worked out the deal sucks, that is). Hopefully there's some statutory EU regulation in place that means Uber picks up any additional costs in that case, given it's ultimately Uber's responsibility that the drivers would have been put into that situation.
      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
      • (Score: 2) by TheRaven on Monday September 25 2017, @12:47PM

        by TheRaven (270) on Monday September 25 2017, @12:47PM (#572632) Journal
        The problem is that the leases didn't actually come from Uber, they came from a company that does car loans. Uber just got a sales commission on each one. Uber therefore has no legal liability (unless you can prove that it was knowingly misrepresented, which is probably was but that's unrelated to this situation). The company providing the leases similarly doesn't have any obvious liability because they're providing leases to buy a car for private use, but with a special exemption that you can use it commercially, but only if you drive for Uber.
        --
        sudo mod me up
  • (Score: 1) by purple_cobra on Monday September 25 2017, @10:49PM

    by purple_cobra (1435) on Monday September 25 2017, @10:49PM (#572826)

    Apologies, this turned into rather more of a rant than intended. It is going to be a bad week.

    I also can't help wondering just how many of the names on the petition are actually legit, and how many might have been faked by hardcore Uber fans, or even Uber themselves

    Single source, take with a pinch of salt, etc: http://zelo-street.blogspot.com/2017/09/uber-fake-petition-busted.html [blogspot.com]
    Uber are being their usual selves, i.e. trying to flannel the public and their VC backers by wailing how unjust it is that they have to follow the same laws as everyone else whilst trying to keep their efforts to legitimately resolve the issues (reporting criminal issues to the police, treating DBS disclosures as just another reference, etc) under the radar. The issue isn't that they're being singled out, rather that they're not being singled out for preferential treatment, i.e. they're being treated like every other taxi/private hire firm and that isn't fair. This kind of puerile showmanship is straight out of Barnum's playbook, yet of course the right wing press and their tame Tory gobshites are trying to position this as a Labour attack on business.

    It is, if you'll pardon the expletive, fucking tiresome that every time the Tories spot an "opportunity" to lay some idiot's self-inflicted wound at Labour's feet they go for it, despite it having little to do with Labour - the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, is a Labour politician, but if the stories in the more objective press are true then he had no part in this decision; technically he's TfL's "boss" but their refusal to grant a licence is hardly something cooked-up in the fairly short time since he won that election - and the other parties are hardly innocent on that score either. I would hope that a lot of other voters are tired of this partisan pissing contest - in many cases the equivalent of "a big boy did it and ran away" - and start demanding they did something bloody useful. For good or ill, the Brexit vote is being taken seriously but our government seem to have absolutely no clue what leaving the EU involves.

    One small tip I'll happily give them for free is that continuing as they have done - blaming the EU for anything they absolutely can't pin on Labour and which, in the main, is utter bollocks - is not going to get us anywhere fast except on a one way trip to bankruptcy. And for pity's sake sack that idiot Johnson; sending him is the equivalent of turning up to a Western-style dual with an empty water pistol and your cock hanging out while your opponent has a cannon. Mockery and blame-shifting will only get you so far and we're well past the point where it could be considered helpful.