Taxi companies are regulated for extremely good reasons. I know people sing Uber's praises but regulations exist for good reasons. Some exist for bad reasons too but they are largely there to protect people.
Would you get in a stranger's car?
And to preempt the downvoters: I'm not saying I don't want competition. I want competition and safety for the general public.
Yes. And I do that when I get into any cab.
This is one argument I never understood. People providing taxi-like services for other people need additional licenses for street safety - sure. But what can be safer apart from that? The person inside could just as well have just stolen the car. They are complete strangers.
It appears I wasn't very clear. The checks and balances that are done by a private company are allowed to be less rigorous than government-enforced regulations. This doesn't just mean that additional licences are needed, it means that extra regulations need to be adhered to. Of course, a private company can choose to go above and beyond these regulations if they so choose, and Uber may even do this.
As I understand it, regulation of private hire vehicles is motivated by regular rapes of attractive, young, drunk women on the way home from nights out.
With that said, as long as Uber verifies that all drivers have the correct vehicle and driver license and background checks [1] I don't see how they're any different to Addison Lee and those.
[1] www.tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-and-private-hire/become-a-private-hire-licensee
I'm assuming Uber does at least the standard background checks for new employees.
It works well in London too. The problem here is not that it doesn't work well. The problem is that the LTDA are protesting against a free market because now they have competition.
The link you posted was interesting. I'm glad Uber cited some good references. It's a shame it's focused on one city it would be nice to see aggregate data for several cities, and also for each city separately. London is also not quite as big as Chicago, and it's harder to get guns in the UK. There are a lot of factors involved in the comparison of crime between the US and the UK that are overlooked.
From what I can tell, they are fully registered as private hire cars. The ones I've seen in Manchester have the same taxi branding as any other.
Is it the case they have to be, though? That's where the argument breaks down here. I'm not saying Uber don't go above and beyond what's necessary to provide a safe service, I'm saying that regulation provides assurances (to a certain degree) to the patrons of this service.
I have a feeling that technology completely solves most of these problems. For example, there's a monopoly on the word "taxi" to prevent impersonation and kidnapping / mugging. But with technology your phone can tell you exactly what car is picking you up, from the model and color all the way down to the licence plate.
Is it the case one could pick up a minor? If so, are there CRB checks done on the drivers?
Taxi drivers need to pass an extra driving test to ensure an extremely high quality standard of driving. Does Uber do that?
Regulations don't necessarily make things safer, they provide assurances to the public that a minimum standard has to be attained. For taxi companies, this standard is rather high. I'm not saying Uber don't go above and beyond these, I'm saying they aren't forced to.
I do, all the time.
Alright. Now would you let your daughter do it? I certainly wouldn't.
If I wasn't comfortable letting my daughter ride an uber, I sure as hell wouldn't be comfortable letting my daughter ride a taxi. Thus far, Uber has consistently provided a far better and comfortable ride than a standard taxi. If regulation hasn't prevented taxi drivers that have, in my experience talked on the phone while driving, lied to me and said they don't accept credit cards, or are just plain hard to flag down. From my, single POV, Uber drivers are that much better and the belief that regulation has 1.) created an acceptable minimum taxi service (it hasn't) 2.) will ensure Uber has a high quality (it already does) is one I can't fully swallow.
Uber already does a great job of vetting their drivers (I've heard drivers who receive even a few bad ratings are sacked) and honestly if the service was so dangerous it wouldn't be such a sought after alternatives to Taxis.