Hacker News Reader

Comment by meritt | Hacker News Reader

Does anyone have details on the associated costs involved for Uber and/or the drivers? I can't imagine background checks being very excessive for the drivers, so maybe it's grossly expensive and miscategorized insurance?

Uber + Lyft just relaunched here in Portland. Drivers are required to have valid business licenses and pass a background check too. Everyone is very happy with the changes. (except our local taxi commission, of course)

View on HN

The required insurance in that bill seems to be 1 million dollars, which seems still very low to me. Mandatory insurance minimums for cars here in Germany are much higher than that.

Glad to hear they could reach a deal in Portland. The terms your describing is, I think, essentially the terms KC is asking for now. Uber is holding out that the Missouri legislature will override the city ordinance with regards to ride sharing. A likely proposition as Missouri's legislators are so readily influenced by those with money and love overriding home rule in the major cities.

Same in many European cities, where even UberX drivers have to have a "private driver" license.

The requirements involve documented regular maintenance and insurance coverage that would include passengers, not sure what's the business logic behind opposing them.

> not sure what's the business logic behind opposing them

They want to have no costs to doing business, and to reap all the profits.

I mean, the cost is already shifted to the drivers (who have to pay for license, submit maintenance paperwork and buy insurance) and taxpayers (who hire government clerks to review all that stuff).

But I get what you're saying - at that point the profit opportunity diminishes somewhat. The upfront cost of it also discourages casual drivers who only planned to do some weekend work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com