Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Fri Nov 17, 2017 7:25 pm

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 6:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 39273
Location: 1066 Country
Cabbies line the street to protest on Uber meeting

Image

TAXI drivers held a demonstration outside Hove Town Hall. The GMB union, Streamline, City Cabs and independent hackney carriage drivers rallied around Tisbury Road and Church Street in Hove to protest the council’s decision to hold the discussion of the renewal of private taxi giant Uber’s licence in private.

The demonstration comes a week after taxi drivers assembled outside the Labour conference, warning that deregulation in the industry has led to a ‘wild West’ situation, with licences given out like ‘sweets’.

Andrew Peters, secretary of the GMB Brighton and Hove Taxi Section said: “Today we are handing over a petition to the council asking for a renewal of the Uber operators’ licence in Brighton to be held in public and not behind closed doors.” The petition, which has gathered 1,069 supporters so far, appeals for the council to rethink the way they negotiate with the private hire firm. It is signed by taxi drivers from across Brighton and Hove, among others who agree that Uber is going against the rules outlined in their licence agreement.

Rob Lawrie, a Brighton taxi driver, said: “Originally, Uber told us they would only use Brighton and Hove licensed vehicles. Since then, Uber has paid drivers to come in from out of town and promised them at least the minimum wage. “Every weekend we have 200-250 out-of-town drivers coming in, which is reducing the income of all Brighton drivers by 25 per cent.”

It is a worrying figure for taxi drivers, however the main concern with unregulated Uber vehicles among council members remains any threat to public safety. Councillor Lee Wares, Conservative councillor for Patcham, said: “It’s not about competition, it’s about levelling the playing field so that every hackney carriage and private hire vehicle in Brighton and Hove is as safe as it can be. It’s a public safety issue.

“Our blue book details what we hold out as our minimum standard. And if Uber can uphold that then that’s fine. But if we’re licensing something that’s about ensuring public safety, then a panel or hearing must be held in public.”

A spokesman for the app defended the company, saying it had always abided by the same rules and regulations as all other private hire operators. They said: “It’s common industry practice for drivers licensed in one jurisdiction to carry out trips in other jurisdictions as long as they are pre-booked and dispatched from the operator’s license they are registered to. “Uber has been embraced by people living in and visiting Brighton.”

Last week, Transport for London made the decision not to renew Uber’s licence in the capital. A spokesperson for Brighton and Hove City Council told The Argus the taxi giant had not yet applied to renew their licence, which expires on Saturday, November 4.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 6:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 39273
Location: 1066 Country
Sussex wrote:
“It’s common industry practice for drivers licensed in one jurisdiction to carry out trips in other jurisdictions as long as they are pre-booked and dispatched from the operator’s license they are registered to.

Really?

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 8:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 10:47 pm
Posts: 10084
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
Sussex wrote:
Sussex wrote:
“It’s common industry practice for drivers licensed in one jurisdiction to carry out trips in other jurisdictions as long as they are pre-booked and dispatched from the operator’s license they are registered to.

Really?



you learn something new every day :lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
Taxis Are Public Transport too

Join the campaign to get April fools jokes banned for 364 days a year !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 7:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:56 pm
Posts: 1018
Sussex wrote:
Sussex wrote:
“It’s common industry practice for drivers licensed in one jurisdiction to carry out trips in other jurisdictions as long as they are pre-booked and dispatched from the operator’s license they are registered to.

Really?



Again UBER spokesperson contradicts themselves,in one application they state the driver accepts the job first,then UBER accepts the booking.
There is no way they can claim that the job is prebooked.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 7:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 7:19 am
Posts: 182
Quote:
''Again UBER spokesperson contradicts themselves,in one application they state the driver accepts the job first,then UBER accepts the booking.
There is no way they can claim that the job is prebooked.''


THAT is the crux of the argument Against uber...The DRIVER accepts the booking and then it is booked on their system by uber...That makes it plying for hire....drivers in Reading have been prosecuted as should others across the country...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:17 pm
Posts: 2033
Maybe Uber asks the driver if he can do a booking before accepting it making it definite?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 5:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 39273
Location: 1066 Country
cheshirebest wrote:
Quote:
''Again UBER spokesperson contradicts themselves,in one application they state the driver accepts the job first,then UBER accepts the booking.
There is no way they can claim that the job is prebooked.''


THAT is the crux of the argument Against uber...The DRIVER accepts the booking and then it is booked on their system by uber...That makes it plying for hire....drivers in Reading have been prosecuted as should others across the country...

I agree.

Uber take a job, they offer it to driver A who is licensed in area X, he refuses it, they then offer it to driver B licensed in area Y.

No way is the above scenario compliant with the 1976 act, via the cloud, IMO.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cabby John 1, Google [Bot] and 24 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group