Ride-hailing in Metro Vancouver: Uber, Lyft, Sidecar - emerging technologies

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

I swear that I gasped when I heard John Horgan quoted on CBC radio last week saying that the NDP were against this and would repeal the bill if they form government. What on earth are they thinking?! They're picking the side of the taxi association/cartel?

The simple but fair response to me would have been: "NDP will unify the regulations for ride-sharing with Taxis, they all have to meet the same safety standards, insurance, etc. and we will do this within 3 months of winning the election".

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by ryanmaccdn

1. This winter was the exception and not the rule
2. Drivers in Edmonton/Toronto seem to handle it just fine.
3. If your a shit driver who isn't prepared than you'll be rated poorly and kicked out of the system quite qickly.

Drivers in Alberta get Winter every year for months. Vancouver gets it typically gets "winter conditions" for 2 days. Then the rest is just slush/ice for a few days.

We underestimate the amount of bad drivers in BC, let alone Vancouver. I don't want to see a regular "class 5" driver driving Uber. I want them to take a road test in their car before being endorsed as being allowed to drive for Uber, and re-tested every 5 years to keep that endorsement.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by cornholio

Anyone know what Taxis pay in vehicle insurance? ICBC said it will roll out a insurance plan specifically for Uber / ride sharing. Depending on cost this may weed out many part time drivers and such and impact the service.

It seems like there is a proposal to do hybrid insurance. ICBC knows that if they didn't make it fair people would just neglect to get insurance. How, apparently, it would work is that while you were on the clock you would be billed higher "taxi" insurance. If you drove for Uber for 5 hours, you would be insured as a taxi for those 5-hours. This evens the playing field and doesn't punish uber drivers with onerous insurance requirements that many would likely not purchase.

It's likely that ICBC would broker a deal with UBER/Lyft to submit to ICBC this extra premium. Doing it this way would ensure the drivers are all insured while at the same time cutting down on insurance fraud. It would also be an easy way for ICBC to test the waters on distance based insurance.

If this comes to fruition, it's a business-savvy and smart move on the part of ICBC to address head-on before ride-sharing becomes mainstream. Given that ICBC handles ALL basic insurance for all people in the province.

This would no different to a city making a deal with AirBnB to charge a hotel tax for all rentals which AirBnB automatically charges and submits to the gov't on behalf of the AirBnB client. Or a deal in which the CRA makes a deal with AirBnB to submit records to ensure people are paying their taxes.

[WarrenC12]

^^^^^^

This is a great idea in theory, if only there weren't stories of Uber falsifying the information they send to authorities already.

[ryanmaccdn]

Originally Posted by Kisai

Drivers in Alberta get Winter every year for months. Vancouver gets it typically gets "winter conditions" for 2 days. Then the rest is just slush/ice for a few days.

We underestimate the amount of bad drivers in BC, let alone Vancouver. I don't want to see a regular "class 5" driver driving Uber. I want them to take a road test in their car before being endorsed as being allowed to drive for Uber, and re-tested every 5 years to keep that endorsement.

Generally 99% of drivers seem to get around day to day without incident... Vancouver drivers would seem no worse than LA, or hell even those garbage south Asian cities where you can have a monkey driving a car and Uber works there.

If you have an issue with driver safety then complain on the lax testing for Class 5's.... but citing a driver who picks up someone on their way home commuting to go through costly testing and red tape seems silly. Defeats the whole purpose of ride sharing...

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by ryanmaccdn

Generally 99% of drivers seem to get around day to day without incident... Vancouver drivers would seem no worse than LA, or hell even those garbage south Asian cities where you can have a monkey driving a car and Uber works there.

If you have an issue with driver safety then complain on the lax testing for Class 5's.... but citing a driver who picks up someone on their way home commuting to go through costly testing and red tape seems silly. Defeats the whole purpose of ride sharing...

That is not how Uber works. People who do Uber have invested in having new-ish well-maintained car, and they just do laps around busy areas until someone orders an uber car. They are otherwise the exact same people who would drive a regular Taxi, except they are no longer driving a fleet taxi.

If you've been anywhere (eg Seattle) where Uber and regular taxi's are available, a regular taxi costs 10X more, thus it's cost-effectiveness only favors a full taxi with it's passengers all going to the same location. So a single rider of a regular taxi is often only going to get one if their destination is also a busy area (eg Airport, Ferry, Train terminal.) The Uber cars don't need to hang around very long to pick up a fare from the same locations. So even if they can not pick up someone from a Taxi stand, they are less than 30 seconds away anyhow.

"Ride sharing" is not what Uber is. It may have suggested being such, where someone working downtown and living in Surrey might be able to pick up someone also going to Surrey on their way, but that is never how it works in practice. At least one time in Seattle, I got the same driver twice because he happened to live around the corner of the location that I was going to/coming from. They accept a fare into a busy location, and then idle around the busy location until they get another fare to come back.

Try getting an Uber car at 2am, it will be surge pricing, because nobody will be available.

And again, my point about class 5 drivers licenses. You only want people with a completely clean driving record driving. There are people (just watch "Canada's Worst Driver") who drive dangerously all the time, aren't good at driving in rush hour, have low confidence in their driving, etc. The drivers can rate the passenger too. So no, you're not going to get honest ratings because the passenger's don't want to be down-rated either.

[libtard]

Originally Posted by Kisai

People who do Uber have invested in having new-ish well-maintained car,

When I used the Lyft in Boston I got picked up by a female guitar player in a band with a piece of crap orange 2003 Hyundai sonata For the price I paid to get across town I'd take that ride any day over a taxi

[flipper316]

How is an Uber or Lyft driver supposed to answer some alert or text on their phone from a potential client when they're on a road that doesn't permit stopping.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by flipper316

How is an Uber or Lyft driver supposed to answer some alert or text on their phone from a potential client when they're on a road that doesn't permit stopping.

Even when they are driving around they have to accept fares on a smartphone app. It really doesn't jive with our strict laws. IIRC you can't even be using a smartphone while your car is running.

But we aren't the only jurisdiction with this law, so who knows.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by flipper316

How is an Uber or Lyft driver supposed to answer some alert or text on their phone from a potential client when they're on a road that doesn't permit stopping.

There are text-to-voice and voice-to-text solutions available for handling text messages without having to remove your hands from the steering wheel or look away from the road.

[Spork]

How is tapping a smartphone to accept a fare any different from tapping a button on a taxi dispatch screen to accept a fare?

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by flipper316

How is an Uber or Lyft driver supposed to answer some alert or text on their phone from a potential client when they're on a road that doesn't permit stopping.

Not even that. "Distracted Driving" laws will make it illegal to accept a fare unless your car is parked.

[jollyburger]

Only in America. They can't control an American company from following local regulations but somehow their business dealings with Saudi Arabia is somehow some backward step for gender equality. If they are that backwards how can you allow any US company (Apple, Google) to have a presence there. But no, forget about human rights we have some moral war to win with Uber.

Julia Carrie Wong‏ @juliacarriew

Always fun to remember that Uber won't follow local regs in Austin (driver fingerprints) but will in Saudi Arabia (women can't drive)

https://twitter.com/juliacarriew/sta...50371661283328

[jollyburger]

Former taxi GM with an alternative view:

The change is a “mixed blessing,” according to former Sunshine Cabs general manager Paul Gill, who advocated consolidation throughout the industry.

“There’s no need for us to compete with each other for various stands, it can be all one big industry throughout the Lower Mainland,” he said. “Service will get better … if it goes all into one dispatch system.”

While Uber may cut into profits, cab companies could dramatically cut overhead by getting rid of dispatch offices, he said. Gill suggested there could be one phone number connected to every cab company.

http://www.nsnews.com/news/uber-coul...017-1.11408919

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Only in America. They can't control an American company from following local regulations but somehow their business dealings with Saudi Arabia is somehow some backward step for gender equality. If they are that backwards how can you allow any US company (Apple, Google) to have a presence there. But no, forget about human rights we have some moral war to win with Uber.

https://twitter.com/juliacarriew/sta...50371661283328

I'm not sure what your point is here. The facts of that tweet still hold true.... Uber's slimy tactics are well known. It appears they think they can get away with ignoring municipal rules, but not those of a strict muslim regime. All in service of the dollar.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Wow NDP against ride sharing?

That will not sit well with younger people, many of whom would be more likely leaning NDP.

What a gaff.

Seems to be pretty common among the left to oppose the "on demand" economy. Hillary Clinton was against it and Bernie Sanders said he has "serious problems" with things like Uber for example.

If you can't regulate it, unionize it, and tax it into submission the left isn't on board.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Only in America. They can't control an American company from following local regulations but somehow their business dealings with Saudi Arabia is somehow some backward step for gender equality. If they are that backwards how can you allow any US company (Apple, Google) to have a presence there. But no, forget about human rights we have some moral war to win with Uber.

The hypocrisy of big companies and celebrities (and the politicians that back them) is astounding.

Take Apple for example. They boycott the state of Indiana because of their religious liberty law which they claim discriminates against homosexuals, but they do business in Saudi Arabia where homosexuality can carry the death penalty.

Disney threatened to shut down its operations in Georgia over a similar law, yet they had no problem filming large parts of Star Wars: The Force Awakens in the United Arab Emirates, where homosexuality can lead to fines, imprisonment and even the death penalty.

Bryan Adams is boycotting North Carolina for a similar law, yet he played a concert in Egypt where gays can be sentenced to up to 17 years of prison and hard labor under their morality laws.

Google claims to be for diversity in the workplace and supporting women's rights, yet they have offices in Saudi Arabia where women can't drive, vote or even leave the house without male relatives.

Starbucks, same case. Even some Starbucks in Saudi Arabia don't allow women to enter.

[Vin]

I wonder if Uber will be allowed to pick up and drop off passengers regardless of municipal boundaries. That would be very unfair to taxis that are restricted in that arena.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Vin

I wonder if Uber will be allowed to pick up and drop off passengers regardless of municipal boundaries. That would be very unfair to taxis that are restricted in that arena.

Remove that restriction on taxis as well. And eliminate the cap on taxi licenses and drop the cost of a taxi license.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Jebby

The hypocrisy of big companies and celebrities (and the politicians that back them) is astounding.

Exactly. If Americans were honest they would cheer Uber for being dirty scoundrels trying to skirt the law in America. As much as their ethics drive them to ignore the fact women aren't allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia.