Unfair Driving Field

I am not a proponent of either Uber or Lyft. I see it for what it is: a way for an individual or small group of people to create a taxi company without having to pay for the license to operate in an area and pass all the costs and liabilities onto the operators and allthe profits onto the “owners.”

For a regular taxi company, they have to pay for a license to operate (livery license to be exact). Uber & lyft claim they do not have to because the drivers are “contract” drivers – they work only when the want to and not on a schedule. Unlike taxi drivers who work on schedules.

Then there are the fees. Taxi companies pay for the vehicles, insurance, gas, maintenance, inspection, tires, etc. They cover it all, including the wages and benefits (if any) for the drivers. Uber and Lyft pass all these operating costs onto the driver.

I've never been in a beat up cab. They always look nice. Can Uber or Lyft guarantee that the cars they want to have available will look decent? Probably not. An accident takes a taxi off the road until repaired. Will a car that was in a fender bender be able to operate under Uber or Lyft? I hit a deer with my car (a used Stratus) and had a cracked grille, taped over headlight, and a decent dent in the hood. Would I be able to operate?

And the drivers are screened before they are hired. Background checks and all. Uber and Lyft left cities in Texas when they required background checks on drivers.

Speaking of that, Uber and Lyf want to pass all the insurance costs onto the drivers. It can come out of the money they make driving around. Well, one accident will put an end to that. I have $100,000 per passenger & all the driving around I do for work has my insurance at $700+ every six months. (OK – I have hit more than one deer in my driving around WNY. I like driving in the country.) Taxi companies pay up to (and possibly over in some cases) $6,000 per car. Guess who wants to pay nothing And let it all come out of the drivers' pockets?

The NY Senate and Assembly are talking some pretty high insurance coverage amounts that would be required for the drivers to have if a passenger is in their vehicle. They are hammering out the plans for rates for when the app is on and the driver is driving and when a passenger is actually picked up. They (the Senate and Assembly) are hammering out the rates, which stretch from $300,000 to $1.5 million when there is a passenger in the car. That's pretty high and guess who doesn't want to pay anything towards it because it would cut into their profits?

And then there are the handicapped drivers. Taxi companies have to accommodate them. Uber & Lyft don't. Is this a form of discrimination?

And the companies only take electronic payment. No cash. So you need a smart phone and either a credit card or PayPal™ to use the service. So the poor are out of the equation. Guess who's stuck picking up those people? (Hint – the poor usually don't have money for tips, which help the drivers make ends meet.)

And then there are those rates. Taxi rates are regulated. Uber& Lyft want the ability to set their own rates, determined by demand, length of drives, etc.

Basically they want a “free” market to do whatever they want. And by this they mean they are free of oversight and regulation so that the company owners can make as much as possible while the taxi companies are heavily regulated and basically go out of business from unfair competition.

I might also add that there are unionized taxi services and (possibly) co-op taxi services. These people have worked and fought for fair wages and Uber & Lyft want to have the rules skewed in their favor against these groups that face many regulations that are designed to keep the drivers and passengers safe. (By doing so, the owners are much safer in operating the service.)

Lawmakers need to see Uber and Lyft for what they are: livery services / forms of taxis.

The drivers may set their own schedules and availability, but ultimately they are doing what taxis do.

Therefore, Uber and Lyft need to be regulated just like taxi services and treated like taxis.

After all, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is.

So if it looks like a taxi and operates like a taxi, treat it like a taxi – same rules and regulations.

It's that easy.

Lyft Uber out of here

Congressman Brian Higgins and Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown have both come out in favor of legislation to allow “ride-sharing services” like Űber and Lyft into the Buffalo and Erie County areas.

What are these so called “services?” These are “app” driven companies where a person posts on an app where they want to go and someone that is headed that way will pick them up and drive them there for a fee, based on “demand.” The higher the demand for drivers, the higher the fee. (Unlike taxis and the NFTA. Same fee covers everything. Any time of day.) Most of this fee goes to either Űber or Lyft, Meanwhile the driver bears the most of the cost of the (mandated) NYS car insurance, car maintenance, and gas. What they receive from the company is pocket change.

This is a fools errand if there ever was one.

First: This is in direct conflict with established locally owned and run taxi services. These companies are paying massive amounts of money (buying the taxis, making sure they are properly maintained and inspected, insurance, licensing, and training the drivers) to be able to operate in Buffalo, Erie County, & Niagara Falls. There are plenty of people that make this operation work - the drivers, mechanics, and dispatchers, all who add to the local economy. The money paid to the taxi companies stays local. Not so with Űber and Lyft. Their fees leave. They leave Buffalo. They leave Erie & Niagara Counties. They leave NY. If the taxi services go belly up, how will we make up that lost revenue? That revenue helps drive our economy (Pun intended.)

Second: This also fights against the already struggling and underfunded public transportation system, – the NFTA. This service covers all of Erie County and extends into Niagara County. It also services the poor and those that can not drive. The NFTA has suffered cut after cut from Republican administrations that are opposed to anything “public” - parks, housing, libraries, schools. You name it. Anything that denies Wall Street and their capitalist cronies the ability to draw more money into their pockets they are opposed to. Why take a bus and have to walk a short distance when I can take a car and be dropped off right in front of my destination? (That's called a taxi service. See previous paragraph.) And the money earned by the bus drivers, mechanics, again, goes local and supports (drives) the local economy.

Third: The taxi and NFTA are both union strongholds. This desire to bring in Űber and Lyft is a direct attack on the unions from … the Democrats, the supposed ally of unions. Both Congressman Higgins and Mayor Brown are both Democrats. Why are they attacking unions workers? These people make good wages and receive good benefits, like health and dental insurance, retirement, and vacation benefits. These are costs that private companies, like Űber and Lyft, don't have to pay if they don't want to. And they don't.

Now Congressman Higgins and Mayor Brown claim that Űber and Lyft will create over 11,000 jobs. They need to be more specific. Those 11,000 jobs are PART TIME jobs WITHOUT benefits and good pay. All the costs of the cars (purchasing the car, maintenance and upkeep, insurance) are the responsibility of the driver, not the company. So, will the fee collected by the driver cover these costs? Not from what I have heard. The jobs from Űber and Lyft are supposed to be side jobs to provide some extra spending money. These are not jobs that people are going to be able to make a living off of, unlike the taxi and Metro services.

Let's look at another (bad) aspect of the Űber and Lyft situation. Road congestion. I've been caught in bad traffic before when driving around Buffalo and Erie County. Buses, Metro Rail, and taxis help cut down on this traffic. They also help alleviate the parking problem that downtown Buffalo suffers greatly from. (Especially the buses & Metro Rail.) Űber and Lyft will add more cars on the road and some of these cars will need to park. Where? The people in the Fruit Belt don't want them in their neighborhoods and downtown parking lots are expensive. (I use the Metro Park & Drive when I have to go downtown. Free parking and I only have to buy the round trip ticket on the Metro Rail. And it beats driving around looking for a place that has parking available. Saves me gas, money, and time. I use taxis for large packages & expensive purchases Free plug for the NFTA and taxis.)

So, all these negatives – loss of jobs, low wages, parking woes, and traffic congestion, all negative impacts on the local economy – it all sounds like an Űber mess that we won't be able to Lyft ourselves out of.

It is one mess that we can avoid though.