1. UberPeople.NET - Independent community of rideshare drivers. It's FREE to be a person and enjoy all the benefits of membership. Sign-up HERE!

CA Proposal Could Be Silver Bullet Aimed At Uber

Discussion in 'News' started by KevinH, Mar 21, 2018.

  1. KevinH

    KevinH Well-Known Member

    Location:
    San Francisco
    https://www.lctmag.com/news/728985/ca-proposal-could-be-silver-bullet-to-uber?refresh=true

    SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) -- Uber Technologies Inc should be classified as the same type of transportation as limousines and tour buses, a California regulator said on Monday in a proposal that could change how the ride-hailing company is regulated in its home state. A commissioner for the California Public Utilities Commission, who had been tasked with investigating and formulating a proposal on regulating Uber, said in her proposed decision that the San Francisco-based company should be classified as a charter-party carrier, a transportation category known as TCP.

    U.S. News/Reuters item here

    Full CPUC resolution here

    From LCT:



    What Proposal Could Mean For Industry

    In an interview March 19, National Limousine Association President Gary Buffo said the proposal could be the most far-reaching and consequential development ever in getting Uber regulated like charter party carriers. It could also heavily influence a federal judge's expected ruling in a class-action driver lawsuit on whether Uber drivers should be classified as W-2 employees, and therefore entitled to back wages while Uber would have to pay back FICA and workers' comp costs. If so, the financial hit to Uber could be staggering, Buffo said.

    The back fees owed to the CPUC alone would be .0033% of total Uber revenues in the state going back years, along with any penalty fees and/or fines, Buffo said.

    A CPUC approval of the proposal could also bring about a "2,000% increase" in insurance costs for Uber, which now skirts the $1.5 million per vehicle/per incident minimum applied to charter-party chaffeured and limousine commercial fleet vehicles in California, Buffo said.

    "This is absolutely justice served in the state of California," Buffo told LCT. "They have been operating illegally from day one, never complied with anything, and always played the lobbying game. I think the CPUC absolutely has done the right thing." The proposal was researched and authored by CPUC Commissioner Liane Randolph.

    Buffo is urging members of the NLA and the Greater California Livery Association to inundate the CPUC with emails, calls and letters supporting the resolution when the official comment period starts April 16 in the lead up to the pivotal April 26 CPUC Board of Commissioners meeting. He warned that Uber and its well-funded lobbying and public relations efforts will mount an all-out offensive against the proposal.

    ""The more pressure we put on them, the more likely this decision gets set in stone," Buffo said. "I think what will happen if it's approved, is other states will follow. Uber and Lyft and other TNCs still do not comply with anything in other states, and still have major safety issues. There is tons of evidence in the proposal. I don’t see how anyone in right mind can say rule against this."

    A favorable CPUC decision also could boost NLA lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill when the trade group convenes industry leaders in Washington, D.C., May 21-23.

    "I think we would get a direct meeting with numerous departments on the federal level, and the discussions could change opinions and result in federal rulemaking or a federal decision," Buffo said. "At least we would have their ear."

    Related: Self Driving Car Kills Pedestrian





    Related Topics: California operators, Gary Buffo, Greater California Livery Association, regulatory enforcement, TNCs, Uber

    [​IMG]Martin RomjueEditor
     
    Trump Economics and melusine3 like this.
  2. Uber_Yota_916

    Uber_Yota_916 Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Sacramento
    $500 TLC license will definitely thin the herd.

    If that doesn't the commercial insurance policy will. $3-4 million in coverage is not cheap.
     
    Trump Economics and mrpjfresh like this.
  3. Mars Troll Number 4

    Mars Troll Number 4 Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Orlando-ish
    Driving:
    Taxi

    A $500 TLC liscense required for all drivers... that will thin the heard.

    If it's required for the drivers to carry 24/7 it will destroy uber in California, if uber can get away with providing coverage only while the driver is on app it won't have much of an effect at all. Basically the booking fee will go up a bit.

    But this regulation could sink uber in it's tracks in California, for about 3o seconds until the public discovers it will be the end of uber then there will be rioting in the streets until the state government gives them uber back.

    The public won't stand for any regulation that kills uber, and that's the reality.
     
    Ant-Man, JoshInReno and Mista T like this.
  4. UberDiaz

    UberDiaz Active Member

    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    So basically uber drivers would just turn into cabbies omg..i like the idea of working whenever i want. Tjat would suck if drivers were w-2 employees, there would be set schedules and breaks and wages would be capped. Uber and lyft did this to themselves, all they had to do was keep the rates fair and they wouldn't have f.u.cked themselves in ther as.s. now look what they did by being greedy. Idiots. Now there business is really messed up.
     
    Mista T likes this.
  5. UberDiaz

    UberDiaz Active Member

    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    wp0_wp0_wp97e8a7ce.png
     
  6. Stevie The magic Unicorn

    Stevie The magic Unicorn Active Member

    Location:
    North of Disney, West of Orlando
    Driving:
    Taxi
    If they forced uber to treat them as employees it would be over for uber in Cali...

    The protests will get the law/regulation overturned within weeks of it getting put into place.

    Uber will simply pull out of Cali and the idiots in california will protest until the law gets rolled back,


    Nothing is going to change.
     
  7. Oscar Levant

    Oscar Levant Well-Known Member

    Driving:
    UberX

    When I first heard of Uber, what I thought was that Uber was a illegal cab operation who hoodwinked the PUC into recognizing them as a new "class" (TNC).

    After reading the pdf, it seems that they are understanding this, as well, that they got hoodwinked, and these are basically a charter party operation ( TCP, vehicle for hire, like limos and shuttles ).

    My god I hope they succeed, I mean, justice served, they have been operating on an unfair playing field for too long, and Uber has totally disrupted the biz, putting taxis and TCP drivers out of work ( I used to make a livable earning doing this, no longer with rideshare, and I'm ruining my car on top of it ) , because what it will do is force Uber out of California, they wont stand for it, they'll just bail on the market, and if that happens, I can go back to driving for Yellow, since they'll be the first company people will call or maybe lease a black town car TCP and go that route.

    ohh, hundreds of thousands of riders will be mad, but then they'll get a taste of paying a rate that a driver can actually live on. I made twice as much driving a cab than I have been making with Uber (except back in 2014, I did real well when the rate was $2 per mile)
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2018
    Ant-Man likes this.
  8. UBERPROcolorado

    UBERPROcolorado Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Colorado
    Driving:
    UberX
    California’s move to punish rideshare companies is completely in line with the rest of the boneheaded decisions that the state has made over the past several years.

    California is broke. They put their stock in liberal thinking and have little to show for it.

     Out of control homeless population
     Out of control drug abuse
     Out of control illegal population
     Loss of the middle class
     Close to being taken over by the feds
     Home of the snowflakes

    Uber is not going to pay a red cent or comply with regulation, on the levels proposed. Since Uber has more financial resources than CA, they will fight it to the end. If they loose, they will shut it down in CA and move on. >>>>Leaving thousands of drivers out in the cold. <<<

    Yup! The snowflakes are melting !!!!
     
  9. observer

    observer Moderator Moderator

    Location:
    long beach
    I think there are more snowflakes in Colorado than in California.

    Ehh, you may be right.

    https://www.google.com.mx/amp/kdvr....far-how-colorado-stacks-up-to-california/amp/
     
    UBERPROcolorado likes this.
  10. UBERPROcolorado

    UBERPROcolorado Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Colorado
    Driving:
    UberX
    I am a Colorado native. I have watched our state develop from a cow-town to a world class city.

    Yes, we are left leaning in the Denver metro area. However, the rest of the state leans right. There is a balance that has worked pretty well for many decades.

    Unlike CA....we don't shoot ourselves in the foot. We value individual rights and equality....to a great extent. But we are also smart. Denver is in the final phase of one of the most successful gentrification programs in the Nation. In less than 10 years we all but eliminated the ghettos, ran the undesirables out, shuttered 9 or the 12 project housing complexes and brought our economy to the top of the heap. Jobs are every where, housing prices are strong and our citizens are happy.

    What CA needs is a balance. Not to far left or right......

    Drive safe
     
    observer likes this.
  11. westsidebum

    westsidebum Well-Known Member

    Location:
    los angeles
    The commission is uber/Lyft Achilles heel in California . When I suggest drivers petition commission to get reform and posted link to him to submit petition my post was deleted by moderator .
     
    Ant-Man likes this.
  12. UBERPROcolorado

    UBERPROcolorado Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Colorado
    Driving:
    UberX
    There is a reason. If the commission were to regulate Uber, can't say about Lyft, thousands of drivers would be out of work. Uber cannot fit this type of regulation into their program. That is why they walked away from India. You may think it cute to stick it to Uber, but all you would end up doing is loosing your job and thousands of others.

    The funny think is, the snowflakes in Calf. Would be lost without Uber. Pimps, hookers, drug dealers and Calf. Polititions would be lost too.
     
  13. observer

    observer Moderator Moderator

    Location:
    long beach
    Just curious, you all but eliminated the ghettos, shuttered 9 or 12 project housing complexes and ran out the undesireables.

    Where'd you send your undesireables?
     
  14. Ant-Man

    Ant-Man Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Los Angeles
    [​IMG]

    Equality, like as in Greely? K. Smart as in municipalities wanting to secede (Greely, Craig, et al.)? K. Yeah I named Greely twice, but that place is looked up to by many in the rural populations.
     
    UBERPROcolorado likes this.
  15. UBERPROcolorado

    UBERPROcolorado Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Colorado
    Driving:
    UberX
    Many left Colo. Others moved into pockets East of the metro area. At least for the time being. As rental rates continue to rise, more are leaving state.

    There are still pockets that house service workers and other lower paying jobs. Since much of our revenue is based on tourism, we must still maintain some affordable housing.

    Denver is a bit too liberal for cities like Greeley. We still need a mix to make everyone happy, but just not as many liberals as we have now, in the metro area.
     
  16. Trump Economics

    Trump Economics Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Fake news

    Fact: Uber drivers are “cabbies”... omg, the realization of it all.

    Fact: Your wages are already “capped” by an algorithm. If you were truly an independent contractor, they would not.

    As for “set schedules” and “breaks,” Uber and Lyft have routinly perpetuated the myth that both of these are mandated requirements — they are not.

    Breaks (for example) are only required if an employee works a certain amount of hours, so if an employee only works for 2 hours — something that isn’t uncommon — they would not receive a break, a lunch, etc. Set schedules? On-call employees don’t have set schedules. They either pick-up the shift or they don’t (without penalty).

    But it’s easy for Uber and Lyft to say otherwise in an attempt to propagandize drivers into fearing what being an “employee” would look like. The truth is, Uber and Lyft would immediately cease operations if they were mandated to classify their drivers as employees.

    Fact: You don’t lose billions of dollars every year, fail to ever turn a profit, and then make things better by saying, “Hey, I think we’ll add minimum-wage requirements to all of this.”

    Enjoy today’s payday loan while it lasts.

    Everything you just described sounds eerily similar to a magnitude of other states. Yes, CA houses a fourth of the US homeless population, but the cost of living in CA is higher than most states, and they rarely have inclement weather, so nothing surprising there. Again... drug abuse (everywhere), illegal immigrants (everywhere), middle-class dying (everywhere), Feds (if they had any real control, they would have already exercised it), and snowflakes (I don’t know what this is in reference to).

    Not hating on your post, but as a California native, I can’t say that I agree with all of the bullet points.

    Everything you reference just sounds so common, and I don’t know of any state that isn’t filled with people who aren’t living paycheck-to-paycheck. “In every state the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.” No, liberals and conservatives don’t often agree on much, but I think we can agree on that.
     
    observer likes this.
  17. observer

    observer Moderator Moderator

    Location:
    long beach
    It's just a matter of time before Colorados homeless population explodes and they're given one way tickets to California.

    https://www.thedenverchannel.com/ne...-colorado-renters-are-at-risk-of-homelessness
     
    Trump Economics likes this.
  18. REX HAVOC

    REX HAVOC Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    Don't we already have a TCP card that we carry on our dash when we go into the airports. I believe this is a group license Uber pays for that all drivers operate under.

    Anywhere outside of Sacramento, Los Angeles and the Bay Area California tends to be very conservative. The central valley, Orange, San Diego and Riverside Counties tend to be on the conservative side.
     
  19. Adieu

    Adieu Well-Known Member

    Location:
    OC
    Driving:
    UberXL
    This would be cool.

    Too many drivers in CA (hopefully) for Uber to splurge and offer to pay fees themselves, which would nicely trim the part-timers and short-term ants

    They're in CA now.

    Anting for Uber or livin' it up in a tent on skid row!
     
    observer likes this.
  20. Oscar Levant

    Oscar Levant Well-Known Member

    Driving:
    UberX
    Really? we got a $6 billion surplus as of January.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/jerry-...llion-budget-surplus-in-california-1515624022

    No, they won't leave thousands of drivers in the cold. The moonlighters can find more useful work, and those of us who were professionals can go back to driving town cars or yellow cab, both of which paid a livable rate, which was taken away when uber came it, slashed rates in half, and took away all their customers.

    If you are arguing "competition", the PUC didnt' require uber to comply with regulations applied to limos and taxis, so they allowed them to play an unfair playing field. That's not "competition", that's using the law to rob people of their livelihood. The suit in CA, if you read the court filing, the regulators now realize they were duped, they didn't fully grasp what Uber was actually proposing, and it's consequences of disrupting the marketplace in unfair ways. I fully support the effort to force uber to play on a level playing field with charter vehicles.

    If they leave CA, I couldn't be happier, to be honest. It would mean that my income will double, as soon as the customers lost return to town cars and yellow cab. But, it will take some time. You'll hear a lot of millennials who never took cabs in teh first place, whine and squeal about it. No, they can go back to taking the bus, which is what buses are for, cheap transportation. An exclusive ride in a $20k car with a professional driver was never meant to be cheap, taxis were never meant to be cheap, it was only meant to be a convenience, like 7/11 charges more for essential items at a higher cost than a supermarket, because it is convenient.
    The flawed model uber adopted was that they wanted riding an uber to be cheaper than owning a car. That is not a viable idea, and will ultimately fail. It "might" work with SDCs, I don't know, but with driver driven cars, no.

    No, a TCP is something different. If you had it, you would know what it is, because it's a whole process that takes several months applying for that status with teh PUC in CA. (I dont know about other states, though ).

    It's easy to send homeless from a state that has snow in the winter to a state that does not.

    Blame california for it's homeless population, but it's the weather. If you were homeless, where would you rather be, in a cold winter state or a moderate winter state?
     

Share This Page