• UberPeople.NET - Independent community of rideshare drivers. It's FREE to be a person and enjoy all the benefits of membership. JOIN US! CLICK HERE

SAN "Hall Monitors"

rickybobby

Well-Known Member
Ok so yesterday I'm picking up at airport and one of the "hall monitors" who are making notes on their little clipboards when I pull in to pick up said something really odd to me. She tells me "You cannot display both Lyft and Uber placards l, you can only display the one for the company you are picking up for". I told her I've never heard that rule and why that would be. She remained vague saying that the rules. I continued to say that rule is nowhere in what Uber and lyft has provided me so I suggested she explain that confusion to the port authority so that all drivers can be aware of this rule.

1. What the heck are these hall monitors doing there when u pull into ur spot?
2. Can these hall monitors ticket you?
3. Why cant they simply ask "are u lyft or uber?
4. Do these hall monitors work for the airport?
5. I don't really see anywhere the requirement anywhere to display ONLY one placard at once instead of having both there.
 

CityGirl

Well-Known Member
They work for the airport. They are recording data for the trial program, so I treat them really great, as their feedback is going to be used. They are not going to remember anything mundane, only the things that go wrong or anything you do to stand out. I smile and say hi, I learn their names if my passenger isn't out yet and I am planning to bring them some water and snacks now and then (it's SO hot out there).

I wouldn't bother questioning them about the rules, I would just say "Thank you for letting me know, I was not aware of that" and then fixing it right away where they can see it. The rules can be whatever they say they are, I just want us to keep the privilege to pick up there!!
 

rickybobby

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
My question was about displaying both Uber and lyft placards and how this is not allowed per their statment. I never said they were not both clearly displayed because they are. Who employs us and where are these so called rules is all I'm getting at. We have a bunch of rules to be versed with so all I'm asking is how these individuals have the right to rule.
 

Alexanditor

Member
My advice is just to be flexible with the airport monitor and thank them for their input. Its a privilege to pick up at the airport(most cities don't have permission)...let's not make waves over small things.
 
I agree. Even if its not listed in the docs we got from uber and lyft, I wouldn't say a word to the airport people. If you're truly concerned about making sure we are 100% on the rules, then follow their instructions for the day and give Uber or Lyft a hard time about it. In the end most likely if they hear it enough they'll go back to the airport authority and either A: validate it and inform everyone or B: the airport authority will clarify with the parking lot attendents.

By the way, they actually are contractors for the airport not airport employees themselves as they work for the parking company. However regardless their word will help to determine if:

A) The program is feasible to continue long term
B) Benefits the airport
C) Benefits travelers
D) Promotes drivers following airport regulations

If any of the above four are not successful they may terminate the program. Lets remember our brothers and sisters in LA dont have authority to legally pickup from LAX last I heard. And I think we all know that these airport trips our huge to our bottom line. Even with more drivers flocking to the airport to get rides, if our visibility increases, the riders currently still taking taxis will eventually start to move over to us, just like when Uber debuted to begin with. Eventually we will push more taxis back to downtown where they can take the street hails that we cant and they can fight amongst themselves while we take the easy (yet profitable) airport rides.
 

rickybobby

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
Thank you beachedc03. Very good info here.

Everyone so far has thought I was being a shithead or something to these individuals in the lot. Just trying to get some information here so we can all be informed. Not rocking the boat. I get it....having airport pickups is a great thing for us drivers....I get it. Just want to know more about who I'm dealing with there and what they are all about. Observers they are.... Sounds good to me!
 
yeah, i dont go out of my way to be nice to them, but i'm definitely not mean either...just compliant :-)

most others i've seen out there are relatively nice too...

just curious, I've done a couple night pickups when they leave and at that time they put the sticks in the way. where do you usually pick up then?

I was once right in front of the area and an off duty lot attendant gave me a warning about that. Just curious what everyone else is doing.
 

CityGirl

Well-Known Member
My question was about displaying both Uber and lyft placards and how this is not allowed per their statment. I never said they were not both clearly displayed because they are. Who employs us and where are these so called rules is all I'm getting at. We have a bunch of rules to be versed with so all I'm asking is how these individuals have the right to rule.
http://www.driveubersd.com/negative-comments-about-uber

Notice they say not to display both brands.

Even if Uber didn't have that rule, the airport rules govern.
 

rickybobby

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
http://www.driveubersd.com/negative-comments-about-uber

Notice they say not to display both brands.

Even if Uber didn't have that rule, the airport rules govern.
That is a stretch. It doesn't say I cannot display Lyft specifically. Besides its my car and private property. Nothing I'm doing is confusing by displaying both brands. It clearly has the one they called for a ride on. My plate number is there and my pic of my car is on their app. Hell even my mug shot is there. There is no confusion by my Lyft trade dress next to my Uber one.

As you know the airport rules are here: http://www.driveubersd.com/san-airport/ I follow those rules as that is all I'm told. And yes I'm nice to the fine "monitors" at the airport watching what i'm doing. I pull in safely to the properly marked stalls....etc etc etc.
Only thing the Uber/Airport rules call out is be sure to display the Uber trade dress when on a call to pick up. That i'm doing. Don't you think the airport authority reviewed/reviews these rules Uber is publishing?

Not trying to be an ass here but come on. Uber isn't telling me I'm doing something wrong. The "monitor" is telling me so they can make notes of what company is pulling in so they can log us in and reconcile back the money they are making by which company. Its all a note taking about which platform is bringing in the rides === who has more demand === possibly turning into which customers pay less of a surcharge because there is more demand on one vs the other? Uber or Lyft....
 

CityGirl

Well-Known Member
I think this is pretty clear "While driving with Uber, any competitor-branding - both interior and exterior - should not be visible to riders"
Can they enforce it? They don't have to use you.

I think the airport is a more important factor...we do not want to lose that privilege. But you asked if they could do that and whether Uber says so, so there you have both answers. What you choose to do with them is your choice.
 

elelegido

Well-Known Member
That is a stretch.
Yeah, that's a weak argument.

This is a classic insight problem; similar to the nine dot problem. Difficult to decipher because the mind perceives restrictions which are not actually there.

The CPUC rules state that you must display trade dress of the company you are online/on-trip with. But nowhere does it say you are restricted to only displaying a maximum of one trade dress at a time.
 
Last edited:

frndthDuvel

Well-Known Member
The question is other than laziness, why would one want to fly both freak flags at the same time? Many drivers already feel enough of a target with just one trade dress in place. From police,cabs et al. Many drive without and only put in place just prior to arrival. Some of that due to insurance concerns of course. I imagine some folks in viewing an incident might look a bit harder at the car that was identified immediately as TNC.
Laminate your trade dress and slip it between dash and window on PAX corner post. It can be changed at a stop light.
Not following any of the rules that the airport wants to dictate is not likely to be helpful. I certainly appreciated one of the folks telling me I could not pick up unless in a stall. Even though my PAX was way down the sidewalk. No problem, Ill take her warning rather than her calling over somebody else to give me a 265 dollar ticket I think she said it was. I drive with one most of the time. I would not want to forget and pull into the airport at the wrong time.
 

rickybobby

Well-Known Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #15
Yeah, that's a weak argument.

This is a classic insight problem; similar to the nine dot problem. Difficult to decipher because the mind creates restrictions which are not actually there.

The CPUC rules state that you must display trade dress of the company you are online/on-trip with. But nowhere does it say you are restricted to only displaying a maximum of one trade dress at a time.

EXACTLY!
 

marketmark

Well-Known Member
A possibility is that these "hall monitors" are auditing uber/lyft to make sure the airport authority is getting properly paid when passengers are being dropped off.
Having both signs up would make it difficult for the monitors to know which service should be sending in money for the ride.

It would be way too easy for uber or lyft to bill 500 pax for the airport fee and pass only 400 pax worth of fees on.
The airport doesn't trust them that much.
Would you?
 

LyftMurph

Active Member
all it takes is another driver to take a pic of your two traded dress with lic plate and send to both./.......
 

elelegido

Well-Known Member
Some drivers are such wusses when it comes to letting Uber over step the mark. "Our customers don't like to see other companies' trade dress on your car", indeed. Buulllll - Shit!

Imagine if Kelloggs said to Walmart, "Our customers don't like seeing other cereal manufacturers' products on your shelves. It confuses them. Please remove all non-Kelloggs cereals from your shelves". Walmart would tell them to piss off, and rightly so.

Uber is trying to do exactly the same bullying with drivers. But no; as an independent contractor I will offer whatever range of services I see fit. Uber is lucky that I choose to include their brand as an option for passengers.

Way too much "does Uber allow me to do this", "am I allowed to do that?" going on here. Come on, folks, grow a pair and start acting like businessmen and women.
 

Bill Feit

Well-Known Member
Okay, look at it from the insurance side. What or which company insurance are you going to use if you get in an accident? A police look at your cell phone (and they look at all today to see if you are distracted) will tell which TNC you were on line with. ALL the rideshares advise not to show your trade dress if you are NOT signed on to their app...that is mostly because of liability issues. I suggest you show only the one you are signed on for when you pick up. Careful with having those shown when you are not on either...you could face really big lawsuit especially if you are at fault and not on line with either!
 
trust me I understand your principle but i dont know that refusing to do something as simple as display the correct trade dress only at the airport is behaving like businessmen/women. honestly i think it's a little backwards, must businessmen/women who have recently received new business, valuable business (such as access to a new location) would do any reasonable action to keep it. Taking down the second or third trade dress you have up is quite reasonable given the time it took to put it up anyway.

your analogy while functionally correct is logically incorrect. a more correct logic would be new valuable product comes along (maybe Bose) and they say, hey we don't want our stuff seen with Sony and Samsung. You can sell them (although we prefer you dont) but dont put us next to them. You know what would walmart do? They'd evaluate the request, is it reasonable, is it feasible to be actioned with minimal effort, and is the brand worth it.

lets look at our situation, is it reasonable, yes it is. is it feasible with minimal effort (less than 5 seconds for most of us) probably so, is the brand worth it, given the near consistency of the type of rides you pull from there and how long we all, and I mean all as in nationally, have wanted airport access the answer is resoundingly yes.

why not pull it down for the 5 minutes you are at the airport and put back after. i get it, when picking up on the street you want to get in and out quickly, there's not time to put up and take down, i get it. but thats not the case at the airport.

to me it's less about uber and more about appeasing the a/p people. give them less incentive to make up stuff. Just remember, people who do menial jobs in the sun for low pay tend to get frustrated easily when people don't follow their directions. Some of these same people are at times willing to do what necessary to no longer have to deal with same non cooperative people. they don't necessarily have to worry about work because the same company runs a boatload of parking lots elsewhere too, so they'll find work within the system.

being that SAN is inline with 9/10 airports in the US that dont/didnt want to let us in, who will they believe when the hall monitors say we cause trouble, even if that trouble was as simple as not taking down a 2nd/3rd trade dress? they (A/P commissioners) aren't looking to keep us, they are looking for the opportunity to say, public we told you so and look now we have the data to back it up. if it ends up a success they'll quietly keep the money, but if not they'll blast it for all to hear.

i understand it may be a 'made up' rule and not an actual legal requirement, but as long as it's reasonable to follow with minimal effort why be defiant. just because one has a right doesn't mean it should be exercised 100% of the time.
 
Top