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

[WestCoastEcho]

Taxi cartel is being even more crappier than normal; they are still trying to stop ridesharing by filing a lawsuit against the Passenger Transportation Board, AND they announced that they won't subsidize accessible vehicles:

https://twitter.com/richardzussman/status/1221938744145727488

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by WestCoastEcho

Taxi cartel is being even more crappier than normal; they are still trying to stop ridesharing by filing a lawsuit against the Passenger Transportation Board, AND they announced that they won't subsidize accessible vehicles:

https://twitter.com/richardzussman/status/1221938744145727488

well, there are always 2 way to play it, i guess they have decided to double down. worst of luck to them.

[GeeCee]

Ride hailing companies aren't required to have accessible vehicles at all, please keep in mind who's being left in the lurch here.

[jollyburger]

So they provided accessibility services while monopolizing the market. Now they want to take their ball and go home. Surprised?

[Sheba]

A few details:

A group of Metro Vancouver taxi companies is heading to B.C. Supreme Court to try to stop Uber and Lyft from operating.

The nine taxi companies filed two legal challenges Monday.

One is an injunction application seeking to immediately stop Uber and Lyft's from conducting business, while the second challenge, a petition to quash their licences, is heard.

...

The lawsuit comes nearly six months after the same group asked the B.C. Supreme Court to quash the Passenger Transportation Board's rules on ride-hailing.

The cab companies argued the rules favoured companies like Lyft and Uber at the expense of the taxi industry, including no initial limits on fleet size and large operating areas for ride-hailing companies.

Cabs are capped at 2,500 licenses and the taxi industry wants that same limit applied to ride-hailing vehicles in Metro Vancouver.

Bauer said they dropped that court action in September because the board indicated it had yet to finalizes its rules.

But when the board approves Uber and Lyft's license applications last week, it kept the same rules on fleet size and pricing.

...

The comments below the article will come as a surprise to no one here. I esp found one person amusing - claiming "untrained people in unregulated vehicles" and "ride sharing is a nice way of describing tax evasion". The majority had a few choice words to say about that.

[jollyburger]

Surrey mayor Doug McCallum said ride-hailing should not be rolled out while there are legal cases in play. However, he said the city would not challenge ride-hailing in court.

What even he's not stupid enough to know they have no legal standing to block ride sharing?

It's a giant PR game and the taxi association is losing ground every day.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by GeeCee

Ride hailing companies aren't required to have accessible vehicles at all, please keep in mind who's being left in the lurch here.

Given the multiple horror stories of being constantly refused by the taxi industry's WAV drivers, disabled passengers have very little to lose with rideshare.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Given the multiple horror stories of being constantly refused by the taxi industry's WAV drivers, disabled passengers have very little to lose with rideshare.

Well at least the taxi industry has wheelchair-accessible vehicles.

Do the ride sharing apps have a provision for requesting an accessible vehicle? If so, owning such a vehicle might give you a bit of a leg up as a Uber or Lyft driver - you'd have the ability to pick up more people (both able-bodied and not) and the for latter you'd be part of a smaller pool of available drivers.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Well at least the taxi industry has wheelchair-accessible vehicles.

Do the ride sharing apps have a provision for requesting an accessible vehicle? If so, owning such a vehicle might give you a bit of a leg up as a Uber or Lyft driver - you'd have the ability to pick up more people (both able-bodied and not) and the for latter you'd be part of a smaller pool of available drivers.

I wonder if there's a business case to be made for having a ride-hailing company that caters to accessibility. Like it doesn't have a token 10% of accessible vehicles, it instead has 100% accessible vehicles.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by WestCoastEcho

Taxi cartel is being even more crappier than normal; they are still trying to stop ridesharing by filing a lawsuit against the Passenger Transportation Board, AND they announced that they won't subsidize accessible vehicles:

https://twitter.com/richardzussman/status/1221938744145727488

I don't understand why they would pursue this when every other Canadian province has ride-hailing services? Surely the taxi lobby in those cities lost such arguments?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Well at least the taxi industry has wheelchair-accessible vehicles.

Do the ride sharing apps have a provision for requesting an accessible vehicle? If so, owning such a vehicle might give you a bit of a leg up as a Uber or Lyft driver - you'd have the ability to pick up more people (both able-bodied and not) and the for latter you'd be part of a smaller pool of available drivers.

Technically they do, but it's only 30% effective, so they're at least making a show of improving that. Still beats the crap out of close to 0%.

[Mac Write]

I don't get it Taxi's are now removing the discount for Wheelchair vans for the disabled increasing the cost for the disabled. I guess having the corner marketed with wheelchair clients and TaxiSavers they can gauge them to death and treat them like low lives, etc.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Technically they do, but it's only 30% effective...

Wow, that suggests that it's a seller's market if you drive an accessible vehicle. You'd think that would be a pretty good incentive to have one.

[jollyburger]

Uber filing for an injunction against Surrey

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/uber-applies-for-injunction-to-stop-ticketing-of-drivers-in-surrey-1.4787782

[Migrant_Coconut]

If Big Taxi had taken even a tenth of the time/effort they waste in court and used it to actually give a sh*t about improving service, maybe they wouldn't be in this mess.

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Wow, that suggests that it's a seller's market if you drive an accessible vehicle. You'd think that would be a pretty good incentive to have one.

Problem is that rideshare in its current form is BYOV. How many non-professional drivers are going to buy a brand new van just for a gig job?

[osirisboy]

Don't all the cities that have uber etc also still have their traditional taxis?

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Wow, that suggests that it's a seller's market if you drive an accessible vehicle. You'd think that would be a pretty good incentive to have one.

not when you have Handydart competing. It's a heavy invenstment for Uber/lyft drivers to buy a new and modify a vehicle to be wheelchair friendly. When most of the customers don't need an accessible vehicle, the business case becomes quite poor.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

not when you have Handydart competing. It's a heavy invenstment for Uber/lyft drivers to buy a new and modify a vehicle to be wheelchair friendly. When most of the customers don't need an accessible vehicle, the business case becomes quite poor.

Handydart can't compete with the convenience of ride hailing. Sure, there's an extra investment in an accessible vehicle, but from the sounds of it you've got pretty much a guaranteed clientele. Would it be worth the investment? I don't know, but it sounds like something to think about.

[Sheba]

Surrey Mayor Doug McCallum signs on to regional ridesharing licence, demands changes for taxi industry

After weeks of pushback, Surrey Mayor Doug McCallum has pledged his support for an inter-municipal business licence for ride-hailing, the details of which were released Friday.

But McCallum wants to see the province’s independent Passenger Transportation Board change the rules for taxi companies.

“By having a single ride-hailing business licence for the region, this will eliminate duplication, confusion, and waste of time and money for both those issuing and seeking a licence,” McCallum said.

“I have not budged from my position that a level playing field must be in place for ride-hailing and taxi companies to compete in. My fight is about ensuring fair competition in a highly regulated industry.”

McCallum says the Passenger Transportation Board must now make changes to improve things for taxi companies and drivers. He is asking for a review of taxi boundaries, fleet caps, insurance requirements, and ensuring ride-hailing vehicles provide accessible services for all customers.

...

Ride-hailing vehicles have different rules than taxi companies when it comes to municipalities. Taxi companies can only pick up in the municipality where they are registered and pay a business licence fee. Ride-hailing companies can pick up in any jurisdiction as designed by provincial law.

...

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

i do agree that whole picking up only in once place thing is dumb.

but forcing ride hailing to have wheelchair vehicles is untenable as well. since it is based on using your own personal vehicle, forcing that onto them is not what the service is about.

since it really isnt about providing a service, it is about people having something to do when they are bored/want some extra money/or just enjoy driving.

if someone has a vehicle, all the power to them. but forcing it isn't a solution i think.