Like many entrepreneurs, I began my business 12 years ago with nothing more than 300 square feet and a dream. Today, I employ more than 120 people in a fast-growing PR Agency, but it certainly did not happen easily, and I have been forced to understand and rise above the many challenges of building a business. In addition to the myriad of obvious issues, from human resources to software licensing, there are government regulations that businesses need to deal with – on local, state and federal levels. The government ones are the trickiest, whereas if businesses do not follow them, they will be fined, dragged into court or shut down.
For example, there is a New York City Department of Health (DOH) bill which requires small businesses to give its employees at least five sick days a year; patently absurd. Business owners must provide multilingual written notices to all employees, and if the DOH finds that an employer fired a worker for being sick too often, the employee can be compensated for at least $5,000 as well as receive benefits – “including reinstatement and promotion.” There are astronomical 50% taxes – and countless rules and regulations.
Business owners must follow the law, they get fined, closed or even worse, criminal prosecution and jail time. At the very least, noncompliant business owners get ostracized.
Given these rather obvious facts, how is it that one of the “sexiest” American companies, now valued at $40 Billion, simply ignores, even breaks the law and still operates without much impairment? How can Uber’s business plan be predicated upon breaking the law, yet win awards and be allowed to continue being rewarded with piles of cash from investors?
Uber’s latest law-breaking activities come in Portland, Oregon, where the Mayor of Portland has said the city would not be “stampeded” by Uber until it follows local regulations. As Mayor Hales noted, “Governments must ensure the safety of everyone, while making sure that companies are responsibly serving their customers and our residents.” While there are many areas over government over-regulation, safety and security of the people are indeed the areas that Government was intended to provide. Yet this mega-company ignored the cease-and-desist order issued by the Portland Bureau of Transportation, and still sends livery drivers to pick up customers while it awaits a hearing in the U.S. District Court in Portland. It is a rogue operation illegally taking fares and transporting people in many of America’s largest cities.
Here in New York, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has shockingly taken a stand in favor of these rogue app companies that dispatch drivers and vehicles, hire and pay drivers, and collect money from passengers, yet do not follow the same rules as New York’s own regulated taxis and car services. (Who ever heard of an AG seeking less oversight?) Schneiderman pursues AirbnB so vigorously, which he believes puts the public at risk and ignores hospitality regulations, yet he placates taxi apps from these rogue companies without seeing the irony of it all.
From Arizona to Nevada, Columbia, Spain & Thailand, Uber operates illegally, and is banned in many countries. Its business model seems to be to break the law, and operate with impunity.
What happens when someone is injured in one of its cars? A woman was just raped by an Uber driver in India, and New Delhi banned them; the country of India is now considering a national ban. Uber has had so many safety issues and operational violations, and still, venture capitalists keep throwing money at it while financial regulators do nothing to stop them from doing so. Where exactly is protection of the public? Getting a lawyer from https://www.legalreader.com/experienced-business-lawyer-can-help-you-avoid-legal-troubles/ is a good idea when it comes to the legalities of such cases.
As Time Magazine noted, “The Company has fought efforts in Chicago, Arizona, California, and elsewhere to make Uber submit to the same background check and drug-testing rules that conventional taxis are required to follow.” Asking Uber drivers to submit to the same security checks that locally regulated drivers do, and to have cars meet the same level of inspection are a basic safety measure. Those protect the passenger; why is Uber allowed to ignore these?
Anyone in any business may not like the rules, but we all understand that we need to follow them or face the consequences. If Uber breaks the law, and puts the public in harm’s way, it must be punished; even if it is worth $40 Billion dollars. If, indeed these laws are wrong then law-abiding companies can lobby and work within the system to clarify or modify the rules for the whole industry, not just to benefit one company.
Actor Wesley Snipes ignored taxes because of his “ideologies” and ended up in prison. Uber does not believe in rules, yet no one is charged with a crime and its valuation keeps increasing. Explain that one!
Ronn Torossian is an entrepreneur & Author. He represents the Greater New York Taxi Association, an organization of medallion owners – although he writes this in a personal capacity.
TfL received 250 complaints in a fortnight last August
Complaints: Buses at Finsbury Park Picture: Glenn Copus
A bus driver who slammed on the brakes so sharply that a baby was “sent flying” to the floor in his pram reportedly told the child’s terrified mother: “This is how I always drive.”
The mother is one of more than 250 people who lodged complaints with Transport for London in the space of a fortnight last August, according to information obtained by the Standard under Freedom of Information laws.
Other complaints include a bus driver accused of going “as fast as possible” the wrong way around a roundabout and another said to be so distracted by a female pedestrian that he hit a cyclist.
There were also 37 complaints of speeding, 13 of running red lights or zebra crossings and three reports of drivers using phones at the wheel.
In the first alleged incident, the mother was travelling from Harrow Road in north-west London towards the city centre on the 36 bus with her toddler and six-month-old son.
The driver was said to have “braked so harshly” at the Hyde Park Corner roundabout that “the pushchair went flying and landed on the floor with the baby inside”.
The complaint report into the alleged incident on August 1 reads: “The customer went to approach the driver about this and asked him to drive more carefully but he responded: ‘This is how I always drive.’
“He was rude and did not offer any apology although at this point the baby was crying due to the fall. She will be taking her baby to the hospital as well as she’s worried that the impact of the fall may have hurt him.”
On average Transport for London receives between 4,000 and 5,000 complaints a year. It said the figure must been seen in the context of the capital’s 2.4 billion annual bus journeys.
A report into the driver of a 140 bus who was accused of driving “as fast as possible” the wrong way around a roundabout said: “People were falling over and a little girl got hurt.
“The driver did not even apologise and just carried on even when people were questioning him.”
One man complained he was almost hit by a W13 bus while crossing the road with his one-year-old son: “The light went red, I could see the W13 bus approaching at speed and hesitated.
“The bus made no attempt to stop for the red light and if anything seemed to accelerate as it went through.” There were 25 incidents involving cyclists. One passenger witnessed a 53 bus “overtake a cyclist causing her to be forced off the road and have to throw herself off the bike to ensure she did not get hit”.
Another described a 45 bus driver being distracted by a female pedestrian, saying: “He was concentrating on her so much that he didn’t see a cyclist and hit them.” Previous Freedom of Information requests to TfL related to a longer time period but were refused as there was too much data to collate.
A TfL spokeswoman said: “Any complaint about a bus driver would be logged and passed on the relevant bus operator. The bus operating company then deals with the driver according to their internal disciplinary procedures. We do not share the outcome of disciplinary procedures.”
Mike Weston, TfL’s director of buses, said: “Passenger satisfaction is hugely important to TfL — in fact our organisational ethos is ‘every journey matters’.
“The statistics in question here must be considered in the context of the 2.4 billion bus journeys that are made each year across a bus network that comprises 8,700 buses, operating on around 700 bus routes and travelling more than 490 million kilometres in passenger service.”
Uber didn’t actually invent anything, they marketed the illusion that the world revolves around us – a self-aggrandising trick that the world is on-demand for me, and yes, I really am the one in control, it is all about me, isn’t it?
Well actually, far from it!
That’s why there’s often a disproportionate outburst when an Uber driver cancels (a regular occurrence). Upper-case screams of “How dare your driver cancel after I’ve been waiting 15 mins”, can be seen all over Twitter.
So what’s gong on? When an Uber driver cancels, unconsciously, we suffer from what’s known as ‘Narcissistic Injury,’ where our delusion of grandeur and entitlement is stripped away. Think of it like this, if we get rejected by someone we find sexually attractive, it’s (intra-psychic) impact on our sense of self can make us feel worthless, ugly, or unwanted. This blow to our omnipotence, forces us to readdress this horrible feeling of humiliation, by seeking out what’s (conversely) known as ‘Narcissistic Supply’.
Unlike those with ‘borderline’ personality traits, who are more likely to self medicate with alcohol to sedate feelings of unworthiness, we narcissists might go and have sex with an ex, a prostitute, or as many people as we can. By doing so, we regain our sense of self importance, thus restoring psychic harmony.
As far as Uber is concerned, we are a little more limited as to what we can do to readdress the balance. We respond with the only option available to us by rejecting them. Further screams of, “I will never use your sh*t service again’ flood Uber’s Twitter page.
With that we regain a degree of control.
We probably fall short of deleting the app altogether, because we might need to draw on the illusion of ‘It’s all about me’ at some point again in the future. We’ll cling on to a lot of things that hide us from the realisation that we are futile.
With Uber’s “everyone’s private chauffeur” I couldn’t possibly be merely data, where my every move is tracked for their benefit and not mine, could I?
So you see, it’s all about feeling in control and avoiding losing control, when in fact, we were never in control to begin with.
They’ve Gotcha!
#Shudder
So where does this leave that Last Bastion of the British Empire- London’s Black Cab drivers? Well, for starters, there’s a far superior app, specially tailored for London, that utilises the services of fully vetted, fully insured, ‘‘street-wise’ black cab drivers only. That aside, the reason why SatNav systems & Gizmos will never replace The Knowledge is;
Passenger: “Can you take me to the famous blue door is please?”
Driver: “Which one sweetheart? 93 Chester Square or 280 Westbourne Park Road?”
Even if I am vague or confused or unsure of where I want to go, the black cab drivers comprehensive understanding of the great metropolis allows for a deductive where, invariably, he knows the destination even without me even having to name it. So, I am reassured to know that I’ll get to where I need to be. The question is, does this make me feel more in control than I would using a smartphone gizmo only?
The reality is that in both cases I relinquish a degree of control to the person driving me. This is a valid position in many areas of our lives, and with that comes the small matter of trust.
Now, out of the 2 services, who would I trust to get me where I need to be, when I need to be there? Unreservedly, and without hesitation, I’d choose the black cab driver…every time!
Local police, together with transportation and commercial authorities, raided the offices of the car-hailing app Uber in the southern Chinese metropolis of Guangzhou Thursday night. Authorities suspect Uber employees of organizing illegal taxi services, according to local Chinese media reports.
Investigators visited the office and confiscated phones and other equipment, according to reports in the Guangzhou Daily, which obtained pictures of the raid. Authorities said in a public statement that investigations were still ongoing.
Ride-hailing apps have spread rapidly in China, but they tread on shaky legal ground. In January, Chinese authorities banned apps that connect passengers with private drivers operating “black cabs.” The regulations, however, contained some ambiguity, allowing for “premium” services and even praising some apps as innovative.
Uber representatives reached by local media said operations continued uninterruptedon Friday. Representatives from Uber’s Guangzhou office could not be reached for comment.
Taxi- and car-booking apps have generated friction across China. A series of taxi strikes this past winter were a reaction, in part, to the increased competition from private drivers using ride-hailing apps. Illegal cabs are common throughout China, but an explosion in the use of car-hailing apps has shone a spotlight on the phenomenon.
Since launching in Shanghai in 2013, Uber has expanded to nine Chinese cities. It’s been a relatively slow expansion, due to the company’s efforts to keep its services both legal and high-quality. That, in turn, has allowed for the rapid spread of domestic competitors, of which many have been dubbed “the Uber of China” and backed by China’s biggest Internet companies.
Uber has hoped to ease its expansion in China by partnering with the Chinese Internet search giant Baidu.
Even as American tech firms have been having a tough time with Chinese markets and regulators, as recently as Thursday commentators were praising Uber China as a model of successful localization in Chinese markets. Last year, the company answered the Beijing government’s call for greater ride-sharing by introducing “People’s Uber,” a nonprofit service that matches commuters traveling on similar routes. In December, Uber partnered with and received an investment from the Chinese Internet juggernaut Baidu.
Uber first encountered problems in December, when police raided an Uber driver training session in the city of Chongqing. Drivers working for various ride-hailing apps have been stopped and fined, with one potentially precedent-setting casecurrently working its way through local courts. Chinese taxi companies are often owned by the local government and operate as oligopolies, creating a steep uphill fight for outside competitors.
Uber had hoped to avoid the illegal “black cab” label by never working with private drivers in private cars. In an interview last August, Uber Beijing General Manager Ben Chiang told The WorldPost that the company partners exclusively with rental car companies and professional chauffeurs. At the time, Chiang said this placed Uber safely within Chinese law, while other local competitors frequently used illegal cars and drivers.
Recent Comments