The Boston City Council agreed today to see if there's anything in the city's taxi regulations they can change that would put the shrinking number of medallion owners on a more equal footing with Uber and Lyft drivers and let them continue driving the streets.
Councilor Frank Baker (Dorchester) requested a hearing on the issue today. Baker cited the plight of individual medallion owners - rather the large fleet owners who had once managed to corner hundreds of medallions before Uber and Lyft move into Boston.
Baker, who said he has had grown men sit in his office and cry, said he would look at whether there are any provisions in the taxi, or "hackney," regulations that could be loosened, because ride-share drivers, who are regulated by the state rather than the city, do not have as many regulatory burdens.
Baker said the BPD hackney unit now has "hundreds of medallions literally just sitting on a shelf now," because there's just no market for the badges now that their prices have crashed from $300,000 to $600,000 before ride sharing to maybe $35,000 today.
Councilor Ed Flynn (South Boston, South End, Chinatown, Downtown) agreed it's a shame what's happened to tax drivers, who he said supported the city when the city was in horrible shape 40 or 50 years ago and that it's time for the city to help them.
"During difficult times in our city, taxi drivers were always there for us," he said. "Now that city is booming, it seems there's no place left for our taxi drivers."
Councilor Andrea Campbell (Dorchester) agreed the council should look at how to help "hardworking dedicated residents and folks who are just looking to get ahead."
She added that "this issue frankly is about justice," because so many cab drivers are people of color and immigrants and because the city failed to help them when the ride-share companies first burst on the scene.
"It is really heart wrenching to hear some of their stories," she said. "They bet their lives on this income to get their child through college, to buy a home."
The next step is for a council committee to call a public hearing on the issue, to let city officials, residents and drivers discuss what could be done.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Taxis
By Bobp
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 3:37pm
I know many will not have any sympathy for taxi drivers, but they were screwed over by the state when Uber and Lyft showed up and were allowed to run illegal taxi fleets by calling them ride sharing. By the time, the state did anything, and it was and still is weak regulation it was too late. Anyone who travels anywhere Downtown or the Back Bay and sees the ride share vehicles parked in no stopping zones, double-parked and ignoring traffic laws should thank the state for the increased traffic.
Add in the horrible driver safety and general non vetting of ride share vehicles and drivers and we get what the state deserves. When all the taxis are gone and Uber runs out of money what happens then?
Crickets from the law and order folks
By spin_o_rama
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 3:55pm
eScooters/dockless bikes wanna setup shop in Boston? Sorry we are going to force you to geo-tag your products, you have to cap top speeds and they cannot be left in Boston.
Uber and Lyft wanna setup shop in Boston? Come on in, we will only geo-tag around airport/major train stations, speed as much as you like and park whereever you can fit.
We all know Uber is hemorrhaging VC money on the pipe dream that one day AVs will be viable enough that they can just dump the drivers to the curb and people can get chauffeured around by AI in comfort because for some reason, AVs are also going to solve traffic congestion.
eScooters and dockless bikes present different issues
By ScottB
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 5:50pm
If Uber and Lyft drivers are speeding or double parking or blocking intersections there's a perfectly good remedy under existing laws: traffic enforcement. If the BPD can't be bothered to enforce the rules on the books that's an issue for policymakers.
eScooters do need capped speeds because the users are likely going to ride on sidewalks and that presents a hazard to pedestrians. Uber/Lyft drivers generally aren't going to be driving on the sidewalk. Dockless bikes wouldn't be so much of a problem, except that experience in other jurisdictions has shown that their users are often careless about where the bikes are left, and that can prove to be a nuisance which the companies need to address. There's also the issue that the City has some skin in the game with respect to BlueBikes.
Some valid points
By spin_o_rama
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 10:52am
But come on, Ubers and Lyfts absolutely drive on sidewalks. And they, along with cars in general, are a far greater hazard to pedestrians. Whens that last time a scooter crashed through a storefront?
The issue with saying BPD should do better enforcement is to say, well yeah duh. But we know it won't happen and they cannot be everywhere, so here we are asking for the same standard to be applied to rideshares as it was to escooters/dockless bikes specifically because the technology exists to do just that.
Uber can know the speeds of drivers and enforce via penalties. They don't. They can geo-tag the countless no parking areas in Boston and penalize for violations. They don't.
We could also have red light and speed cameras but the car lobby will fight tooth and nail against that.
Literally can apply that to countless things with motorists, yet here we are putting up with it.
Cabs drive on sidewalks too.
By ScottB
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 1:37pm
Several years back, a friend of mine ended up with a serious injury when a cab hit him on the sidewalk. And good luck trying to collect any compensation when the cab/medallion owner carries the bare minimum in liability coverage or is allowed to self-insure. Cabs are just as much a hazard to pedestrians as rideshare vehicles so maybe we should ban them too. They're certainly a far greater hazard than your ordinary private automobile.
If we want Uber and Lyft to penalize drivers for speeding or parking in no-parking areas then we should absolutely require taxis to carry the same sort of technology and be subject to the same sort of penalties. However, geotagging down to the level of no-parking zones won't work in areas with lots of tall buildings; GPS just isn't that reliable.
Like I said, there are already laws on the books which prohibit the behavior by Uber/Lyft/cab drivers you cite. Demand more effective enforcement. With e-scooters and dockless bikes, we'd need to fine users for riding on the sidewalks and potentially impound the vehicles if they're left blocking sidewalks or in other unacceptable places. At least with BlueBikes, the user pays a hefty fine if the bike isn't returned to the dock.
Red light and speed cameras suck because they end up being used to drive revenue for the camera company and governmental jurisdiction more so than to improve safety. You get more rear-end collisions because drivers slam on the brakes to avoid a citation. Cities and towns shorten yellow light durations to the bare minimum (and sometimes less) to drive more violations. Cha Ching.
The whole red light camera industry is rife with corruption and bribery. Go look at what happened in Chicago to see how sleazy the whole business is.
Citations please
By spin_o_rama
Thu, 03/05/2020 - 4:37pm
Awful lotta things said here, not so much substance.
Thanks!
Then there’s Lyft for that,
By Ahab
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 3:59pm
Then there’s Lyft for that, too. Don’t like that the taxi cab companies aren’t (no pun intended) faring well? Too bad. It’s a competitive market. And frankly, after years of dealing with sketchy issues from drivers (I.E. “my credit-card scanner isn’t working..pay cash†or ignoring picking up persons of color such as myself), I opted for ride-sharing. Maybe if the cost of a taxi cab medallion wasn’t so artificially-inflated, drivers wouldn’t have to go by the absurd lengths to pay off the cabs.
Let the medallion owners compete
By anon
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 7:28pm
It is now a competitive market but the hacks are hamstrung by city regulations that the share drivers aren’t.
Relax the regulations.
The medallion price wasn’t artificially inflated, BTW.
That was true supply and demand at work because of the limits on the # of medallions issued.
The limited number of
By anon
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 12:23am
The limited number of medallions IS an artificial inflation of medallion prices.
Free market supply and demand would mean more people wanting to ride in taxis would push up the fare, which would encourage more people to switch from other jobs to driving taxis.
Kind of like what happens with Uber and Lyft today. Look at all the cars with NYC TLC plates in Boston.
Don’t be fooled
By iamblued
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 8:21pm
Both Uber and Lyft have quarterly losses in the BILLIONS. Don’t be fooled by corporate doublespeak like ‘disruption’ and ‘innovation’ neither company has a plan for profitability or sustainability except to crush any and all competition and figure out how to make profits later.
Do we not want to have anything to fall back on when investors either wisen up, or Lyft and Uber jack prices up massively to offset their massive nearly 20 Billion dollar yearly losses?
Rideshares have 100%
By RoseMai
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 11:53am
Rideshares have 100% innovated on the customer experience. Taxis are free to keep up, but the vast majority can't or choose not to try. I would happily take a taxi that has: an app, no cash necessary, background checks, ratings, the capability to send my location to someone else, etc.
Otherwise, I see no reason to prop up a service that has been IME unreliable and rather sketchy at times. (The sketchiness can happen with Ubers too, but at least when it does you can share your location, have a record of who picked you up in what car, contact the authorities, have tracking of where you were taken, or leave a poor rating.)
If Uber and Lyft tank, I'm sure some other company will fill the gap.
Its not sustainable
By spin_o_rama
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 12:34pm
The business model is losing money and the low rates riders enjoy is only a result of Uber taking heavy loses.
They want AVs to one day replace the drivers and keep those low rates. Oh and magically solve congestion.
Those Billions in losses are primarily growth / non-ride share
By DB
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 12:50pm
The core ride-share business is close to profitability. Much of the losses are attributable to growth costs from new market entry and the other businesses (Eats, Freight, AV). Perhaps ride-share costs will need to eventually come up a few percent, but it's misleading to claim that somehow the ride-share business will eventually need to make up the $B+ quarterly shortfall.
Profitability
By Carson
Fri, 02/28/2020 - 7:07am
The truth about Uber is they have no road to profitability only a Ponzi scheme that they float with borrowed money and money from going public the true road to profitability will be to jack up all the prices on the general public which they undoubtably will have to do if they want to survive by then they’re hoping the cab business is wiped out all the politicians have played ball with them By giving them light regulations not make them get fingerprinted like cabdriverS have to do Every single year at Boston police headquarters And what is most corrupt at all if they have allowed them to Do surge pricing with no oversight at all if they want to make more money searge price who’s watching them that’s stealing but that’s OK because their Uber they have the keys to the city because they bought them from the politicians that’s a fact corruption play the biggest role in Uber‘s growth can anybody really dispute that and let us never forget tricky DeVol Patrick Top of the list Took the power away from local cities and gave it to the state his wife was doing legal work for Uber while he was governor and I believe is still on Uber‘s board
Cabs
By Carson
Fri, 02/28/2020 - 6:54am
You’re pretty fast to say it’s a competitive market with the deck was loaded against cabdrivers it wasn’t fair and if they could do it the cab driver that can do it to anyone they change existing laws to destroy your business not sure what you do for a living but I could probably happen to you to write all about greed and only a handful of people got super rich even the Uber and lift drivers are slaves don’t make enough money work too hard think about that before you you write off hard working cabdrivers
> double-parked and ignoring
By anon
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 4:05pm
> double-parked and ignoring traffic laws should thank the state for the increased traffic
taxis are guilty of this as well
> When all the taxis are gone and Uber runs out of money what happens then?
I don't care. Free market will find a way.
Horrible taxi service and broken MBTA are the root cause of these issues. Ride sharing is the symptom.
To be fair, I did have a really good Taxi experience recently (Metro Cab). I needed a van service to logan from Brighton: Uber quote: $80 + unspecified long wait, Taxi: $45 and a curteous and professional driver within 15 minutes. Taxi beat Uber on price and service, I will likely use them again.
I hope you are right...
By iamblued
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 8:39pm
I wish you I shared your quixotic faith in this neon god you praise.
Capitalism is built around capital. Capital is precisely what Uber and Lyft totally lack. Two companies losing BILLIONS of dollars quarterly with no near term plans to correct things and move towards profitability.
The very identity of the Corporation is founded on the idea of returning value to investors. Sooner or later investors will want the payout they expect (and deserve), and neither company has any plan for that.
I hope your right, but history has not been kind to this kind of business.
The state couldn't do anything about it
By ScottB
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 5:42pm
Because Uber and Lyft still aren't taxi services. They're not allowed to pick up curbside hails; the rides have to be prearranged, just as livery/black car services had been for many years. It's just that someone(s) figured out a very clever way to match customers with drivers via apps and back-end server infrastructure. And as it turns out, requesting a ride on an app is a better customer experience than standing next to the street with your arm up, hoping a cab stops, and hoping they won't drive away when you tell them you want to go to Mattapan.
They're not popular just because they're less expensive -- the T is usually the least expensive option, after all. The customer experience with Uber and Lyft is generally much better than it is with a cab because the customer rating matters and because the driver can't lie about the credit card reader being broken.
And the state moved slowly to regulate in part because these services are popular with the public. There was, appropriately, little political will to protect a small number of rent-seekers at the expense of a broad swath of the public.
Considering the crazy $#!+ I've seen cabbies do on the road in Downtown and the Back Bay, Uber and Lyft drivers are in no way, shape, or form worse.
I recently found myself in a
By CH
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 7:52pm
I recently found myself in a situation in which Uber/Lyft are way, way worse than taxis. I was dropped off in Allston after 2 AM, with only a regular phone because my smart phone recently died. No way to hail an Uber or Lyft and the taxi industry is dead so there were no cabs on the street or at the cab stand near McDonald's. I was stranded in 15 degree weather, watching cars with pink Lyft lights drive by, until I found a parked cab with a phone number on it so I could order myself a car the old-fashioned way.
Sure, it was an unusual situation, but I wasn't the only one: there was another guy wandering around the same area asking anybody he saw if he could get a ride. Seemed like he'd been doing it since the bars closed. I called him a cab, too.
Not sure what the market-based solution for this is. Occasional late night T service would've fixed it for sure.
Need help understanding part of your story
By Smart Arse
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 10:36pm
Dropped off? then you needed a ride. The hell?
I had a ride from Worcester
By CH
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 10:42am
I had a ride from Worcester to Boston, but they were not willing to take me all the way to my actual neighborhood. Allston was the closest they would get.
That's what GoGoGrandparent
By anon
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 12:27am
That's what GoGoGrandparent is for. It's a niche business to provide Ubers by phone call.
Another problem is that SuperShuttle and the like no logger serve a lot of outlying areas. And you can't arrange an Uber or Lyft for an early morning flight in advance. You have to take your chances that one will be available.
lol what? uber and lyft both
By anon
Fri, 02/28/2020 - 9:43am
lol what? uber and lyft both have "schedule a ride" options. I used uber's two weeks ago to make sure I'd have an XL available at 3am for a first-out flight.
As far as I know, the
By anon
Fri, 02/28/2020 - 5:22pm
As far as I know, the "schedule a ride" feature does not actually schedule a ride in advance with a specific driver. It just starts looking for a driver at that time, the same as if you left it to the last minute. If no drivers are around your distant suburb that morning, you could be out of luck.
Lyft driver here. In the app
By DTP
Mon, 03/02/2020 - 8:40am
Lyft driver here. In the app we can look for scheduled trip requests and sign up for them in advance. They all seem to get snapped up almost immediately after they appear.
Not sure how Uber does it.
Go go grandparent
By Stevil
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 12:33am
You can call them and they will call u a Lyft or Uber. Really for old people that don't have smart phones so a bit of a buggy whip biz, but it'll do the trick.
The truth
By capecoddah
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 8:22pm
Uber and Lyft drivers in Massachusetts are subject to a TNC inspection.
Tony over on Belgrade and Centre refused to inspect my car until I vacuumed it... and he is a good friend. I have badge awards for cleanliness and zero complaints in five years. You cannot have an unvacuumed car on your day off in this state.
Non vetting my ass.
inspection
By Bobp
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 9:16am
so before last year what happened.?
i am sure you have all the proper insurance and liability as well since you are a professional driver.
Insurance
By capecoddah
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 9:32am
Yes.
While not a proper vetting, this little Q+A here is still a little addition to the thorough vetting Uber and Lyft drivers are subject to. Ask a cab driver if they ever had some smartass confront them with "i am sure you have all the proper insurance and liability as well since you are a professional driver".
I didn't vacuum my car before state inspection. Now with TNC inspection added, I do. Before last year I always vacuumed my car before going online. Now I vacuum my car before going online and before TNC inspection.
before last year
By Bobp
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 12:07pm
there was no real safety checks and poor background checks. It was after all the problems with drivers that Uber started the new program. TAxi drivers are professional drivers have to pass a test and are required to have proper insurance and have twice yearly safety and equipment checks.
Wow
By capecoddah
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 12:21pm
And there was me taking my car in once a year for state inspection.
What got into me?
What SAFETY procedures/inspections are required of Boston cabs above the state inspection?
poor logic
By anony-mouse
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 9:16pm
This premise is faulty logic. Taxi drivers were as bad as Uber/Lyft drivers when it came to bad driving, and unprofessionalism. And the State didn't regulate them because they found a niche not covered by the regulations, while also doing a much better jobs than taxis.
regulation
By Bobp
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 9:13am
all taxis, limo's and any other vehicle for hire are regulated by the state DPU. Uber and Lyft did not do this and the state turned a blind eye. Hello lobbying money. Other states, cities and countries stopped them immediately.
Do we know it was lobbying money?
By DB
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 12:58pm
I thought Uber's strategy was to move aggressively into new markets to establish a user base before the regulatory wheels could turn and block them. Customers became accustomed to the superior value prop of Uber before any real regulatory action could take place, so politicians were forced to go easy on Uber for risk of public backlash.
Of course Uber spends on lobbying. It's part of the answer for sure. But I'd bet they invest first in gaining market share and then lobby from a position of strength.
Has the city Council the mayor and the governor all of a sudden
By Carson
Fri, 02/28/2020 - 7:14am
Has the city Council the mayor and the governor all of a sudden developed a conscience Wow what brought that on after six years of screwing cabdrivers Now that we’ve helped destroy the cabbusiness let’s see if we can throw them some crumbs and appear to be doing the right thing for a Change Liberal city like Boston always claiming to help the immigrants what do they think the cabt business is they didn’t have the voting power to vote these idiots out of office politicians knew that so they screwed them
I wonder if the existing
By JLS
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 3:45pm
I wonder if the existing regulations governing jitneys would help.
They are on the books and may just need applying/enforcement.
Jitneys!!
By Charles Bahne
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 9:06pm
As yes, the newfangled, market disrupting technology... from a century ago!
Literally -- the 19-teens.
Cambridge uses their jitney
By anon
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 12:31am
Cambridge uses their jitney license law to interfere with all kinds of buses other than the T. Such private shuttles run by colleges and employers, and interstate long-distance buses (which are supposed to be able to operate without local interference under Federal law).
It's funny....
By Rozzie Rez
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 3:47pm
How business owners love the free market until it works, then they go crying to the government to help.
Industries and business models get disrupted -- constantly. If you bank on regulatory capture and or rest on laurels you will go under.
Taxi medallions
By anon
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 7:43pm
Were never a free market.
Medallions are a way for the government to maintain a quota.
Medallions
By ScottB
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 10:10am
Were a way for the existing players in the market to keep out competition. Almost a century ago, the purpose might have been to avoid chaos and congestion from too many taxis on the road, but the medallion system involved into a scheme where medallion holders could extract rent from drivers and passengers without producing any value for that rent.
Government enables rent seeking
By Bob Leponge
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 2:27pm
Initially, government could have issued 1, 2, 5, whatever year licenses instead of selling perpetual licenses that could then be re-sold on a secondary market. Thereby enabling rent seekers, permanently fucking up the market, and tying their own hands for future adjustments as demand changes: “oh, we couldn’t possibly issue more medallions because that would reduce the value of a medallion and screw the existing owners.â€
See also liquor licenses, FCC radio spectrum auctions, etc.
Short-term thinking bites us once again. Color me shocked to discover that selling off the commons rather than renting it out was a bad idea.
That's exactly how Brookline
By anon
Fri, 02/28/2020 - 5:20pm
That's exactly how Brookline taxi licenses work.
Has anyone looked into how the Brookline taxi industry has dealt with Uber/Lyft competition, and if taxi drivers ended up any better since they hadn't sunk money into medallions?
I have a hunch that many of
By CH
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 12:49pm
I have a hunch that many of the suburban TNC drivers saying that disruption is a fact of life, you can't bank on the value of your investments staying high if they're propped up by regulations, etc. feel the exact opposite way when it comes to their property values and real estate development in their neighborhood. Maybe I'm just being uncharitable.
“Yes today has been crazy
By Giggy
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 4:06pm
“Yes today has been crazy busy! But everyone paying by card! You pay cash so I can buy gas okay?†That’s.......Not how this is supposed to work. Cabs suck.
Taxis
By Kent Burns
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 4:11pm
I don't have any sympathy for the taxi industry. I'll never use a taxi service again, gone are the days of me waving down a cab and getting passed by empty cars. There were times I'd leave work at an accounting firm and use cab vouchers only to have the drivers drop me off on the main street of of fear I'd rob them in my condo parking lot, and them being fully aware that I called from my company and using a voucher. Countless times I've called a cab, told 15 mins only to call back in 30 and given an attitude and told to wait and sometimes it may never come. How about the cab leaving me and my son, because they didn't want me to use the credit card machine as I had no cash on me. They had a monopoly on the ride game for a long time and were very arrogant about it, if they provided a higher level of customer service they wouldn't have gotten pushed to the brink so easily. So Im sorry that these drivers are having these issues, but given the treatment I've recieved over the years it's tough to reconcile enough sympathy for whats currently happening.
This is really the crux of
By anon
Thu, 02/27/2020 - 5:47am
This is really the crux of the situation. A lot of us were burned SO many times by Boston's taxi industry there's just no way to have any sympathy now.
And it wasn't just the big companies. Small companies would also speak rudely on the phone and then never end up sending the cab requested.
Let's speak like adults
By Gary C
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 4:23pm
I'm no huge Uber fan or defender, but this is just not accurate. Given how many Uber/Lyft rides are given every day, their safety is very good and certainly no worse than that of taxis.
(And yes, in the past, taxi drivers have occasionally assaulted people, so that is not something that is "new" and limited to rideshare drivers.)
Yeah, I don't buy it
By eeka
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 5:00pm
Rideshare customers can easily mark right on the app if they felt a driver was unsafe. Drivers are surely getting kicked off the platform more easily than taxi drivers get their medallions revoked.
What is the background check protocol for taxi drivers? I know Lyft has rather strict policies. A colleague of mine got rejected for having a many-years-old conviction for simple drug possession.
Actual BPD background check...
By Pete Nice
Wed, 02/26/2020 - 5:22pm
So the driver who was arrested for rape but the victim didn't want to testify and the case was dismissed is going to be able to drive for Lyft/Uber (because they don't see those reports and it doesn't show up on a CORI). But the BPD can see the actual report and ask the applicant about the incident.
That's the way it used to be done anyway.
Pages
Add comment