Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All I know is the government here rallied around the existing cab companies by saying Uber would have to operate like they do and Uber doesn't want to pay the money that cab companies have to pay nor adhere to the regulations the cab companies have to follow. That seems to be a sticking point with them where ever they go.
The side story or conjecture of "how they were treated" or if they got their feelings hurt in the process means nothing to me.
So you want a government that chooses economic winners and losers? That in itself undermines this country's economic system. If the cab companies offer a bad service and someone comes in an offers a better service, why should city govt rally around company the bad company and not give the other company a chance to improve it?
So you want a government that chooses economic winners and losers?
It is a law. If you want to change the law...change the law. Cab companies have to pay fees and carry insurance. Uber is a cab company as defined by Alabama law. I want a government that plays fair and what is good for the goose is good for the gander - unless we change it.
Quote:
If the cab companies offer a bad service and someone comes in an offers a better service, why should city govt rally around company the bad company and not give the other company a chance to improve it?
It I your opinion that they are "bad." I can't answer your question because I feel it is leading and based on false pretences. You believe Uber is better, and that's fine with me. But this is not a good vs evil....I mean bad... sort of thing.
So I've been looking at old stories on AL and how Mean Ole Lady Rafferty spit in the face of the nice Uber guys and I came across some interesting comments. Any truth to any of these?
Quote:
Q:We desperately need an alternative to the abysmal taxi service in the metro area. Can we please get the City Council to do something right for a change?
A: Yeah, I'd say they've done alright telling a bunch of arrogant jerks that want a special deal that no, us yokels are going to insist on the same things as the places that Uber currently operates. Cause they aren't getting a free pass anywhere else, they just don't talk much about it.
Quote:
C: "Rafferty also criticized Uber's method of using social media to protest the council's proposal. She called the company's recent action more like an intimidation tactic rather than business-like debate and discussion."
Yes... because this city has a great track record of always being in support of innovation. We lose brilliant tech people every day because we shun innovation. Not only do we need things like Uber for tourism and transpo... we need innovation in general.
R: Uh huh, shun tech. You do know she invited them to basically write the code that applied to them before they went out of the meeting and claimed they were being 'blocked'. Oh, I guess you weren't. Now you are.
Any trouble Uber is in now they fabricated for themselves.
Quote:
Strange they should characterize it that way, since the edits that were tabled today were actually designed to facilitate Uber's entry into the Birmingham market, and in fact, Uber was asked to review, comment, and make modifications to what -was- to be considered today. They refused, and immediately began to mis-characterize it and muddy the waters and get the villagers out with their torches.
THAT is why it was tabled, and why the Uber rep got a tongue lashing from the Dias today.
The council has invited them, Uber, to basically write the applicable parts of the code, which is hardly antiquated at 2 years of age, and Uber has refused, and chosen to demonize our officials, who were actually looking forward to working to get Uber in Birmingham. Important verb tense being 'were'.
The dirty secret Uber doesn't let out, when they are pushing their techno-free-market-Supermen schtick is that they actually have to comply with the sorts of things our Council (which HAS studied the business model, for over a year, including numerous Uber rides where available) is interested in making sure are covered - in DC, Atlanta, most of the places they operate - or they wouldn't be. They want to try and get our folks to fold like a house of cards, and gain the advantage of an un-level playing field.
Truth is, our Council was looking forward to Uber getting here. Until Uber got here. Cause they're real jerks.
It's time for another rant by your favorite cd rantor!!!!
Here's my write up of Uber's insurance liability issue that turned the city council cold:
Uber's insurance coverage only applies when a driver has accepted a trip and has a passenger in the car. Uber's coverage is not available when a driver is without a passenger, although they may still be logged in to the system (a cab with its lights on). When a Uber driver is riding around logged in but not on an assignment, they are only covered by their own personal insurance. Now, in the case of them hitting and injuring a third party while not on an assignment, many personal policies won't cover claims if the driver was conducting a commercial activity. So if a Uber driver negligently plows into Cindy Loo Hoo and her family and kills the little nugget, their insurance may not cover the resulting damages. That could leave the Hoos SOL in recovering from the Uber guy if he is impecunious. It's that angle that has turned many places cold to allowing them to operate. However, where Uber is available, you can bet that there have been some tweaks in insurance requirements that Uber has reluctantly agreed to (market too good to not have presence there), OR statewide insurance laws have change with respect to the types of insurance policies available (new categories of insurance established specifically for app-driven, ride sharing services).
Another with illustrations!:
When an Uber driver is logged into the software, they are on the clock and are using their vehicle in the commission of a commercial activity - which is expressly prohibited by virtually all personal insurance policies. This taken from Uber's blog:
The issue arrises when you nail a family of 6 while operating within the grey section of the graph. If you are at fault and using your vehicle for a commercial activity (operating while logged into Uber's software), then your provider will deny any claim and drop you like a bad habit. This destroys much of the recoverability for the injured party and / or any subrogated claim their insurance provider may seek, because you would be without insurance and your personal finances are not going to provide much relief against the amount of general / special damages that the party you plowed into would be seeking.
City councils have been apprised of this scenario -- which actually occurred last year in San Fran -- and are reluctant to allow Uber to operate because of the potential for what are essentially accidents involving uninsured motorists.
So I've been looking at old stories on AL and how Mean Ole Lady Rafferty spit in the face of the nice Uber guys and I came across some interesting comments. Any truth to any of these?
We get it, you don't like ride share companies and would rather have govt support failed companies with outdated business such as the cab companies in this area.
I hate to say it, but it has to be said that people like Ms Rafferty and yourself and others are part of the problem in why this area still struggles compared to other cities in the region.
You guys love Birmingham as is, and that may work for yall, but for the rest of us who think that this city can be much much more this lets keep thing the way they are attitude is a problem.
Last edited by sleepless in Bham; 04-22-2015 at 08:59 AM..
We get it, you don't like ride share companies and would rather have govt support failed companies with outdated business such as the cab companies in this area.
I hate to say it, but it has to be said that people like Ms Rafferty and yourself and others are part of the problem in why this area still struggles compared to other cities in the region.
You guys love Birmingham as is, and that may work for yall, but for the rest of us who think that this city can be much much more this lets keep thing the way they are attitude is a problem.
So you didn't read the comments I posted, nor have any credible response to them or Mick's subsequent post and believe that Birmingham should've accepted a sucker's deal that those other cities that Uber operates in would've rejected just so you can have your nice shiny new hipster toy - damn the taxpayers, damn the city's liability and damn existing businesses.
I give our cities leaders more credit than you do. And I refuse to be blinded by the smear campaign led by Uber because they didn't get to run roughshod over Birmingham AND Alabama. They obviously can't afford to do without big markets like NYC, the Bay, etc...so they make concessions in those markets to get in. Our leaders are at least smart enough to look at the setup Uber has in those cities and asked for a similar deal. Uber thought they were going to take advantage of what they thought were a bunch of backwards hillbillies and it didn't work out so to cover for that they showed their ass in front of the council and went to social media to try to make themselves look better. And you fell for it.
So you didn't read the comments I posted, nor have any credible response to them or Mick's subsequent post and believe that Birmingham should've accepted a sucker's deal that those other cities that Uber operates in would've rejected just so you can have your nice shiny new hipster toy - damn the taxpayers, damn the city's liability and damn existing businesses.
I give our cities leaders more credit than you do. And I refuse to be blinded by the smear campaign led by Uber because they didn't get to run roughshod over Birmingham AND Alabama. They obviously can't afford to do without big markets like NYC, the Bay, etc...so they make concessions in those markets to get in. Our leaders are at least smart enough to look at the setup Uber has in those cities and asked for a similar deal. Uber thought they were going to take advantage of what they thought were a bunch of backwards hillbillies and it didn't work out so to cover for that they showed their ass in front of the council and went to social media to try to make themselves look better. And you fell for it.
Do you work for the city? Because your going above and beyond defending their actions here as if they can do no wrong and which in this case they were not working in the best interest of the citizens who would of benefited from Uber or any ride share company. Instead they were only looking out for the cab companies which time and time again provides sub par service.
If Rafferty really wanted to negotiate with Uber then she wouldn't acted like an complete ass when they started their social media campaign, which they are well within their right to do so btw.
Do you work for the city? Because your going above and beyond defending their actions here as if they can do no wrong and which in this case they were not working in the best interest of the citizens who would of benefited from Uber or any ride share company. Instead they were only looking out for the cab companies which time and time again provides sub par service.
Do you work for Uber? Blah, blah blah, yakety ***. You try so hard to deflect. Instead of attacking me, deal with the issue at hand. You can't project feelings or thoughts on to me that are false lies and expect me to argue with them. I'm just not going to do it. "Above and beyond." Come on, man.
Quote:
If Rafferty really wanted to negotiate with Uber then she wouldn't acted like an complete ass when they started their social media campaign, which they are well within their right to do so btw.
You should talk to Rafferty. I know when I conduct business, I expect the people I'm dealing with to talk and deal directly with me and that we keep our discussions confidential until we are done doing the deal. In which case considering the nature of these proceedings, some of it would then become public seeing as how it pertains to the public. Running to social media to start a smear campaign because things aren't going the way you want them to just so you can try to get the other person fired or voted out of office is not good business. Instead it is childish, dirty and dishonest. I would choose to not do business with them ever again. Rafferty was in her right to blast Uber's behavior.
Rafferty and Austin were looking out for the taxpayer and the city of Birmingham.
Sleepless' desires are all in the right place. Birmingham desperately needs more efficient taxi transportation and Uber provides just that.
But Uber has a dark side too, and if you'll do a little browsing, you'll find that they routinely **** off cities with which they are doing or are attempting to do business. Their CEO has been quoted with some of the most unprofessional comments you'll ever hear (takes it personally when cities reject Uber) and it's remarkable that a company trying to get a piece of a long-standing industry becomes so hostile when normative probing is done into their company.
Tourian's information is spot on, so the ad hominem is not cool. And while I agree that Raferty was less-than-professional herself in dealing with Uber and protecting her contributor's yellow cab interests, the city's position against Uber is hardly unique or illegitimate - many many other places have passed on Uber for the exact same reasons.
ALL of us clearly want a better Bham and to see it reach its potential, but the city must be smart about progress and ALWAYS look out for its citizens and businesses. And here's the good news: it has forced yellow cab's hand juuuuusssst a bit because they've got an Uberesque app available now (not great at all, but it's some effort) AND, ANNNNNNND, Uber has hired Capital Resources lobbying firm to represent their interests in Alabama. SO, the fight is not over yet, and perhaps some tweaks can be made and we'll eventually see ride sharing in the state.
Do you work for Uber? Blah, blah blah, yakety ***. You try so hard to deflect. Instead of attacking me, deal with the issue at hand. You can't project feelings or thoughts on to me that are false lies and expect me to argue with them. I'm just not going to do it. "Above and beyond." Come on, man.
You should talk to Rafferty. I know when I conduct business, I expect the people I'm dealing with to talk and deal directly with me and that we keep our discussions confidential until we are done doing the deal. In which case considering the nature of these proceedings, some of it would then become public seeing as how it pertains to the public. Running to social media to start a smear campaign because things aren't going the way you want them to just so you can try to get the other person fired or voted out of office is not good business. Instead it is childish, dirty and dishonest. I would choose to not do business with them ever again. Rafferty was in her right to blast Uber's behavior.
Rafferty and Austin were looking out for the taxpayer and the city of Birmingham.
Deflect? You get all bent out of shape when anyone is critical of city govt. That is why I asked did you work for the city. I'm not the one who went digging up information from the comments section of Al.com of all places just to prove a point.
As for Rafferty and Austin, they work for the taxpayers of the city of Birmingham and if the taxpayers want ride share companies to operate here then its in their best interest to make it happen. Instead she made it clear that her personal feelings and the cab operators are more important than the taxpayers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Come on, man.
