Uber Vs. the World, How Cities Are Dealing With Ride-hailing Technology

 
“Uber is so big and so pervasive, it’s like the internet of transportation,” says John-Kurt Pliniussen of Queen’s University’s School of Business.

Even in the face of negative headlines about sexual assaults, concerns over data privacy, protests from taxi drivers, raids on its offices and outright bans, the California-based ride-hailing company continues to grow. Toronto city council asked staff to develop new rules to accommodate it within municipal taxi and limousine bylaws.

• Why cities need to regulate Uber: Valverde
• Why transport apps like Uber are shaking up how you get around
• Uber vs. Taxi: Why the taxi industry will never be the same
• How the sharing economy took off

Since it launched in 2009, Uber has expanded its services dramatically. It’s now available in more than 300 cities in 58 countries. The Wall Street Journal estimates Uber is worth about $50 billion, almost twice its value in 2014. In the Greater Toronto Area alone, Uber says it has 500,000 riders a month and growing.

The reason, says Pliniussen, is simple: “People around the world love it.”

With that in mind, he suggests, cities have no choice but to deal with this technology that’s giving traditional taxi companies a run for their money.

‘We have to work with them’

Toronto decided it would regulate Uber in Canada’s biggest city, though it hasn’t yet worked the details yet. Mayor John Tory, to the chagrin of the local taxi lobby and its supporters on city council, has repeatedly said an outright ban wouldn’t be practical.

“Most of the wise city councils are going to go the same way,” Pliniussen said. “They’re going to say, ‘Yeah, we have to work with them, so let’s just figure out what we want Uber to look like and let’s get going.’ ”

There’s plenty of precedent to follow. Uber estimates that more than 50 jurisdictions have adopted permanent regulatory frameworks for ride-hailing technology.

California led the pack when it adopted ride-sharing regulations in 2013, coining the term Transportation Network Company, or TNC, to describe companies that provides transportation services but don’t technically own cars or employ drivers.

Other U.S. states and cities — Seattle, Chicago, Colorado, Illinois, New York City and Washington, D.C., to name a few — have since followed suit, adopting their own TNC legislation.

Some places have more stringent rules than others, says Pliniussen, but they all generally follow the same basic principles —  they impose licensing requirements, insurance policies, vehicle inspections and driver background checks on private transportation companies like Uber.

In Canada, Edmonton is on its way to being the first major Canadian city to regulate ride-sharing. The city is set to vote on a set of proposed regulations, which would see Uber drivers get official city taxi licenses, in November.

Kitchener-Waterloo, meanwhile, became the first in Ontario to propose a ride-hailing bylaw in August. Under the proposed rules, drivers would be required to have a GPS and a closed-circuit television system installed in their vehicles, and commercial auto insurance policies for a minimum of $2 million.

Still, no region has been able strike a balance that leaves all parties satisfied, says Pliniussen.

In California, Uber employees are suing the company over payment, arguing they’ve been wrongly classified as contractors. In Chicago, taxi drivers are suing the city over what they say are unfair regulations that benefit Uber over traditional cabs.

“These are the early days of the frontier of private transportation providers,” Pliniussen said. “That’s why there are all these news items.”

Read the full post in CBC News World