"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 12:48:59 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 12:16:19 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


wrote in message
news:f6Cdna62i4IkczHKnZ2dnUU78dfNnZ2d@giganews .com...
In article ,
(Robin9) wrote:

tim...;157466 Wrote:
"David Cantrell" wrote in message
k...-
On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 09:48:46AM +0100, tim... wrote:
-
They have the duties and obligations of a "business", these are
significantly greater than the duties of a private individual-

Businesses are required to make reasonable adjustments for disabled
customers and employees.

They are not required to make unreasonable adjustments.-

What adjustment do you have to make to carry a dog in your car FFS.

A rug on the back seat - job done

But (many of them) still refuse to do so

In London, minicab drivers are not allowed to refuse guide
dogs. They are allowed to refuse other dogs.

Rumour has it that some Asian drivers refuse even guide dogs.
If this is true, those drivers should lose their licence, although
that would involve the customer making a complaint, TfL
identifying the driver with the co-operation of the cab firm,
and TfL taking a tough line.

As the hire car operator has to maintain records, identifying the
driver
shouldn't be hard. If the records aren't good enough the operator
should
lose their licence.

Which is exactly my point that, if TfL want to specifically target Uber
for
non-compliance of some rule or other, that they can use to "break" them,
this is the one that they should start with - a rule that already exists
that, anecdotal evidence suggests, significant number of their drivers
ignore (instead of coming up with pointless nonsense about where the
company
is registered).

If there is one rule that Uber certainly complies with, it's having
detailed, exact records of every journey, including the customer, the
driver, the details of the car, the fare paid, the customer's credit
card details, the timings, the route, and the levels of satisfaction
on both sides. No other mini cab firm is likely to have such detailed,
accurate records, and nor will any black cab operator.

so they'll be able to fess up all of the drivers who refused a fare
because
they wouldn't carry a guide dog then, wont they?

Without doubt, but the number is probably close to zero. How would a
blind person even order or recognise an Uber cab?

Um

How do blind people go to the shops?

Visit their friends?

Get to the doctor/hospital?

And then, when they do, you can say "and you, as their "operator" are
guilty
of not making sure that your drivers comply with the rules" so we are
taking
away *your* license to operate as well as those of all the guilty drivers.

I suspect it's not so simple.

It can be made that simple

tim

tim... wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 12:48:59 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 12:16:19 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Robin9) wrote:

tim...;157466 Wrote:
"David Cantrell" wrote in message
k...-
On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 09:48:46AM +0100, tim... wrote:
-
They have the duties and obligations of a "business", these are
significantly greater than the duties of a private individual-

Businesses are required to make reasonable adjustments for disabled
customers and employees.

They are not required to make unreasonable adjustments.-

What adjustment do you have to make to carry a dog in your car FFS.

A rug on the back seat - job done

But (many of them) still refuse to do so

In London, minicab drivers are not allowed to refuse guide
dogs. They are allowed to refuse other dogs.

Rumour has it that some Asian drivers refuse even guide dogs.
If this is true, those drivers should lose their licence, although
that would involve the customer making a complaint, TfL
identifying the driver with the co-operation of the cab firm,
and TfL taking a tough line.

As the hire car operator has to maintain records, identifying the
driver
shouldn't be hard. If the records aren't good enough the operator
should
lose their licence.

Which is exactly my point that, if TfL want to specifically target Uber
for
non-compliance of some rule or other, that they can use to "break" them,
this is the one that they should start with - a rule that already exists
that, anecdotal evidence suggests, significant number of their drivers
ignore (instead of coming up with pointless nonsense about where the
company
is registered).

If there is one rule that Uber certainly complies with, it's having
detailed, exact records of every journey, including the customer, the
driver, the details of the car, the fare paid, the customer's credit
card details, the timings, the route, and the levels of satisfaction
on both sides. No other mini cab firm is likely to have such detailed,
accurate records, and nor will any black cab operator.

so they'll be able to fess up all of the drivers who refused a fare
because
they wouldn't carry a guide dog then, wont they?

Without doubt, but the number is probably close to zero. How would a
blind person even order or recognise an Uber cab?

Um

How do blind people go to the shops?

Visit their friends?

Get to the doctor/hospital?

Not using Uber, I'd guess. Are you aware of how you order and recognize an
Uber car? How would a blind person do it?


And then, when they do, you can say "and you, as their "operator" are
guilty
of not making sure that your drivers comply with the rules" so we are
taking
away *your* license to operate as well as those of all the guilty drivers.

I suspect it's not so simple.

It can be made that simple

How? They're not Uber employees.

From:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-a3228431.html

An Uber spokesman apologised and said Mohamoud no longer works for the
firm. “Whilst the drivers on the Uber platform are self-employed we remind
them of their legal obligation to take service animals before they can
start driving,� he said.

“Any Uber partner-driver who doesn’t accept service animals not only risks
having their Uber partnership revoked, but also risks having their private
hire licence taken away.�

So, here we have a case in point. Will TfL take a tough line?
Will TfL take away this driver's licence?

On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 19:22:05 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...bed-by-uber-dr
vers-because-of-her-guide-dog-a3228431.html

An Uber spokesman apologised and said Mohamoud no longer works for the
^^^^^^^^

Well there's a complete ****ing surprise.

--
Spud

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:



Without doubt, but the number is probably close to zero. How would a
blind person even order or recognise an Uber cab?

Um

How do blind people go to the shops?

Visit their friends?

Get to the doctor/hospital?

Not using Uber, I'd guess. Are you aware of how you order and recognize an
Uber car? How would a blind person do it?

Is it not possible to order an Uber car using the "reading" software that
blind people use to read computer pages?

And when Uber drivers arrive for a pick up at someone's house, surely they
announce themselves in the same was as any mini cab would?

Or do they just sit outside and "hope"?

And then, when they do, you can say "and you, as their "operator" are
guilty
of not making sure that your drivers comply with the rules" so we are
taking
away *your* license to operate as well as those of all the guilty
drivers.

I suspect it's not so simple.

It can be made that simple

How? They're not Uber employees.

I don't think that's a valid excuse.

There is a contact between Uber and the drivers, they don't just turn up and
drive on a whim.

Uber must therefore be responsible for making sure that their drivers comply
with regulations and have a disciplinary procedure (i.e. they terminate
their contract) if they don't.

I accept that this, "punishment after the event" system means that there
will always be one or two rogue workers, but systematic non compliance with
regulations suggests a controller who doesn't give a damn.

And anecdotal evidences suggest that Uber don't give a damn, unless pushed,
and pushed and pushed and threatened with having their execs imprisoned and
then actually having their execs imprisoned, before they decide to comply.
This isn't a company that takes its responsibilities seriously.

tim

In message , at 09:58:33 on Tue, 16 Aug
2016, tim... remarked:
And when Uber drivers arrive for a pick up at someone's house, surely
they announce themselves in the same was as any mini cab would?

Or do they just sit outside and "hope"?

My experience of (pre-Uber) minicab drivers is they just sit outside in
the road tooting the horn until someone emerges from the house. Yet
another completely illegal procedure, of course.

The only ones who actually come to the door are airline courtesy "limos"
for business class flights (and I've not had one of those for years).
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:58:33 on Tue, 16 Aug 2016,
tim... remarked:
And when Uber drivers arrive for a pick up at someone's house, surely they
announce themselves in the same was as any mini cab would?

Or do they just sit outside and "hope"?

My experience of (pre-Uber) minicab drivers is they just sit outside in
the road tooting the horn until someone emerges from the house. Yet
another completely illegal procedure, of course.

I was aware of that

Recliner was talking as if they didn't even do that

tim

tim... wrote:

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:58:33 on Tue, 16 Aug 2016,
tim... remarked:
And when Uber drivers arrive for a pick up at someone's house, surely they
announce themselves in the same was as any mini cab would?

Or do they just sit outside and "hope"?

My experience of (pre-Uber) minicab drivers is they just sit outside in
the road tooting the horn until someone emerges from the house. Yet
another completely illegal procedure, of course.

I was aware of that

Recliner was talking as if they didn't even do that

Uber is more likely to be used by people who are out and about. Once a
driver has been assigned, Uber sends the client a description of the car,
and it's up to the customer to identify it and get in.

Someone getting a mini cab from home is more likely to phone their local
firm, which will be cheaper and more likely to have a car available
locally. They will also accept pre-bookings, which Uber does not.

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:58:33 on Tue, 16 Aug
2016,
tim... remarked:
And when Uber drivers arrive for a pick up at someone's house, surely
they
announce themselves in the same was as any mini cab would?

Or do they just sit outside and "hope"?

My experience of (pre-Uber) minicab drivers is they just sit outside in
the road tooting the horn until someone emerges from the house. Yet
another completely illegal procedure, of course.

I was aware of that

Recliner was talking as if they didn't even do that

Uber is more likely to be used by people who are out and about.

I don't use it

but I thought the MO of Uber was to be able to hail a mini-cab at an agreed
price, with all of the billing taken care of "automatically"

I can't see any reason why your normal mini-cab user wouldn't use it, none
at all

Once a
driver has been assigned, Uber sends the client a description of the car,
and it's up to the customer to identify it and get in.

Someone getting a mini cab from home is more likely to phone their local
firm,

why, they have all the aggro of paying in cash

which will be cheaper

will it. I thought that Uber was cheaper (or at least the same price) as
mini-cabs

and more likely to have a car available
locally.

why?

They will also accept pre-bookings, which Uber does not.


which is completely irrelevant if you want a car now

tim

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:50:19AM -0000, Recliner wrote:

Uber is more likely to be used by people who are out and about. Once a
driver has been assigned, Uber sends the client a description of the car,
and it's up to the customer to identify it and get in.

The app notifies you shortly before the driver arrives. If you don't
make yourself obvious to the driver quickly then IME he phones you.

Someone getting a mini cab from home is more likely to phone their local
firm,

Are they? I certainly don't, partly because Uber are cheaper and
quicker, partly because the app is more convenient.

which will be cheaper

IME Uber is cheaper than a local cab office.

and more likely to have a car available locally.

At least where I live Uber has sufficiently good coverage that they're
actually more likely to have a car available quickly than the local cab
office.

They will also accept pre-bookings, which Uber does not.

Yes, that's the only reason I ever use any cab company other than Uber
now.

--
David Cantrell | Official London Perl Mongers Bad Influence

European immigration: making Britain great since AD43