INDUSTRY IN REVIEW

By Don McCurdy

Reform?

A recent article from New Mexico called for reform of the Public Regulation Commission after one of its members was pled out on embezzlement and check fraud charges. The article cited a study which reported that “As long as the PRC is so powerful and has so few qualifications for office, we believe it's going to continue to be a magnet for corrupt politicians like Jerome Block Jr.”

“Corrupt politicians?” Isn't that redundant? They're changing the qualifications for the office, but that's really not the root of the issue. As long as the government picks winners and losers in business through regulation there will continue to be corruption. Dividing up the agency and increasing the qualifications, how about honesty, may improve the situation but the opportunity is still there.

Let's translate that.

Well, an equitable solution has been found for drivers refusing service to blind people with guide dogs in Atlantic City. All 600 drivers will take a civil rights training class. Really? How is it equitable for 600 drivers to take a class because one-third of one percent refused a guide dog? Well, let me translate that for you. The company likes it because they don't have to pay, just waste the time of 598 drivers who they don't pay anyway since they're independent contractors, a point the company owner made to the reporter.

The attorney general is happy because he looks good to the handicapped community and he “wins” the case despite the fact that the company didn't “lose” the case. Who exactly is going to pay for the time of the 598 drivers who didn't refuse the blind passenger with a dog? Why isn't the solution to rid the industry of the two drivers who refused to carry the guide dog who they should know has more right to be in the cab than they do? Hey, somebody prove me wrong here.

The article dances around the issue of the driver's religion although it does go to the trouble of quoting a driver named Mohamed Alam who asserted that for most drivers he knows, religion is not typically a reason for denying animals in their vehicles. Two drivers brought hardship on the rest of the industry and the best we can be told is that they don't know if they still drive for the company? Get serious. Start pulling the licenses of offenders and the problem will be resolved.

A kinder, gentler Chicago

One of the main excuses cities have for regulating the taxicab industry is safety. You don't want a bunch of Kamikaze pilots out there do you? Well, apparently that's just what they have in Chicago since the city records are reported to reveal that “only a fraction” had their chauffeur's license pulled despite numerous tickets, suspensions and accidents. The obvious question for me is whose getting the money? What's up with that? Could this be another opportunity for the regulators to be compassionate toward those they regulate? Does compassion cost a lot?

That about sums it up

In a recent op ed by Al LaGasse, the brains behind the Taxicab Limousine and Paratransit Association (TLPA), he said “occasionally, elected officials are confronted with the agenda of an outside group promoting a self-serving solution in search of a problem.” The only thing I would change about that is occasionally should be constantly. That said Al goes on to use one of the smoke screens consistently used by the TLPA to protect member companies from the boogieman known as deregulation.

Deregulation doesn't work, I get that, but reasonable entry criteria isn't deregulation. Protect the market too much and it will stagnate, allow competition and it will force the existing companies to be more competitive. It's pretty simple, if the driver has few or no choices regarding who to drive for they end up paying higher leases for less service. If the riders have few or no choices on who to ride with they get stuck with whatever level of service the company chooses to provide. That's not always horrible service, but think about it, if you owned a store wouldn't you want one or two people waiting in every cashier line all the time? Don't get me wrong, I like Al, but his job is to protect his members, not provide great taxicab service. Deregulation is a loser, I'll give him that, but so is closed entry.

Hit the road Jack

Well the fur is flying in Salt Lake City. Effectively the city has put the local companies on the fast track to poverty by selecting an out of state firm to provide exclusive service to the local airport. Oops, somebody backed the wrong candidates. Quick, who knows how I feel about politicians picking winners and losers in business? Well, that's exactly what this is.

Why would a company that is licensed by the city be excluded from a city owned airport? It happens in a variety of places, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If the company is good enough for the voters who elected the people making this decision why isn't the company good enough for visitors? I did like Don Barron's, the owner of Yellow Cab, comment about putting the drivers out of work. They won't be out of work Don, they just won't be paying you, they'll be paying the new guys. Nice try though, it always sounds good.

And now the other solution

Monterey Regional Airport has decided that any cab that is licensed by the “Regional Taxi Authority” and pays a $250 annual airport license fee will be allowed to operate at their airport. OMG they'll collapse the industry! Just kidding. What a great plan, the airport gets the cash, an important part of any regulation is who gets the cash, and the drivers don't have to deadhead back to town unless they choose to. There was reported to be a lot of discussion on the issue with the airport director worrying that the $250 might have some drivers boycott the airport. Let's see, $250 a year for access to millions of potential customers, okay, I'll do it.

Yeah, but who pays the gas tax?

Bicyclists are whining in San Francisco over the new rule allowing taxicabs to drop off customers curbside instead of outside of the bike lane in traffic. Help me out here, how much of the gasoline tax goes to road funding? How much of that is paid by bicyclists? Sharing the road is sharing the road, not having exclusive lanes that people can't even drop off in. I did like Mark Gruberg's lame, but politically correct comment about it helping the handicapped. I mean really, how could those evil bicyclists deny the handicapped? Well, it was San Francisco after all.

Ah, New York, New York

New York City, what a taxicab story all you can read buffet! Hey, I'm here to help with some simple solutions to apparently complex problems. Let's see how it goes.

East side stand refusals to convey? An easy fix, hire a couple of 70 year old grandmothers on independent contractor status to do a “sting” on the stand and pull in those drivers who refuse and suspend their license for a month for the first offense. Double the penalty for each subsequent offense. Nobody will ever do it a third time. Switch off the grandmothers at regular intervals throwing in a grandfather once in a while.

Need faster response from police to taxicab events? No problem, enforce the laws you currently have, send the occupy bums home and you'll have more police free to respond to citizen's concerns. You know, kind of like they're supposed to.

Police threatening drivers when they do respond? Raise morale, plan camp outs for off duty officers at Zuccotti Park. They can commune with the more peaceful, loving side of humanity.

Mayor doesn't like wheelchair accessible cabs? No problem, make them all electric and he'll mandate them in a minute. Personally, I thought it was nothing short of hysterical when I heard that Bloomy was concerned about increased costs to the industry.

Drivers honking their horns too much? Tie the horn into the computer system with an assortment of reasons why the driver wants to honk the horn. Channel the requests to a central “horn” dispatcher for acceptance or rejection.

I hope all of these help.

Who serves the people?

New York is now seeing a practical demonstration of mixing politics and business. What should be obvious business decisions are becoming political decisions which do little to serve the people's needs. The practical reality of the situation is that if you have enough money you can drive not only the debate, but the outcome.

What's the question? Should livery drivers be allowed to pick up flags? Is this something the people of New York need? Pretty obviously the answer is yes. Why the drama? Well, the city has sold “exclusive” medallions to pick up street hails. The people who represent the yellow cab medallion holders are fighting to keep the status quo. Good for them, but their drivers aren't willing to service the needs of the entire community. What is their answer to that issue? Let them eat cake? If the industry has no solution then it becomes clear that regulation has stagnated the industry choking off their competitive spirit.

It also seems quite clear that Governor Cuomo has little interest in the plight of the common man needing transportation but worries mightily about the plight of the potential donors owning the medallions. The truly hysterical part of the story is that these self-serving demigods bill themselves “public servants” and the champions of the “little guy” when nothing could be further from the truth. Proof positive that you can do whatever you want if you have a good PR firm.

If you have any comments regarding this or any of my articles please feel free to contact me at dmc@mcacres.com. —dmc