|
|
INDUSTRY IN REVIEWBy Don McCurdy So, who trains these people? Recent reports from Lawrence, Indiana chronicle that a driver crashed his cab into a house to prevent robbers from gaining control of his vehicle and robbing him. It's reported that one of the robbers asked if the driver had change for a $50 to pay a $34 fare. The driver then, reportedly, pulled out his money which the suspect promptly grabbed. Taxi driving 101 says you never have change for a $50. Not only do you never have change for a $50, but you have a dummy trip sheet on your clipboard to prove it. Now, I wasn't at the scene. The crash might have been one of the most outstanding examples of quick thinking that have ever taken place, but was certainly a clear example of poor training. Driver safety is often passed of as needing this or that device that will "keep the drivers safe," but it's not quite that simple. Drivers not trained in managing their own safety will get little improvement in their overall safety from simply adding a device. In the example reported above the two "men" were described as "about 18 years old," which is the most common profile for problem passengers, young males. Let's see, at night, two young males run up a $34 fare and ask for change for a $50. Uh huh. Is there any such thing as a warning buzzer? You can issue every type of safety device, GPS locator or what ever to drivers, but if they're going to make these kinds of mistakes it will simply not help. A properly trained driver operating at a company with established safety procedures could have prevented the entire affair. No doubt there will be an outcry for some safety equipment in Lawrence. They'll install hijack lights and everybody will breath easier. At least, until a driver gets murdered. Don't get me wrong, safety devices incorporated into a preplanned safety strategy can be quite beneficial, but without the preplanned safety strategy they're just merely another reason to be complacent but not effective.
Fernando Mateo, the president of Hispanics Across America, whatever that is, and the New York State Federation of Taxi Drivers is quoted as saying "you know sometimes it's good that we are racially profiled because the God's-honest truth is that 99 percent of the people that are robbing, stealing, killing these drivers are blacks and Hispanics." While I doubt Fernando's statistics, he is at least partially correct in that driver assaults in NYC do tend to fit a specific profile. The real question isn't whether to profile or not, but what criteria to use. While Fernando seems to be suggesting race which might work in NYC, my experience has been that there are other more realistic criteria. First, where did you pick them up? Was it a residence that they can be traced to? If not, that should raise a cautionary flag. Two, are they male? Not meaning to be sexist, but males quite probably are the 99th percentile Fernando is claiming minorities to be. Three, how are your potential passengers carrying themselves? Standing in the shadows, flying gang colors, calling from a pay phone with a cell phone in hand and having your "hoody" pulled down covering your face are not good signs. Both Al Sharpton and David Yassky, Taxi and Limousine commissioner, commented on Fernando's statement, condemning racial profiling. Good for them. I doubt very seriously that either of them have ever been a night driver and had to make the split second, life and death decisions a night driver routinely makes. As far as commissioner Yassky's comment about it being illegal 100% of night drivers agree, it's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Despite the fact that "the science is settled" and "the debate is over" there are those who believe that the entire global warming/climate change fiasco is nothing more than an elaborate hoax. Not so the Portland city council. Portland is wanting to join NYC in their lawsuit against the Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade. Portland isn't concerned with NYC's issue, but wants to be allowed to force business owners to "go green." At risk are the current regulations that require businesses to adhere to various "green" regulations. Of course, the politicians running the city can't admit they were full of hot CO2 when they passed those regulations, so they're going all in to prevent the courts from disallowing their "green" initiatives. While I'm a big believer in states rights I'm also a big believer in truth. My own personal opinion, worth absolutely zero to the Portland city council, is that the truth should actually be determined before politicians start spending someone else's money to fix a problem that doesn't currently exist. Mixing science with politics might just leave our scientists wondering exactly what is is. A full assessment of the situation is currently impossible since true peer review of the findings has been stifled by the media and the body politic. Currently, the well is poisoned, but that doesn't stop progressive thinkers, or is that stinkers, like Bloomberg or the Portland city council from damning the torpedoes and full speed ahead spending other people's money.
Imagine, if you can, that you pick up a fare, drop him off at a grocery store, have to go in and get change, and then end up as a "person of interest" in a mass murder. Well that's pretty much what happened to a Tucson taxicab driver. While what must have been total panic on the part of the driver was lost in the news coverage of the tragedy, it does bring the point that drivers are often thrust into situations, not of their doing, that make the nightly news. That said it would still be pretty shocking to see a picture of yourself on the news coming out of a grocery store and hear that you were wanted for questioning by every level of law enforcement known to exist. Well, maybe not Interpol. The entire affair reinforced, at least in me, the idea that we are all innocent until proven guilty and "a person of interest" didn't always do it. Would it be a lesson to media? I doubt it. The usual discredited suspects, the press, quickly jumped on the "hate speech" band wagon and blamed everybody except themselves, the real purveyors of hate speech. How can anyone claim “credibility” The sad state of affairs for the press in the U.S. is that nobody trusts them. They simply aren't interested in the truth. My own personal experience is that they don't listen, don't get the story straight and seek "facts" to establish their preconceived idea. I don't know what you call that, but it certainly isn't reporting.
Reports out of San Francisco, how could it be anywhere else, are that a new transportation service is being offered, Homobiles. Sorry, I didn't make that up. The new service is reportedly for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender folks who have had issues with taxicab drivers. The suggested "donation" is $1 a minute. The claim of the author is that the service responds more quickly than Yellow or Luxor, San Francisco's two largest taxicab companies. I find that very difficult to believe, but I doubt that I will be testing the service any time soon. One has to wonder what will happen the first time one of these vehicles is involved in a collision in which a passenger is injured. No doubt the cry will go out demanding to know why the city allowed vehicles without proper insurance, driver licensing and vehicle licensing to be on the street carrying the unsuspecting public. If I had recently purchased one of the city's taxicab medallions I would be screaming bloody murder.
Reports are that NYC TLC is getting into the dispatch business. Wheelchair accessible vehicle dispatching that is. While covering a city the size of NYC will be difficult the TLC appears headed in the right direction by offering subsidies to the drivers along with the usual taxicab fare. There are certainly critics of the new program, but whining that something won't work doesn't make it so. A lot of cities in the US have similar issues providing realistic taxicab service to the wheelchair community and this is an opportunity for the NYC industry to develop a solution for a real problem in today's world rather than some 100 year from now problem. See that, real leadership isn't that hard.
It's been reported that an Orange County California Judge has ruled that Disneyland can have an exclusive contract with a single taxicab company of their choice. Really? Disney gets to decide who comes on their property? Well, yeah. Even though it's Disneyland its still private property. Why wouldn't they have the right to choose who comes on their property to do business? Over the years we have somehow come to the conclusion that there is something sinister about selecting one vendor over another or one service over another when that is what makes competition so important. Disney was looking for superior service and "clean-burning" vehicles. If you can't provide what's requested why should Disney be forced to subject their clients to inferior service to help foster your inferior product? There seems to be some who believe that private facilities on private property that entertain the public somehow become public property. Sorry, that's not the case. You don't get to come stay at my house uninvited either so fuhgeddaboudit.
Well, reports out of Denver are that Yellow Cab is the devil. GM Brad Whittle didn't help matters much with a blistering internal memo, but sometimes even Darth Vader likes to answer back. While it may seem like stonewalling or simply a lack of faith from corporate, Whittle wasn't permitted to discuss the issues with the local media, not that they would have gotten it right anyway. The "Mean Streets" "daring expose" could really have been written about a number of cities in the U.S. with equal alacrity. While I don't know the circumstances of the Denver situation I do know of the exaggeration and wildly false claims that were made against me when I was in a similar position. It's always good to have an enticing front page story and all, but it is entirely another matter to be discussing items in litigation. Giving your potential legal adversaries ammunition is considerably worse than getting your name in the paper, especially for the bottom line. I'm sorry, but some of the accusations simply don't ring true for me. Whittle was certainly right to keep his mouth shut to the press. Too bad he didn't keep his keyboard under control. If you have any comments regarding this or any of my articles please feel free to contact me at dmc@mcacres.com. —dmc © 2013 TLC Magazine Online, Inc. |