INDUSTRY IN REVIEW

By Don McCurdy

A rose by any other name.

Ambassador plate owners in Toronto are upset with the "two tier" system that they've had in place for several years. The "ambassador" plate holders are petitioning the city to do away with the evil ambassador program, which got them their plates to begin with, and convert all of the ambassador plates to regular plates, which can be leased and sold.

You certainly wouldn't have had to have been too clairvoyant to have seen this coming, it happens all the time. Drivers whine that they are "exploited" by the plate holder but rush to be able to "exploit" the next guy. In my opinion the grossly dishonest part was going to the Human Rights Commission claiming they're being discriminated against when the only reason they have a plate to begin with was a reward for attempting to elevate their skills. Now they act as if they've been abused the whole time.

The driving restrictions placed on the ambassador plates are there for a reason, to put plates in the hands of the drivers. Now that they have them their greed is starting to show. Pretty ugly stuff, but pretty much just like San Francisco.


Speaking of San Francisco.

Amazingly, the Metropolitan Transit Authority of San Francisco, which is now in charge of taxicab regulation, is finally taking steps to clean up some of the permit corruption. Could this be a precursor to the mayor's attempt to sell off the medallions? Who knows, but at least they're starting to take some action.

It's noteworthy to point out that absolutely nothing was done about the corruption of the industry when the police department handled regulation and enforcement. In fact one of the reported permit holders was the wife of the Captain who was in charge of the taxicab detail when she got her permit. The really great part of the story was that he claims he was cleared of any wrongdoing in helping his wife get the permit.

Now it doesn't mention if he had any knowledge of the fact that his wife wasn't actually driving a cab. I mean hey, maybe she went out several nights a week pretending to drive a cab to fool the Captain because any moron would know that the head of the taxicab detail would have knowledge of the driving requirements.

No, you don't believe that? Well, if you don't believe that then you must believe that the Captain knowingly stood by while his wife committed fraud which would seem like a bad thing for a police captain to be doing. Not only does it appear that he was part of the deal, they both had the audacity to continue the lie after it was reported on the news.

Exactly what kind of crooks are on the San Francisco Police Department one would wonder. What about the superiors of Captain Steve the Wonder Cop? Do you think one of them might say "gee Steve, this really looks bad. You might want to ditch the permit." I would imagine it was more like "don't worry about it Stevie, who's going to complain about our ethics, the mayor?" I doubt it will happen, but I think the judge ought to fine them the exact amount they've stolen from the drivers over the last ten years It would only be fair. Good on the MTA for finally rooting out some of the corruption in the industry there. It's just a shame that they seem to be the only honest bunch in the city.

The MTA has also blown the whistle on a reported 189 taxicab drivers in the city who do not have a valid California driver's license. Imagine the company's shock when they found out that their drivers are supposed to have a license. Will this nit picking never stop? By the way, doesn't it make you wonder exactly what the previous regulators were doing with their time?


Sometimes you're lucky.

I had a driver get charged with reckless endangerment once when he dropped a passenger off on the interstate. The passenger was drunk so the cop figured, wrongly or so the judge said, that the driver should have insisted on dropping him off at a safer location. Imagine, with that story in my mind, my surprise when I read that an 81 year old dialysis patient was dropped off beside the road, in the summer heat, after a disagreement with the driver and the driver wasn't charged. I'd say he was pretty lucky.

Mears Transportation is reported to have said that the driver had a "good record". Guess that's not so now. Now, if it happens with that driver again and the passenger dies Mears will be on the hook for a major lawsuit. Mears did offer the 81 year old, World War II veteran, dialysis patient, oxygen requiring, degenerative spinal cord disordered passenger free lifetime rides to and from his dialysis. Good choice there boys, that's got to be 1/500 of what it would have cost to just defend the lawsuit. I wouldn't have wanted to have the nightmares that would have gone with dreaming about being at the court room for that one.


Maybe this time.

Cleveland Hopkins Airport may finally have gotten it right. They're now using three taxicab companies instead of the political favorite. No strikes are being threatened, no lawsuits, it's all pretty straightforward. Each of the three will have a set number of cabs that are allowed at the airport. You might remember back in 2007 the proposal was a single provider with GPS, cameras, and drivers with "enhanced" training. All in all the new program sounds a whole lot more workable and a whole lot less pie in the sky. But hey, that's just me.


Uh oh.

It's being reported that the "millions" being paid to taxicab drivers in Las Vegas has not only generated a lawsuit but it has attracted the group that put Al Capone out of business, the IRS. Yep, apparently the IRS feels like it's not getting its piece of the action. While the city, county and state have virtually ignored the issue the IRS sees it a little differently. They see the potential for penalties and interest going on here. Reportedly, one company has fulllogs and video tapes of transactions just in case. I sure wouldn't want to be a taxicab driver that is on that tape that hasn't filed it as income. Might have been safer when the Mafia was running the town.


Bummer.

Well a federal judge is reported to be blocking Michael the Greens plan to penalize non-hybrid cabs. You have to wonder what his honor might say if someone who knew nothing of one of his businesses tried to dictate to him. But I digress. Apparently the judge supports the merit of buying hybrids, but doesn't think it's legal for the city to start setting emissions standards.

The entire article was funny in a sick sort of way. There have been so many things done by various governments lately that it struck me as odd that a court might find that the government wasn't allowed to do whatever they pleased whenever they pleased. I mean hey, it's for our own good, what's the beef? It's not like we have anything that even remotely resembles the freedoms imagined by the guys who wrote the laws that started this grand experiment—liberty.

I can't understand what that judge might have been thinking. Doesn't he realize that the judiciary as imagined by the framers is gone and has been transformed into a political lap dog to whatever ideology is popular? We're no longer concerned about the law, we're concerned about empathy and the "social" experience of a judicial candidate. Perhaps the new "wise Latina" style judges should start wearing clown suits instead of robes, that way our expectations of the quality of their legal opinions might be a little more realistic.

Anyway, hats off to Judge Cotty of the Federal District Court of Manhattan, but judge, be advised that ruling against any "green" proposal will probably cost you advancement.


Judge says no to minimum wage for drivers.

U.S. District Judge Robert C. Jones has ruled that Nevada voters probably didn't intend to remove exemptions for taxicab and limousine drivers from the minimum wage law when they passed an amendment to it raising the minimum wage. The Bell Trans drivers are seeking permission to appeal the order to the 9th Circuit Court and may also try to get a ruling from the Nevada Supreme Court on the intent of the voters. At issue is whether voters intended to remove the exemption or the amendment simply overlooked the issue leaving intact the exemption.

While the companies claim the drivers should be compensated on productivity they leave out the company's ability to determine how many vehicles are on the street competing for what business exists. If the company knows that business is off 20% and still puts the same number of vehicles on the street it would seem to me that they are in effect controlling the driver's compensation. By the same token companies would go broke paying wages to drivers who consistently fail to make an average take.

 


—dmc

 


© 2015 TLC Magazine Online, Inc.