INDUSTRY IN REVIEW

By Don McCurdy

Keep studying, you’ll get there.

Recently Traci Dantoni of the Fairfield Mirror, the student newspaper for Fairfield University, went on a rant against the high cost of cab fares in Fairfield Connecticut. Not so cleverly disguised as a news item, her “story” was titled “Too much for Taxis?”.

She lamented that the drop charge in Fairfield is $1.00 more than New York City. Nothing was mentioned about the other ride charges like the stopping (waiting) time charges or the mileage charge or the cost of doing business in a small town or the income level of the drivers.

On the surface it would appear that getting the whole story is less important than letting the poor suffering college students vent., but then I don’t have the whole story.

The accountants were right!

A recent story from the Lexington Dispatch of Lexington, North Carolina reported that the city council “let” the local taxi service “leave town”. I mentioned in a previous column that the local company was allowed to attempt central dispatch from their location in Winston-Salem. Apparently the experiment wasn’t quite as successful as could be hoped, since the city council decided to opt for a service located in Lexington, however, not retaining a call center.

According to the article the original taxi manager that said he was moving to Winston-Salem to remain with the taxi company stayed in Lexington to open a limousine company but with no call center. Oops. The city claimed that they had received numerous complaints from riders that they would call and no cab would arrive.

It appears that having no management and no quality control can lead to some cost savings, however it does appear that it could eventually affect the revenue side of the equation. I have always wondered why accountants consider a taxicab call center as a cost center. I guess now I know, I’ll bet they’re saving a bundle.

What does a prudent man do?

As the General Manager of a taxicab company the worst duty I ever performed was attending the funeral of a murdered driver. Shortly after that bitter experience I transferred to the company’s largest branch.

My first week of service saw two drivers shot. Thankfully neither driver died, but that really doesn’t change the fact that hardly a news cycle goes by that doesn’t include robberies, assaults or murders of drivers.

I can tell you from my own personal experience that getting robbed at gunpoint is an unhappy experience that affects your attitude for years. The question is what to do about the issue.

Recently, a debate took place in Las Vegas over cameras in taxicabs. Cameras do prevent some incidents and allow for a much easier prosecution of perpetrators of events not prevented. The latest versions of the cameras also allow for some monitoring of driver behavior and driving habits. Did you say much wailing and gnashing of teeth?

The drivers say great, cameras to protect us. But wait a minute now. They’re also alarmed that the company can now monitor how they drive. The driver’s “union” is unhappy about the situation.

There are, of course, some potential independent contractor issues for other jurisdictions, but the question arises, what does a prudent man do? If company owners in other jurisdictions ignore the safety benefit of cameras and do nothing they leave themselves open to lawsuits.

If they install the cameras and attempt to exert a greater degree of control over how the driver behaves they leave themselves open to independent contractor issues. My free advice, and worth every penny, would be to install the cameras but be very cautious over why you cancel a driver’s contract based on camera provided information.

Great idea Ricky!

It has been reported that Cleveland’s Hopkins airport manager Ricky Smith decided that having only one taxicab company servicing the airport would be a good idea. The mayor also liked the idea so off they went. I don’t think they were quite prepared for the donnybrook that ensued.

The exclusive contract idea has been shelved for the time being, but it is part of a recent ordinance that allows other options to be tried.

If I was managing a company in Cleveland I would make damn sure that the other options worked. Exclusive airport contracts aren’t uncommon and it is believed that switching to one company would bring order to what is
described as a “chaotic” situation. I would argue the point that the drivers are the root cause of the issue and that passenger complaints should be scrutinized to eliminate drivers committing offenses.

It does the airport no good to ban companies if the drivers that are causing the problems simply move to the company with the contract. It would seem to me that issuing the driver a permit to work the airport, that is cancelable for specified violations, would solve the problem.

Of course that would not be as simple a solution, if the city’s current plan is actually a solution. Perhaps a trip to the Charlotte airport is in order, their transportation manager runs a tight ship. She takes no grief from companies or drivers.

Is this a winner?

The city of Houston has instituted a $6 flat rate from anywhere to anywhere in the central business district. Sounds pretty simple right? Well, not so fast there Spunky.

How would you like to be the driver that explains to a passenger that the meter says $4.00 but they really owe $6.00? Sounds like a good time to me. I’m sure that the occasional $7 and $8 meter fares will require no information. If they’re looking to improve utilization perhaps improving service would inspire more ridership.

Are you putting me on?

They just don’t train robbers like they used to. According to news reports Evando Minor was attempting to rob a cab driver when he accidentally shot himself in the genitals while pulling his pistol out of his waistband. I guess we don’t have to worry about him any more.

—dmc

© 2015 TLC Magazine Online, Inc.