I was in an Uber this morning headed to Charles de Gaulle airport and got to see this all first hand. Hundreds of taxi drivers stopping traffic and flipping off the police while stalling traffic for a bunch of unlucky motorists.
My driver pulled the car over as we approached the airport. He asked me get into the front seat, and then told me we had to act like friends if we were forced to stop and end up getting harrassed. He then went to the trunk and pulled out a pair of his normal clothes and changed right there on the side of the road (Uber drivers are easily recognizable thanks to their fancy attire). Upon settling back into the driver seat, with a big smile and a thick French accent, he said, "I am Batman."
How meaninglessly proletarian and small minded. Like the smashing of weaving machines during the industrial revolution. The impossible fight against change and the inexorable march of technology. Also shame on France for imposing a minimum 15 minute delay for picking up a customer. France, where free market competition is second to politics and special interests. Look at the anti Amazon legislation.
"Free market" is not really a reality in France; it's not just "second to politics", it is hated for its own sake. Competition is considered a bad thing; the reasoning is that it leads to waste, that resources are better allocated when centrally planed by civil servants who don't have a dog in the race. Many sectors in France still operate exactly like that, in 2014 -- not just taxis; for example if you want to sell cigarettes you have to apply for a licence to the state and you'll only get it if you're far away enough from other cigarette sellers.
It must sound crazy to non-French people but that's just the way it is; is it sub-optimal? Yes. Stupid? Probably. Will it ever change? I wouldn't hold my breath. This is how this country is and thinks.
But, in the case of the taxis, they have a reason to be upset; they all buy their licence for a very expensive price (I believe half a million Euros), usually borrow the money for it and have to somehow pay it back. If they are suddenly out of business or their licence worth nothing, it's a problem.
In order to free this market, the problem of the licence has to be addressed (state buy-back?); or, maybe, the govt. can decide you don't need a licence anymore: taxis will be extremely upset for a while, and then when the dust settles the problem is solved.
In typical French fashion however, the current govt. has decided nothing; non-taxi taxis can operate with a stupid 15 minutes delay, which is supposed to appease the incumbents.
This 15 minutes delay is even worse than it sounds, because it doesn't apply to 4- and 5-star hotels!! (And this is a leftist government). If you want to call Uber from the desk of the George-V you don't have to wait; if however you're calling from Hotel Ibis in Pantin then you do have to wait.
> Like the smashing of weaving machines during the industrial revolution
I know, the buggy-whip manufacturers are doomed to be replaced by the... slightly-more-sophisticated app-supported buggy-whip-manufacturers.
Seriously, Uber's success doesn't come from spectacular disruptive technology, they succeed by circumventing the absurd regulatory capture that exists in the taxi market in some cities.
If you look at it as them managing the economy and the survival of its people, at least putting into place temporary measures to delay the speed of the change, this is the why. France has other mechanisms in place, such as only a certain number of pharmacists serving a population, so then there's not too much competition so a job can exist - instead of perhaps two stressed out pharmacists competing in different ways in order to win over enough consumers. I know it's very different thinking than "free market" - however the U.S. doesn't practice pure free market either, not at all.
Right?? You would think taxi drivers wouldn't be blind to the possibility of disruption. Look at the music industry and many others. I can't wait for all remaining crap services to be forcefully improved.
While you might slag their politics off all you like, I've not been in small towns in the UK that still have the incredible sense of community that the French towns do.
Part of that's to do with this sort of protectionism. Capitalism is not a panacea for all ills.
So I understand that on of the main points of contention is that the paris cab drivers face steep regulation in the form of requiring an expensive license, while the Uber drivers require no such license, and that to counter this lack of regulation they require the Uber drivers to wait 15minutes before picking up their customer.
But there are still a few things I don't understand:
Why do the Paris cab drivers require such regulations?
How come the Uber drivers aren't required to have such a license?
And maybe I don't completely understand the advantages of Uber (because I've never used a cab before), but at first glance, it seems the main reason uber is succeeding so well, is that there is an app to quickly summon a driver. So why doesn't such an app exist to call these licensed drivers who are so angry?
Taxis are regulated in most countries, typically in exchange for a fee and following a set of regulation they'll get the exclusive right to pick up people on the street.
The precise regulations vary but generally the type of things they include are:
* Criminal background check
* Level of city knowledge
* State of car
* Prohibited to refuse to pick someone up
* Prohibited to refuse short journeys
* Regulated pricing
* Rules on detours
The problem with cabs is when they are circulating looking for work. They are causing congestion for no real benefit. Regulation caps how much useless congestion there is by capping the number of cabs on the road.
Limo companies don't cause this unneeded congestion because they only go out when they have a job to do, so there is no need to regulate the number of limos on the street. Whether or not Uber should be regulated depends on what their drivers do with their down time. Do they trawl the streets or do they get off of them? It seems like they should get off the road since they can't really pick people up without a reservation. However they may trawl good spots for pickups like near bars or something in which case they are causing unneeded traffic and should be regulated.
Paris has an incredibly strong Taxi union, which has enjoyed it's monopoly for many decades. Uber cars not being unionized means they are taking money from this massive institution. I think, quite simply, it's cronyism.
Also, the 15 minute wait is because the taxis-by-dispatch are inherently slower. Instead of trying to compete, the taxi union pushed hard on Paris and got them to pass the restriction.
Generally, rather than innovating and trying to compete, the taxi companies in the union have taken the much simpler route of attempting to blockade the upstart.
I cant speak directly for Paris, but in my home town, one reason we limit the number of taxi cabs is because we've decided (as a society regulating itself) that too many cabs is a social problem. It may sound funny, but imagine a case where there is a lineup of 200 cabs clogging the airport to get that one lucrative fare. Alternatively, outside of a office building to aim for CEOs. They take up a common good that is free (space and to some extent air quality) and therefore are a tragedy of the commons case.
The licenses are limited in number, and re-sold. They’re seen by taxi drivers as a kind of life insurance. Talk about abolishing them or issuing more and, you guessed it, they’ll strike.
Paris, where the meter starts when you call the cab. After the second time with 40+ Euros on the meter we stopped calling cabs and flagged one on the street. Third trip we figured out walking was faster.
Is this circumventable by shipping form another EU country? Amazon UK ships for free to most of Europe and is AFAIK not bound by these laws, so this is a really strange situation.
Yes, I heard that the same thing happened to a driver from "Chauffeur Privé" at the Orly airport. Wind mirror broken, nothing serious, but it's crazy how the taxi drivers do not care about the situation and want to keep their monopoly. The French company "Taxis G7" is a powerful lobby and they still decide everything for every taxi driver in France. Instead of changing, ugprading, offering new (and better !) service to their passengers, they try to scare the new comers. And seriously, it would not be difficult to improve the service in French cabs : remove the bad smell, remove the racist jokes, shutdown the loud radio talking about the latest soccer game which not everyone listens to, learn to say hello/thank you/goodbye, etc.
It demanded that for each new computer, Le Monde should pay for one print worker to type on the keyboard and another simultaneously to watch the screen. It got its way.
This sounds like a joke made up by a Tea Partier about how unions cut efficiency. I can hardly believe it.
While i condemn the violence, i have hard time justifying uber as a new revolution or advancement of technology.
Medallion owners pay close to 1.0 M $ to get the Taxi license from the city (NY) and they are not doing that for charity. If a new middlemen like Uber try to take the market without paying single dime it is bound to cause issues who have played by rules and invested significant money to acquire the license.
Uber simply tries to aggregate the demand side and demand concessions from the supply side to get the leads. Portraying Uber as egalitarian is wrong in so many levels.
This is one of the reasons that people don't cross picket lines.
Good people won't cross them out of principle. The unprincipled among us may encounter other obstacles. It is very likely this driver got his just deserts.
This is like McDonald's workers going on strike and attacking a Wendy's employee for going into work.
You're saying that you're ok with someone being subjected to violence because he just did his job as he does every day, but other people who did similar but different jobs happened to think that he should have stayed home that day. I doubt you'd think the same if a competitor of yours went on strike and attacked you for going into work.
Saying that the driver here got his "just desserts" is a truly disgusting and reprehensible attitude that is not fit for a civilized society. When a larger group of people can organize and use violence to subject smaller groups to their will, you no longer live in a free society.
[+] [-] lewsid|12 years ago|reply
My driver pulled the car over as we approached the airport. He asked me get into the front seat, and then told me we had to act like friends if we were forced to stop and end up getting harrassed. He then went to the trunk and pulled out a pair of his normal clothes and changed right there on the side of the road (Uber drivers are easily recognizable thanks to their fancy attire). Upon settling back into the driver seat, with a big smile and a thick French accent, he said, "I am Batman."
I rated the trip 5 stars.
[+] [-] thomashapytag|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bertil|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bicknergseng|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] eloff|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bambax|12 years ago|reply
"Free market" is not really a reality in France; it's not just "second to politics", it is hated for its own sake. Competition is considered a bad thing; the reasoning is that it leads to waste, that resources are better allocated when centrally planed by civil servants who don't have a dog in the race. Many sectors in France still operate exactly like that, in 2014 -- not just taxis; for example if you want to sell cigarettes you have to apply for a licence to the state and you'll only get it if you're far away enough from other cigarette sellers.
It must sound crazy to non-French people but that's just the way it is; is it sub-optimal? Yes. Stupid? Probably. Will it ever change? I wouldn't hold my breath. This is how this country is and thinks.
But, in the case of the taxis, they have a reason to be upset; they all buy their licence for a very expensive price (I believe half a million Euros), usually borrow the money for it and have to somehow pay it back. If they are suddenly out of business or their licence worth nothing, it's a problem.
In order to free this market, the problem of the licence has to be addressed (state buy-back?); or, maybe, the govt. can decide you don't need a licence anymore: taxis will be extremely upset for a while, and then when the dust settles the problem is solved.
In typical French fashion however, the current govt. has decided nothing; non-taxi taxis can operate with a stupid 15 minutes delay, which is supposed to appease the incumbents.
This 15 minutes delay is even worse than it sounds, because it doesn't apply to 4- and 5-star hotels!! (And this is a leftist government). If you want to call Uber from the desk of the George-V you don't have to wait; if however you're calling from Hotel Ibis in Pantin then you do have to wait.
Go figure.
[+] [-] Pxtl|12 years ago|reply
I know, the buggy-whip manufacturers are doomed to be replaced by the... slightly-more-sophisticated app-supported buggy-whip-manufacturers.
Seriously, Uber's success doesn't come from spectacular disruptive technology, they succeed by circumventing the absurd regulatory capture that exists in the taxi market in some cities.
[+] [-] loceng|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LaGrange|12 years ago|reply
How meaninglessly privileged and small minded.
> France, where free market competition is second to politics and special interests.
As it should be. Free market is like a wind, and sometimes you have to protect yourself from it.
[+] [-] discostrings|12 years ago|reply
You think this violence is representative of the working class? That's a pretty dismal view of a huge part of society.
I'm hoping it's just that you lack a full command of that word...
[+] [-] SDMattG|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mattmanser|12 years ago|reply
Part of that's to do with this sort of protectionism. Capitalism is not a panacea for all ills.
[+] [-] cafard|12 years ago|reply
The internal combustion engine?
[+] [-] rfnslyr|12 years ago|reply
They're not exactly brain surgeons.
[+] [-] harshpotatoes|12 years ago|reply
But there are still a few things I don't understand: Why do the Paris cab drivers require such regulations? How come the Uber drivers aren't required to have such a license? And maybe I don't completely understand the advantages of Uber (because I've never used a cab before), but at first glance, it seems the main reason uber is succeeding so well, is that there is an app to quickly summon a driver. So why doesn't such an app exist to call these licensed drivers who are so angry?
[+] [-] ig1|12 years ago|reply
The precise regulations vary but generally the type of things they include are:
[+] [-] stonemetal|12 years ago|reply
Limo companies don't cause this unneeded congestion because they only go out when they have a job to do, so there is no need to regulate the number of limos on the street. Whether or not Uber should be regulated depends on what their drivers do with their down time. Do they trawl the streets or do they get off of them? It seems like they should get off the road since they can't really pick people up without a reservation. However they may trawl good spots for pickups like near bars or something in which case they are causing unneeded traffic and should be regulated.
[+] [-] mattlutze|12 years ago|reply
Also, the 15 minute wait is because the taxis-by-dispatch are inherently slower. Instead of trying to compete, the taxi union pushed hard on Paris and got them to pass the restriction.
Generally, rather than innovating and trying to compete, the taxi companies in the union have taken the much simpler route of attempting to blockade the upstart.
[+] [-] maerF0x0|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stereo|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mcguire|12 years ago|reply
Historical and ongoing[1] abuse. The usual reason for regulations.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_Mexico#Security_Rec...
[+] [-] darrylb42|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] temuze|12 years ago|reply
Holy crap. And I thought the "Lang Law" was bad: http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/10/the-anti-amazon-law-is-abou...
Apparently, France also fixes the price of all books to keep it 'fair' for small bookstores.
[+] [-] morsch|12 years ago|reply
So does Germany. As well as many other countries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed_book_price_agreement
[+] [-] rockdoe|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jarnix|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] trekky1700|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Argorak|12 years ago|reply
For example, kidnapping the boss to prevent layoffs (or at least get better severances) is something that happens regularly.
[+] [-] brohee|12 years ago|reply
Don't get me wrong, French unions are mostly wrong on about everything, but violence against individuals is still a big no-no. Thankfully.
[+] [-] icebraining|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kungfooguru|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] theorique|12 years ago|reply
Yes, he's in the same business, but radio cabs are a competing arm compared to licensed taxis.
[+] [-] kazagistar|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xxpor|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yetanotherphd|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] oh_sigh|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fiorix|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jarnix|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nolite|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] linux_devil|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brg1007|12 years ago|reply
[1]http://www.economist.com/node/21524883
[+] [-] theorique|12 years ago|reply
This sounds like a joke made up by a Tea Partier about how unions cut efficiency. I can hardly believe it.
[+] [-] mattyohe|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dandare|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] caruber|12 years ago|reply
Medallion owners pay close to 1.0 M $ to get the Taxi license from the city (NY) and they are not doing that for charity. If a new middlemen like Uber try to take the market without paying single dime it is bound to cause issues who have played by rules and invested significant money to acquire the license.
Uber simply tries to aggregate the demand side and demand concessions from the supply side to get the leads. Portraying Uber as egalitarian is wrong in so many levels.
[+] [-] hapless|12 years ago|reply
Good people won't cross them out of principle. The unprincipled among us may encounter other obstacles. It is very likely this driver got his just deserts.
[+] [-] john_b|12 years ago|reply
You're saying that you're ok with someone being subjected to violence because he just did his job as he does every day, but other people who did similar but different jobs happened to think that he should have stayed home that day. I doubt you'd think the same if a competitor of yours went on strike and attacked you for going into work.
Saying that the driver here got his "just desserts" is a truly disgusting and reprehensible attitude that is not fit for a civilized society. When a larger group of people can organize and use violence to subject smaller groups to their will, you no longer live in a free society.
[+] [-] mikeash|12 years ago|reply
Can you explain why? I fully respect workers' right to unionize and strike, but there's no reason I should be bound by their strike.