Uber Licence not renewed in London - seems a bit of a surprise.

Yeah can't see it being a good political move, regardless of whether it's the right one.

Why not good politically?

Because pretty much everyone in London, while understanding that Uber is not perfect, loves it and has got used to only paying 60% of what a black cab charges you. LOL sample size, but looking down my facebook feed today, which is so populated with lefties you'd think Labour would have won a landslide election on election day, it's full of very angry people blaming Sadiq Khan.

Like I said, I'm happy to suspend judgement on whether it was morally right to do so or not. It seems like something that's quite hard to comment on without specialist knowledge of the industry, but I do not see it as being a good political move.

We have a similar outfit in Merseyside called Delta. They operate pseudo self employment paying nothing in sick pay, holiday pay, redundancy etc while creaming off a significant portion of drivers' take home pay through fees for using its software to get jobs. They have built what is essentially a monopoly which allows ever increasing fees to be charged. Prices, set by Delta, are kept low enough to keep people off buses and other firms. The authorities (labour run ofc) failed to regulate like everywhere else to the detriment of both mini cabs and black cab drivers. Pure market rules, no limits on the numbers of plates issued, hours worked etc. The boss of this company is stinking rich needless to add.
It is refreshing to see some regulation in this area. While this does mean an increase in prices that's just too bad. More affordable public transport would help, this investment should run along side regulating the private sector which should take the edge off price hikes. Tbh I don't think it's all that leftist to expect rock bottom prices (for what is generally a luxury) thanks to super exploitation.

Firstly, I'm both amazed and intrigued to discover that Tom is an honorary scouser. As for the über issue, I'd say it's a rare example of strong negotiation as über is clearly exploiting a series of loopholes in the current taxi market and will now have to step up and throw a few bones to their drivers. The current situation seems ripe for exploitation of workers, and hopefully this will be one of many examples of the workers stepping up and demanding more.

Any idea how many drivers will lose their jobs?

Probably a daft question from a non Uber-user, but why can't the drivers go back to driving for minicab companies?

The root of the argument is that Uber doesn't insist on the same checks etc as minicab companies, which the others think is unfair, so literally anyone can drive for Uber with no experience.

OK, I get that, but security and criminality checks are good things, so if drivers who fail such checks drop out of the pool of cab drivers and the drivers who pass the checks go back to being minicab drivers earning a higher wage and offering greater security, surely that's OK?

And when you factor in that Uber have been bankrolled as a loss-making enterprise by Goldman Sachs and Black Rock etc and that once they've forced minicab companies out of business are expected to raise their prices accordingly, it sounds like a good thing.

What have I missed?

Many customers will return to minicabs but Uber (in London) also competed with public transport so jobs will be lost because public transport is vastly more efficient in busy places like London.

The argument that Uber could put up prices significantly at some point sound like hogwash to me. It's uber (and alternatives) that will find themselves squeezed as the main value in the whole enterprise increasingly comes from the vehicle/driving. If investords expect to make money it's because the cost of running Uber will decrease dramatically as the app/tech matures.

Uber aren't competing against public transport or even so much against black cabs (because of price, comfort etc), but against minicabs. They're in the chezlaw's-too-pissed-again-to-get-home-without-assistance and 2am-drunk markets. That's why the lack of security checks are a serious concern when many of their fares will be single women and/or people in an advanced state of disrepair.

If they've effectively forced minicab companies (many of whom are pretty scummy, but needs must) out of business they'll monopolise their sector of the market.

Why wouldn't they hike their prices?

That's never been me but the too pissed to get a bus crowd is only a part of their market.

Uber will always have competitors - raising prices helps that competition significantly. Also a company like Amazon could leap in at any time, just like they are with groceries.

I'm surprised that you seem to be pro-Uber in this case.

If they're forced out, it wouldn't hurt Londoners to revert to whatever mode of transport they were using five years ago. It seems a small price for people to pay for a safer, less exploitative service.

I'm not pro uber in this case.

Proper regulation is required but that will mean driving jobs being lost to public transport. You seem to think it would all go to minicabs - that's where we disagree.

No, I just said Londoners would revert to whatever mode of transport they were using five years ago (or simply won't make of the journeys).

I don't see it as a great loss in most cases.

Fair enough.

I'll be very surprised if it's not resolved in some way because both sides will be looking for a resolution. It would obviously be a disaster for uber but it's also a political (and legal) headache for Labour because so many of the drivers and regular users are going to be labour leaning.

Bump

It's hard to find any accurate estimate but some data from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41358640 gives some idea of the scale of this even if it can't simply be translated into numbers of jobs at risk.

Uber started operating in 2012 and there's a graph a long way down the link that shows (for London) between 2013 and 2017

Private Hire Licenses went up from 67,000 to 117,700

Taxi licences went down from 25,600 to 21,300

Seems a pretty high bumber. Is it possible though that many of them could be part time and have other jobs rather than relying on uber solely for income? I've gotta admit I don't know too much about it all and I've never used it.

Some are just earning a bit extra. There's also probably a fair few who don't do anything or give it up after a short period.

I cant find any less crude estimates than the one I linked

Lots of people minicab in the evenings for extra money - my dad did to supplement his meagre lecturer's salary when my sister and I were teenagers - so a chunk of those 40,000 drivers will be part-time.

As Uber drivers are all nominally self-employed I guess the only people who know the numbers involved are Uber themselves, who don't seem to be the most transparent company ever.

Ding something about the PFI contracts was high on my labour wishlist

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41379849

It's totally insane to be paying these huge markups to private firms when the govt can borrow at ~0%.