Jesse Walker | October 23, 2007
New York's cabbies go on strike to protest new city regulations:
Since Oct. 1, all yellow cabs have been required to carry an onboard GPS and credit-card machine, as well as a television on the back of the driver's seat that plays advertisements and short programs. The devices were required as part of a 2004 deal that increased fares by 25%.
According to [Taxi Workers Alliance chief Bhairavi] Desai, there are glitches with the GPS devices, which she said slow the meters and take minutes to load. The TVs heat up the driver's seat, and credit cards lead to a 5% surcharge for cabbies - problems she said the city has ignored.
[Via Roderick Long.]
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Perhaps those cabbies would prefer a more thorough deregulation of the industry. That way, they could make nothing, and probably still have to have credit card machines and GPS. Of course, those TVs are just stupid.
I get what they're saying.
As a native new yorker, I can see the GPS used to keep people from
getting ripped off, but most of us New Yorkers know where we are
going, so I assume that i'd be more of a tourist tax.
But what the heck, deregulate the entire thing... this way on rainy
days I can make a few extra bucks by slapping a sign on the window
of my car!!
Lamar,
I'm confused as to your point:
Are you asserting that if they deregulate the taxi industry, are
there are enough drivers who like driving so much that they could
supply the entire demand for taxi services for no charge?
Or do you just think that people who aspire to be cab drivers are
so stupid that they would operate at a loss indefinitely and would
enter the industry even when it is unprofitable?
Lamar,
I totally agree with you that the cabs should be less regulated.
And they would probably all have credit card machines then, because
otherwise they would lose customers pretty quickly. However, I
doubt they'd have to have GPS. I don't think anybody's ever going
to turn down the cab in front of them because they want to wait for
one with GPS.
tarran,
The biggest barrier to entry for cabbies is the medallion, which is
obscenely expensive. Take that away, and taxis could operate at a
somewhat lower fare and still make money.
The number of drivers would stabilize at a number that allowed most
drivers to make a decent profit.
I don't know any of them, but I doubt there are many John Galts amongst the union members. Their concept of "economic justice" probably does not extend to a total deregulation of the industry. And I doubt their union welcomes non-union competition. Not that all the layers of regulation are not imbecilic anachronisms.
This should be interesting. Usually New Yorkers tend to side
with the strikers in transit matters--for about 1 day. Then they
experience one awful day of transit and their sympathy goes
straight down the tubes. Striking transit people spin as hard as
they can to blame the city but the resentment almost always ends up
on the strikers.
The city over-regulates the cabs, the medallions are
super-expensive, and the drivers whine now but if you opened up the
market to anybody who wants to pick anyone else up for money, they
will scream bloody murder. They're all jerks.
Who will get screwed here? Commuters, mostly.
Tarran, Brian24 gets what I'm saying. With competition will come
more services, such as credit card machines and, arguably, GPS.
While I wouldn't wait for a GPS equipped cab to go crosstown, I
might if I were going to the airport.
With the number of cabs not limited by medallions, there would be
more drivers willing to accept less money. Taxi corporations would
hire people desperate enough to work for bottom of the barrel
wages. Their money would be made on volume. Independents would get
pushed out (to the extent they haven't already been pushed
out).
What's the nature of the 2004 deal? Was it unfairly imposed or something? Otherwise it seems like the Taxi Worker's Alliance is trying to back out of a deal they agreed too. At the very least, I hope they are also demanding that the rate increase be postponed until the situation is worked out.
Brooklyn should secede from NYC.
If it gets us some damn cab service, I'm all for it.
it seems like the Taxi Worker's Alliance is trying to back
out of a deal they agreed too
That's exactly what they are doing.
I got into one of these cabs the other day, and I thought it was
a joke. For me it served no purpose. I knew where I was, and I
couldn't see my destination on the map. I didn't notice a zoom
feature. Maybe I missed it.
It does more than GPS. It's similar to the video they put in
elevators these days and only slightly more interactive. You can
push "news" and get the news.
"The devices were required as part of a 2004 deal that increased
fares by 25%."
Were drivers complaining then?
Brooklyn should secede from NYC.
If it gets us some damn cab service, I'm all for it.
I go all over. I take people to the Bronx, Brooklyn, I take 'em to
Harlem. I don't care. Don't make no difference to me. It does to
some. Some won't even take spooks. Don't make no difference to
me.
a television on the back of the driver's seat that plays
advertisements and short programs.
So now I have to pay extra to get yammered at by an ad machine?
WTF?
"However, I doubt they'd have to have GPS."
I thought the GPS was there to keep the cabbies from screwing off.
If you know where all your cabs are at any given point, then you
know who is really working and who isn't. I know that truck drivers
went balistic over GPS for that reason; no one wants their boss
knowing they are hanging out at the local strip club rather than
working. I don't know how cab drivers are paid. Maybe they work
strictly for tips or a cut of the fares which means they have no
incentive to screw off. But if they work by the hour, my guess is
that is the reason they object to GPS.
Ahh, so if more cabs are owned by corporations, the more likely they are to want GPS.
Were drivers complaining then?
No, because they already got what they wanted.
I go all over.
That's because you're a crazy skinhead whackjob. You'd have to be
to actually follow the rules and take people where they want to
go.
Why not just open up the cab business to anyone who can pay a nominal fee to the city and has a car that can pass a safety inspection? In return for that, I would gladly not require the cab drivers to have GPS or TVs or anything else they don't want to besides a safe car. Something tells me the cab driver's union wouldn't like that very much though.
I rarely take cabs, but I would think the GPS to be a value to the customer who can find his location and his destination and see how many miles it is so he can get a decent approximation of what the fare is going to be.
"I rarely take cabs, but I would think the GPS to be a value to
the customer who can find his location and his destination and see
how many miles it is so he can get a decent approximation of what
the fare is going to be."
That makes it difficult to scam the tourist by taking a crazy rout.
I have taken cabs in cities all over the world most of which I
didn't speak the language and have never had that scam happen to
me. I wonder if that is just an urban myth.
That's because you're a crazy skinhead whackjob. You'd have
to be to actually follow the rules and take people where they want
to go.
The days go on and on... they don't end.
All my life needed was a sense of someplace to go. I don't believe
that one should devote his life to morbid self-attention, I believe
that one should become a person like other people.
John, I'm not sure the routing scam is the point, it's more a case of just knowing the cost makes the cab a better option in some cases. If you're going 20 miles, maybe public transit is a better option, but if you're going 3 miles maybe a cab is a better option. Why wait around 20 minutes for buses and trains when for only a few bucks more the cab can get you there in less than 10 minutes?
The incentive is against wild rides because, at least in NYC, they get more money by taking more people short distances.
Nah, I got scammed in Rome. Although I doubt GPS would have helped any. And I've had guys try to scam me in New York, as they mistake my southern accent for a sign that I'm new in town. Mostly, I think GPS could help the drivers, because the days of a cabbie knowing where the fuck he's going seem to be long gone.
Oh -- and the strike was a dismal failure. The picketers, few that there were, kept yelling about scabs. Isn't a scab someone who is hired to replace a striking worker, not just a worker who refuses to strike?
"Mostly, I think GPS could help the drivers, because the days of
a cabbie knowing where the fuck he's going seem to be long
gone."
Unless you are in London. That is not a myth. Those guys really do
know their stuff. Two hardest jobs in the world are London cabby
and Park Ranger at Gettysburg. One has to know every tiny street in
one of the largest most complex cities in the world and the other
has to play and win stump the chump with every civil war geek in
America.
The city over-regulates the cabs, the medallions are
super-expensive, and the drivers whine now but if you opened up the
market to anybody who wants to pick anyone else up for money, they
will scream bloody murder. They're all jerks.
Typically, the drivers are not medallion owners, so I don't think
many of the drivers would scream bloody murder if the medallion
system were scrapped. It doesn't benefit the drivers--it benefits
the fleet owners.
Describing the device the city has required as a GPS tends to cause
confusion. Most people here believe, reasonanbly enough, it's like
the GPS for cars, to plan a route from one point to another. But as
John suggests, it's actually a device to track the driver's
location at any given moment.
Finally, claiming the Taxi Workers Alliance is backing out of a
deal made with the city to raise fares 25% is also misleading. The
Alliance is not like typical municipal union; it does not have a
contract with the city. It's really more of a voluntary association
than it is the kind of union most H&R commenters love to
hate.
If the private cab companies wanted to put in devices to track their employees' locations, more power to 'em. But where the HELL does the city get off ordering businesses to keep Orwellian tabs on their employees at all times?
There are some surprisingly anemic defenses of free-market taxis
here today. What about the power of branding to raise taxi
standards? If you're a tourist worried about getting ripped off,
you might look for a brand of taxi with a best-route guarantee. If
there's a demand such a company would spring up. What else might we
expect? How about nice cabs that don't smell or make you feel like
a criminal behind glass? Ones available at all hours of the day,
especially around rush hour?
Taxis are easily the least free market in most municipalities. It
should be a libertarian project to free the taxi market in one or
more cities to demonstrate just how much better it could be.
It's really more of a voluntary association than it is the
kind of union most H&R commenters love to hate.
True; and this Alliance only represents a fraction of drivers. The
major parties are the fleet owners and the Taxi & Limousine
Commission.
Unless you are in London.
Yeah, a starker contrast with the situation in NYC is hard to
imagine. Here they are supposedly required to know Manhattan
thoroughly, and the "major destinations" in the outer boroughs
(which in practice means "the airports"). In my experience most
drivers know almost nothing about the outer boroughs. Which is not
surprising since most of them refuse to travel there.
I have taken cabs in cities all over the world most of which
I didn't speak the language and have never had that scam happen to
me. I wonder if that is just an urban myth.
I was in Greece this summer, and I took a cab from a major hotel in
Athens to my mom's condo. I had done the route 5 times in that
week, and the fare was never over 5 Euros. The final time I did the
route I picked up a cab at the hotel.
Once we arrived at the condo, the driver quickly reset the meter
(luckily I had been watching the meter -- for some reason this guy
seemed shady) and turned and said the fare was 10 euros. I
explained to the cabbie that in fact every other time, the fare was
5 or under. He said that well the meter read 7 (it didn't, it read
5 before he turned it off) and because this was a radio dispatched
taxi (depsite the fact that I picked it up at a cab stand outside
the hotel) there is a booking fee of 3 Euros.
I told him to pound sand and said he can take 5 euros or leave it
cuz that's all the route was worth or we can wait for the cops to
sort it out. He took the 5 and left.
I have the perfect big-government solution to the GPS and credit card swiper: Make the cabs follow strict routes like the buses and subways have to. Problem solved. First in line, first served. One fare for all. Tokens only. You no likee the route, you no have to takee the cab. And if you want the TV off, that's another token. Because I'm all about choice.
I guess I have been lucky warren. Either that or too stupid to know I was being robbed, which is always a possibility.
Them aiports in NYC should have enough bargaining power to decide upon taxi standards. I do not see why government should get involved. The only thing what is needed is for airports to decide what taxis can enter the terminal ramp, and which not. Problem solved.
Lamar,
Having read your response, I am even more puzzled:
First, brian said something different; that a deregulated market
would have more drivers until the prices fell to the point where
becoming a cab driver didn't look attractive anymore to new
entrants. Of course, this means that the guys already in the market
are making enough money that they are still willing to drive a
cab.
Your original post implied that people would be driving for
nothing.
What I am taking away from this conversation is that you are
insisting that people willing to work for less money than you
approve of be denied jobs just so that a lucky few who have access
to medalions can live comfortably. Which is a pretty vile bit of
elitism, if you ask me. Perhaps you don't realize that medalions
are generally rented out to poor lunks who do the actual driving
but kick back a significant portion of their fares to the guys who
have the medalions? Thus, instead of a lucky few drivers who get
high wages, you have a situation where many poor people are denied
access to jobs, and a lucky few get to slave away so that the
politically connected of New York City can make money off of their
backs.
I think you consider yourself a leftist (it's hard to keep
everybody straight reading a spottily as I do and I apologize if I
am wrong) which means that you think you are helping people out by
calling for restrictions on the supply of taxis. Honestly, though,
that policy has the effect of hurting the poor not helping
them, and I think you should reconsider your support of it.
I have taken cabs in cities all over the world most of which
I didn't speak the language and have never had that scam happen to
me. I wonder if that is just an urban myth.
When I lived in Chicago I knew where I was going and I had taxi
drivers frequently try to pull that scam on me,
until I corrected them. I must have looked like a tourist to
them.
Tarran,
That is how all schemes to restrict supply end; with a few
politically connected people getting rich at the expense of
everyone else. I don't care how well intentioned such schemes are,
it is inevitable that the politically connected will benefit most.
I would rather take my chances with the market and let the smartest
or the hardest working benefit. But I am not a connected
choney.
I would rather take my chances with the market and let the
smartest or the hardest working benefit.
The smartest and hardest working will inevitably collude to
restrict supply. Government, in its desire to break up the trust,
inevitably becomes a third party in the trust.
Re: Jerry's comment about the NY/NJ metro area airports.
The Port Authority is the lessee of JFK, Newark and LaGuardia. The
PA is an agency co-owned by the states of NY and NJ, so expecting
"the government" to stay out of running the airports is perhaps
wishful thinking.
According to the PA's website:
The Port Authority is a financially self-supporting public agency that receives no tax revenues from any state or local jurisdiction and has no power to tax. It relies almost entirely on revenues generated by facility users, tolls, fees, and rents.
I'd like to have a forensic accountant squint at both their
operating and capital budgets before I accepted that "no tax
revenue" claim. Frex, I have my doubts that the PA is paying market
rents to the states and cities for the various facilities it
operates. There's also the question of the PA's access to state
bonding power and other governmental functions.
Cancelling the medallions would bring up the problem of
extinguishing their owners' property rights. IIRC, the medallions
trade for a hefty price, and according to this
page
Three-quarters of all individual cabs are now owner-driven.
Last time I was in NYC, I had to take a cab from Manhattan to
Roosevelt Island. RI has about 2 roads, and the driver got
lost! Judging by his accent, he may never have been there
before.
Kevin
""""Mostly, I think GPS could help the drivers, because the days
of a cabbie knowing where the fuck he's going seem to be long
gone.""""
As far as I could tell, the GPS map was only in the backseat. This
would not help the driver. It's hard to get lost in Manhattan
anyway.
""""The incentive is against wild rides because, at least in
NYC,"""
Wild rides? All the rides seem normal to me, but my visiting
friends always hang on as if it's something too scary to ride at
the state fair.
Tarran,
I think you might misunderstand me. I was pointing out that cabbies
like to fight against regulation, but it is the regulation that
puts them in such a sweet position. The artificial scarcity created
by the medallions allows them to charge higher rates and get away
with less service than if there were true competition. If they
claim that regulation is killing them, they should wonder what it
would be like without regulation. I suspect they'd have to incur
the expense of the credit card, GPS and tv gadgets to keep up with
competition, but they'd also be getting paid less (i.e., a market
wage).
I wasn't suggesting that I have a particular wage level that I
approve of. If anything, I think driving around town is worth very
little, and cabbies earn too much right now.
The truth is that people who drive a yellow cab for a living are
screwed either way. Restrictions and rules result in corporations
hogging the medallions and many times they are the only ones rich
enough to navigate the restrictions. Take away the regulations, and
the wages will go so low, that the only money to be made will be in
volume.
If its a wash, why not at least give competition a chance and give
NYers a break?
Im a NY'r and rode in a cab (well, 2) last night, and had a
little firsthand education on the 'strike'
I dont know what the gizmos really have to do with it - if you
asked riders, they'd say, 'who gives a shit about GPS? Credit card
machine, OK, but please dont put a TV in the back.'.... seemed to
me the cabbies werent really participating in this 'strike' anyway.
The city was clogged with em last night. BUT = the first one I get
in, he tells me its "$10 PLUS the meter". Im like, "What?" he says
they're on strike. I say, you're on strike? Then why are you out
here working. He kicks me out of the cab. I wave over a cab right
next to me. I get in, he takes me home, and charges me only what's
on the meter. After I pay I ask him about the 'strike'... he says,
"oh, right, yes, they are on strike..." I ask why he's working. He
seems to fumble a bit, then goes, "well, it's all a bunch of
bullshit. I went to the cab stand and all the cars were gone.
Everyone is working. But some companies are not. We dont talk about
it."
I dont really get it. The GPS and CC machine things are not
necessary... nice, but not necessary... and the TV in back is
stupid stupid stupid. They've tested them before and customers just
want to turn them off. THe city wants to create ad revenue. They're
not happy with the shithole subways covered in advertisements...
they want to pump them in your face while you're trying to get
crosstown. The whole thing just smells stupid
John,
Me thinks you were too ignorant to know the difference. If you
don't know the usual prices, cabbies, especially in countries where
there are no meters, will happily rip you off. Or they could pull
on you what a cabbie in NY pulled on me once, which was take a
route that was similar mileage-wise, but far worse traffic-wise.
Instead of going down from the East 80s on 2nd, he decided Central
Park West to Times Square was the ideal route. I yelled at him for
whole route and gave him $0 tip*.
Oh and the owner operated thing is b.s. There are "benefits" for
being owner operated, but most owner operators drive something like
2 hours a month to keep the status and the associated
benefits.
* This is contrasted by a cabbie that accidentally drove past my
destination, turned off the meter and offered me a lower price than
what it should have cost.
I have 3 friends who own-operate cabs... they're actors. :) They feel it's a good deal. They work less than 40hrs a week...but still, its not some token deal
the first one I get in, he tells me its "$10 PLUS the
meter".
Pretty sure that's illegal in NY, and could cost him his
medallion.
Last two times I had to take a cab in NYC they tried to
completely screw me over.
One of the times I had a late-evening flight that was cancelled,
and they weren't getting me out until the next morning. All of the
LGA-area hotels were full because of the multiple cancellations, so
I had to go out to my grandparents' house in Nassau County. Fare to
Nassau County is supposed to be equal to the fare to the county
line, and then 2x the fare from that point on. He turned off the
meter once we got on the LIE and refused to stop off anywhere or
turn it back on, and then looked up in whatever "book" he had to
say the fare was $80. This was back when I was young and naive, so
I paid it without fighting. Filed a complaint with the licensing
board, they told me I had to go to a hearing in NYC, which was no
good considering I didn't live there.
Second time was more recent. Spent a month in NYC for business back
in February, going back and forth to home on the weekends.
Generally travelled via the car service my employer provided, but
for some reason they had forgotten to call for it one afternoon, so
I had to grab a cab (always fun at 5 PM on a Friday, considering
shift change times and all). Was headed to JFK. Consider that the
fare to JFK is supposed to be fixed at $45. Consider that my office
I was working at was at around 42nd & Madison, right near Grand
Central. Picked up there. He not only had the meter on for a normal
fare, he went the complete opposite direction he should've been
going, ending up at about 54th. Then told me that he couldn't take
me to JFK because there was something wrong with the cab's brakes.
Tried to collect a $10 fare for that. Told him to screw himself,
didn't pay.
Not quite sure the point of that rant, except for it's the reason
why I don't empathize with the cabbies too much, and why I always
prefer to use the private car services.
Pretty sure that's illegal in NY, and could cost him his
medallion.
It could have been part of the extra fares they put in place during
the strike in order to cut demand. Or yeah, it have could have been
a scam.
In MN - if I plan on going out at night I usually always take a
cab home. No matter what time of the day or night - the cost of
that ride from downtown to my house will be between 14 and 16
bucks. I always keep a $20 bill for this very purpose. Last weekend
I got in a cab and was paging through a paper. When we got my house
the meter read $24 and realized he took the longest possible route
around the lakes between downtown and my house. So yes - scams
happen. And he only got paid 20bucks.
Minneapolis just got rid of the laws limiting the number of cabs
allowed to operate in the city. Within a couple of years - there
will be no limit. It will be interesting how that changes
things.
I think "putting extra fares in place" is itself illegal. The meter is there for a reason in this quasi-monopolistic market - if you want the benefits of highly restricted entry, you get the burden of price controls.
"I always keep a $20 bill for this very purpose."
That's what I always did. I figured, if the cabbie wants to lose
his cash tip, fine with me.
"""I dont really get it. The GPS and CC machine things are not
necessary... nice, but not necessary... and the TV in back is
stupid stupid stupid. They've tested them before and customers just
want to turn them off. THe city wants to create ad revenue. They're
not happy with the shithole subways covered in advertisements...
they want to pump them in your face while you're trying to get
crosstown. The whole thing just smells stupid"""
Remember the recordings of the celebrity voices telling you to
buckle up? That was real annoying. No idea too stupid.
Wait a minute, they added invasive in-cab advertising simultaneously with a huge fare hike? What amazing gall.
There's also a law that says cabbies have to have an EZ Pass for the bridges (and pass along the savings to the customer). They rarely do, and that ends up coming out of their tip. Of course, they always try to charge the higher amount...
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245