If so, why did they need to vote on the issue?
There were some excellent speeches by Mark Gruberg, Barry Korengold, Mary Mcguire, Jeffery Rosen, Tara Houseman and others whose names I've forgotten or never knew.
To summarize, these points were made:
- TNC vehicles are not going to be inspected by the SFO – and should be.
- TNC drivers are neither given DOJ background checks nor fingerprinted – and should be.
- TNC vehicles and drivers are not properly insured – and obviously (to anyone but a government official) should be.
- All this endangers the public.
- Why should taxis and limos have to meet higher standards?
- SFO might be held liable for lowering their standards to oblige the TNCs.
- Pollution and congestion will increase at SFO because of the TNCs.
- SFO will be putting customers at risk.
- Allowing double stands is creating unfair competition for taxi drivers.
- Letting TNC's enter the airport could spell the death knoll for the taxicab business.
Cab driver and video maker John Han pointed out that all the drivers who buy new cars to use as TNC's are committing insurance fraud; and, if taxicabs are put out of business, the fraud would be massive.
Another speaker said that this was just the start of a war of the rich on the worker and that workers in every other business will soon be facing similar assaults on their professionalism and incomes.
Yet another speaker dissed the Commission for calling this a three month test period – the only purpose of which was to push the legalization of TNCs through without public comment.
Several drivers raised the likelihood of a massive strike.
All blowing in the wind.
John Han thought that the speeches were good because they would be part of an official record.
So it's back to the CPUC ... for justice?
Just in case you've forgotten, I'm closing with an updated partial list of TNC attacks.
The logic of a Mexican mayor "legalizing" a drug cartel.
BTW – SFO sets the rules for us. They can certainly set the rules for anybody else who wants to operate in their domain. What Commissioner Crayton was in essence saying was, "We're just as corrupt as the CPUC."
This youtube video was sent to me as a comment but I'm including it here because it's a good summary of what we've been hammering on for the last two years. It's very well made.
Four Things You Wish You Never Knew About Uber.
- The scary and ridiculous - like the Uber driver who locked a woman in his car so he could steal her phone and give himself a five star rating.
- The creepy – like the Lyft driver stalking his passenger.
- The frightening – weird harassment.
- An alleged assault on a pedestrian by a Lyft driver.
- An alleged homophobic verbal and physical assault by an Uber driver.
- An Uber driver charged with fondling a customer in Chicago.
- An Uber driver arrested for sexual assault in Washington D.C.
- An alleged kidnapping and rape by an Uber driver in L.A.
- Another Uber driver arrested for raping a teenager in Washington D.C.
- The Hammer attack
- Monday's Battery
And no – there is no comparable list for cab drivers.
The Airport Commission voted unanimously to let the TNCs operate at SFO.
Director of the Airport John L. Martin said that he would have liked to have the vehicles inspected and the drivers vetted but couldn't get it done for some reason. He's hoping that the standards will improve in the future.
Commissioner Larry Mazzola thought that this was a good first step to solving the problem of the TNCs. He pointed out that they'd been operating illegally for two years. He didn't say it but the next sentence should have been ... "at least this way we're getting paid."
Director of the Airport John L. Martin said that he would have liked to have the vehicles inspected and the drivers vetted but couldn't get it done for some reason. He's hoping that the standards will improve in the future.
Commissioner Larry Mazzola thought that this was a good first step to solving the problem of the TNCs. He pointed out that they'd been operating illegally for two years. He didn't say it but the next sentence should have been ... "at least this way we're getting paid."
The logic of a Mexican mayor "legalizing" a drug cartel.
BTW – SFO sets the rules for us. They can certainly set the rules for anybody else who wants to operate in their domain. What Commissioner Crayton was in essence saying was, "We're just as corrupt as the CPUC."
This youtube video was sent to me as a comment but I'm including it here because it's a good summary of what we've been hammering on for the last two years. It's very well made.
Four Things You Wish You Never Knew About Uber.
These permits to Uber, Lyft, and Sidecar are invalid. The SFO can not issue any type permit to an unregistered, un-permitted company, driver, or vehicle involved in interstate ground transportation. FAA and FMSCA rules and regs prohibit such licensing to un- authorized ground carriers. These are other laws in the California State Statutes and CPUC rules and regs. We have asked Mr. Martin's legal counsel, Stacy Lucas, yesterday to review the laws and ask Mr. Martin to rescind the permits. If not, then a formal complaint should be made to the FAA and the FBI. Simply the SFO or any airport in the US can not issue such permits without compliance to all the laws. Certainly the insurance is invalid as NO insurance carrier can issue a PAL (public auto liability) commercial "for hire" policy to an unlicensed company, driver, or vehicle. Insurance fraud is a felony. There is no such thing as "gap", app/on app/off, peer to peer insurance as these companies claim they have. It just does not exist. Of course, these companies have claimed their general liability surplus line policy covers the driver and passenger if the primary policy does not pay off. All a fake ! Even the SF DA declared the insurance fraudulent. (See SF Chronicle)
ReplyDeleteHopefully Mr. Martin will have his legal staff and the FAA do a complete due diligence on this improper issuance of these permits and rescind them.
Mr. Martin is one of the people who voted who to allow the tncs into the airport.
DeleteHav'nt Y'all heard the term " Money talks, Bullshit walks" Unfortunetly thats always been the bottom line.
ReplyDeleteI drive night time shift and I can say that business have been good recently.I do not stay at the airport. I complitly understand that all of this public officials for sale.We can not afford to buy them.There is aThe public ( drivers, passengers, and investors) have been manipulated by a group of serial con artists. These groups have formed a concerted criminal conspiracy and fraudulently induced the public to fund their scheme. Of course the media fell for it all also. Imagine, a group who developed an app with a tap and a automobile shows up very quickly to transport you at cheap rates. How could this work? How could this turn into a scam to raise almost two billion dollars and Uber alone claims they have a $18 billion valuation with no assets in the company -just an app. How did they pull it off? A business platform was developed with this great idea and presented to major investors like Google, Amazon, Fidelity, Blackrock with the sales pitch "get in now-we are going to do an IPO bigger than Facebook.' ...and did they ever. Now they have the money how do we get the drivers and passengers? They will use social media marketing and blitz America. Since the websites and all the social media marketing are untrue and fraudulent, the drivers flocked off their couches and bit on the "Get Rich Quick" pitch. The public passengers signed up quickly and gave their credit card info to cyberspace, landing in their corporate base in Amsterdam.. The media was suckered and promoted these operations freely without questions. Banks and credit unions were conned with giving below subprime financing contracts for non-credit worthy applicants for luxury cars and SUVs. So after operations started, these companies continued the greed and started cheating the drivers out of their employment benefits that they are entitled to as well as their tips. The public is priced surged terribly. The investors are stuck and embarrassed because the IPO was called off (SEC will not pass on a "comic book" registration and prospectus). The investor's major stock holders are asking hard questions as to why public monies of these corporations were invested into shell app private companies who had no assets nor operating history. Now the driver is faced with much exposure and potential criminal liability if he has an accident, injury, or kills someone. These companies and their surplus line insurance policies will run and not pay a dime. If the driver signed and receive one of these vehicles and can not make the payment. then he should return the vehicle, hire an attorney to rescind the fraudulent finance contract and demand his money back plus damages the driver may be entitled to. If a driver wishes to continue driving, he will have no problem getting on with a taxi or limo company who is legal and make a nice legitimate living. Or perhaps, the driver will form his own company, be his own boss, and keep 100% of the money. You know that is not difficult to do. Otherwise, it is best for the driver to explore other opportunities in another industry. But above all of it, the driver must not be part of a criminal concerted conspiracy. Walk away quickly. His personal integrity and name is his most important asset and his family is entitled to just that as the head of the household.
ReplyDelete