Single Operator Permits Hit the Streets

Dave Schneider, who is the thirteenth driver to be issued a Single Operator Permit (SOP), stands next to his taxi.

Schneider has driven cab for over thirty years in San Francisco but never put his name on the Waiting List. He sees these permits as correcting an injustice in the original Prop-K legislation. (For more of his thoughts on the subject see the end of the post.)

Dave seemed so excited that he reminded me of a fifteen year old who had just bought his first car and was trying to be cool. He says that he intends to drive Saturday, Sunday and Tuesday nights so that the other drivers of the cab will have some decent shifts. It's the first time in his career that he's had the choice to work when he wants.

The Evolution of an Idea into Reality.

The idea of "Peak Time" taxis has been around for at least as long as Schneider's been driving. It was given new life by driver and blogger John Han who first proposed "Single Operator Permits" during a Town Hall meeting a few years ago. Deputy Director Chris Hayashi liked the idea and ran with it. Why? It offered a solution to the eternal San Francisco problem of too much business at certain times and too little at others.

Han, Hayashi and others at the meetings originally proposed that the SOPs should be owned like an affiliate by a single driver who would be allowed to work a maximum of 60 hours per week. There would be no designation of what hours the driver should choose but it was assumed that he or she would naturally self-select to work busy times like Friday and Saturday Nights or conventions and avoid the slow times.

During the Town Hall meetings in the spring of 2011, the concept was modified. Hayashi thought that SOPs would be a good way to reward drivers like Dave who had not put their names on the List but nonetheless had driven cabs for 20 or 30 years. It was pointed out that older drivers might not want to put in 60 hours a week so the possibility of a second driver to share the cab was added.

The SOP's happened to mirror a longtime plan of SFMTA Director Malcom Heinicke for "Peak Time" taxis. The main difference was that Heinicke wanted the cabs to be driven at fixed times. There was some back and forth between the Director and the people at the Town Hall meetings. The argument that peak times actually fluctuated and changed with conventions, sporting events and so forth carried the day and 50 "Single Operator Permits" were approved by the SFMTA last summer.

The Current Plan: A Different Kettle of Fish.


The SOP's have morphed into a very different program.

1. They now have a single permit holder and will be run as gates&gas instead of affiliates.
2. The vehicles will be run for 90 hours instead of 60.
3. The vehicles will be bought and owned by color schemes.
4. The color scheme must be able to produce electronic trip data.
5. The color scheme will fill the shifts that the permit holder doesn't drive.
6. All conditions that apply to a regular medallion will apply to these permits.
1. The permit holder must drive 800 hours per year.
7. The permits are for a term of three years with an option to renew for three years. 
1. The permit holder and the SFMTA both have the right to reject renewal.
2. If the permit isn't being used properly, the MTA can terminate at any time.

What Happened?

I interviewed MTA Investigator Mike Harris who is running the program. He said the changes were made because:

1. None of the older drivers wanted to buy the cars themselves.
2. None wanted to work as affiliates or choose their own drivers.
3. The hours expanded from 60 to 90 hours because the cab companies complained that they couldn't make a profit at 60 hours.

When I pointed out that this defeated the purpose of the SOPs, Harris disagreed. He said that most of the old school drivers didn't want to drive at peak hours. They wanted to drive Sundays, Mondays or Tuesdays and leave the busy hours (along with the drunks) to younger drivers.

One Beauty of the Taxi Business ...

... is that if you do something for one group of people everyone else complains.

1. Company owners and managers don't like the SOPs because they think that they won't be profitable enough.

At Green Cab, Treasurer Joe Mirabile said that he didn't know how they were going to make money off the SOPs. On  the other hand, Green didn't have to buy new cars for the first two permits that they put out because the company recently lost a couple of medallions. All they had to do was invest in a new paint job.

Desoto Cab owner Hansu Kim said that the SOPs would make little or no profit.

"They should either have put them out with one driver/owner for the 60 hours or just given the older drivers regular medallions," he added.

However, he also said that he would pay $1,000 a month to any Single Operator Permit holder who ran the taxi through Desoto.

2. Non-medallion driver and TAC member Tone Lee, who had strongly supported the original plan of one or two drivers and 60 hours, is very upset by the expansion to 90 hours.

I ran into him at the Mariott Marquis on Thursday and he talked about how slow it was on a night that was supposed to be busy and predicted that the SOPs would have devastating effect on the Monday night business. He also thought that it was unfair to give out the permits by A-card seniority rather than to people on the Waiting List and he feared that the permits would eventually be turned into full time medallions.

Of course Tone has a right to his opinions but I think he's wrong on one of his complaints.

He said the MTA was giving the permits to former medallion holders who had already sold their medallions.

I put the subject to Mike Harris who said that two former medallion holders had applied but he turned them down. He added that allowing former medallion holders to get permits, "was not the plan and is not the plan."

He said that anybody who knew the name of a former medallion holder who was given a SOP should contact him at (415) 701-5493.

If you don't feel comfortable talking to Mr. Harris, you can send the name to me and I'll pass it on.

Lee is organizing a protest for the MTA on Tuesday July 17th at 1 PM. Refreshingly, he's asking the drivers NOT to drive around City Hall and NOT honk horns. He just wanted drivers who are upset by the SOPs to show up and speak.

If you're in favor of the SOPs, you should also show up and say your piece.

My Take

I have mixed feelings. Like Mr. Lee I liked the original plan - especially the 60 hour limit. But, I also like the idea of rewarding older drivers who have driven for years but aren't eligible for an earned medallion. Besides, 90 hours is 50 or 60 hours less than cabs are ordinarily driven. This means that drivers stuck with the really bad hours are unlikely to see much new competition.

I sympathize with the drivers who didn't sign up on the List because the only reason that I put my name on it was that I was living with a woman who used to greet me every morning by bitching,

"Did you put your name that list yet?... No! ... Boy are you stupid!"

I finally caved just to shut her up. If I hadn't had the good/bad luck to be hooked up with this Harpie, I'd be in the same situation as Mr. Schneider. I'm happy that these guys are finally getting a little something after all the the contributions they've made to the business.

As for the people on the List ... well, unless the MTA screws them (not a possibility to be discounted) in the final plan, they should be able to either earn their medallions or buy them.

I don't like the expansion of the hours but I think that fifty cabs added on Monday or Tuesday peak times aren't a real problem. Increasing the fleet by 3% isn't going to break anybody's bank.

The real reason that it was slow on Thursday (and almost every other day) are the hundreds of illegal limos and taxis either racing us down the streets or bribing doorman so they can steal our fares. My number one priority is to encourage the City and the MTA to stomp on them - while our medallions still have some value.

In the meantime, congratulations to Dave and the others.

Dave Schneider	10:45 AM (19 minutes ago)
to Dave

I'm appreciative to the SFMTA and also to Chris Hayashi who I heard was one of the prime architects of the single operator medallion.  It seems to me it CORRECTS AN INJUSTICE IN THE ORIGINAL DRAFTING OF PROP K by then Supervisor Kopp. The way Kopp wrote it and, as amended  by Daly Ma and subsequent legislation,  DID NOT CREATE A TRUE SWEAT EQUITY BASED CRITERIA for medallion qualification - you had to sign up in addition to doing the work.     But many worker drivers didn't sign up for whatever reason and, while there may be some truth in "you snooze, you lose," still they did THE REAL WORK carrying thousands of passengers, driving lots of hours, shifts and miles.     They did the work by the seat of their pants.    Now with the single operator medallion, there's a chance the working poor might be able to move into at least the lower middle class and even pay off a few bills in what remaining time remains for these often elderly and impoverished drivers for whom the so called American dream has been, more often than not, a real social and economic nightmare.    In one San Francisco appellate court decision awarding cab drivers workers' compensation, the court compared cab drivers to sharecroppers working in the fields.    Today the taxi worker struggle in many fields continue and the the single operator medallion is one drop of welcome rain in the parched taxi driver fields.  Not only single operators, but all drivers should have fair working conditions, real wages and benefits beyond "independent contractor" poorhouse status. Dave S.

A Change in TAC ... tics?

There were three new faces on the Taxi Advisory Council on Monday who are likely to mean a change in direction. Until now, the TAC has pretty much been an owner's council. But the addition of Rua Graffis, Tara Housman and Tone Lee seems certain to challenge that dynamic.


Ms Graffis (Left) is a leader of the United Taxicab Workers (UTW) and has spent over thirty years fighting for driver's rights. She replaces non-medallion holder not on the list, Timothy Ajaegbu, who regularly missed council meetings.





Mrs. Housman (Middle photo) is a medallion holder who also takes a driver's point of view. As she pointed out at the meeting, medallion holders can also be drivers. She replaces Laurie Graham who routinely gave Yellow Cab a second vote.

Tone Lee is a leader among the drivers at the airport. He replaces Dmitry Nazarov who was a lease driver at Luxor Cab and has bought his own medallion. Nazarov, who was supposed to be representing drivers on the list, voted with President John Lazar of Luxor Cab absolutely every time.


All three of the new councilors have regularly attended and spoken at TAC meetings so that they are already up to speed. 


When you add another recent addition, Richard Hybels (owner of Metro Cab who is well-known as a maverick that sometimes sides with drivers) to the mix, the council promises to be much more evenly balanced than it has been in the past.


Council Business


The council voted to have Chair Chris Sweis and Vice Chair Barry Korengold continue in their positions for another six months.


Driver's Fund


The main subject for discussion was, what to do with the drivers fund?


This was the first time that the council has seriously discussed the issue and it was primarily a brainstorming session. The councilors generally agreed that the sum of money (currently $1,462,500) was too small to pay for medical or retirement benefits. Some ideas put forward for the fund's use were:

• Scholarships for the children of drivers.
• Catastrophic insurance.
• Benefits for injured or traumatized drivers who needed time off from work.

Councilor Barry Korengold introduced a plan to use a 25 cent drop fee to build the fund more quickly but the drivers could not use their share unless they were vested for 5 years.

Christopher Fulkerson liked the idea in general but thought that the fund should be invested in an IRA that drivers could access whenever they wanted.


Tone Lee wanted to set up a lottery that would pay $100 to fifty drivers every two weeks on the provision that they showed up at TAC to collect it.

In the end, the council voted for a motion make by TAC member and general manager of Desoto Cab, Athan Rebelos, to make certain that the funds would be managed by the beneficiaries (i.e. the cab drivers) and not the MTA.

Town Hall Meeting: Meter increase

Let me start by saying that I think that a meter increase will take place. It would have to be approved by the SFMTA Board but it appears as if they will approve a reasonable raise.

The only questions are: how much of an increase and how would such an increase be calculated.

The chart on the left was a working tool used to look at various possibilities.

Factors considered were:

• The initial drop.
• Distance and waiting time.
• Radio dispatch fees.
• Gas surcharge fees.

Needless to say that in four sessions there were an incredible number of suggestions. But, toward the end, the mood was summarized as K.I.S.S. - Keep It Simple Stupid.

The feeling was against gas surcharges per se (visible surcharges that is) and, if there was a to be a radio dispatch fee, it should probably be a set price of maybe $2. At least that was my impression - a lot of people had a lot of different ideas.

Toward the end three main plans held sway or at least my attention:

1. Christopher Fulkerson called for no increase in the drop and an additional 10 cents for every 1/5th of a mile which would bring the price to 55 cents every 1/5th of mile.
2. Tariq Mehmood called for no increase in the drop, an additional 10 cents per 1/5 of a mile plus an another additional 10 cents per 1/5 of a mile for a gas surcharge which brings the price to 65 cents for every 1/5th of a mile.
3. Tone Lee, on the other hand, wanted no increase in the drop but he only wanted an increase in the number of clicks from 5 to 6 per miles - meaning that there would be 45 cent for every 1/6th of mile.

I should say that there were quickie votes taken at both sessions and the Mehmood plan won by narrow margins in both cases. (Of course a nitpicker might point out that Mehmood had stacked the meeting with disciples so the votes were, shall we say, dubious). Nonetheless the powerful and great Tariq proclaimed this as THE DRIVER'S PLAN.

What we need is a quick comparison. 

 At current rates with a 3.10 drop and 45 cents per 1/5th of a mile. (Using calculations from the above chart as a starting point.)

• A 3 miles ride with 3 minutes of waiting time = $10.75
• A 13 mile SFO with 5 minutes of waiting time  = 34.15

Under the Fulkerson Plan with a 3.10 drop and 55 cents per 1/5th of mile. 

• 3 mile ride = $12.45
• 13 mile SFO = $41.05

Under the Tone Lee Plan with a 3.10 drop and 45 cent per 1/6th of a mile

• 3 mile ride = $11.20
• 13 mile SFO = $40.00

Under THE DRIVER'S PLAN

• 3 mile ride = $13.75
• 13 miles SFO = $47.15

Of course these are rough estimates.

• Increasing the drop to 3.50 that would add 40 cents to these totals.
• Deputy Director Hayashi wanted to add 75 cents as a gas/credit card surcharge.
• A radio response fee would add $2.00 or $5.00 depending.

 The majestic Mehmood, realizing that a ride to SFO would be a tad high under THE DRIVER'S PLAN , declared that there shall be a flat rate to the airport of $40 from downtown and $45 from Fisherman's Wharf.

Faced with the criticism that THE DRIVER'S PLAN would lose business by making the rides too expensive in the outer areas of the city, no less a personage than the great and powerful Tariq Mehmood himself decreed that there shall also be flat rates from areas like the Excelsior, the Ingleside, Park Merced, the Outer Richmond and the Outer Sunset.

Although I have been told (both in person and with vague threats and obscenities sent as comments to my blog) by Tariq the Terrible and THE DRIVERS, that I am forbidden to speak, I will add my two cents anyway.

I think that something along the lines of either Tone Lee's or Fulkerson's plan will be adopted - possibly with a gas surcharge on the drop as long as it's kept under $4.00.

THE DRIVER'S PLAN is both too complicated and far too expensive. The burden of the cost would fall on people taking shorter rides - especially paratransit people. For that reason alone, the MTA almost certainly will not adopt it.

Deputy Director Hayashi said, that in the future, the cost-of-living need for a meter increase will be reviewed every two years so we won't have wait 9 years for the next raise.

Hayashi also said that she will advise the SFMTA Board NOT to allow the companies to increase the gate as a quid pro for relieving them of the credit card charges.

TAC 3-14-2011 Part 2

The rough draft of the TAC report on the Pilot Program was put together by Council Chair Chris Sweis (photo) after going through more than 12 hours of tapes. For this he deserves an award.

However, as councilor Carl Macmurdo and others pointed out, Sweis forgot to include Medallion Holders as one the four primary participants in the S.F. taxi industry. (A Freudian slip? Sweis wouldn't be the first owner of a taxicab company to wish that medallion holders would disappear. ) The Chair admitted that it was an oversight and promised to include a section on medallion holders in an amended draft at the next session.

As for the rest, I simply want to deal with a few points of the draft. You can read the full text in TaxiTownSf.

The discussions at TAC were mostly about the effects on Taxi Companies and Drivers on the waiting list.

1.The major effect on companies was the change from Gates and Gas to Affiliate Leases.

• In 2003 there were few cabs operated on as Affiliates.
• By 2010 more than half the taxis were affiliates.
• 56% of the medallions purchased during the pilot program have chosen to become affiliates.

Sweis and others see this as a negative.

• G and G operations, according to Sweis, "provide greater control over vehicles and drivers."
• Loss of G and G medallions "will reduce company revenues and quality control."
• Companies are losing taxis to Affiliates.
• Experienced drivers are losing good shifts when Affiliates replace them with less experienced drivers.
• Which "would lead to a decline of taxi service to the public."

Driver Tone Lee (photo) disputed this claiming that Affiliates and LTLs did a better job because the drivers worked harder and took better care of the cars that they, themselves, purchased.

Gratchia Markanian, the head of Checker Cab, made similar points and predicted that all taxis would someday be Affiliates.

Hansu Kim (photo), on the other hand, who has been strongly in favor of Affiliates, reversed his position and said that taxi companies needed gate and gas arrangement to be profitable. Coincidentally, Kim recently purchased Desoto Cab.

Councilor John Lazar of Luxor Cab said that the frozen gate rates had "killed gates and gas" arrangement. He also said, as he's said before, that new buyers couldn't afford to work under gate and gas because their loan payments were too high.

I have a few problems with these arguments - namely that neither one of them appears to be true.

• The payments on a 15 years loan are $1,798 per month. The lowest amount that a GG medallion holder is paid is $1,800 per month and the highest is $2,400 per month. In addition a medallion is worth $5,000 to $10,000 per year in better shifts etc. What can't they afford?
• If the cab companies are so strapped for cash, how come they are engaging in medallion bidding wars?

Companies are currently offering bonuses as high as $5,000 and medallion payments as high as $2,400 a month to wrest medallion away from each other. If they're so broke, where are they getting the money for their campaigns?

In the end, they passed a motion by 10 to 4 to have all cabs that are awarded to drivers on the list to be worked as Gates and Gas for the first three years.

Next: The effect on Drivers.