Showing posts with label the MTA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the MTA. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

TAC Proposes: 25 Single Operator, 25 to the List, Restart OTA


On Monday, June 13, 2011 the Taxi Advisory Council held its most productive meeting so far.

It started with the introduction a new councilor, Timothy Lapp (Photo front), who replaces Jim Gillespie as the Yellow Cab delegate. Tim and I started driving taxi on the same day almost 28 years ago. I know him as a creative person who has travelled widely in Europe and Asia with a definite mind of his own. I'm sure that he'll make great contributions to the council when he's not parroting his firm's propaganda - maybe even when he is.

Then, a ghost proposal popped up. At the Town Hall meetings (of which TAC was supposed to be an extension) Peak Time Permits had been given the thumbs down and left for dead by everyone. Yet, there they were back on the agenda under the new name of "Part Time Company Permits." They certainly couldn't be peak time because they could be operated up to 80 hours a week.

Veteran MTA watchers recognized this as the handiwork of Director Malcom Heinicke. Heinicke has occasionally spoken about "transparency" but appears to have only the vaguest idea of what the word means. For the director's elucidation allow me to include a few definitions from Wikipedia:


Transparency, as used in the humanities and in a social context more generally, implies openness, communication, and accountability. It is a metaphorical extension of the meaning a "transparent" object is one that can be seen through. Transparent procedures include open meetings ....


In politics, transparency is introduced as a means of holding public officials accountable and fighting corruption. When government meetings are open to the press and the public ... when laws, rules and decisions are open to discussion, they are seen as transparent and there is less opportunity for the authorities to abuse the system in their own interest.


In short, what's the point of putting us through 3 days of Town Hall meetings and then going back door to whimsically change what the drivers had decided upon? Did the director think we wouldn't notice?

Heinicke is in danger of turning all these meetings into the farce that Brad Newsham, Tariq Mehmood and others claim they are.

Whatever - the TAC didn't like the Heinicke Corporate Cabs any better than drivers liked Peak Time Permits at the Town Hall Meetings. Thumbs down once again!

Under the firm direction of Chair Chris Sweiss, the Taxi Advisory Council voted for:
  • 25 Single Operator Permits.
  • 2 Electric Vehicle (EV) permits.
  • 25 Medallions to the top of the Waiting List.
The council also decided to urge the MTA Board to work out various ways to improve service before arbitrarily adding cabs to the fleet

TAC then voted to advise the Board to re-issue a Request For Proposal (RFP) for Open Taxi Access (OTA). This would invite bidding from tech companies to build the Open Taxi Access Platform. This would be the first step to making OTA a reality.

TAC also voted to encourage all companies to take dispatched calls.

Speaking of Tariq Mehmood (And how can one not?) ... he showed up at TAC to tell everyone that he was going on strike because, at the last Town Hall meeting, he took 9 of his friends into another room where they agreed that the Single Operator Permits should be operated at fixed times.

Most of the people at that meeting appeared to prefer a more flexible schedule.

But Mehmood, the self-proclaimed "powerful and great" leader, declared that he was in the majority, that 80% of the drivers were behind him and that, if the permits were not operated at fixed times, he would strike.

There you have it! Talk about motivation! A "powerful and great" man's gotta do what he's gotta do.

The rest of the drivers at the Town Hall Meetings had pretty much agreed with TAC's recommendations.

The upshot is that the drivers should get a meter increase and (quid pro quo) 25 Single Operator cabs should be put out to work at peak times, 25 more taxis should be added to the fleet and a high-tec dispatching solution should link all the taxis in the city in one big network.

Hopefully this will help both the drivers and the public.

We'll see.

Monday, June 13, 2011

Bye Bye Electronic Waybills? Bye Bye Waybills?


Deputy Director of Taxi Services Christiane Hayashi had an epiphany during last week's Town Hall Meetings on Electronic Waybills. Since the major cab companies are already computerized and collecting data on every ride, why have waybills at all?

The real question for Hayashi is, "What information do I need?"

The MTA needs data to:
  • Qualify medallion applicants.
  • Revoke medallions from medallion holders who are not disabled and not driving.
  • Investigate criminal complaints.
  • Identify key industry statistics.
And what stats do they need?
  • Times of pick ups and drop offs to help identify busy times and slow times - including days of the week.
  • The locations of pick ups and drop offs - to give the MTA the ability to plan taxi stands and white zones for drop offs. Or, to eliminate taxi stands that aren't needed.
  • Paid vs unpaid miles - in the aggregate - broken down by times and days of the week.
  • Number of passengers - how many people are riding in taxis.
The goals for obtaining this information are to improve driver income and service to the public by increasing the percentage of paid miles and increasing the number of taxi rides.

What the MTA doesn't need is a lot information on individual drivers. 

In short,  you probably won't have to fill out daily trip sheets because companies are already generating them. Medallion holders, people on the list, and drivers who want will be able to get waybills for their own records but drivers won't have to keep records unless they want to.

The MTA won't have to keep much information on file because it's being kept by the companies. When the MTA does need to know something for one of the above reasons, they can simply get it on a need-to-know basis from the companies.

Security Issues.

Director Hayashi has already stated that the MTA has refused to open up its files for Homeland Security.

As it happened, I had some high-level security experts in my taxi over the weekend (they were discussing attempts to hack U.S. Government secrets concerning Pakistan) so I picked their brains. They said:
  • Whether or not information can be hacked depends upon how the security is set up.
  • Keeping info in different locations makes it more secure.
  • Credit cards are usually insured against theft.
There was also a point that they didn't state but hinted at ... namely that thieves generally don't steal from the poor. Grifting my identity, for instance, wouldn't get them much and, as cab drivers go, I'm filthy rich.

Monday, January 3, 2011

The Need for a Universal Driver's Lease: Part 1


Speaking of exercises in Nostalgia and theory ...

As many readers know, I have no love for the leasing system and would like to see a return to employer/employee method of organizing the taxi business. There are two main reasons for this:

1. A split meter would take cab companies out of the leasing business and put them back into the taxi business where they belong. They would be forced to deal with the realities of the market place. Their incomes thus would depend upon finding better methods of giving service rather than looking for new ways of extracting money from their drivers.
2. The so-called "Independent Contract" deprived cab drivers of basic "worker's rights" and left them unable to form unions and powerless to fight abuses by the companies.

I've come to realize, however, that my dream ain't gonna happen. The only other person with a voice (the vast majority of drivers are unrepresented and have no voice) speaking in favor of "employee rights" for drivers is Christopher Fulkerson and the two of us don't a movement make.

Company owners and managers like leasing because:

 1. It reduces company expenses. They don't have to pay:
     a) Payroll taxes.
     b) Social Security Taxes.
     c) Unemployment taxes.
     d) Medical or retirement benefits.
     e) Sick pay, vacation pay, etc.
2. Companies don't have to worry about unions that might strike for all or part of the above.
3. They don't have to worry about the ups and downs of the market. In fact, they tend to do very well in mild recessions because so many unemployed people are desperate enough to fill even the worst shifts.


Medallion holders like leasing for many of the same reasons that companies do:

1. They benefit, we benefit, from reduced company expenses, and don't have to worry much about the ups and downs of the market place.
2. We're the real "Independent Contractors" in this scenario.
     a) Companies bid for our services.
     b) If we don't like one company, we can take our medallions to another.

The Municipal Transportation Agency doesn't want taxi drivers to be employees because:

1. I suspect that MTA administrators don't much like the unions they do have. They sure don't want a gang of striking cab drivers on their hands.
2. This makes it easier for them to raise fees and dream of "income streams."

The United Taxicab Workers might talk about a union but they've done precious little to bring one about.

1. I think that they're caught in a conflict of wanting "employee rights" for drivers who aren't employees and they've never quite figured out what to do about it.
2. If they demanded that all drivers should be employees, they're afraid of losing the support of drivers who want to be under a lease.
3. If they fight for the people on the lease, they lose the ones who want "employee rights."
4. In this confusion, they've been divided and conquered.

Lease drivers may not want to become employees because:

1. They like the freedom that leasing gives them. They can go anywhere they like and work any way they want.
2. They may not fully understand what they are giving up when they sign the lease.
3. What they are actually free of are all the legal rights that have been granted to employees over the last hundred and fifty years including: age, race and sex discrimination laws; the right to a minimum wage; the right not to be fired without a cause, the right to collect unemployment, etc - not to mention the right to having half their social security taxes paid as well as actually having social security benefits to collect when they get old.

To be fair, it should be said that the high number of medallion holders (probably around 20% of all drivers) has drastically cut cab company profits. According to Pre K medallion holder, Art Lempke, the money given to the medallion holders created by Prop-K have made it impossible for companies to afford paying benefits to regular drivers.

On top of this, the whole industry has been geared to leasing for over 30 years. Changing to a employee/employer system would drastically change the business in unpredictable and, possibly, destructive ways.

Yet -  the "Independent Contract," which defines the relationships in the lease, is more a fictional than a legal document in the way it's used in the taxi business. It is supposed to be a contract between parties of equal power.  While this really does describe the relationship between companies and medallion holders (see the bit about medallion holders above), it's a joke when applied to non-medallion holding drivers. They are powerless and easy prey for those who want to abuse their power at the drivers expense.

The problem is how to stop these abuses while keeping the companies solvent and improving service to the public.

Next up: Company scams.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

A Conversation with Rebecca Lytle


I spoke last week with Rebecca Reynolds Lytle, Vice President of Lending at San Francisco Federal Credit Union (SFFCU).

Among other things we discussed the differences between a Gate and Gas and an Owner/Operator arrangement from her standpoint of making a loan to a new buyer. Other subjects came up during the conversation including, of course, her decision to require the full 20% down payment from those who choose the Owner/Operator lease and not accept down payment assistance except on a gate and gas arrangement.


Let Last Be First

It turns out that Ms. Lytle and SFFCU had already decided to require the full down payment from Owner/Operators before TAC voted to do so. The reasons for this were that an Owner/Operator loan:
  • Costs more to underwrite and maintain.
  • Has little or no way for the credit union to verify that various financial arrangement are, in fact, what the new buyers claim they are.
  • Carries a higher risk because of this.
SFFCU wants to reduce their risk by getting the full $50,000 down payment from Owner/Operators.

In order to understand the reasoning behind this, it's necessary to see how these loans are structured.

Gate and Gas Arrangements

Lytle described these are "turnkey" arrangements because the company:
  • Buys the car.
  • Provides the insurance.
  • Does the maintenance on the car.
  • Hires the drivers and makes certain that they have good driving records and A-Cards.
  • Etc.
The taxi companies are set up to do this and they have a vested interest in making certain that everything is done properly.  Therefore the credit union doesn't have to sweat the details.

Owner/Operators Arrangements

The Owner/Operator has to do all the above himself or herself.

In order to assure the safety of the loan, SFFCU and Ms. Lytle need to make certain that:
  • The Owner/Operator owns the car and does have insurance.
  • The drivers have A-cards.
  • The Owner/Operator is complying with City regulations by not charging more than $104 per shift for a hybrid or $96.50 for a regular vehicle.
  • Lytle is also considering getting copies of DMV printouts as supporting documentation that the medallion holder is complying with the Transportation Code.
  • Etc.
All this involves considerably more work and thus more cost in terms of labor hours than a GG Loan. And, even after the additional issues, the loan company still has no way to guarantee that the information is accurate or kept up to date - although the credit union does require the Owner/Operator to provide updates on all the above annually, or sooner, if requested.

Because of the uncertainly, Ms. Lytle and SFFCU want to see a greater amount of financial responsibility on the part of an Owner/Operator. Lytle added that it doesn't make any sense to continue allowing  Down Payment Assistance on a loan with this type of lease arrangement when the MTA intends to stop this practice in the next 30 days or so anyway.

Forced into being Owner/Operators?

Prior to 10/14/2010, when SFFCU began requiring the 20% down, Ms. Lytle said that 63% of the loans were to Owner/Operators. She takes issue, however, with people who claim that new buyers have been "forced" by financial necessity into this type of arrangement.

Ms. Lytle pointed out that the $250,000 fixed price was chosen by the MTA requirement that loan payments not exceed the monthly amount that medallion holders are paid by taxi companies. The $250,000 number was arrived at by calculating the size of loan payments and comparing them to Gate and Gas monthly payments. Lytle also indicated that, in order to further validate the worth of the medallion, the MTA's fixed price was compared to medallion markets in Boston, Chicago and Philadelphia - cities similar to San Francisco.

SFFCU so far has made three types of loans;
  1. 12 years with a fixed rate for $2,300 a month.
  2. 15 years with a 3 year balloon payment for $1,798 a month.
  3. 25 years with a 3 year balloon payment for  $1,440 a month.
The monthly payment is slightly higher if the borrower did not have the full 20% down payment and needed the down payment assistance loan. You can view examples of loan payments for all the different types of loans on the credit union’s website at http://www.sanfranciscofcu.com/loans/taximedallion_loan.htm

These numbers are consistent with the amounts that various companies pay their medallion holders.

To the charge that the interest rates will probably rise when the balloon payments become due, it could be said that there will probably be a meter increase before then, meaning that medallion holders will be paid more money.

Satisfaction

Ms. Lytle said that these taxi medallion loans have given her more satisfaction than almost any other loan that she's ever underwritten. They've allowed her to "help these people realize their dreams." The medallion holders or their relatives are "overjoyed" to be able to sell the medallions after thinking that they never would be able to do so. And the new buyers are "so excited" to finally get their medallions.

Ms. Lytle said that she would be more than happy to answer any questions about the loan programs. She can be reached at:

Tel. 415.359.2926   Fax. 415.447.2240
Rebecca_Lytle@SanFranciscoFCU.com

Friday, October 15, 2010

TAC Votes to Limit Down Payment Assistance


On Tuesday October 12, the Taxi Advisory Council voted unanimously (William Minikel and Dmitry Nazarov were absent) to grant Down Payment Assistance only to buyers who choose to work their taxis as "gate and gas" for at least three years. 

The motion to do so was put forward by National Cab's Dan Hinds (photo, left) in order to limit the number of new buyers who operate their cabs as Owner Operators or Affiliates (i.e. owners who operate their cabs as Long Term Leases).

The vote came after a lengthy discussion of the pros and cons of GG vs LTL and the problems of trying to run a full service cab company.

Declining Profits

Desoto's Jane Bolig said that: problems with the EDD (California's Employment Development Department), the costs of medallion holder bidding wars, and the increased number of cabs going LDL were causing declining profits in companies giving full service.

(Her comments on the EDD referred to suits that the EDD had filed against both Luxor Cab of San Francisco and Yellow Cab of San Jose that charged the taxi companies with millions of dollars in back Unemployment taxes.)

Yellow Cab's Jim Gillespie said that the EDD "only has issues" with GG drivers and leaves LTL alone. However, he added that it was possible to structure GG leases in such a way that "doesn't" turn GG drivers into "employees." He gave the practice of having drivers pay for their shifts in advance as an example.

Jane Bolig said that she thought that giving Fleet Medallions to full service companies would be about the only way for them to survive.

Green Cab's Athan Rebelos (photo, left) said that he agreed with the necessity for fleet medallions and added that he'd been in the taxi business in New York City where they had a combination of Fleet medallions and individual medallion holders and suggested that San Francisco follow a similar policy.

But he also said that declining profits were a "national problem" and that in many cities neither the taxi companies nor the cab drivers were making any money at all.

Scheduling Problems

Lease Driver John Han (photo, right) said that he wanted to be a GG driver and that, if taxi companies would actually honor the "Independent" contracts that their drivers sign, fewer drivers would want to become LTL drivers.

Han gave the example of his own shift which is listed as being from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm according to the lease he signed. He usually can't get started driving, however, until 9:00 or 9:30 am - unless he pays the dispatcher "some huge tip."

Council President Chris Sweis chose to describe this as "a scheduling problem." And, indeed, it no doubt is. The company Han works for is clearly scheduling a "short" that overlaps John's shift. The "short" apparently runs from 3:00 am or 4:00 am to 9:00 am. This allows the company to get an additional three or four hours of profitability (not including tip) from the medallion. The "short" takes up part of Han's shift  because the company would be unable to sell the "short" without including the 7:00 to 9:00 morning rush hour.

But I digress ...

Unintended Consequences

Dan Hind's original motion didn't impose any time limit but Jane Bolig said that having a GG taxi wouldn't do Desoto Cab any good unless they could keep the taxi for three years.

Lease Driver David Kahn (photo, right) then proposed an amendment to the motion calling for a three year time limit.

Athan Rebelos backed the motion saying that the Pilot Plan "had been developed around a gates and gas program" and that no one was prepared to deal with so many Owner/Operated taxis hitting the streets at the same time.

The unanimity of the vote came from the perception that the conversion of GG cabs to Owner/Operated leases has been having a negative effect on almost everyone in the business except the new buyers.
  • Companies have been losing revenue from cabs.
  • Drivers have been losing shifts.
"Warp Speed Scottie."

The Taxi Advisory Council, as its name suggests, can only advise the MTA on a policy. The MTA has to okay a change and then a new policy does not officially take effect for 30 days.

The San Francisco Federal Credit Union, however, already put the new Down Payment Assistance rules into effect on 10/14/2010. As of that date, "Supplemental funds from the down payment assistance provision in the Pilot Program are not acceptable for financing" Owner/Operator (aka Affiliate) leases.

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

MTA Board Unanimously Passes Pilot Plan


With a vote of 7-0, the MTA Board made history by unanimously okaying Prop-K reform and passing the Pilot Plan.

The meeting, which didn't start until almost 5 PM, had the air of a foregone conclusion about it. The room was half full and only three people spoke against the plan. The usual people, with the addition of Murai, spoke in favor of it.

The people who are financing the loans (called "my suits" by Chris Hayashi) confirmed that they were willing to grant loans on the basis of a Fixed Rate of $250,000.

Director Heinicke asked them if they would be willing to grant loans for a higher amount of money and their spokesman said that $250,000 was all that they would be willing to loan at this time.

That's it folks. It's a done deal. Now we'll see how it works out.

Sunday, January 31, 2010

The Pilot Plan: What it is. What it isn't - Unfair???



There has been so much misinformation written in the press and disinformation spread about the Taxi Town Hall Meetings that I think it's necessary to review what went on there.

There have been two main attacks leveled against the meetings: that they were unfair and that the outcome was fixed or predetermined.

The first assertion is ridiculous and the second is false.

1. Aside from the famous 175 hours of meetings, there were at least twenty presentations given and anybody who had a thought or a question was encouraged to speak. Mark Gruberg of the UTW, the main critic of the meetings, not only spoke for three or four hours all by himself but his idea for a "driver's fund" is now part of the plan. Furthermore, Director of Taxis Chris Hayashi went far beyond the normal call of duty and talked with taxi drivers at the airport, at cab lots and anywhere else she could find them.

2. I think that these meetings were supposed to be fixed. They were supposed to be the usual dog and pony shows designed to manufacture consent. Only, thanks to Hayashi, they were not.
  • This is the plan that was supposed to be shoveled down our throats. It comes from Malcom Heinicke, a director of the MTA board.
  • This is an outline of the Pilot Plan we developed at the Town Hall Meetings. (The final version is still being drafted.)
Those of us who took part in these meetings know how absurd these attacks against the Town Hall process are. We sat and watched the plan being drawn up from scratch on a blank slate. Chris Hayashi started out by asking the people at the meetings what they thought should go into the plan and then wrote in the suggestions.

Over a period of four months, the plan constantly changed and evolved as people debated various points or came up with a fresh ideas. The plan remains a work in progress and will be subject to change even after it is accepted by the MTA. The final version won't be drawn up until we see how the various parts of this pilot program - like the fixed-priced sale of taxis - play out in the real world.

I doubt that workers from any industry of any kind have ever been given the chance express themselves more freely, openly, thoroughly and, yes, fairly than the people at these meetings. I think that few groups of people have ever had more say in reforming the future of their business.

Currently, Hayashi is working to find the best financing possible for the drivers who might want to buy a medallion under the new plan. She's decided to hold a Town Hall Meeting for all the banks and lending institutions that are interested - on Friday, February 12th from 2pm to 5pm.

I asked her if it was okay if I attended.

"Of course," she told me, "It'll be open to the public. We don't do anything in secret around here."

Saturday, October 17, 2009

Chris Hayashi's New Plan


Deputy Director of Taxis Chris Hayashi had an epiphany the other night which led to a change of emphasis during the October 16th Town Hall meeting. Originally she had intended to discuss two separate plans: one offering medallions holders a chance to buy a retirement and the other offering the chance sell a medallion at a fixed rate.

Ms Hayashi's revelation was that the two ideas could be combined into one. She only saw the broad strokes in her vision so the details have yet to be worked out. However, the outline goes something like this:
  • Medallion holders could opt for either retirement or sale.
  • The List would be maintained and drivers on it apparently would have a choice between getting the medallion by paying for it or not.
  • The City would take fees of at least $10 million for brokering the deal because they are giving us public access to the streets ... or something.
  • Some of these fees would go back to the taxi industry in the form of enforcement against illegal taxis and limos as well benefits for the non-medallion drivers.
It's hard to see how some of this would work but the genius is always in the details and we won't begin to see those until Monday.

I think the idea was generally greeted with enthusiasm - especially by those of us who thought that the twain could never meet between the plans; and that the people favoring one side or the other could never reach an agreement.

There was hostility loudly expressed against the high percentage of the fees (ranging from 20% to 50%) that the MTA wants to charge the taxi industry for putting Deputy Director Hayashi's plan (or any other plan) into effect, mostly by medallion holder Jim Templeton and myself. Jim argued that it was absurd for us to be contributing to the salaries of MTA personnel who make more than twice as much money as we do. I concentrated my attack on the fact that we would be hit by much higher taxes than anyone else pays.

I'm afraid that we both of got a little carried away. Jim had the good grace to apologize for his outburst but I did not. I should have. My Irish temper had the best of me. My animosity was (or should have been) directed at the idea not the person. Let me apologize now.

In any case, our complaints had no effect. Ms Hayashi told us that we should talk to an attorney. Her legal opinion is that the MTA has the right impose any fees that they wish.

She saved the best news for last. She told us that the plan that wouldn't die is finally dead.

"I tried to get one of you to say something good about the plan but couldn't," she told us.

She deflected all attempts to get details about this radical change of direction with a series of impish "yes" and "no" answers to all queries on the subject. In the shadowy Byzantine world of the MTA, the force apparently is finally with Deputy Director Hayashi.

The people in the taxi industry are apparently to be given the chance to decide their own destinies.

Let's hope the wind stays at her back.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Nat Ford Serves a Facial


It's official. As of Monday 9/21/2009, Taxis & Accessible Services became Administration, Taxi & Accessible Services under Director Debra Johnson.

Instead of having our own division within the MTA we are now lumped into a cat-call sub-division that looks like this:

  • Equal Opportunity Contracting
  • Human Resources
  • Marketing and Customer Service
  • Employee and Labor Relations (for MTA employees)
  • Organizational Development and Training
  • Taxis
  • Accessible Services
Can't you just see the logic of the grouping?


Christiane Hayashi is still the head of Taxis but she's now Deputy Director who reports to Director Debra Johnson as well Executive Director Nathaniel Ford.

In practical terms, this means that Ms. Hayahsi has lost some of her freedom and power and will have to clear her actions with Debra Johnson before going ahead with them. As to whether this will effect her plans to crack down on illegal taxis and limos remains to be seen.

As to how this will effect the forthcoming Town Hall Meetings is also an open question.

One thing is certain: If Director Ford chooses to ignore the wishes of everyone in the Taxicab Business in going ahead with this change, it must be his way of telling us that:
  • What we want doesn't matter.
  • The Byzantine internal politics of the MTA are more important than the needs of the cab industry or the City of San Francisco.
  • We are under his thumb.
Welcome to the MTA.

Thursday, July 30, 2009

The Application Hearing Process - A New Set of Rules?



The July 24, 2009 hearings for medallion applicants turned out to be a radical event.

In the old days (before the MTA took over), a medallion applicant merely had to stand up before the Taxi Commission and tell them that the city needed to give him or her the medallion for some reason or other. I think I told them that they needed to give one to me because, in all humility, I was the best taxi driver there was.

The new Director of Taxis and Accessible Services, Christiane Hayashi, looked at this process and decided that it was laughably "ridiculous." She thus instituted a new procedure where a hearing officer and one of her investigators would actually look at the applicant's waybills.

The unfortunate object of this new vigor was medallion applicant Leonid Slootsky who has owned a ramp medallion for the last four years. Four years ago Slootsky worked 165 shifts and three years ago he totaled over 1200 hours but, for the last few years, he apparently decided to coast and put in only a little over 800 hours per. In the old days, that might have been okay but this is now.

Slootsky's waybills were closely examined by MTA Hearing Officer Harry Epstein and Taxis and Available Services investigator Scott Leon. On Slootsky's behalf, it should be said that neither Epstein nor Leon appeared to have the foggiest notion of what it was like to actually drive a taxi. As dilligent as they were clueless, the two of them took Slootsky's waybill apart line by line.

Epstein wanted to know why Slootsky only worked two days a week and why he started every shift with a ride at Geary and Taylor. "Is there a hotel there or something?" he asked.

Both Leon and Epstein want to know why Slootsky spend an hour or two every day waiting at the airport. Noting that he stopped taking rides an hour or two before he turned in the cab, both Epstein and Leon pared down Slootsky's time to a little over 700 hours.

The befuddled Slootsky, talking through a Russian interpreter, could only say that his wife and family worked; and promise to put in more days in the future.

I had to leave to start my shift so I didn't hear the end but I think a final determination was put off until August 14th.

As I walked out, a driver who had also watched the ceremony told me,
  • "I used to tell everybody cab driving was a great job. I'm telling 'em that any more."
He had a point. According to Epstein and Leon, working is no longer enough - one has to work successfully. It isn't enough to desperately look for rides during those desperately slow recession days and nights. You have to find them.

On the other hand, both Epstein and Leon appeared to be dedicated men with inquiring, open minds. If they asked stupid questions, it was because they wanted to know how things worked. I'm sure they'll soon get up to speed and have a better sense of what it's like to drive a cab.

But the rules have changed. While it's clear that Slootsky often got his waybills stamped long after he actually quit working, such behavior would have been acceptable last year. From now on drivers will have to completely work their shifts to get their time. I don't see where that's a bad thing.

The moral of this tale is that it's a good idea to be safe. I don't have a problem because I put in at least 1,200 hours a year. I don't know if you need that many but every driver should now put in a 1,000 hours per - just to be sure.




Saturday, June 20, 2009

Players & Plans: SFCDA



Although they are the new kids on the block, the San Francisco Cab Drivers Association is the only group to consistently protest against the MTA's plans to extort money either by selling cabs or imposing fees on medallion holders. With refreshingly openness, President Barry Korengold consults with the general membership in order to formulate policies or plan actions.

SFCDA's plan calls for:
  • The preservation of Proposition K.
  • An "exit strategy" that would entail a gradual relaxation of the driving requirement. Korengold suggests that the requirement be reduced by 25% every five years and an additional 25% when a driver reaches 65.
  • Changes in the waiting list that include: drivers being automatically placed on the list when receiving an A-Card and the idea that drivers should be able to remain qualified once they meet a basic requirement of driving 9 out 10 continuous years.
  • A serious crack down on illegal limos that would create significant revenue for the City and allow for the issuance of "hundreds more permits" for legitimate taxicabs.
The proposal should appeal both to medallions holders who don't want transferability and to people high on The List.

Medallion holders who want to sell and regular drivers who want to buy of course will dislike it.

The plan also doesn't really address the fact that the waiting list moves much too slowly for many people - except once again by putting more taxis on the street.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Players & Plans: Luxor


While we're waiting to find out when (or if) the Town Hall Meetings will resume, I thought that it'd a good time to glance at the players and their plans.

Reading through them, I've come to realize that I've arrived late at a party that's been going on for years. Many of the proposals are far too detailed to have been worked up in response to Newsom's bomb. While I was whiling away my summers riding camels on the Silk Road or trading vodka shots in Mongolia, cab drivers were feverishly mapping out strategies and engaging in back-door negotiations - all with the dream of being ready for the death of K.

In short, the allegations that I am "uninformed" are true. However, I'm less "uninformed" than any official journalist is likely to be. Reviewing these plans will hopefully lead toward enlightenment. I only have space to look at a few main points. For a full summary check with sftaxi@sfmta.com .

Let's start with Luxor because it has a plan that is both unique and, up to this point, has had the most effect. Drawn up by President and General Manager John Lazar together with Charles Rathbone, the proposal features:
  • A $50,000 up front fee to be paid by a K medallion holder for the right to transfer the permit via an auction. It's a striking idea that the MTA liked so much that thy stole it.
  • A two tiered system that would consist of two classes of medallions and medallion holders.
  1. Transferred medallions, called "M", could in turn be auctioned off like medallions elsewhere. The transfer fee for these would be 5% - 20%. And, once an M always an M.
  2. K medallions would also be maintained as would the List. K cabs would be given out as they are now. Where would they come from? From drivers who died or retired without transferring their medallions and from the City which would issue 10 to 20 new cab permits each year. K drivers from the list would always have the option converting to an M.
  • Drivers high up on the list would be able sell or auction off their positions to drivers lower on the list.
  • The City would give a few corporate medallions every year to dispatch companies like Luxor as a reward for top performance.
While it's authors see lots of winners (money for the City, protection for both medallion holders and drivers on the List as well an exit strategy), the proposal also has difficulties.
  • $50,000 is a chunk of money. It = two and a half years of my life. And up front?
  • The figure is so high that it doubtless has already destroyed any chance of negotiating a reasonable compromise with the City. Then again, at this point that might not be possible anyway. Threatening to steal all the medallions probably was Newsom's idea of negotiating.
  • The amount may be so high that only desperate drivers would pay it. Once the old and infirm had cashed out, the medallions would probably move very slowly. Many medallion holders wouldn't be able to raise the money or wouldn't have enough left to retire on after they did sell their medallion.
As for Luxor's plan for a dual system ...
  • It appears very complicated and the best ideas are usually simple. On the other hand, San Francisco's taxi industry is very complex. Maybe there are no simple solutions.
  • It also seems to me that the supply of K medallions would dwindle fairly quickly as most holders converted to the M permits. Charles Rathbone thinks that 30% of K drivers would chose not convert but even so the number of K medallions would eventually run low.
  • For me, that is the major flaw of the dual system. It can't be maintained without constantly putting new taxis on the street.
  • And, the cabs would be added solely to make the system work - not because of any real business demand or necessity.
The more I think about this proposal, however, the more I like it. It needs to be tweaked of course but it's bold and creative. It shows a willingness to look at the situation with fresh eyes instead of being mired in the usual us vs them narrative. Now if only Mr. Lazor could put that $50,000 back in his paper bag.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Chris Hayashi on Illegal Taxi's Etc


I called Director Chris Hayashi of  the MTA'S Taxis and Available Services to find out when her Town Hall Meetings would resume but she couldn't give me an answer. Her office is swamped with numerous problems such as moving personal from the Taxi Commission and re-checking the qualifications of almost every driver who ever had dealings with Officer Makaveckas. It'll be at least a few weeks before she'll be able to plan the meetings.

She did say that soon after June 19th her office will start issuing the thirty or forty medallions that have been backlogged by the Proposition A changeover to the MTA. Most of the medallions come from either the deceased or revocations and will be handed out to drivers on the list ala Proposition K. 

Hayashi's department is also gearing up for a crackdown on illegal limos and taxis. They'll start by going after the cabs which she says are, "on the front burner right now." "The "initial stages" of the operation are already in planning. This entails a a lot of administrative detail. "The best work requires the best preparation ...  the groundwork is being laid so that we know when we do hit the ground that we are effective. I don't want to just chase them (the illegal taxis) around."

These preparations sound incredibly complex and include:
  • Putting the Traffic Division under the control of the MTA which "will get more responsiveness from traffic cops on MTA issues and taxis is now one of those issues."
  • Coming up an enforcement plan. "The airport has one," Hayashi said, "so we're going to do our own for downtown ... we want that before we turn the police loose because ... we want to make sure that we have what we need for the district attorney to prosecute."
  • "We want to talk to the District Attorney's Office first, give them a heads up that these cases are coming , let his office know how important it is to prosecute these and find out what they need in order to make sure they can prosecute effectively."
  • And of course they need to identify and find the addresses of the illegal taxis.
Hayashi's team is compiling a list of illegal cab - including four that I gave her. Drivers can help in this effort by sending their photos of taxicabs that they think are illegal to:  sftaxi@sfmta.com or they can call 415.701.4400 for with other information. 

Some things you might look out for are:
  • A fleet of taxis with a 333-3363 phone number pretending to be yellow cabs. If would be helpful if the MTA knew exactly how many bogus taxis are in this fleet. So if you see any of these cabs try to photograph them. 
  • Any location where you see illegal taxis parked - especially if it looks like a base address.
  • Try to get license numbers, vehicle numbers, color schemes, phone numbers and any thing else that might help to identify the fake cabs. It might also be useful to take down the cross streets where and the time when you saw them.
  • For now, focus only on the taxis. The limos are a more complicated issue so the MTA is going after them later.
One thing drivers should avoid, however, is any kind confrontation, vigilante action or citizens arrest. I can attest to the wisdom of this.  One limo driver I photographed last year threw a punch at me and another one tried to run me off the road with his limo. While I personally found these events entertaining, I sensed that my customers didn't. As Hayahsi puts it, "avoiding fist-fights is a good thing."

She would also like all drivers to check their brakes before starting a shift. San Francisco's cable car fleet is small.

Hayashi thinks that she can get $5,000 for every illegal cab she catches. She's looking forward to this "because the city needs the money." 

Once director Hayashi has "all my stuff in order ... it'll just be a matter of going out and mopping up the floor. We'll swoop down and pick 'em off one by one."

Thursday, May 7, 2009

Twain, Groucho & Mencken on Politics and Politicians


"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing it and then misapplying the wrong remedies."
--- Groucho Marx

"Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right."
--- H.L. Mencken

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed - and thus clamorous to be led to safety - by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
--- H.L. Mencken

"In religion and politics people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing."
--- Mark Twain

"When politics enter into municipal government, nothing resulting therefrom in the way of crimes and infamies is then incredible. It actually enables one to accept and believe the impossible."
--- Mark Twain

"The political and commercial morals of the United States are not merely food for laughter, they are an entire banquet.
--- Mark Twain

Remind you of anyone?