6 ms·

Uber/Lyft are very interesting. The main reason cabs are so terrible is because the unions have a complete stranglehold on the industry, which means pretty muc

Uber/Lyft are very interesting. The main reason cabs are so terrible is because the unions have a complete stranglehold on the industry, which means pretty much no advancement in technology and monopolistic pricing. They both are basically going against everything the unions stand for by not having regular wages or benefits. Edit: Admitting you're wrong is not something most people here on HN can do. Instead, they downvote.

Grishnakh 11y ago
Um, I thought the reason cabs are so terrible is not because of unionization, but because it's a cartel, and it's given that power by the government because of the issuance of licenses (called "medallions") which ensure a limited supply of cabs, artificially restricting competition.
- bobby_9x 11y ago
  "but because it's a cartel, and it's given that power by the government because of the issuance of licenses (called "medallions") which ensure a limited supply of cabs, artificially restricting competition." Right, the unions. It's not a corporation that is artificially restriction competition, it's the unions. These unions have deals with the government. The same thing happens in the auto industry.
  - Grishnakh 11y ago
    No, that's not a union, that's a cartel. A union is an organization of labor, not company owners. And it's the cab owners who have the deal with the government.
    - bobby_9x 11y ago
      You are just mincing words to make it seem like unions aren't the bad guy here. The auto unions, for instance, are larger than most big corporations and many of the leaders get paid out millions of dollars in bonuses every year. Read the first line of this article: https://news.vice.com/article/taxi-drivers-are-trying-to-take-down-uber https://news.vice.com/article/taxi-drivers-are-trying-to-tak... "Taxi unions in cities such as Boston, Denver, New York, and San Francisco are not pleased...." Sorry, but they are unionized and like every other industry where unions have control, you get inflated wages and higher prices. It nearly put the big 3 out of business during the downturn of 2008. Companies like Toyota didn't even bat an eye during that time because they could make changes with ease.
      - gotchange 11y ago
        I think those unions resemble more trade associations and not labor unions as they lobby and fight for the owners of cab companies and not the drivers as your comment suggested.
      - biot 11y ago
        Boston only started to unionize in 2007, for example. Prior to the labor union being formed, the taxi cartel has long had an artificially restricted monopoly on medallions, which ensures a lack of competition and discourages innovation, causing them to stagnate and become ripe for disruption. I'm sure having unionized labor doesn't help in keeping costs down and the driver unions have gone on strike over things like requiring GPS, but you have failed to demonstrate that the labor union is the primary cause of their current troubles. If that were the case, you ought to be able to show that prior to 2007, Boston's taxi companies were constantly innovating and upping their game and that it's only after unionization that they have stagnated. In fact, the GPS strike was due to the New York Taxi and Limousine Commission enacting rules that required the use of GPS -- this was something that the taxi companies could have introduced themselves if they were at all competitive, but due to their cartel status why should they even bother? [0] http://theunionnews.blogspot.com/2007/08/steelworkers-organize-boston-taxi.html http://theunionnews.blogspot.com/2007/08/steelworkers-organi...
  - function_seven 11y ago
    Your use of "unions" causes the reader to assume you mean "labor unions", which is why your original comment is gray.
    - bobby_9x 11y ago
      My original comment is gray because most people don't want to admit that unions cause inefficiency and bloat. I think people on HN are smarter than that.
      - ska 11y ago
        It really isn't. It's because "the unions" is colloquial shorthand for "labor unions" which, whatever their plusses and minuses might be, are a very different concept than `taxi unions' Because of this muddled terminology (and probably because suggesting a single source here is obvious oversimplification) you sound like you don't know what you are talking about and are just typing a screed. Hence the downvotes. I think you are smarter than that, and can find a more articulate approach.
      - mywittyname 11y ago
        Your comments are grey because your statements are completely ignorant. Major cities instituted a medallion system for taxi, restricting who could operate a taxi service. The owners of the cab companies in major cities bribed the local governments into limiting the number of medallions in circulation, then bought all of the medallions. Meaning that cab companies have government-sanctioned monopolies on taxi service in many major metro areas of the US. As others stated, this is an example of a cartel, not a labor union. And the entire purpose of cartels is to maintain artificially high prices.
gamblor956 11y ago
Cabbies are not unionized. They rent their medallions from the taxi company and are treated as independent contractors.
- bobby_9x 11y ago
  Here is just one example: http://www.nytwa.org/ http://www.nytwa.org/ If what you are saying is true, the cabbies wouldn't be getting so upset and would welcome Uber/Lyft with open arms.
bobby_9x 11y ago
Edit: I think I'm done commenting about this. I thought HN was supposed to be about expressing new ideas, but I was wrong. It's an echo chamber and not even close to being open or free.

Grishnakh 11y ago

Um, I thought the reason cabs are so terrible is not because of unionization, but because it's a cartel, and it's given that power by the government because of the issuance of licenses (called "medallions") which ensure a limited supply of cabs, artificially restricting competition.

bobby_9x 11y ago
"but because it's a cartel, and it's given that power by the government because of the issuance of licenses (called "medallions") which ensure a limited supply of cabs, artificially restricting competition." Right, the unions. It's not a corporation that is artificially restriction competition, it's the unions. These unions have deals with the government. The same thing happens in the auto industry.
- Grishnakh 11y ago
  No, that's not a union, that's a cartel. A union is an organization of labor, not company owners. And it's the cab owners who have the deal with the government.
  - bobby_9x 11y ago
    You are just mincing words to make it seem like unions aren't the bad guy here. The auto unions, for instance, are larger than most big corporations and many of the leaders get paid out millions of dollars in bonuses every year. Read the first line of this article: https://news.vice.com/article/taxi-drivers-are-trying-to-take-down-uber https://news.vice.com/article/taxi-drivers-are-trying-to-tak... "Taxi unions in cities such as Boston, Denver, New York, and San Francisco are not pleased...." Sorry, but they are unionized and like every other industry where unions have control, you get inflated wages and higher prices. It nearly put the big 3 out of business during the downturn of 2008. Companies like Toyota didn't even bat an eye during that time because they could make changes with ease.
    - gotchange 11y ago
      I think those unions resemble more trade associations and not labor unions as they lobby and fight for the owners of cab companies and not the drivers as your comment suggested.
    - biot 11y ago
      Boston only started to unionize in 2007, for example. Prior to the labor union being formed, the taxi cartel has long had an artificially restricted monopoly on medallions, which ensures a lack of competition and discourages innovation, causing them to stagnate and become ripe for disruption. I'm sure having unionized labor doesn't help in keeping costs down and the driver unions have gone on strike over things like requiring GPS, but you have failed to demonstrate that the labor union is the primary cause of their current troubles. If that were the case, you ought to be able to show that prior to 2007, Boston's taxi companies were constantly innovating and upping their game and that it's only after unionization that they have stagnated. In fact, the GPS strike was due to the New York Taxi and Limousine Commission enacting rules that required the use of GPS -- this was something that the taxi companies could have introduced themselves if they were at all competitive, but due to their cartel status why should they even bother? [0] http://theunionnews.blogspot.com/2007/08/steelworkers-organize-boston-taxi.html http://theunionnews.blogspot.com/2007/08/steelworkers-organi...
- function_seven 11y ago
  Your use of "unions" causes the reader to assume you mean "labor unions", which is why your original comment is gray.
  - bobby_9x 11y ago
    My original comment is gray because most people don't want to admit that unions cause inefficiency and bloat. I think people on HN are smarter than that.
    - ska 11y ago
      It really isn't. It's because "the unions" is colloquial shorthand for "labor unions" which, whatever their plusses and minuses might be, are a very different concept than `taxi unions' Because of this muddled terminology (and probably because suggesting a single source here is obvious oversimplification) you sound like you don't know what you are talking about and are just typing a screed. Hence the downvotes. I think you are smarter than that, and can find a more articulate approach.
    - mywittyname 11y ago
      Your comments are grey because your statements are completely ignorant. Major cities instituted a medallion system for taxi, restricting who could operate a taxi service. The owners of the cab companies in major cities bribed the local governments into limiting the number of medallions in circulation, then bought all of the medallions. Meaning that cab companies have government-sanctioned monopolies on taxi service in many major metro areas of the US. As others stated, this is an example of a cartel, not a labor union. And the entire purpose of cartels is to maintain artificially high prices.

gamblor956 11y ago

Cabbies are not unionized. They rent their medallions from the taxi company and are treated as independent contractors.

bobby_9x 11y ago
Here is just one example: http://www.nytwa.org/ http://www.nytwa.org/ If what you are saying is true, the cabbies wouldn't be getting so upset and would welcome Uber/Lyft with open arms.

bobby_9x 11y ago

Edit: I think I'm done commenting about this. I thought HN was supposed to be about expressing new ideas, but I was wrong. It's an echo chamber and not even close to being open or free.