3 ms·

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 o

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...

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...