3 ms·

This argument is my pet peeve. Taxi companies employed drivers as 'independent contractors' who were paid pretty similar to Uber drivers now- by the ride, not b

This argument is my pet peeve. Taxi companies employed drivers as 'independent contractors' who were paid pretty similar to Uber drivers now- by the ride, not by the hour- and frequently forced the drivers to do or pay for their own repairs on the cars. They were often immigrants, they'd work 12+ hours a day, medallion owners issued them illegal fines or took an overly large chunk of the money they earned, etc. The taxi industry was known as notoriously abusive to its drivers for decades & decades before smartphones were even invented, much less Uber. I'm always a bit amazed at how people now remember the old taxi system as good for drivers, much less riders

giaour 5y ago
> and frequently forced the drivers to do or pay for their own repairs on the cars. I'm not saying the old medallion system was great, but I thought the cab companies back then owned all the cars. (Source: my in-laws owned a medallion company, and I knew a few other cab company owners in NYC in the aughts.) They would frequently make drivers take responsibility for routine care and maintenance (with the worst medallion companies really stretching the definition of "routine"), but they put up the capital and rented cabs out to drivers at exorbitant rates (e.g., $1500/week in NYC ~15 years ago). Contrast this with Uber, which imposes the same or worse labor conditions and offloads all capital risk onto the drivers.