to be furious they have banned Uber from London?

[Acidophilus]

WTF?

Uber has itsbissues but this is ridiculous.

TFL have bowed to Black cab pressure and we will all pay massively for it. Or get mini cabs that are less safe and treat heir drivers worse.

I had to report a black cab driver once for harassment, which was incredibly frightening. I've also had countless black cab drivers refuse to take me south of the river - leaving me in potentially vulnerable situations. But I hope the emergence of uber has meant this happens less. I've always found it a comfort that my husband has been able to track my uber journeys if I want him to & I have never had an issue, I use them once a week or so. I think Uber need to address TFL's concerns & improve workers' rights, but I feel incredibly sorry for all the drivers who must be fearful for their jobs.

but I feel incredibly sorry for all the drivers who must be fearful for their jobs

It's funny when uber supporters say this, did any of you care if black cab drivers lost their jobs? I doubt it

Soon enough we will all be working in gig sector paying our employers for work with no employment rights. You will have no choice but to use these the services from these huge corporates. They will drive out SMEs and individuals and then put their prices up. As I stand on this crowded train with people pushing shoving on this damp morning I wonder why I'm paying thousands to be treated like a sardine. Still, market forces...

Uber were put on notice to clean up their act months ago and they arrogantly ignored the warning thinking TfL were bluffing.

They will appeal and win. TfL will have to change it just hasn't caught up with the challenges of gig sector. Competition law will be on their side. Nothing wrong with competition I just wish we could stand up for more ethical and sustainable practices but I'm afraid thsy our governments become powerless against some of these global powerful companies with people in high places.

I don't think competition law can do much to override basic safety requirements.

Everyone should read this..... it is not Uber which has not had its licence renewed its the minicab arm ULL and for strong, serious and legitimate reasons

www.londonreconnections.com/2017/understanding-uber-not-app/

By failing to tell police about serious criminal offences committed by Uber drivers it has in several cases prevented prosecution

I can only speak from personal experience but i find black cab drivers rude and arrogant. what's the point in having "the knowledge" when that has been superseded by technology (Waze for example). I use uber a lot and have always had very pleasant drivers. Of course the sex assault allegations are a whole other story but I dont think that is a new thing - some minicab drivers had / have the same problems.

#saveuber

smash12

this is not an issue about the politeness of drivers, or about the level of fares, nor even about the job security of minicab drivers (with a company that wants to deny them minium wage, holiday pay, job security, pensions, and seeks to have self-driving cars with no drivers)

"the next time you see a link to a petition or someone raging about this decision being ‘anti-innovation’, remember Greyball. Remember the Metropolitan Police letter. Remember that this is about holding ULL, as a company, to the same set of standards to which every other mini-cab operator in London already complies."

user1471451327 your link is a very good summary. Thanks. This morning on R4 Today I heard someone from Uber trying to justify their failure to report assaults committed by their drivers to the Met. Seemingly it's really difficult but the company have a committee to discuss it an are open to dialogue with the police blah, blah, blah.

Fucking hell mate, spend five minutes on Mumsnet and you'd know to call 101.

www.buzzfeed.com/saraspary/uber-now-says-it-wont-ever-be-perfect-but-it-will-operate?utm_term=.bvoRGQoJrA#.iqw2moKAbW
Uber Says It Won't Ever "Be Perfect" But It Will Operate In London With "Humility"
The under-fire taxi firm has apologised after TFL refused to renew its licence, but union bosses say "actions speak louder than words."

Thank-you user1471451327

Luckiily Labour did not win the last election but sadly Khan won in London. Hopefully pressure can be brought and the will of the 40,000 Uber drivers and 3.5m Uber users will prevail.

Does it really harm those drivers and users if Uber are required to require with basic legal requirements like having proper driver checks and reporting serious offence properly? Are you seriously claiming that every one of those individuals is happy with the fact that Uber continued to employ a driver accused of sexual assault without reporting him to the police, and that that driver allegedly went on to use his position to commit a second assault?

No-one's preventing use of Uber-the-app-company. It's Uber-the-minicab-firm which has failed to meet the frankly minimal standards required of regulating its drivers but is wailing that it's because of the app. This whole issue is nothing to do with the app!

NotCitrus Agreed, but most people won't be aware of that. As usual, the right-wing press has distorted the facts and tried to turn it into a story to attack Mayor Khan whilst ignoring the internal war going on within the government that will affect everyone in the country, not just those Londoners who like to travel in minicabs.

I just heard the CEO of Uber on the radio saying they had 40,000 employees.

Oh PigletJohn, that's so last week.

Today Uber's back to claiming drivers are all independent small businesses who just happen to use its app.
Uber appeals over tribunal ruling giving drivers benefits

PigletJohn and PerkingFaintly

How exactly do you personally both believe that Uber drivers are "employees"?

Eh?

I'm going from the legal definition in England & Wales which applies to everyone, whatever their business.

When my small employers had specialists in for a three month period, they had to get their heads round employment law to understand whether the temp specialists were employees or self-employed, and what conditions had to be met either way. Because it's the law of the land, intended to protect workers, customers (re liability), and all of us (re revenue).

Are you suggesting you have a personal belief that Uber drivers are not employees? If so, can you explain:
a) how you personally believe that this bunch of people (drivers), working for a company (Uber) are not employees, and
b) why your personal belief matters a fig in an employment tribunal?

Although actually, I'm rather more interested in hearing Uber management explaining how they believe Uber drivers are both employees, and not employees, at the same time.

Franklin77

What a strange question.

The CEO of Uber claims that he has 40,000 employees, and you ask me, personally, why I agree with him?

What did he say when you asked him why he made that claim?

I have still not heard explanations from either of you.

Waiting on yours, too, Franklin.

Though I actually did explain.

The CEO of Uber declared that he had 40,000 employees.

What makes you imply that I, personally, agree with him?

Why do you, personally, disagree with him?

OK, I see. You can't. Just rant. But you simply can't explain your thinking behind anything you say.

No point dealing with a poster like you. You've been found out.

whether the temp specialists were employees or self-employed,

Sadly the courts have recently muddied the waters and introduced a third category of "worker" who is technically self employed for tax purposes, but is eligible for employee related rights and benefits. So it's no longer a case of "self employment for tax means no employee rights" - they're now legally defined differently! Looking at the bigger picture, we desperately need the politicians to tackle all the ambiguity of employment versus self employment - the lack of clarity and nonsensical laws are causing a lot of confusion and harm. The name "self employment" is a misnomer to start with because it legally means being in business whereas a lot of people with more than one job seem to think they're "self employed" just because they don't have a main employer.