An Uber headache for ride-sharing companies in Mississauga

City council signalled Wednesday that it will not support Uber’s current way of doing business.

Thestar.com
April 20, 2016
By San Grewal

It’s likely going to be an Uber headache for the ride-sharing company in Mississauga, as councillors signalled Wednesday that they won’t follow the path the disruptive transportation business was hoping for.

“All (Uber) drivers will be required to obtain an annual municipal licence ... insurance requirements will be equivalent to taxis, limousines,” as will driver record and criminal background searches. Those were just some of the staff recommendations that would force Uber to effectively operate under the same rules and conditions as traditional taxis in Mississauga.

It was clear at council that members plan to support the staff report when the recommendations go to a vote in early May.

“It’s a tough decision,” said Councillor Jim Tovey, “But I have some very, very grave concerns about your industry,” he added, indicating he would be supporting the recommendations, as more than 100 taxi drivers, who filled the council chamber, broke into applause whenever councillors voiced support for the recommendations.

“We’re going to get our fair share of whatever fees and taxes,” Councillor Ron Starr thundered in response to Uber spokesperson Chris Schafer’s plea to council, asking them not to support the staff report.

It recommends that Uber would have to pay a per-trip fee for all rides originating in Mississauga, that all Uber drivers be required to have a valid GST/HST registration number, that all would have to use an app that calculates fares based on distance, that no roadside passengers can be picked up, and that vehicles would be subject to on-road inspections by city officials.

“You cannot support the proposed recommendations,” Schafer said to council. “It is a vote to exclude ride sharing, innovation and the future in Mississauga.”

Members of the taxi industry promptly responded at the podium.

“They should be in jail,” said Karam Punian, reminding members that, despite their request to Schafer in March to have Uber suspend its operations until new rules are hammered out, the service has continued in Mississauga.

At that meeting Schafer had asked council to consider a drastically different set of rules for ride-sharing companies.

Councillor Carolyn Parrish told the crowd she had just been informed by the provincial government that Uber drivers will soon be required to operate on a level streetscape. “They will have to carry full commercial insurance.”

Outside the chamber, Schafer later said he does not agree with many of the staff recommendations and challenged concerns raised about safety issues.

Addressing calls for Uber drivers to install onboard cameras, as taxis are required to do in certain jurisdictions, Schafer said they “cost in the range of $1,000-plus to install.”

Asked if Uber sees no additional safety benefits to installing cameras, to protect drivers and passengers, Schafer responded: “Adding the requirement for a camera when it’s not necessary for safety to Uber driver partners, when these cameras cost in the range of $1,000-plus, is an unnecessary cost.”

He said Uber, through its app and other identification safeguards, does not need cameras for safety.

As for the commercial insurance requirement, Schafer said he hopes to see “Ride-sharing specific (insurance) products available in Ontario ... It’s insurance that recognizes the unique differences in the taxi model vs. the ride-sharing model.”