In the conflict between taxis UberPop, against the truths succeed and accumulate. Let us try to see a little more clearly and to dismantle propaganda.
Precision to our readers: This article is a personal view classified in the "Humor" and does not claim to be completely objective nor to state a universal truth. It does not take the party Uber and is not dependent against taxis, but purpose is to respond to many erroneous clichés that we often hear about the conflict UberPop vs.taxis, and have donation 'prodigiously annoy the author and certainly thousands of French users of taxis, Uber, of UberPop and other services of VTC.
Update # 3 (30/06/2015): see the response of a taxi driver in this article, an open forum we offered him to express his views.
Update # 2: Here's clarification Uber responded to my request this morning 24/06, by the voice of Thomas Meister, Director of Western Europe Communication Uber:
To clarify therefore:
ADEME figure to € 7,500 annual cost of maintenance and ownership of a vehicle; after long reflection, we decided to establish the threshold level beyond which it is mandatory to formalize the activity as entrepreneur. Below, income from POP must be declared and subject to income tax (we assist POP drivers in their steps, which are also particularly complex); speaking there really a complement activity (maximum € 600 per month)
since March of this year, we impose POPs drivers who use the service is a regular activity to settle as independent entrepreneurs, and thus to contribute to RSI and other totally transparent manner; this decision was taken at the request of the POP drivers themselves, who faced many difficulties to declare their income. As always for auto-entrepreneurs, revenue is capped at € 33,000 annual
With this reservation, conditions sent are valid. To complete, we often recall that everything is traceable and transparent in Uber, which simply prohibits fraud; more (and unlike most big tech) the Uber system that the majority of income from the activity remain on French soil, since 80% of the races income remains in France. Uber 20% commission is consolidated in the Netherlands.
Update # 1: See end of article a screenshot of my email exchange with Uber France this morning and their response to the requirements to become UberPop driver.
The current debate on the conflict between UberPop and taxis starts to become painful. And as is often the case with all the polemics, it does not avoid a little grotesque postures, the sleeve effects enthusiasts, against-truths and stereotypes, all sprinkled with a good dose of bad faith. I did certainly not escaped me.
If you follow me a little on Facebook, you definitely understand that I am not a big fan of taxis, and even less since they use very questionable methods to conquer "their" law, unfortunately with the blessing and even support of prefects without courage, the forces and the Ministry of Interior, which obviously gives them that feeling of omnipotence and legitimacy.
This does not mean that I defend and Uber UberPop at all costs. In this conflict is invectives without much discernment, it has not escaped me that the practice of UberPop problematic for various reasons, including - if I hear the arguments of opponents to this company - Legal and tax.
But I read regularly so many cons-truths and - let us say - nonsense on the subject, not just from union officials taxis, I would like to make my small contribution to the debate by restoring some truths that 'we do not hear very often. For this I contacted Uber France to test my point by point explanation.
Here are 5 against annoying truths about Uber / UberPop vs. taxis and my contradictory views.
1. UberPop is unfair competition
This I put it first because this is probably the one that one reads and hears most often. The problem with this notion of "unfair competition" is that we out about all the sauces and in all situations since the advent of the Internet and the digital economy, and is variable geometry. In fact it is often the only argument that opposes the traditional economy to the new economy, rather than trying to adapt and evolve, innovate and modernize. Remember we heard about the mp3 vs. CD, downloading (legal) vs. movies theaters, buying eBooks vs. booksellers, newspaper publishers vs. Google News, artisans vs. auto-entrepreneurs etc etc etc. I even remember that in more distant time, professional film and TV programs of directors had pushed the same cries of outrage in the creation of Canal Plus. In France, land monopolies and situations annuities adoubées by the State, whatever comes somewhat upset an established market and strongly locked with arrangements between friends is immediately accused of "unfair competition", a term has become generic for any form of competition. I do not say that in some ways, especially if some UberPop drivers are not declared (this remains to be proven) there is not a form of unfair competition, but the term is so overused that it's become a pie the cream empty of meaning. Moreover, from a purely regulatory perspective, know that to be UberPop driver, you must first be registered under auto-entrepreneur regime from 7500 euros of turnover is inscribed on black white in the general conditions. This means that the driver UberPop is theoretically subject to all conventional fillers of a professional, even if under the auto-entrepreneur regime latter are more profitable, at least in the first months of activity.
So then we will talk about the famous compulsory license and to become exorbitant taxi. I have never seen such a fallacious argument. On the one hand, it is not license but "a free parking permit issued by the prefectures." Of course, due to the shortage organized by the state under the pressure of some taxi companies, the price of those famous "licenses" blazed with the complicity of taxis in office, he seems up to 200,000 euros . So what ? First, no one is forcing anyone to buy a license and go into debt (plus the price of the car) heavily for years to exercise a profession that brings supposedly nothing. And taxis are not alone in having to pay an entrance fee to the prohibitive amount to run their business. Anyone any merchant must also pay tens or hundreds of thousands of euros to open shop. It's called the right-to-lease and it is also the result of the shortage (or scarcity of good locations) and a speculative economy. When we made the career choice of life, you have to assume then, and do not shout to competition when a new smarter player and offering a better service comes to live next. If I whined every time a new talent Tech blog opened on the Web and we had a little competition we piquant readers, if I had shown every time I saw our audience down because-aspired Facebook gradually our readership, I would not have enough tears for a long time for true emotions, believe me.
Finally, we see in use, most users are UberPop customers who anyway would never take a taxi because of the price, particularly young people returning from evening and whose parents are reassured to know them Uber passengers in rather than the car of a friend with 3 grams of vodka RedBull blood ...
And apparently taxis do not bother to walk in the flower beds of others, huh ...
Therefore, unfair competition, sorry but bogus argument. Competition certainly unfair, not.
2. Uber and UberPop, sharing economy or "collaborative economy"?
Some consider Uber UberPop and are representative of the sharing economy. On the contrary I see others rise up against this argument, whereas a box like Uber, whose valuation is approaching $ 50 billion is all but a symbol of the collaborative economy. Uber is basically evil, Monsanto digital, the new Microsoft. You know what ? Personally I never considered that Uber was in the sharing economy, and frankly I do not care, because it's not really an issue in my opinion. The subject is how a box that was not there 7 years ago and which is built on the simple observation of a deficiency (not enough taxis in Paris and a disgusting service) has taken advantage of the new tools SoLoMo (Social, Localized, Mobile) and the explosion of applications on smartphones to quickly build a relevant offer and meet a need. In the first months of its existence, Uber was in the sharing economy (I share a place in my car against a few euros to take people from point A to point B). Today, it is clearly not the case (or when sharing with shareholders).
3. UberPop encourages moonlighting
Generally, for there to be moonlighting requires that several conditions are met. The first of these fundamental and inescapable: that money circulates liquid. From the moment where there can be cash payment there may be hiding and therefore moonlighting. Regarding many people, but as surprising as it may seem, not UberPop. For companies with VTC is impossible to base as there is no cash exchanged between the client and the service provider, all transactions are settled via platforms on customer credit card accounts. After, it is possible that some drivers "forget" to declare their income to the tax authorities and the URSSAF but the situation is the same for all the professions, no more no less. However, taxis themselves are mostly paid in cash because oddly their credit card payment terminals are often broken (I personally experienced so often). I say that I mean nothing, huh.
4. UberPop vehicles are not insured to carry passengers
I read that too many times, often on a very alarmist tone (sometimes from people who also moaning on Facebook against speed cameras and speed limits, it's pretty funny). According to them, move UberPop would be super dangerous because drivers are not insured for the transport of persons, and basically we seriously risk our lives every journey. I also checked with Uber: for driver UberPop must, I quote, "a professional liability insurance (covering vehicle, driver, passenger, third)." I think it's pretty clear. I will add my point of view, based on my personal experience: being without a car for a month in February, I UberPop frequently used for small urban travel. Not once have I felt myself in danger. Usually the drivers drive quiet, with small city cars in good condition. This is also probably the large majority use UberPop: small urban travel a few kilometers in troubleshooting. Not the most dangerous context, certainly. Also, do not forget that the customer has the opportunity to note the driver in each race to post a comment free, and that poorly rated drivers are sacked without notice. It may be brutal but it is the price to pay for excellent service. After one is free to play the game or not. But as a destroyer of Uber and VTC, one can hardly blame a thing (without security) and its opposite (the selectivity in the drivers and thus a certain precariousness).
5. Anyone can become UberPop driver, without any control
Completely wrong. Again, I checked with Uber. To become UberPop driver must be over 21 years and driving license of more than a year, own a vehicle 4 doors under 8 years and a gray card in the name of the driver, have a clean record and a visit medical fitness to drive, and training on quality and safety, attested by a test of 90 questions. Certainly all this may seem to some fairly light and represent a minimum, but these rules already allow seriously filter access to this activity.
Here. Again I have no action at home and I do not pretend to defend against Uber UberPop or taxis only restore some truths because I am tired of hearing so much crap on the subject. Of course critics (often taxis advancing masked) will say I was paid by Uber to write it, etc. Whether they do so this allows them to think this is a strong argument that will give them more credibility in their fight, I do not care. Why I take sides in this debate? Because I can not stand to see some lobbies conduct guerrilla warfare against the players in the new economy, which is more downstream of the authorities. As I could not stand at a time not so long ridiculous projections, swollen with arrogance and bad faith of Pascal Negro or any representative of the majors against the emergence of mp3 and downloading. As I could not stand the DRM, the HADOPI and all these stupid foam erected barriers against a flood which anyway would take everything in its path, and that it would have been smarter to adapt rather than go out forks and banners. I know that everything is not rosy side Uber and we are far from the Bears, but do not forget that we are at the beginnings of new uses and that all is quickly organize, back in order (and manners) and the current candied we will seem much obsolete in a few years.
I could still make five more paragraphs on the subject (radicalization and violence, taxis who whine driving their Merco or their Porsche at 100,000 bales, accusations of modern slavery etc) but I preferred I focus on the basics, and it's not bad.
Update: Here are two other items to go further in thinking
Uber: a revolution to end abuse?
Uber and taxis: chronicle of a denial of reputation
And another for a laugh, it does not hurt
Uber yields to claims taxis and requires its drivers to be less friendly
See below a screenshot of my email exchange with Uber France this morning and their response to the requirements to become UberPop driver (click to enlarge).
