If there was ever a formulaic article in this genre, then this is it
Right down to the usual Uber boilerplate at the end.
Of course, there's a vibe about the piece basically saying that Uber is unlicensed, particularly as the piece gets going. But, to be fair, the rules are quite well explained.
But otherwise it's the usual David v Goliath sort of stuff, in economic terms at least. Rightly or wrongly.
But, I mean, I'm sure all these people shop exclusively at the corner shops and independent stores, and never go near Tesco, Sainsbury's or Asda
Swale taxi bosses call for changes in rules allowing Uber drivers to operate despite not having a licence
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/sittingbou ... ol-340062/
Taxi firms say “unfair” rules allowing Uber drivers to pick up jobs in areas where they do not have a licence need to change.
People are able to book the American giant’s vehicles in Swale despite the borough council not giving it a licence to do so.
Swale council confirmed it had received no application from Uber to run services in Sittingbourne, Faversham or Sheppey.
Under the current rules, the drivers can complete “cross-border” jobs which are pre-booked.
That is because Uber has a licence with neighbouring local authorities, such as Medway.
But they cannot take on “hail jobs” – where a driver picks up someone on the street without a booking – under these rules.
Swale-based taxi firms have told KentOnline they are aware of Uber drivers encroaching on their patch and have called on the rules to change.
Dee Griffin, the boss of Royal Taxis, which has 19 drivers, says it is “totally unfair” that Uber drivers can operate in Swale when they don’t pay for a licence with the council.
The 63-year-old has run the Sheerness-based firm since 1994. She said: “It’s causing lots of problems.
“If a non-licensed driver does something wrong in Swale, the council cannot penalise them or take their licence off them.
“[The other issue is] we lose revenue and the council is not making any money either.
“All our drivers have to pass the Swale knowledge test, which they pay the council to take. The Uber drivers don’t.
“It’s totally unfair and needs to change.”
Meanwhile, Neil McLennan, owner of iCars, which operates across the borough, says if Uber was to come to Swale it would “take over everything”.
The 55-year-old said: “The issue we have is that they drop off on the Island.
“But people will book with Uber to pick them up from the Island and they don’t come.
“While competition is good, Uber is not competition. They will just take over everything.”
Roland Pout, who co-owns Reeves Taxis in Faversham, says Uber is playing “by different rules”.
The 82-year-old great-grandad, whose firm has 10 drivers on its books, said: “Nobody is happy about Uber drivers operating in Swale.
“They seem to get in anywhere and everywhere.
“But it’s not fair and there’s something wrong with the current rules.
“There’s very little we can do about it, but it’s not right, and the rules need to change.”
In response to the criticism, Uber said its presence in Kent was beneficial to the county’s economy and passengers.
A spokesperson for the £150 billion company, said: “All drivers on the Uber platform in Kent are fully licensed, operate under the same stringent safety regulations as all other private hire operators and have industry-leading worker rights such as holiday pay and a pension.
“Since being granted an operator’s licence by a number of councils across the area, Uber has supported the local economy by expanding transport choice for passengers and creating new earning opportunities for drivers in Kent.”