Portland’s cab companies swear they’ve gotten a bad rap.
Since the ride-share service Uber stormed the city gates last month—forcing a series of events (fines! a lawsuit!) that will culminate in a new task force meeting for the first time this week—Portland’s cabbies say they’ve stood agog as news accounts painted them as a sinister, change-averse monolith, and politicians held backroom discussions about the future of their industry without even a courtesy call.
So sometime in December, most of the city’s seven cab companies—some of them longtime and acrimonious rivals—decided to team up. And get a PR agent.
As of the last hour or so, that group—calling itself the Transportation Fairness Alliance (TFA)—has a new website, and an online petition you can sign if you’re on board with its central premise: that Uber must play along with the rule cabs have labored under for decades. They’re also planning a big rally tomorrow afternoon at Pioneer Courthouse Square
“This is unprecedented,” says Wynde Dyer, a TFA representative who ferries Oregon Health Plan participants to medical appointments as a driver for Green Transportation. “What we want is to make sure our voices are being heard, and we don’t feel they have been for a long time.”
Dyer came to the Mercury offices this morning with Noah Ernst, a superintendent at Radio Cab, to push the idea cab companies aren’t the influential, lockstep conglomeration that Uber has sought to portray. The rivalries run back decades for some local companies. And Ernst and Dyer insisted repeatedly that the city’s cab drivers aren’t against more competition, or even Uber. They just want everyone on the same page.
That means holding Uber to a long list of standards cab companies must meet to operate within the city of Portland—including cameras in every vehicle, a certain percentage of a company’s fleet being able to accommodate handicapped customers, insurance requirements, price regulations, and on and on.
“We have tried to build a business under those over the decades,” Ernst said. “We think they are often good regulations, but they weren’t our regulations. We feel we’ve been blamed for the result of those regulations.”
Their main point, repeated again and again this morning: The regulations make you safer, so they’re a good thing.
Coming months are going to be crucial to the face of Portland’s cab industry. After Uber, which allows customers to hail a private car with a touch of their smartphone, decided to flout city rules in early December, officials first fumed, then sued. Then an uneasy peace was reached in which Uber agreed to pull back for several months while Portland did serious soul-searching around its taxi market, often criticized for allowing too few vehicles on the road (and also for its treatment of drivers).
The Private For-Hire Transportation Innovation Task Force that will break down the city’s rules around cabs and other conveyances will meet for the first time Wednesday.
You’re not crazy to question the cabbies’ sincerity in this. After all, it was only three years ago that the city’s existing taxi companies screamed in outrage over the specter—and eventual creation—of a brand new cab outfit, Union Cab. At the time, cab companies swore Portland’s market couldn’t handle a fresh influx of cabbies. They launched visible protests against the move.
But today, Union Cab has been welcomed aboard, and is even part of the new “fairness alliance.” Ernst says the Union Cab scenario was different than the threat posed by Uber.
“At least Union Cab followed the rules,” he says. “They did exactly what you are supposed to when you enter the city of Portland.”
And he downplays the hue and cry over more competition at the time. He says there are cab companies who haven’t been awarded additional cab permits—the finite mini license plates affixed to legit taxis in Portland—for decades. They were incensed, then, to see a new outfit awarded the plates.
There are currently 460 taxi permits in play, though that number could go up shortly. Back in 2012, at the same time they were okaying the creation of Union Cab, city bureaucrats recommended expanded permits to three additional companies. Only a fraction of those permits were ever approved. An additional 55 were left hanging, though the city’s private for-hire transportation manager, Frank Dufay, expects those might be taken up within weeks.
“There are times we’re really, really short on cabs,” Dufay says. “You’ve got to throw them out there; that’s how you build a cab culture. People would use cabs more if they were more reliable.”
The city’s cabbies aren’t willing to go that far. They agree with Dufay that there are times when the market is strained—Friday and Saturday nights around bar close, mostly—but say otherwise Portland is well served.
Here’s the official TFA line, from the website:
Cab companies acknowledge, though, that there is a demand for services like Uber.
“The court of public opinion is going to decide [Uber’s] fate,” says Dyer. “What I do want is to make sure that the playing field is legal and level.”
New regulations are expected by April, at which point Uber plans its return to the Rose City.
Other things they demand: Uber won’t be allowed to pick up anyone within an hour of when they call on friday nights, and any lesbians attempting to ride after dark must be tossed out of the cab on an interstate.
Once again, a Portland journalist conflates the interests of taxi drivers and taxi companies, ignoring the fact that more taxi permits means more profit for companies, less for drivers. Just once I’d like to see a working journalist make the effort to understand that Portland’s tightly regulated taxi market empowers taxi companies who charge money to drivers for the privilege of driving for them. Just once I’d like to see a journalist explain to the public what the kitty is and how the economics of the taxi business actually work.
Though it’s unknown what type of regulatory restructuring will emerge in the weeks ahead, it’s all but assured that the losers will be Portland’s 1000+ cabdrivers. They’re already hovering near starvation wages and clearly no one gives a damn.
Noah Ernst: “We think they are often good regulations, but they weren’t our regulations. We feel we’ve been blamed for the result of those regulations.” Some context, before this statement Noah described how the city regulates and limits the number of cabs on the road and has been slow to grant additional licences that cab companies have asked for. The result that we feel we have been blamed for is that sometimes it takes a long time to get a cab when it’s busy. Since the city controls the number of cabs
Continued from previous post: … This has been out of our control. I’m a cab driver. I saw Noah speak and thought this point could use context to clarify.
@econoline The TFA did not demand this. Please check your facts. Currently a city of portland taxi permit is needed to pick up passengers within city limits without a reservation. That is part of the city’s regulation of the industry. The TFA is just asking that Uber or any of the ride hailing companies play by the same rules as cab companies. (Uber could apply for portland taxi licenses like Union cab did a few years ago) You referenced an unfortunate and frankly appalling incident where riders were discriminated against. I’m proud to drive for Radio Cab. I know that wasn’t my company and I’m confident that will never happen in a radio cab. We are as diverse as portland is and happy to serve every customer who needs us. Uber on the other hand systematically discriminates against the disabled.
@ portland Mercury I just posted three comments 2 giving context to clarify a quote in your article, 1 to fact check and respond to another users comment. All 3 have been removed. None were inappropriate in language or content. Why are you censoring the cab drivers perspective and meaningful discussion?
okay they just reappeared. Disregard the censorship comment.
I’m actually really happy with this article. Of all the news outlets in town (pending the analysis by the NW Labor Press, which I suspect will be equally, if not more, thoughtful and thorough) I think the Mercury pinned the tail on the donkey best. It’s true, it’s kinda odd for taxis to hire a PR firm. It’s also true that just because we’ve hired a PR firm doesn’t mean we aren’t sincere. It’s also good for journalists to question our sincerity, given our history of protest against Union Cab. But the Mercury does a great job to re-contextualize our behavior then, and to show the transformation that’s happened by welcoming Union Cab into the industry, and beginning them to the table for Alliance discussions. I work for Green Cab, but I love Union Cab and Radio Cab and Broadway Cab, and I’m looking forward to learning more about Portland Taxi and Rose City, and I hope we all get more plates. I’m also excited to have Eco Cab and Rainbow Cab enter the market, hopefully sooner than later. While I respect the hell out of Red Diamond, I disagree with his feelings about the evil cab bosses, and I don’t think putting a reasonable number of additional cabs on the street will hurt business for us low-wage, long-hour drivers. On the contrary, I think it’s a good long-term solution that will, ultimately, build business through more efficient, reliable, safe, and friendly service. In the short term, until we restore the public faith in our services, business might suck for a bit, but more cabs makes sense for long-term sustainability. I’m excited–of mildly trepadatious–about the transformations coming for our industry, and I applaud the Mercury for framing our concerns these changes so accurately.