London accused of ‘bogus’ Uber ruling
TfL’s threat to revoke ride-hailing app’s licence called politically motivated
Transport for London is facing accusations that its decision to revoke Uber’s licence in the British capital was politically motivated rather than based on safety concerns after it was revealed that the regulator was responsible for two out of the four failings it gave for cancelling the licence.
The capital’s transport regulator partly based its decision on the ride-hailing app’s safety record, questioning how the company obtained background checks and medical certificates for its drivers. But TfL is responsible for both vetting the backgrounds of all private-hire drivers in the capital and ensuring they are medically fit through its preferred provider before issuing them with a licence.
“A lot of people don’t know that drivers are background-checked and licensed by TfL. Uber does not get a say on who gets licensed in the capital,” one person close to Uber said. “Without the TfL licence, they can’t come and drive on the Uber app.”
James Farrar, an Uber driver and representative of the United Private Hire Drivers trade body, who is embroiled in a lawsuit with the US company on drivers’ employment status, said the system had been politicised.
“To me this reeks. It’s a bogus charge from TfL. Uber will be able to remedy this in court immediately because DBS [Disclosure and Barring Service] and medical certification are prerequisites for drivers getting their licences from TfL,” he said.
TfL said Uber had conducted identification checks itself rather than through a third party. It added that this resulted in TfL writing to 13,000 drivers informing them to retake “enhanced DBS checks” that had not been cleared by the regulator’s approved contractor.
TfL told Uber four months ago to “get its house in order” and return in September with proof that it was tackling concerns over vetting its 40,000 drivers and the security of its 3.5m passengers.
A person close to City Hall said that Uber had previously encouraged drivers to use an online GP service to do medical checks via video link. TfL had rejected those reports and instead insisted on in-person medical checks. “Uber only stopped promoting this service following intervention from TfL,” this person said.
Another person close to Uber said TfL had in recent weeks resisted requests to meet to discuss potential remedies, adding that it had met the regulator only once this year, when officials refused to discuss the licence.
But a City Hall aide disputed the claim, saying: “As far as I know it’s them who were being very, very awkward in terms of answering questions. If they are now keen to meet and put out olive branches then so much the better.”
The person denied suggestions that Sadiq Khan, the London mayor, had timed the announcement to occur on the eve of the Labour party conference in Brighton, giving him a burst of publicity.
TfL’s decision was backed on Sunday by senior Labour figures including John McDonnell, shadow chancellor, who called Uber a “disgrace”, but the company has been defended by some Conservatives including former culture minister Ed Vaizey.
While it is TfL that is responsible for issuing Uber’s operating licence, the regulation of the company has been subjected to political pressure in the past.
In late 2015, Boris Johnson, then London mayor, drew up ideas to protect black-cab drivers from growing competition from private-hire cars using Uber. But only three months later he dropped several of the most controversial ideas, including forcing customers to wait for five minutes between requesting a car and beginning a journey.
This came after both David Cameron, the former prime minister, and George Osborne, the former chancellor, texted Mr Johnson to ask him to reconsider, a former official at City Hall told the Financial Times.
On Wednesday morning, drivers in the IWGB union will stage a public demonstration outside TfL’s offices on Blackfriars Road, the same day they return to court to challenge Uber on its employment practices.
“Our members wish to express their dissatisfaction with how TfL handled this decision and its refusal to engage directly with any dedicated trade union representing only private hire drivers,” said Jason Moyer Lee, IWGB’s general secretary.
A petition at change.org to reverse the decision has already gathered more than 650,000 signatures. City Hall on Saturday issued emails to all the signatories in an attempt to explain its own position.“
The ball is in Uber’s court. They now have the time and space to start playing by the rules, and start doing what the law and the regulations require them to do, and then they can keep going,” said a mayoral aide.
https://www.ft.com/content/5f1918d4-...f-7f5e6a7c98a2
Social Networking Bookmarks