tim... wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:



Without doubt, but the number is probably close to zero. How would a
blind person even order or recognise an Uber cab?

Um

How do blind people go to the shops?

Visit their friends?

Get to the doctor/hospital?

Not using Uber, I'd guess. Are you aware of how you order and recognize an
Uber car? How would a blind person do it?

Is it not possible to order an Uber car using the "reading" software that
blind people use to read computer pages?

It's a sophiticated smartphone app with graphics, not a text page. You'd
need to have reasonably good eyesight, as well as a smartphone, to use it.


And when Uber drivers arrive for a pick up at someone's house, surely they
announce themselves in the same was as any mini cab would?

Or do they just sit outside and "hope"?

Uber sends the customer a description of the car and where it is, and it's
up to them to spot it and get in. But as I explained in the other post,
Uber isn't the ideal choice for home pickups; there are better, cheaper
alternatives. Uber is for people who are out and about and want to be
picked up from wherever they are and be taken to an arbitrary address.

That's hardly typical of the movements of people who need a guide dog. They
are more likely to have regular journeys, using a trusted local firm, which
they pre-book.


And then, when they do, you can say "and you, as their "operator" are
guilty
of not making sure that your drivers comply with the rules" so we are
taking
away *your* license to operate as well as those of all the guilty
drivers.

I suspect it's not so simple.

It can be made that simple

How? They're not Uber employees.

I don't think that's a valid excuse.

There is a contact between Uber and the drivers, they don't just turn up and
drive on a whim.

Uber must therefore be responsible for making sure that their drivers comply
with regulations and have a disciplinary procedure (i.e. they terminate
their contract) if they don't.

No more than any other cab firm.


I accept that this, "punishment after the event" system means that there
will always be one or two rogue workers, but systematic non compliance with
regulations suggests a controller who doesn't give a damn.

Is there systematic non-compliance with regulations? Or is that more
anecdotal 'evidence' from Uber's competitors?


And anecdotal evidences suggest that Uber don't give a damn, unless pushed,
and pushed and pushed and threatened with having their execs imprisoned and
then actually having their execs imprisoned, before they decide to comply.

Are there any Uber executives based in the UK? And good luck trying to pin
any criminal conviction on them.

Who provided that anecdotal evidence? Was it from an official source, or
the black cab trade, which is losing out to Uber?

This isn't a company that takes its responsibilities seriously.

It's probably better than most cab firms. The reason that black cabs hate
Uber is that it's so popular with customers, not that it provides poor
customer service.