[Thomas The Transporter]

We know the day will come, eventually, so, before we end up with a bunch of rules that suck for drivers, let's pre-emptively come up with rules that are actually driver-friendly.

Once we have a good set of rules, we can take them to our senators and reps. I actually have one who's a Democrat and the other a Republican, so the three of us can sit down together for a final, bipartisan proposal that each can bring to their respective houses.

Issues we should cover are:

1. Insurance
2. Inspection
3. Licensure
4. Criminal/driving record/background check
5. Taxation

1. Insurance: What would be a fair amount for annual ride-share insurance? $100? $500? $1000?

Since Uber allegedly will cover you in an accident, I think a small, token amount like $100 would be fine.

2. Inspection: Should Connecticut restrict vehicles by age and/or mileage? How about a car can be no more than ten years old and have no more than 250,000 miles on it? What about an annual safety inspection for $20?

I've had riders tell me they've ridden in some scary pieces of junk.

3. Licensure: Should Connecticut create a new type of driver's license endorsement called "ride-share" to allow you to transport paying customers in your personal vehicle? Would $20 a year be a fair amount to pay for this endorsement? Or $50 to run concurrent with each driver's license renewal?

I don't mind paying for such an endorsement, and I'm sure the state would welcome a new source of revenue.

4. Criminal/driving record/background check: Should Connecticut conduct its own background checks? Should it include fingerprints? Should that be tied into applying for the aforementioned ride-share endorsement application or be a separate process?

I think tying the ride-share endorsement to the background check makes sense. Paying $50 initially then $20 for renewal.

5. Taxation: Should Connecticut tax rides? At what rate? 1%? 2%? 5%?

I'm in favor of 2.5%, paid for by the rider and not effecting our pay, collected directly from Uber by the state.

I think those are all pretty fair rules for drivers, and Connecticut can feel good that they are now regulating ride-share and making some money while doing so.

Please give us your thoughts on this or add anything else you think should be covered.

 

[CROWBOY]

Why would CT do any if these things? They can barely pass insurance regulations and they've tried to regulate rideshare in general with no agreement. If you go back to about a year ago, the biggest issue was one guy wanted stickers and large lettering to identify rideshare vehicles and Uber had to provide handicapped vehicles for those in wheelchairs. It never made it to vote I believe. If anything, livery endorsement. No need to make a new endorsement and cost tax payers more money. Taxes on rides should be Uber's problem, not ours. Livery plates for the cars and the rideshare insurance that most companies have, but not yet available in CT.

 

[Thomas The Transporter]

Why would CT do any if these things? They can barely pass insurance regulations and they've tried to regulate rideshare in general with no agreement. If you go back to about a year ago, the biggest issue was one guy wanted stickers and large lettering to identify rideshare vehicles and Uber had to provide handicapped vehicles for those in wheelchairs. It never made it to vote I believe. If anything, livery endorsement. No need to make a new endorsement and cost tax payers more money. Taxes on rides should be Uber's problem, not ours. Livery plates for the cars and the rideshare insurance that most companies have, but not yet available in CT.

Never send a boy to do a man's job.

 

[CROWBOY]

Never send a boy to do a man's job.

Man's job? You're the one working for pennies Thomas The Transporter

 

[UberTaxPro]

We know the day will come, eventually, so, before we end up with a bunch of rules that suck for drivers, let's pre-emptively come up with rules that are actually driver-friendly.

Once we have a good set of rules, we can take them to our senators and reps. I actually have one who's a Democrat and the other a Republican, so the three of us can sit down together for a final, bipartisan proposal that each can bring to their respective houses.

Issues we should cover are:

1. Insurance
2. Inspection
3. Licensure
4. Criminal/driving record/background check
5. Taxation

1. Insurance: What would be a fair amount for annual ride-share insurance? $100? $500? $1000?

Since Uber allegedly will cover you in an accident, I think a small, token amount like $100 would be fine.

2. Inspection: Should Connecticut restrict vehicles by age and/or mileage? How about a car can be no more than ten years old and have no more than 250,000 miles on it? What about an annual safety inspection for $20?

I've had riders tell me they've ridden in some scary pieces of junk.

3. Licensure: Should Connecticut create a new type of driver's license endorsement called "ride-share" to allow you to transport paying customers in your personal vehicle? Would $20 a year be a fair amount to pay for this endorsement? Or $50 to run concurrent with each driver's license renewal?

I don't mind paying for such an endorsement, and I'm sure the state would welcome a new source of revenue.

4. Criminal/driving record/background check: Should Connecticut conduct its own background checks? Should it include fingerprints? Should that be tied into applying for the aforementioned ride-share endorsement application or be a separate process?

I think tying the ride-share endorsement to the background check makes sense. Paying $50 initially then $20 for renewal.

5. Taxation: Should Connecticut tax rides? At what rate? 1%? 2%? 5%?

I'm in favor of 2.5%, paid for by the rider and not effecting our pay, collected directly from Uber by the state.

I think those are all pretty fair rules for drivers, and Connecticut can feel good that they are now regulating ride-share and making some money while doing so.

Please give us your thoughts on this or add anything else you think should be covered.

How about something in there for the drivers like a minimum mileage rate that Uber would have to follow? CT does that for taxis now. $2.60 mile in my area I believe.

 

[JaniceCT]

New haven to Boston and back ($135) minus gas doesn't sound that good . Probably not worth bragging about

 

[Thomas The Transporter]

New haven to Boston and back ($135) minus gas doesn't sound that good . Probably not worth bragging about

Well, you are probably right, if someone made a trip like that. You know someone who did?

How about something in there for the drivers like a minimum mileage rate that Uber would have to follow? CT does that for taxis now. $2.60 mile in my area I believe.

If you mean forcing Uber to pay a higher rate than they already do, I don't think Uber would be too happy with that. Is there a state that already forces a higher than Uber-standard rate?

 

[UberTaxPro]

Well, you are probably right, if someone made a trip like that. You know someone who did?

If you mean forcing Uber to pay a higher rate than they already do, I don't think Uber would be too happy with that. Is there a state that already forces a higher than Uber-standard rate?

Sec. 13b-96-37 of the DOT regulations gives the DOT the right to approve all rates. Uber already falls under these regulations however they have chosen to ignore them and the DOT has refused to enforce them against Uber.

 

[zerostars]

Remember uber does not provide transportation - it simply sells the use of its application

 

[Thomas The Transporter]

Remember uber does not provide transportation - it simply sells the use of its application

That is 100% correct.

Riders pay Uber for using their app.

Uber pays their partners(drivers) for helping Uber to advertise and market their app.

 

[ctuber]

CT is a chump market for UBER, any regulation will result in them leaving the state without hesitation. The greasy politicians know that which is why they have been "talking" about this for over a year and will not take any action imo.

 

[zerostars]

That is 100% correct.

Riders pay Uber for using their app.

Uber pays their partners(drivers) for helping Uber to advertise and market their app.

To me this is a shame

The deficit is so large that Malloy is proposing to increase Pistol Permit fees 5 times from $75 to $350 to help raise $12,00.000 towards the budget shortfall

Yet all of this "transportation" that we provide on a daily basis is not taxed at the proper State sales tax rate costing the State millions in lost revenue

Uber and Lyft can easily collect and assess the sales tax required under the General Statutes for transportation services and help to pay their way in this great State and contribute to the State economy by being a tax collecting entity

Under Uber eats they collect the sales tax and every meal sold

I am 100% in favor of all ride sharing being taxed just like a taxi ride - period

The State is loosing a lot of revenue

CT is a chump market for UBER, any regulation will result in them leaving the state without hesitation. The greasy politicians know that which is why they have been "talking" about this for over a year and will not take any action imo.

Let them go.

There are many others who will come

They say they are doing 200,000 rides per month - figuring their $1.80 booking fee and lets say an average uber fee of $2.00 that is $760,000 per month and that is a conservative estimate.

I am sure that Lyft would be more than happy to take over that business.

In Austin when Uber left many others came in to take over who were more driver friendly and ride sharing is alive and happy

The reality is that many major states in the region are now in the process of regulating this industry - NJ - and next NY - CT will be soon to follow

Within a year most states will have ridesharing regulations of one kind or another

[QUOTE="
Issues we should cover are:

1. Insurance
2. Inspection
3. Licensure
4. Criminal/driving record/background check
5. Taxation

.[/QUOTE]

I am 100% behind you on all of these

1. Insurance is already sufficiently provided by Uber

2. Inspection - all cars should be required to have a yearly saftey inspection by a DMV repaid shop

3. Licensure - I am in favor of all ride share drivers needing a taxi endorsement - it is easy to obtain and serves very useful public safety functions

4. This would be covered by number 3 above

5. All ride shares should pay the same sales tax as a taxi ride - good for the state

 

[UberTaxPro]

To me this is a shame

The deficit is so large that Malloy is proposing to increase Pistol Permit fees 5 times from $75 to $350 to help raise $12,00.000 towards the budget shortfall

Yet all of this "transportation" that we provide on a daily basis is not taxed at the proper State sales tax rate costing the State millions in lost revenue

Uber and Lyft can easily collect and assess the sales tax required under the General Statutes for transportation services and help to pay their way in this great State and contribute to the State economy by being a tax collecting entity

Under Uber eats they collect the sales tax and every meal sold

I am 100% in favor of all ride sharing being taxed just like a taxi ride - period

The State is loosing a lot of revenue

Let them go.

There are many others who will come

They say they are doing 200,000 rides per month - figuring their $1.80 booking fee and lets say an average uber fee of $2.00 that is $760,000 per month and that is a conservative estimate.

I am sure that Lyft would be more than happy to take over that business.

In Austin when Uber left many others came in to take over who were more driver friendly and ride sharing is alive and happy

The reality is that many major states in the region are now in the process of regulating this industry - NJ - and next NY - CT will be soon to follow

Within a year most states will have ridesharing regulations of one kind or another

[QUOTE="
Issues we should cover are:

1. Insurance
2. Inspection
3. Licensure
4. Criminal/driving record/background check
5. Taxation

.

I am 100% behind you on all of these

1. Insurance is already sufficiently provided by Uber

2. Inspection - all cars should be required to have a yearly saftey inspection by a DMV repaid shop

3. Licensure - I am in favor of all ride share drivers needing a taxi endorsement - it is easy to obtain and serves very useful public safety functions

4. This would be covered by number 3 above

5. All ride shares should pay the same sales tax as a taxi ride - good for the state[/QUOTE]

Taxis don't pay sales tax in CT

 

[Maven]

This thread is useful and interesting, but ultimately ineffective - unless the issues and priorities discussed are communicated from a large enough number of citizens to those in a position to legislate. If you wish your voice to be heard then

• Contact your Connecticut State Legislators https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/menu/cgafindleg.asp
• Contact the Transportation Committees of the Legislature https://www.cga.ct.gov/tra/
• Write an Op-Ed or Letter to the Editor in your local Connecticut newspaper

 

[I_Like_Spam]

How about something in there for the drivers like a minimum mileage rate that Uber would have to follow? CT does that for taxis now. $2.60 mile in my area I believe.

State governments don't set "minimum rates" for taxis, they set the rates, period. Taxis can't charge higher that the set rate either.

The object of the regulations is to protect the public, not the companies or their partners.

 

[zerostars]

State governments don't set "minimum rates" for taxis, they set the rates, period. Taxis can't charge higher that the set rate either.

The object of the regulations is to protect the public, not the companies or their partners.

Good idea

It would be excellent if a few drivers spent the time to voice our concerns to the CT transportation committee

One of the members actually signed up as an uber driver and did some rides

Us drivers as a group have no unity - we have no voice and we have no rights

I am 100% behind you on all of these

1. Insurance is already sufficiently provided by Uber

2. Inspection - all cars should be required to have a yearly saftey inspection by a DMV repaid shop

3. Licensure - I am in favor of all ride share drivers needing a taxi endorsement - it is easy to obtain and serves very useful public safety functions

4. This would be covered by number 3 above

5. All ride shares should pay the same sales tax as a taxi ride - good for the state

Taxis don't pay sales tax in CT[/QUOTE]

Correct

I mean to say LIVERY CARS like town cars and black cars etc

http://www.ct.gov/drs/cwp/view.asp?a=1514&q=268464

 

[UberTaxPro]

State governments don't set "minimum rates" for taxis, they set the rates, period. Taxis can't charge higher that the set rate either.

The object of the regulations is to protect the public, not the companies or their partners.

What the stated "object" is and the reality are two different things. Your're right "they set the rates".