I'm not sure I'd want The New York Times brokering a deal for me. In this case, the Gray Lady's Op Ed folk are suggesting that New York City's Taxi and Limousine Commission acquiesce to cabbies' demands for a $1 per trip fuel surcharge. In exchange, the paper calls for a free ride IF a cabbie talks on his or her cell during a fare. It sounds sensible enough– until you consider the fact that there is already a law against cabbies on cell phones (even hands-free) whilst working. In other words, the NYT wants the government to bribe taxi drivers to comply with an existing regulation. Surely the time to do the carrot stick thing was before the law was enacted. "New York did raise taxi fares two years ago, which helped drivers’ incomes, at least until the price of staying on the road quickly climbed to more than $4 a gallon at area stations. According to drivers’ advocates, costs have risen as much as $1,000 a month for some drivers." If The Big Apple's "giving" taxi drivers an extra grand, they should look for some sort of new concession. Suggestions?
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
The cabbies on cell phones thing is a major problem in NYC. The city had mystery riders handing out tickets to them and it didn’t change anything.
Cute of NY Times to suggest something even if it is impossible to implement.
Fuel surcharge is also dumb. They are converting the taxi fleet to hybrids more and more every week. Current taxis are Crown Vics – what, 15 mpg in heavy traffic? But get this…
Now nearly every hybrid on sale in the US (except the GM models) is in service in NYC as a taxi now – most popular by far is the Ford Escape, and then there are also plenty of Prius, Camry, Lexus RX400h, Highlander, and Altima taxis. Not limos, yellow “hail on the street” cabs.
Justin,
You took the words right out of my mouth (or keyboard…)
The fuel surcharge is ridiculous. Since the taxi fleet is rapidly converting to hybrids, the need for that $1 surcharge becomes more and more of a non-issue. Of course, don’t be surprised if we are surcharged for the ‘Upgrade Cost’ of converting to hybrid taxis…
As an European it boggles my mind how any cabbie shopping for a taxi fleet could think “umm… my cars idle a lot and rack up lots of miles – I think a heavy body-on-frame sedan with an antiquated automatic gearbox and a big V8 is what I need”
Doesn’t seem to make any economical sense from a TCO perspective.
Mirko-
The Ford Panther platform (Crown Vic, Lincoln Town Car) has ruled the streets of New York for quite a while now. The West Side repair shops have every single part in stock and can even replace rear axles at 3AM. The business advantage of this has been considerable and, until recently, the gas cost wasn’t an issue.
NYC has a replacement rule. Yellow cabs must be replaced after (I think) five years. The next two to three years will, I believe, see most of the fleet replaced by hybrids. A year ago they were curiousities. Now they are common.
Until the release of the articles about a NYC Taxi medallion being sold for over $600,000, I had no idea that the number of taxis had a limit. And I didn’t know that the city government controlled the fares. And I didn’t know that vehicles had to be replaced after a certain amount of time regardless of condition.
I didn’t know that government regulated taxis so heavily (and limited the supply of taxis), and I couldn’t for the life of me fathom why taxi fares were so expensive.
Now I get it
The cellphone cabbie law is universally ignored. I took two cabs last night and both drivers were on their cell the whole time. It doesn’t usually bother me as long as I can’t really hear what they’re saying. I’ve had to yell at a couple drivers who were literally screaming into their cell phones.
They should get the extra $1 though. They take a huge hit with fuel prices.
I’m a New Yorker and I wouldn’t even fathom paying a sucharge until the TLC consistently enforces the GPS/Credit Card requirement that was agreed as part of 2006’s fare increase. I don’t care for the GPS tracking (and the ads it brings with it) but the ability to pay a fare by swiping a crdit card is invaluable.
The drivers objected to installing GPS (because they can be tracked) and the credit card machines (because of the service fees) and only about 60-70% of cabs have them installed. Let’s get everyone in compliance with the last concession before we agree the next one!
Are the profit margins that beefy that taxi drivers don`t even bother to quit their fuel gulping crown victorias for sake of tree huggers and common sense? You know, those tiny mandarin cherries with nano liters displacement and the arabian penninsula menacing fuel consumption. Ok, so if they ask you additional charges, send them to school- the best school, as always ,is to refuse to use their services.
In cab showers.
The Vics are ridiculously cheap to service en masse, which is why they like them. Anyone with a sledgehammer, duct tape and a modicum of experience can get them running, and the parts are ubiquitous.
They’re not reliable, they’re not efficient, they’re not safe. But they have the lowest TCO from a fleet perspective.
If NYC (or Boston, etc.) had any sense they’d make the cabbies drive London Taxis:
http://www.lti.co.uk/tx4/
Nicknick, you absolutely got it. New York (and other cities) “regulate” the taxi business, allegedly to protect the consumer, but the benefits accrue mainly to the limited number of people who get taxi licenses. Can you imagine the reaction if a politician declared “We have too many grocery stores and the competition results in price-cutting. The government should restrict the grocery business to people deemed most deserving of the privilege.”
If the cab oligopolies could be broken, our sprawling cities would have a lot of mom-and-pop jitney services that would meet the needs of many riders better than buses.
bunkie:
NYC has a replacement rule. Yellow cabs must be replaced after (I think) five years. The next two to three years will, I believe, see most of the fleet replaced by hybrids. A year ago they were curiousities. Now they are common.
I think it’s actually 3 model years.
psarhjinian: They’re not reliable, they’re not efficient, they’re not safe. But they have the lowest TCO from a fleet perspective.
Crown Victorias are quite reliable (and rugged, too) and very safe. The gas tank issue has been overblown – please name another vehicle that can regularly survive direct hits from vehicles traveling at 70-80 mph?
Too bad cost is the decisive factor, which keeps dinosaurs like the Crown Victoria in the taxi fleet. It’s not just the fact that they are cheaper to repair, but because Ford has never actually fully updated the thing, there are probably a million out there to be cannibalized for parts.
The Ford Transit Connect would make for a good taxi (they had a concept version at the NY Auto Show). I also saw a Chevrolet Malibu hybrid taxi the other day, which makes sense as a taxi. It’s far less complicated than the full hybrids, and its stop/start capability is most useful in the city – cutting down on consumption and pollution (maybe my windows in my apartment won’t turn jet black so quickly).
But maybe taxi drivers should drive more efficiently. I always find it amazing how the people who are paid to drive are such poor drivers. This is obviously a generalization, but I would have more sympathy if they didn’t gun it toward every red light. And as a side note, it would be nice if they check their mirrors before they make a turn (as to not knock me off my bike in the process – not like that happened to me…).
@TwoTwenty
The Ford Transit Connect would make for a good taxi
I just spent a week in turkey, where taxis were mostly Transit Connects, Kangoos and Doblos. The police also had the Transit Connects and Doblos.
geeber,
Reliable to a fleet/owner and an end-user are not the same thing. Yes, they’re rugged, but they still suffer electrical, control, trim and minor (and sometimes major) mechanical issues to a greater degree than, say, a Camry or Accord. These things aren’t a big deal for fleets, but piss off end-users enormously. The cars aren’t at all pleasant, too.
As for safe: the Panther regularly gets trounced by it’s unibody competition in IIHS and NHTSA testing. That big, heavy frame holds up, but the body built atop it crumples like a tin can. That kind of construction makes sense for fleets (especially taxi and cop, where it’s so much cheaper to fix a frame than a unibody assembly, and you’re regularly hopping curbs and bumping other cars), but it’s not safer for the average buyer.
I think a lot of commentary on reliability comes from mechanics and similar gearheads. I get this a lot when I talk to European car fans (disclaimer: I own a Saab) or truck buyers, too. They go on at length about how solid or well engineered the car is, how long the engine will last between rebuilds, how stout the frame is, how easy and cheap it is to fix, etc.
The thing is, average buyers don’t care. They want the little things to work, well, day in and day out. They’re certainly not going to put up with the compromises the Panthers require.
If you are a personal buyer, a Taurus or Camry is safer and more reliable by a very wide margin. If you’re a fleet buyer, the Panther’s design has decided advantages. Right tool for the right job, etc.
Every time I see one of these, I can’t help but think they’re the automotive equivalent of a shark: they do what they do well, but they’re an evolutionary dead end, and when you look at what rules the roost, you can see why.
“If the cab oligopolies could be broken, our sprawling cities would have a lot of mom-and-pop jitney services that would meet the needs of many riders better than buses.”
I shudder to think of the consequences of this. In theory it sounds nice. But we would instantly suffer the tragedy of the commons as all the newly-legal jitneys seek to occupy every available square inch of Manhattan’s busiest street.
I refuse to ride in the so-called “dollar cars” out in the boroughs. Doing so one night almost got me killed. And, you can be sure, you would be SOL if you every tried to recover your medical costs in court from one of them should you suffer an injury.
psharjinian: Reliable to a fleet/owner and an end-user are not the same thing. Yes, they’re rugged, but they still suffer electrical, control, trim and minor (and sometimes major) mechanical issues to a greater degree than, say, a Camry or Accord. These things aren’t a big deal for fleets, but piss off end-users enormously.
They also tend to driven under much worse conditions than a Camry or Accord, and for many more miles per year.
psharjinian: As for safe: the Panther regularly gets trounced by it’s unibody competition in IIHS and NHTSA testing. That big, heavy frame holds up, but the body built atop it crumples like a tin can. That kind of construction makes sense for fleets (especially taxi and cop, where it’s so much cheaper to fix a frame than a unibody assembly, and you’re regularly hopping curbs and bumping other cars), but it’s not safer for the average buyer.
I agree that the Panther cars hardly represent the cutting edge of technology in safety (or anything else). But that doesn’t mean that the Panther cars are unsafe, which was the original contention.
psharjinian: Every time I see one of these, I can’t help but think they’re the automotive equivalent of a shark: they do what they do well, but they’re an evolutionary dead end, and when you look at what rules the roost, you can see why.
Very true, but, in all fairness, Ford isn’t promoting these all that much (the Crown Victoria, for example, has been all-fleet for a few years now, and even the Town Car is mostly a fleet queen, too). And it certainly isn’t placing its passenger-car hopes on these vehicles. Say what you will about the Fusion, Taurus and MKS, but these are legitimate attempts to appeal to today’s family car buyers.
It’s not as though Ford is pitching the Grand Marquis or Town Car as the ideal family car, or even as the ideal car for older people. It sells most of these cars to fleets, and some Grand Marquises and Town Cars to conservative buyers who haven’t moved with the times. (They want one, so why not sell them one? The tooling has been paid off for years now.)
When they die off, the cars will, too.
Are you sure “hands-free” wasn’t referring the the steering wheel technique of NY cabbies?
The taxi cab business in NYC is run as a truly capitalist enterprise where the capitalist (medallion owner) will always reap the economic benefit of constrained supply and the laborer (taxi driver) will make minimum wage.
This is the way it works – since there are more licensed cab drivers than medallions the drivers show up at the cab stands each day at 5am or 5pm (there are two 12 hr shifts in the day). Based on the relative number of cabbies available to drive on a given day, the stand sets a shift rental rate for their cars. Guess what – the stand charges more for a hybrid than a Crown Vic (approximately the incremental cost of filling the Crown Vic for the shift).
The cabbie pays the stand for the car & hits the street. The meter tallies a total according to the rate schedule set by the Taxi & Limo Commission, but he keeps 100% of you pay him (fare + tip). The proof this is the case – if cabbies working alone had to divy up their earnings with the absent medallion owner wouldn’t cabbies offer flat rate, off meter rides to pliable passengers? I’ve lived or worked in NYC for nearly 10 years, look the part of a cheapskate and never had a yellow cabbie suggest we take a ride off the meter (other than airport fares which are the flat-rate exception on the T&LC rate sheet).
Any economist can tell you that the gas surcharge won’t make a difference in what these essentially unskilled, virtually unlimited laborers will earn from threatening your life while behind the wheel – the cab stands will just raise their shift rates by $1 x avg. number of fares per shift.
The coolest thing I learned in business school is that strip joints & strippers work the same way – the girls pay for stage time. Yup – the homilier girls that work the breakfast shift pay much less than the talent on stage FRI night – they could get the FRI night gig, but don’t since they couldn’t cover the rent with their assets.
My uncle has a medallion. He got it several years ago for $120,000. We’ve suggested that he rent out his car for the times when he’s not driving himself, but he’s very particular about how his car is treated (Camry hybrid) and doesn’t want anybody else to mess with it. He just drives six days a week doing mainly airport runs from JFK to Manhattan. Totally flexible hours, fixed fares, interesting clients. I think he just turns the “Off Duty” light on once he’s dropped off his fare to loop back to the airport. I’m told by other cabbies that this arrangement would be their preferred route if they owned their own medallion as well.