Spain is trying to get rid of Uber: drivers will face fines up to €18K

http://novobrief.com/spain-trying-push-uber-country-drivers-will-face-fines-e18000/

by lleims • 12 years ago

68 101 12 years ago

rmc4• 12 years ago

How they will do this in a city with thousands of cars is a different question, and authorities haven’t given any details on how they will try to find Uber cars in the streets of Madrid.

Easy. Undercover inspectors just book an Uber ride. Soon as they step into the vehicle, they present ID and fine the driver.

w1ntermute• 12 years ago

I don't think it's that "easy." Uber could easily develop a way to detect such users and block them.

Argorak• 12 years ago

Test buyers can be recruited from the current customers.

Also, denying service can be an offense as well. (depending on the reasons)

onion2k• 12 years ago

The authorities wouldn't need to be successful very often. So long as there's a possibility of a large fine the number of drivers would start to fall. If it falls to a level where getting an Uber car takes too long the customers will leave, and then Uber withdraw because they aren't making any money if there aren't any customers.

If 1% of Uber drivers are fined leads to 50% of drivers being scared away that could be enough to stop Uber completely.

rmc4• 12 years ago

Silicon Valley tech companies rarely spend a lot of time caring about the rest of the world. Uber won't bother that much.

bertil• 12 years ago

I'm just wondering: facing such explicitly adverse government, what is the point of trying? Do you think Uber should sit that one out, and wait success abroad to change people's mind, or have foreign tourists used to Uber beg for the service to come back?

I can’t imagine a change in public opinion in favor: the country that has massive official unemployment, systemic black market: the “sharing economy” cannot be more popular than now. One PR strategy would be to denounce the undeclared equivalents, drivers who offer rides without any licence or control; have the obvious accident happen (unceremonious driver, riders running away) and blow it out with a PR campaign; Uber could then present as the savior, and an needed control over the unscrupulous drivers and riders.

jjoergensen• 12 years ago

It would be nice to be able to find a "sane" taxi-driver in Spain. Many (most) of them drive like crazy and they are all listening to very loud football on the radio.

MordodeMaru2• 12 years ago

I believe that's part of their value proposition. I enjoy pulling out from them how far right-winged they are by throwing out franquist bullshit all the time. They make my day.

pantulis• 12 years ago

I usually do the same. I wonder if Madrid cab drivers think all their clients are right wing enthusiasts.

Adirael• 12 years ago

I don't use taxis very often but I've never found a stereotypical taxi driver in the 10-20 times I've used them (I live in Madrid). They were all polite, their cars were clean and had no music/radio or it was set to a low volume.

MordodeMaru2• 12 years ago

NOT REPRESENTATIVE.

lleims• 12 years ago

Stereotypes.

I've used MyTaxi or Hailo many times in the past few months here in Madrid and have had 0 issues with taxi drivers. I'm not saying there are no taxi drivers like the ones you described above, but I think it's a minority.

Numberwang• 12 years ago

Anecdotes.

I've booked a single taxi journey in Spain, and it was one of the most frightening experiences in my life. The guy was chasing pedestrians and would have run over several of them had they not jumped. He got us to where we were going quickly though.

narag• 12 years ago

I've used Madrid taxis dozens, maybe more than a hundred times. What I have to say: driving is not crazier than any other non-taxi Madrid driver, including me when I had a car.

Anything annoying they stop it as soon as requested. My experience is I have to expressly allow them to turn radio on.

What I don't like: about at least a 15% of rides, the driver tries to take the (very) long way. A couple of times I've demanded them to 'stop me right here'. That's sad for the majority of good drivers out there, but still a problem and forces me to be extra careful, while I'd rather relax and enjoy the landscape.

pfortuny2• 12 years ago

You have to bear in mind that Amazon was not in Spain until just a couple of years ago because you know, the law here is very much pro-publishers. This move is not a surprise for us Spaniards. A real pity.

On the other hand, taxis here in Spain are nowhere near the chaos they seem to be in Manhattan or SF. They are usually rather clean (not necessarily shiny but decently clean) and drivers tend to be agreeable (there are exceptions, as in everything).

oldspiceman• 12 years ago

Can't agree with your point here. It's extremely common to get ripped off by taxis in Spain. There is no incentive for them to be agreeable with foreigners.

santialbo3• 12 years ago

It's easy to get ripped off by taxis anywhere in the world if you are a tourist who doesn't know your way around.

RBerenguel4• 12 years ago

Not in Barcelona, at least, since fare prices are shown in the windows (IIRC this is also the norm in the UK, and I thought this was also done Spain-wide, but it's been a while since I took a taxi outside of Barcelona.) Of course, nothing prevents the taxi from driving around needlessly. But this can happen anywhere, Uber or no Uber.

pfortuny2• 12 years ago

Well, yes, I not being a foreigner, I have no experience in what you tell so you are probably right there.

txutxu• 12 years ago

Well, a taxi license in Spain costs as much as a good new house.

Maybe even two houses depending on the area.

Historically, people needed to take big credits to start a taxi career.

I'm not sure what is my position, but I've empathy for those who did pay such license and special insurances.

Also I've empathy for those who want to make use of Uber services.

It's not easy to make justice to all of them at the same time.

I think there are more European countries with the same conflicts regarding this situation with traditional taxis and Uber. Many disputes, demonstrations and strikes, all around Europe.

Here in Spanishtan the government has take a position. We can not presume of a 2.0 government, neither about pro technological laws, or pro entrepreneur laws. Indeed. Is not new for me.

samuel3• 12 years ago

Also, licenses had their own bubble. Probably their value has decreased about a 50% since the peak.

vimes656• 12 years ago

Exactly, the price for a driver spot is driven by demand, it's not expensive just by law.

Traditionally, getting a driver license in Spain has always been like signing for a relatively well paid and secure job for life. And moreover, there is no need for any investment learning any particularly difficult skill. This is all supported by ridiculously high fares backed by regulations.

This is not to put the blame on taxi drivers, I truly believe they are choosing a honest option to make a living. But considering that an important factor, if not the most important, for the Spanish economical crisis is the inability to adapt to a global economy, with this kind of actions, the message the government is sending is: "don't invest your time learning to code, or getting engineering degrees because we are still trying everything in our hand to keep traditional professions secure and well paid, not like those new risky technological jobs". The average Spanish programmer is in a more precarious situation than anyone with a highly regulated unskilled profession.

Here in Spain, I'm constantly seeing measures to try to maintain the old ways of living at any cost with total disregard about how the rest of the world is evolving. I'm not claiming globalization is good or bad but it's happening, and if the Spanish government keeps trying to hide it from its population with more debt, in the long term, it only means less economical competitiveness for the country and slimmer chances to catch up with the rest of the world in the future.

Defending these minority groups only means more poverty overall for everyone in Spain.

pron11• 12 years ago

Also I've empathy for those who want to make use of Uber services. It's not easy to make justice to all of them at the same time.

Well, it depends on your culture and perspective, of course. To me, the answer is almost always clear and obvious: when there's a conflict between the worker's happiness and the consumer's happiness, the worker comes first. Society's role is to ensure its members can make a respectable livelihood -- not to solve every minor inconvenience for those whose comfortable survival is already guaranteed, or to make their life more "efficient". Of course, if the rich want to run their lives like well-oiled machines, it's their prerogative, as long as they don't interfere with society's more important goals.

_yosefk• 12 years ago

You mean typewriter manufacturers should have been kept afloat forever using taxpayers' funds so as to not fire workers?

(That's what "the worker comes first" despite the consumer not wanting the product would mean, I think. If not, then the question is where you draw the line and how you measure the harm done to the average worker when he is forced to support other workers who are unproductive compared to available alternatives. For instance, rich people have private cars and sometimes private drivers and don't need taxis that much. Who needs a taxi? Someone without a car who needs to quickly get from A to B. Could be a rather poor chap. Of course, taxis, that regulated brand of public transportation, are hardly affordable on a regular basis to "poor" people. Whether this helps or hurts "workers" is not obvious to me. All of which is not to say that I'm "on Uber's side" or some such, I'm too uninformed to take a side on this one. Just wondering about your "pro-worker" statement.)

netcan3• 12 years ago

That's a tricky position to take, as a political habit.

The problem with defining 'worker happiness' some way is that if unhappiness entitles you to something unhappiness can be achieved. What about the happiness of those who would like to be a worker, but can't because it conflicts with existing worker happiness?

Workers are ann entrenched interest group (or even class, to borrow more Marxist language) and they are interested in maintaining the way things are. The loudest are reactionary, preferring to go back to the way things were.

The unionized factories of 2 generations ago were not the pinnacle of human civilization.

samuel3• 12 years ago

The thing is that they aren't workers. It would be a much easier problem to solve if they were. They are freelancers with unlimited liability.

Houshalter• 12 years ago

This position makes no economic sense. Consumers are the end goal of an economy. Workers are just a means to meet consumer demand. Eventually, through automation, we may not even need any workers at all. You can artificially raise wages up to a certain point, but it's not at all clear that this is good for the economy as a whole. E.g. unemployment for workers whose labor isn't worth that much, higher prices for consumers, etc.

A better alternative is something like a basic income. Something that helps all people, not just people who have jobs with high demand. And is payed for by taxing the entire economy, not just businesses that coincidentally employ a lot of workers (or indirectly, their consumers.)

Kurtz79• 12 years ago

I think that it´s an easy position to take.

If the government sides with Uber it loses the money he get from the (outrageously expensive, like you said) licenses, and has a lot of unhappy voters (taxi drivers).

What would it gain ? Better service ? Lower prices, more fares ? Happier citizen ? That is really all to be demonstrated.

It´s a very rational decision in my opinion, on part of the government, although I might not agree with it.

On the human side, I agree that taxi drivers deserve sympathy, but no more than other owners of traditional businesses that are made obsolete by progress (small CD shop owners, bookstores, photo development shops)...

samuel3• 12 years ago

The councils(not the goverment) sell/auctions a tiny fraction of licenses. There's a secondary market where license owners sell them, usually when they retire.

marknutter• 12 years ago

Because the last thing Spain needs is more job opportunities...

santialbo3• 12 years ago

Of all the jobs spain needs, taxi drivers is not one of them, that's for sure.

bottled_poe2• 12 years ago

That's for the market to decide.

piokoch• 12 years ago

As far as I can see, Uber is the problem in countries, where taxi industry is heavily regularized.

Recently Uber started its operation in Poland, in Warsaw. For 2 days that was a news, but later nobody paid much attention on it.

In Poland in order to become taxi driver one needs to fulfill a number of conditions (only people who never comitted a crime are allowed a licence, must be physically and mentally healthy) a then pass the "city knowladge" exam. Exam is obligatory only in cites larger then 100K. And that's all.

Due to competition taxi prices are kept on resonable level, so taxi companies are competing by having nicer cars, being highly available (wating for a taxi longer then 10 min is unusual), offering loyalty cards, cummulative invoicing at the end of the month, etc.

Uber can compete with lower prices - they have promised to be 20% cheaper. It is not clear however cheaper from which price - premium taxi companies (about 60 cents per kilometer) or cheap services (40 cents per kilometer).

There are other questions as well - would Uber be able to provide invoices, if not, it is not a deal for many people.

Even if I pay less (10% less?), I don't think I will risk riding with someone who might be totally unfit for the job and does not know city. Plus if something goes wrong I am not sure how Uber is going to handle that.

So, basically, Uber is one more taxi company out of 25 with fancy way of calling taxi, so there is no reason for other companies to protest.

bottled_poe2• 12 years ago

Exactly. Uber has risen as we perceive the cost of a taxi service to be excessive. Why is this? Is it exploitation by a bloated monopoly or is it to cover actual costs (such as insurance, regulatory constraints) which don't present themselves to the average traveler? I'm sure it is somewhere in the middle.

james10713• 12 years ago

The main differences will be labour rates-i.e. how much the driver is paid (or earns) per shift and the utilization rate (i.e how much of the time the driver is working).

alkonaut5• 12 years ago

Same in Stockholm, Uber isnt some revolutionary new method of transportation, it's another taxi co among hundreds. The app+payment is the only thing that sets them apart, but apps of course exist for a handful of the other largest taxi companies.

chrisseaton• 12 years ago

Doesn't Uber use considerably nicer cars than any other taxi service? When I get an Uber in London it's a very new and clean spacious black car, not your standard taxi. And the drivers are far more polite (they don't try to ask me about football for example).

TeMPOraL2• 12 years ago

Yup. We already had our taxi disruption in Poland when iCar and the like appeared. They used a legal trick to get around requirements for taxi license. A dozen media storms, few slashed tires and a law change later, they were made to operate under taxi law, and everyone seems to live along well. The primary important features introduced by iCar, et al. was a) fare based on distance, therefore known before the ride, and b) use of GPS to navigate around the city.

I actually switched to iCar mostly for b) - I trust GPS more than taxi driver's instinct.

I don't see anything new Uber can bring here. We already have a taxi network with an ordering app anyway.

sveme• 12 years ago

This. Many commentators especially in Germany are complaining about the lack of a will to innovate, yet uber is nothing new under the sun. They pretend to be part of a sharing economy, yet charge more than the fuel costs of a trip, which is the quintessential difference to ride sharing. They are simply a global taxi company with a fancy app that is trying to benefit from not being regulated by claiming to be something new - ride sharing.

They are a taxi company so should have to follow the same regulations as all the other taxi companies.

james10713• 12 years ago

Yes, of course they are a taxi company and they are playing a game of words in pretending not to be.

The reason that they do so is that the licensing rules for taxis protect the incumbents from new entrants.

anon1385• 12 years ago

When people talk about 'heavy regulation', they don't usually specify what regulations they are actually talking about. In Germany for example, Uber is in trouble because they are not ensuring that their drivers are insured (a normal private car insurance won't cover commercial operation) and not ensuring that the vehicles have the required level of mechanical safety checks (commercial vehicles require more regular tests because they do far more miles).

When you peel away the vague and emotive language of 'heavy regulation' to look at the actual issues then suddenly things look quite different.

Hands up who on HN thinks filling our roads with uninsured drivers is a good thing? Hands up who thinks mandatory checks on vehicles brakes and other basic safety systems is a bad thing? I think I see pg's hand at the back there. But in general the vast vast majority of people think mandatory insurance is a good idea. That's why nearly all developed countries require it by law.

Uber don't want to actually come out and say 'our drivers are not insured', but make no mistake, thats the kind of thing Uber and SV VCs are talking about when they complain about 'red tape' and 'regulation' and 'lack of entrepreneurial spirit'. Ignoring insurance laws makes it easier for them to undercut law abiding and sociably responsible competitors, and they want to continue to get away with it.

ekianjo2• 12 years ago

Hands up who on HN thinks filling our roads with uninsured drivers is a good thing? Hands up who thinks mandatory checks on vehicles brakes and other basic safety systems is a bad thing? I think I see pg's hand at the back there. But in general the vast vast majority of people think mandatory insurance is a good idea. That's why nearly all developed countries require it by law.

The thing is that instead of making these things "expected" because of market forces, imposing it by law makes it a default for everyone and it becomes a box to tick when you want to operate a taxi, just like many other things. And you end up with people who simply do not give a shit at all about consumer experience and providing a good service at all. That's the key difference with countries were taxis have less regulations: people actually compete on service, for the benefit of everyone, not just the few who are taxi drivers and running a monopoly provided by the State.

With this attitude you end up with Taxi drivers who do this job because they see it as a rent, not as a way to make a difference on the market. Yeah, that's the spirit!

svdree• 12 years ago

commercial vehicles require more regular tests because they do far more miles

That doesn't make any sense. Sure, high mileage cars probably need to be checked more regularly, but that goes for non-commercial vehicles as well. The fact that money changes hands after a ride does not do anything to the technical state of the car.

Same thing for the insurance: if I drive a friend to the airport, that's OK apparently. But if I drive someone else to the airport for money, suddenly I'm not insured anymore?

To me this just sounds like people making up rules to protect their own interests.

rmc4• 12 years ago

Their idea of "disruption" is to ignore the law. And yet the US companies want us to obey their copyright law on media that they won't sell us.

slowmotiony2• 12 years ago

I don't know what taxi services are you using, but I live in a major Polish city and the taxis are horrible, for a couple of reasons:

- You always get a different price

- You never get a receipt (if you request one, you often get yelled at)

- Drivers drive like madmen

- Sometimes it takes 30+ minutes for a taxi, other times no taxi picks up the damn phone

- Sometimes they tell you 20 minutes, and then don't come at all.

Fuckers will talk all the ride about how hard it is for them to make a living, how the laws are hard to follow for them etc. And then give you a price of 50zl for a 10 minute ride. Ridiculous. I can't wait for services Uber and alike to take them all out of business.

lgieron• 12 years ago

Are you a non-native? The culture of overcharging foreigners is probably still pretty strong in many places (it was born during the communist time, where every westerner was perceived as a walking wallet).

someone234• 12 years ago

In Germany and Spain, there's a state-maintained taxi cartel. They don't want any competition - that's the point of a cartel to begin with - and so, their friends in the government are working to prevent it. All the bullshit regulation is just part of maintaining the cartel.

Apparently they don't have this problem in Poland, and rather unsurprisingly, taxis are cheap and competing by having nicer cars etc.

Shorel• 12 years ago

Here in Colombia Uber is AMAZINGLY better than any taxi company. The difference is simply too big.

A normal taxi will not go where I want, or refuse to take me for any other reason. And payment has to be cash only. And there's always some risk the driver will try to take advantage of you.

luisivan3• 12 years ago

I live in Madrid and I'm totally ashamed about this.

I used Uber a couple times, the second one this friday, and I friend and I asked the driver what will he do about the fines that will start happening this monday. He just said that he will probably stop driving.

I love these new kind of services and this is not the way to boost innovation.

Our politicians are fucking morons.

ergl• 12 years ago

Do you live in the same Madrid as me? I can't figure out what kind of 'innovation' Uber is bringing to the table.

There are plenty of taxis and free services for you to book one, I have never waited more than 10 minutes to get one, and most drivers are respectful and will turn the radio off or leave you alone if you say so. You can even ask them to take a particular route and they won't have any problem in doing so

luisivan3• 12 years ago

The innovation is that you don't have to pay 100K in order to be a city driver

mokkol2• 12 years ago

Have you tried Cabify yet? Cheaper than a taxi, very good quality of service and many more cars on the street than Uber. And 100% Legal

luisivan3• 12 years ago

Yeah, a friend of mine works there and I'm kind of a regular user :)

sergimansilla• 12 years ago

I take a fair amount of taxis and Uber. Except on some cases*, my experience with Uber is always vastly superior than it is with taxis: from the conversation to cleanliness, efficiency, etc. Specially in Spain.

I agree that Uber needs to have the same fiscal treatment as taxis do, but making the service illegal is beyond ridiculous, and a very sad way to try to stifle innovation (which will end up finding its way anyway).

RBerenguel4• 12 years ago

I don't know where you have taken taxis in Spain, but all taxis I've taken in Barcelona are incredibly clean and the drivers are incredibly efficient (given that I'm Spanish and know the best routes for these trips, too, of course)

huehue• 12 years ago

Just upon arriving to Barajas Airport in Madrid, I went outside to the taxi area and could delight myself with taxis not respecting the queue (allowing clients instead of referring them to the head of the queue) and the image of two taxi drivers fist fighting for some clients. Yup.

Not to mention they wanted to charge me over 100 euros for going from the Airport to the main train station.

From my experience the taxi industry of Spain is highly inefficient and overpriced.

pron11• 12 years ago

Why do you think Uber is an "innovation"? It's simply an unregulated, unsafe and uninsured taxi service. It's just like those illegal scalpers offering rides in any airport, except with a smartphone app. That's not innovation (useful and popular taxi apps existed before Uber), and whatever it is, it's not being stifled. Uber is free to apply for permits just like everyone else. I think that instead of being sad you should be proud that your country doesn't automatically adopt any potentially harmful idea that comes from America.

raldi3• 12 years ago

unsafe and uninsured

What are your citations for those bold claims? The first one is subjective, and the second one seems objectively false: http://blog.uber.com/ridesharinginsurance

moondowner• 12 years ago

I lived in Madrid for some time, and I rarely used taxi (in fact, only in cases when I needed to get to the airport in late hours).

The public transportation is pretty good, one can get anywhere in Madrid by using metro. http://www.expatica.com/es/essentials_moving_to/essentials/P...

mokkol2• 12 years ago

People could just order Cabify in Madrid. 100% legal, cheaper than a taxi and more cars on the street.

alexperezpaya• 12 years ago

I live in Spain. I hate spanish laws. Living here is like living in socialism. 3 months to create your company because of bureaucracy, laws agains Airbnb and Uber, we want some liberty.

santialbo3• 12 years ago

I don't see what the problem is. In Spain the rule is that you need a taxi license to be a taxi driver or you'll get fined. Uber pretending they don't need one is bullshit.

raldi3• 12 years ago

Most American cities have that same rule, and yet Uber is legal in them; the key is how you define "taxi driver".

In most US cities, if you don't pick up strangers holding up their hand on the sidewalk, you're not considered a taxi, and the rule does not apply.

ivanche• 12 years ago

"According to Spanish law, private drivers are not allowed to use their own cars to provide transportation services for-profit."

I wonder if private drivers are allowed to drive someone else'e car to provide such services?

drKarl• 12 years ago

It is indeed true that taxi licenses in Spain are so outrageously expensive that taxi drivers have to take a mortage big enough to buy a house, to pay for it.

There are certain industries in Spain which have legal barriers of entrance, so that it is very difficult for newcomers to get in, such as pharmacies and taxis. Think of it like a mafia.

That said, it has been proved on a TV programme, that a spanish-looking person taking a taxi, the taxi took a short route, and a foreign looking person taking a taxi from the same place to exactly the same destination, the taxi took a much longer and expensive route.

That said, it is my opinion that taxi driver and truck driver as a career has its days counted, in the light of innovations such as self driving cars. Obviously there will be a fierce (and presumably violent) opposition to the introduction of such disruptive technologies, they will lobby as a group (or as a mafia) trying to avoid that overtaking the market, but in the end those technologies will win.

So in the end, it is irrelevant if Uber can or can´t operate now in countries like Spain, because taxi drivers have no future.

The only hope for smart taxi drivers will be to buy a self-driving car and operate it 24hours a day (that is, embrace innovation as opposed to resist it, resistance is futile), while working themselves on something else, or just enjoying life.

forthefuture• 12 years ago

I don't want to be a wet blanket, but it seems to me that a better business model would be to make sure your entire company isn't operating illegally most places it exists (AirBnB, Uber / Lift).

Spain is trying to get rid of Uber: drivers will face fines up to €18K

Related Stories