Skip to content
Link copied to clipboard

Rules of the road must apply to Pa. newcomers too

By Alex Friedman The hype surrounding the launch of ride-sharing services like Uber and Lyft in Pennsylvania strikes me as being just a tad over the top. Stripped down, these companies allow drivers to use their personal cars to transport customers for a fee.

By Alex Friedman

The hype surrounding the launch of ride-sharing services like Uber and Lyft in Pennsylvania strikes me as being just a tad over the top. Stripped down, these companies allow drivers to use their personal cars to transport customers for a fee.

Yes, customers can use an app to arrange the ride and, yes, some ride-sharing drivers slap a pink mustache on the grill of their car. Otherwise, these services are not much more innovative - or safer - than hitchhiking was back in the day.

Lawmakers need to look beyond the hype and focus on the risks that these businesses pose for their customers.

The services routinely pull into a state or city and launch operations without complying with laws or regulations that other carriers like taxicabs must follow.

In Philadelphia, the Parking Authority has oversight of taxicabs. But the newcomers want to bypass the law and are pushing the Public Utility Commission (PUC) to grant them statewide authority to operate. On Thursday, two PUC law judges recommended that Uber not be allowed to operate in the commonwealth, and the full PUC will consider whether to accept, deny, or modify that recommendation, perhaps as early as November.

Some issues are best left to local officials, including building codes, parking rules, and zoning. Why should ride-sharing services be allowed to get around local requirements?

Here's one example. Under state law, cab companies must provide adequate insurance coverage for their vehicles to protect customers and the public. Ride-sharing companies don't offer to provide insurance coverage, or would provide it only if a driver's personal insurer declines coverage.

These companies jack up prices during busy hours, but PUC regulations prohibit taxicabs from "surge" pricing, a predatory business practice that is unfair to customers. Cab drivers undergo criminal background checks. Ride-sharing drivers do not.

Outside Philadelphia, motor carriers are required to obtain a certificate of public convenience from the PUC. Uber and Lyft didn't bother to seek PUC approval before launching here. The carriers' refusal to obey the subsequent cease-and-desist order from the PUC led to last week's recommendation.

These companies should play by the same commonsense laws and regulations that protect consumers and ensure a level playing field for all businesses. Their failure to do so has lawmakers and regulators taking action across the country.

In June, Virginia officials ordered Lyft and Uber to stop operating.

California lawmakers have tightened insurance requirements for ride-sharing companies after a 6-year-old girl was hit by an Uber driver in San Francisco.

Arizona's governor vetoed a bill that would have legalized ride-sharing companies because the legislation did not include any insurance mandate.

Local officials in New Jersey, Florida, Arkansas, New York, and other places are grappling with these issues as well.

Insisting that ride-sharing companies follow commonsense safety rules does not mean shutting the door to innovation or establishing unfair barriers to competition. It is the job of lawmakers and regulators to ensure that all companies, including those new to the marketplace, play by the rules and follow the law. These standards will not only protect the carriers' customers, but also anyone else traveling our roads and streets. In the process, Pennsylvania will continue to maintain a level playing field for all motor carriers.