pressured into implementing it throughout the country. 2/2
I think they tend to fight regulations that exist intentionally as "anti-uber" laws. Which seems fair.
-
-
I defined anti Uber law ;) it's not an anti-TNC law.
-
Tweet unavailable
-
do you think the city is right that Uber's background checks are worse?
-
to me it seems like a transparent attempt to make Uber's onboarding process slower and more annoying for little win
-
Tweet unavailable
-
it's a problem but they're willing to do it to get the local business. That doesn't make it a good regulation.
-
here are the changes Uber agreed to in Portland.pic.twitter.com/BhFSeS4nh8
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
IOW "taxis use background check X and Uber uses Y; let's mandate X" is an anti-uber law, and they fight it.
-
but for example you never see them fighting insurance requirements.
-
another example, Uber doesn't fight accessibility requirements.pic.twitter.com/rInz3B4S3N
-
yeah not going to lie these don't seem like regulations for better safety/process rather to stop Uber/Lyft.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.