Taxi Drivers Suing NYC over the Nissan NV200 - UPDATE

[AZhitman]

This is damn near comical, if they weren't serious.

From: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-1 ... l-cab.html



New York City taxi fleet operators sued the city over rules that make a Nissan Motor Co. vehicle the city’s official cab.

The plaintiffs, who include the Committee for Taxi Safety and Taxifleet Management LLC, said the city and other defendants exceeded their powers under law in selecting the “entirely untested” Nissan NV200 as the only authorized taxi, according to a complaint dated Nov. 28 in state Supreme Court in Manhattan.

“Taxicab medallion and vehicle owners, who have long been permitted to choose from among dozens of different vehicles made by numerous different manufacturers, will have all choices eliminated and will instead be required to purchase and drive the NV200 only,” the taxi operators said in the complaint.

According to the complaint, the Nissan NV200 is untested in city stop-and-go traffic, uses “outdated engineering, design and technology,” doesn’t employ hybrid or electric power, wouldn’t be able to withstand years of cab usage and would require replacement parts manufactured outside the U.S.

“These new rules will improve service to the riding public without harming the industry, as the plaintiffs allege,” Kate O’Brien Ahlers, a spokeswoman for the city’s law department, said in an e-mailed statement. “We believe the suit lacks merit.”

Also sued were the New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission, its commissioner, David Yassky, and Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the majority owner of Bloomberg News’s parent company.

The case is Committee for Taxi Safety v. City of New York, 12104315-2012, Supreme Court of the State of New York (Manhattan).
_____________________________________________________________________________

Wait, let's look at this. HAD to be drafted by someone with a 4th-grade education.

Nissan NV200 is untested in city stop-and-go traffic

Really? They've been running in city stop-and-go traffic in Japan and Europe since early 2009, almost 4 years. They're also seeing heavy use in China, India, Indonesia, and countless other countries, including the US.

Nissan NV200 uses outdated engineering, design and technology

Really? As compared to the Checker Marathon, which has remained virtually unchanged since 1956. The LAST Checker was built in 1982, THIRTY years ago.

NYC also uses the ubiquitous Ford Crown Victoria... a vehicle that has remained substantially similar since 1992, TWENTY years ago. It's not fuel-efficient, it's not accessible to all riders, and surveyed passengers said the ride isn't as comfortable as other cars.

Nissan NV200 doesn’t employ hybrid or electric power

No, but it gets 25+ mpg, certainly far better than the Crown Vic or the old Checker... The electric version of the e-NV200 is expected to be available by 2017, possibly sooner for the NYC taxi fleet.

There's a historical disconnect here as well: In May 2007, Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed a plan to switch to more fuel-efficient hybrid vehicles as part of an agenda to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, the plan was dropped after Cab companies complained that the cost of maintaining the new hybrid vehicles vastly outweighed the tiny amount of fuel savings they got from going smaller.

Nissan NV200 wouldn’t be able to withstand years of cab usage

Cab drivers aren't automotive engineers, and they sure don't have a crystal ball. The current New York City taxi fleet is comprised of 16 different vehicles from nine manufacturers (sedans, minivans and SUVs). NONE were purpose-built or specifically designed to be a taxi. They were all outfitted by third parties and local garages to conform to TLC's taxicab specifications.

Nissan NV200 would require replacement parts manufactured outside the U.S.

Actually, this much might be true. The NV200 is built in Mexico. However, the Crown Victoria was built in Canada. Not quite seeing the problem here.

Yep. I'm no attorney, but this suit lacks merit.

Here's an article about the process of selecting the future taxi vehicles for NYC.

http://www.nissanusa.com/innovations/ta ... ticle.html

[MinisterofDOOM]

The "outdated technology" comment nearly killed me by laughter asphyxiation. Body-on-frame, solid-axle Crown Vics and Checkers feature SUPER MODERN HYBRID POWER!

Also, since when is hybrid technology the end-all, be-all of taxicabs? Sure, you might gain a few MPG INITIALLY, but anyone operating a cab company should have long-term operating costs in mind. Batteries and extra complexity of Hybrids do NOT bode well in that respect.

However, I COMPLETELY agree with the complaint that the private taxi company operators are locked out of choice by someone else's politics. That's pretty solid horsepucky.

[krash]

It IS kind of dumb that everyone HAS to use this car though.

[Coupefinger]

I'm sure all the taxi drivers just don't want to spend more money. It is very reasonable to make this car a taxi however I wish they would mandate all taxis are manufactured in the US. This is just the country taking away a money/job making opportunity

[AZhitman]

The drivers won't spend more money. The cab companies should do quite well, considering the costs of fuel will be lower, maintenance should be less, and their fares will be more satisfied (and therefore, tip more).

As I understand it, ALL manufacturers had an opportunity to compete for the business... I'd be more upset with GM / Chrysler for not even TRYING. (Ford built an entrant, but it was the runner-up.) So, I don't think anyone "took away" an opportunity. I'm sure the UAW would have screwed the whole thing up anyway... maybe it's best they DIDN'T compete.

I'm wondering if any "domestic" vehicles that could have won are even built in the US. Most are more foreign-sourced than the "foreign" manufacturer offerings.

[MinisterofDOOM]

As I understand it, ALL manufacturers had an opportunity to compete for the business... I'd be more upset with GM / Chrysler for not even TRYING.

Yeah, but restricted choice isn't good for anyone.

I'm wondering if any "domestic" vehicles that could have won are even built in the US. Most are more foreign-sourced than the "foreign" manufacturer offerings.

An article I read a while back noted that Ford's Transit Connect offering is Canadian-manufactured. I don't think GM or Chrysler even played.

[AZhitman]

Right. They didn't even try. So, the cabbies should blame GM and Chrysler.

Keep in mind, I think Bloomberg is, in general, a loon. But this was done on the up-and-up, and was a two-year process, WITH input from cabbies, New Yorkers, and the automobile industry.

Instead, they'll sue the city they supposedly love and serve, taking money out of the public coffers to defend this silliness, to what end?

Hell, most of the cabbies don't even know what they're whining about - they haven't even driven one yet.

[MinisterofDOOM]

But this was done on the up-and-up, and was a two-year process, WITH input from cabbies, New Yorkers, and the automobile industry.

Can't argue much with that. Puts it into perspective.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

FYI- Most auto industries are switching from an emphasis on "US produced/sourced" to "North American produced/sourced". So that includes Mexico and Canada. I've been noticing it a lot lately just reading through random new vehicle announcements. Its sort of something they are trying to do to gain public support while "sneaking under the radar".
It helps that a lot of production is coming back to North America. A land where the currency (yen) isn't as strong, and shipping can be done by rail or truck.

[AZhitman]

Yep. Noticing that as well in a lot of the automotive industry publications I subscribe to.

[Dattebayo]

It IS kind of dumb that everyone HAS to use this car though.

There are plenty of other companies other than NYC Taxi in the city.

Yeah, but restricted choice isn't good for anyone.

Tell that to the billion-or-so Apple products users. For some people it's all about the brand, despite the limitations. Did I mention people are stupid mostly?
I believe in using a product or vehicle for what it's good for. I have no idea why a taxi company would want a fleet full of vans running around, it doesn't make sense to me at all.

[Jesda]

It's ridiculous that they're told what to buy within such a limited selection, but they're wrong about the vehicle's capability.

Yeah, but restricted choice isn't good for anyone.

Tell that to the billion-or-so Apple products users. For some people it's all about the brand, despite the limitations. Did I mention people are stupid mostly?
I believe in using a product or vehicle for what it's good for. I have no idea why a taxi company would want a fleet full of vans running around, it doesn't make sense to me at all.

Consumers individually choose Apple, quite voluntarily. Your comparison makes no sense.

[themadscientist]

Forcing people to buy one type of car, typical HYC bull s***

[Dattebayo]

Consumers individually choose Apple, quite voluntarily. Your comparison makes no sense.

Sure it does. NYC Taxi voluntarily chose Nissan.

[krash]

Consumers individually choose Apple, quite voluntarily. Your comparison makes no sense.

Sure it does. NYC Taxi voluntarily chose Nissan.

No it doesn't. The proper comparison would be you forcing your whole family to only use Apple products.

[Dattebayo]

Taxi drivers are not individual consumers. They work for the company, and they can only do it a couple of ways:

They can either purchase the rights to use the name of the cab company, insurance and make use of their dispatch services (while using a company approved car, of course), -OR- they can rent the whole kit-and-kaboodle for a daily fee. Either way, they are contract employees unless they are sole owner-operators of their own company (in which case the whole thing doesn't matter...)

[MinisterofDOOM]

Either way, they are contract employees unless they are sole owner-operators of their own company (in which case the whole thing doesn't matter...)

It actually still does matter, because of the way NYC taxi licensing works. The city offers a limited number of "medallions" for taxi operators. Anyone who wants a medallion must conform to the City's requirements. Which means no buying your own fleet of used Crown Vics and calling yourself a taxi company. They use this to enforce things like handicap-accessibility. But it also enforces this single-vehicle "deal."

This is how I understand it, at least. I could be wrong.

I'm not sure if other livery/chauffer services use the medallion system as well, though, so you might be able to use that as a loophole.

[AZhitman]

You're pretty close on all that, Chris. The Wiki article on "New York Taxi" contains some good insight.

The point, which remains uncontested, is the cab drivers have collectively filed a suit that has little to no merit. I'm no attorney,. and I'm well aware that there are details and nuances that could challenge my "caveman" knowledge of such matters... but on its face, this suit is silly.

Speaking of silly, Bloomberg is still a dipstick and an enemy of individual liberties.

[Dattebayo]

my "caveman" knowledge

hah!

Speaking of silly, Bloomberg is still a dipstick and an enemy of individual liberties.

I can't believe they ever passed the soda thing.

[300ZXttZMAN]

Wow I bet the guy that said all that stuff about NV (most of which is false) drives a Prius. Smh

[Jesda]

Consumers individually choose Apple, quite voluntarily. Your comparison makes no sense.

Sure it does. NYC Taxi voluntarily chose Nissan.

No, a better comparison would be your town or HOA telling you to buy only from Apple.

[Dattebayo]

Sure it does. NYC Taxi voluntarily chose Nissan.

No, a better comparison would be your town or HOA telling you to buy only from Apple.

Fine. Honestly, you knew where I was going with it. Do you really have to push the "I don't understand" button when you clearly knew where it was going? Ugh...

[Jesda]

Fine. Honestly, you knew where I was going with it.

Nowhere logical.

[hannibal]

What i dont get is why there is just one single vehicle qualified to be a NYC cab. I can see them adding or removing vehicles from the "allowed" list, but why restrict it to just one model?

[AZhitman]

Not sure what the thinking behind that was, but the Taxi Commission made that determination. Probably to ensure 100% compliance with ADA and other requirements (EPA stuff, other Fed stipulations, etc).

[PapaSmurf2k3]

Maybe its like how london only has those red phone booths?

[AZhitman]

Well, I can speculate, but it would make more sense to simply ask someone at the TC (where's our roving reporters? )

Uniformity is always a plus (for a ton of reasons)... Convenience to the public, compliance with federal law, reduced costs due to uniform maintenance, training of repair staff, parts sourcing, etc., plus there's economy of scale with purchases like this. All guesses, but I'm sure they play a role.

[AZhitman]

Another interesting twist on this matter... get your popcorn!

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/ ... new-taxis/

[MinisterofDOOM]

It never fails: New York is always there to assuage my doubts just when I start feeling like I can't hate things any more than I already do.

[AZhitman]

I was hoping NY and CA would secede, but then I'd have to update my passport to go to JCCS.