Uber Technologies has pledged to eliminate carbon emissions and “unnecessary” plastic waste from its growing delivery business by 2040, bringing it in line with goals at its ride-hailing arm.
The ride-hailing company said 100% of food delivery trips will be emission-free globally in 2040, with an earlier target of 2030 in European cities, enabled by regional policies. It also pledged to scrap all of what it called “unnecessary” plastic from deliveries globally by 2030 and to eliminate 80% by 2025 in Europe and Asia-Pacific.
CEO Dara Khosrowshahi is set to announce last week at an event in London on Thursday.
Pollution, which includes waste from takeout meals, is helping destroy marine species and habitats
Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi
“With the scale we have globally, it’s just a responsibility on our shoulders,” said Uber Delivery senior vice president Pierre-Dimitri Gore-Coty. Uber Eats has 890 000 sellers in more than 30 countries, including South Africa. At least 14 million tons of plastic waste ends up in the ocean every year, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature. That pollution, which includes waste from takeout meals, is helping destroy marine species and habitats, and contributes to climate change.
Uber is better-known for the ride-hailing side of its business, but during pandemic lockdowns its takeout and grocery-delivery arm surged and in 2022 made up 44% of sales. That said, the passenger car service is responsible for more emissions proportionally because the average journey is longer and uses a four-wheeled vehicle, while short two-wheeler trips are more common for deliveries.
Uber committed in 2020 to eliminate ride emissions by 2030 in Europe, the US and Canada and 2040 globally, a goal which it said would cost the company US$800-million by 2025. That same money will help pay for the new delivery emissions goal, while an extra as-yet unquantified pot of money will be spent on the packaging pledge, a spokesman said.
“We’re taking the hit,” Khosrowshahi said. “We have to make it economically sensible for drivers. So, for example, our take rate on electric rides is lower because right now generally EVs cost more than combustion engines.”
Uber is far from guaranteed to hit all its green targets. It’s also measuring the emissions “from the tailpipe”, for instance, not including the carbon cost of generating the electricity needed to power vehicles. The World Wildlife Fund and Closed Loop Partners will consult on Uber’s progress.
San Francisco-based Uber will encourage its couriers to switch to bicycles, electric bikes or mopeds, and electric cars. It’s partnered with electric bike-sharing and charging companies HumanForest, Zoomo, Gogoro and Gachaco to secure better prices, and will also extend its US vehicle partnerships, including a rental programme with Hertz Global Holdings for Tesla electric cars.
Green packaging often costs as much as a third more than single-use wrapping, Gore-Coty said. He said Uber’s aiming to close the gap and has partnered with distribution company Bunzl in Europe to secure discounts for restaurants. Users will be able to choose restaurants and merchants based on green packaging in a new feature launching this week in London, Amsterdam, Paris, New York, San Francisco and Taipei.
Some foods, such as ramen, will prove trickier to transport without plastic, Gore-Coty acknowledged.
Kelechi Deca
Kelechi Deca has over two decades of media experience, he has traveled to over 77 countries reporting on multilateral development institutions, international business, trade, travels, culture, and diplomacy. He is also a petrol head with in-depth knowledge of automobiles and the auto industry
Global leading ride-hailing company Uber plans to launch two new services in Nigeria. The company is working on launching Uber Connect and Uber Hourly in Nigeria in the “next few months,” the company said at the just concluded Go Get global consumer event. Speaking on the development, Tope Akinwumi, Uber’s Country Manager said that “We want to bring innovations designed to help people get anywhere and get anything as cities start to move again.”
Tope Akinwumi, Uber’s Country Manager
“As we want to show our commitment to improving the lives of Nigerians, and more importantly, unlocking access to earning opportunities for drivers, we believe this announcement is a step in the right direction.”
Uber Hourly is an alternative to on-demand, point-to-point trips that will provide riders added convenience with no need to re-book their ride.
It enables riders to book rides by the hour, providing them with a single driver for their entire journeys and unlimited stops along the way.
“Hourly already launched in several cities around the world including Dar es Salaam and based on those insights and the warm reception from both riders and drivers, we’re excited to bring this to Nigeria,” Akinwumi said.
“We built this feature for those moments when you anticipate you’ll need extra time getting things done, and so drivers can access a meaningful earnings opportunity while “locking in” an upfront time frame for the service provided,” adds Akinwumi.
Uber Connect leverages Uber’s logistics technology and network to provide people with a quick and affordable way to send packages to friends and family using the Uber app. Akinwumi explains, “The agility of our platform allows us to quickly adapt our products to meet the evolving needs of communities impacted by the health crisis while experimenting with new revenue streams and earning opportunities for drivers.”
Uber Connect is already available in Ghana, South Africa and Kenya, including other countries across the globe.
Kelechi Deca
Kelechi Deca has over two decades of media experience, he has traveled to over 77 countries reporting on multilateral development institutions, international business, trade, travels, culture, and diplomacy. He is also a petrol head with in-depth knowledge of automobiles and the auto industry
Uber is expanding its software as a service (SaaS) business with three additional public transit partnerships in a pilot project starting off in the United States, and may be replicated in other parts of the world. The ride-hailing company announced that it would be selling the software that powers its ride-hailing business to transit agencies in Denver, Colorado; Cecil County, Maryland; and Porterville, California. The news comes amid Uber’s broader push into public transit.
Uber
Denver’s Regional Transportation District will start using Uber’s management software this week to manage its fleet of wheelchair-accessible vehicles, while Cecil Transit and Porterville Transit will follow in the weeks to come. For a subscription fee, these transit agencies will be able to use Uber’s “matching and marketplace technology to facilitate on-demand community rides using their own transit fleet,” the company says.
Uber announced its first transit deal with Marin County in the San Francisco Bay Area in July 2020. As part of that deal, the Transportation Authority of Marin pays Uber a subscription fee to use its software to facilitate requesting, matching, and tracking its vehicle fleet. Cape May County in New Jersey is also a customer of Uber’s SaaS program.
Starting in late April, Ceil Transit will use Uber’s software to transport “riders in recovery seeking access to employment, essential services, appointments, and recovery programs,” Uber says. The service area is a closed loop.
Porterville Transit, based between Fresno and Bakersfield, will roll out transit vehicles with Uber’s software to members of its community in early May. Porterville previously had used a software company called Transloc, which is owned by Ford, but switched to Uber for “enhanced reliability.”
Over the years, Uber has been accused of directly competing with and poaching riders from subways, trains, and buses. Declining bus and subway ridership has been pegged to the rise of app-based ride-hailing in dozens of cities across the US. Recently, Uber has added transit directions and ticketing to its app in some cities in the hopes that by giving transit equal footing in its app, it can blunt that criticism. It also acquired an Atlanta-based company called Routematch, which sells software to public transit agencies for data management, dispatching, trip booking, and ticketing.
Last year, Uber announced it would begin selling train and bus tickets through its app for customers in Denver. Since then, the company has integrated public transportation schedules and directions into its app for over a dozen other cities. Less than a year later, Uber says that “over 2 million riders” have tried Uber Transit.
Kelechi Deca
Kelechi Deca has over two decades of media experience, he has traveled to over 77 countries reporting on multilateral development institutions, international business, trade, travels, culture, and diplomacy. He is also a petrol head with in-depth knowledge of automobiles and the auto industry
Uber is facing a new battle that may affect its business model globally. Just after its recent taw in a long drawn battle with British authorities, Uber is facing another challenge as its use of facial recognition technology for a driver identity system is being challenged in the United Kingdom where unions are calling on Microsoft to suspend Uber’s use of B2B facial recognition.
Uber
The British App Drivers & Couriers Union (ADCU) and Worker Info Exchange (WIE) are up in arms against the app after finding multiple cases where drivers were mis-identified and went on to have their licence to operate revoked by Transport for London (TfL). The union said it has identified seven cases of “failed facial recognition and other identity checks” leading to drivers losing their jobs and licence revocation action by TfL.
When Uber launched the “Real Time ID Check” system in the U.K. in April 2020, it said it would “verify that driver accounts aren’t being used by anyone other than the licensed individuals who have undergone an Enhanced DBS check”. It said then that drivers could “choose whether their selfie is verified by photo-comparison software or by our human reviewers”.
In one misidentification case the ADCU said the driver was dismissed from employment by Uber and his licence was revoked by TfL. The union adds that it was able to assist the member to establish his identity correctly, forcing Uber and TfL to reverse their decisions. But it highlights concerns over the accuracy of the Microsoft facial recognition technology — pointing out that the company suspended the sale of the system to U.S. police forces in the wake of the Black Lives Matter protests of last summer.
Research has shown that facial recognition systems can have an especially high error rate when used to identify people of color — and the ADCU cites a 2018 MIT study that found Microsoft’s system can have an error rate as high as 20% (accuracy was lowest for dark-skinned women).
The union said it’s written to the mayor of London to demand that all TfL private-hire driver licence revocations based on Uber reports using evidence from its Hybrid Real Time Identification systems are immediately reviewed. The ADCU said Uber rushed to implement a workforce electronic surveillance and identification system as part of a package of measures implemented to regain its license to operate in the U.K. capital.
Back in 2017, TfL made the shocking decision not to grant Uber a licence renewal — ratcheting up regulatory pressure on its processes and maintaining this hold in 2019 when it again deemed Uber “not fit and proper” to hold a private hire vehicle licence. Safety and security failures were a key reason cited by TfL for withholding Uber’s licence renewal.
Uber has challenged TfL’s decision in court and it won another appeal against the licence suspension last year — but the renewal granted was for only 18 months (not the full five years). It also came with a laundry list of conditions — so Uber remains under acute pressure to meet TfL’s quality bar.
Now, though, Labor activists are piling pressure on Uber from the other direction too — pointing out that no regulatory standard has been set around the workplace surveillance technology that the ADCU says TfL encouraged Uber to implement. No equalities impact assessment has even been carried out by TfL, it adds. WIE confirmed that it’s filing a discrimination claim in the case of one driver, called Imran Raja, who was dismissed after Uber’s Real ID check — and had his licence revoked by TfL.
His licence was subsequently restored — but only after the union challenged the action. A number of other Uber drivers who were also misidentified by Uber’s facial recognition checks will be appealing TfL’s revocation of their licences via the U.K. courts, per WIE. A spokeswoman for TfL told us it is not a condition of Uber’s licence renewal that it must implement facial recognition technology — only that Uber must have adequate safety systems in place.
Kelechi Deca
Kelechi Deca has over two decades of media experience, he has traveled to over 77 countries reporting on multilateral development institutions, international business, trade, travels, culture, and diplomacy. He is also a petrol head with in-depth knowledge of automobiles and the auto industry
In Kenya, rider-hailing drivers are excited. The same in South Africa. But not in the same way. In South Africa, the lines of litigant drivers are gaining distance, stretching out their elasticity. There, two law firms have inhaled some inspiration from the recent judgment of the highest court of the United Kingdom, sitting at Parliament Square, against Uber. The judgment is simple in summary: if you control drivers, they are your subordinates; and if they are your subordinates, they are your workers, not independent contractors, not any other jargons.
Uber
But even the two law firms in South Africa are different. One, Leigh Day, the renowned law firm that triggered Uber’s ordeals in UK courts — with offices in Birmingham, Chesterfield, Liverpool, London, Manchester, Newcastle — wants to migrate to South Africa, by way of assistance— allowed to do so as long as its lawyers are licensed in South Africa. The other, Mbuyisa Moleele Attorneys, based in Johannesburg’s capital and famous for the gold miners’ case, wants to lead the protest from home. The common agenda has since been set: to reclassify all South African Uber drivers as workers and not independent contractors. Therefore, they are headed for the Johannesburg Labour Court, in a class action suit.
“South African legislation relating to employment status and rights — the Labour Relations Act and the Basic Conditions of Employment Act — is very similar to UK employment law,” the two firms said in a joint statement.
“Furthermore, Uber operates a similar system in South Africa, with drivers using an app, which the UK Supreme Court concluded resulted in drivers’ work being ‘tightly defined and controlled’ by Uber,” they added.
But then, it is still a long journey from here…
Between South Africa and Kenya, there is remarkable difference on how the battle is being fought. In Kenya, it is the country’s minister of Labour and Social Protection, Simon Chelugui, who is drawing out the dagger. This week Tuesday, the issue became so overpowering that he had to call a meeting. The drivers, mostly of Uber, were bearing banners; the stage was set. But what came next was neither a rude shock nor a big relief: just some form of speaking from both sides of the mouth.
“The ruling in London on Friday, does not apply to our jurisdiction,”Chelugui said, glancing over the drivers. “We can only reference, it can only persuade us, but we cannot act on it as a country.”
And then creepily, aiming towards the rapid surge in ride-hailing apps in Kenya, he sought a balance in his statements.
“The labor laws on internet based services have not been properly developed,” he said, “and we will need an engagement as a ministry to develop regulations and guidelines on how to run such an economy.”
And that was the end, but the beginning of a new chapter.
If Drivers Kill Ride-Hailing Apps, What Would Be Left For Them?
In South Africa, Uber has been quick to issue a rather lengthy statement initiating this discussion.
“At a time when we need more jobs, not fewer, we believe Uber and other platforms can be a bridge to a sustainable economic recovery. Uber has already produced thousands of sustainable economic opportunities,” the statement reads in part.
By October 2019, there were already 13,000 active drivers in South Africa and each of them had completed 38775 trips since Uber set its foot in the country in 2013. In Kenya, the number is 12,000 drivers as at November, 2020. In Nigeria, it is 9000 as at 2018. In Egypt, 200,000 as at 2020, since it was launched in Cairo in 2014.
Now, torn between these metrics and a fair life, the drivers have found themselves floundering in a deep blue sea of choosing to quit or to stay while responding to perpetual rounds of ride-hailing requests mindlessly.
“I am suffering but those who are suffering the most are those who depend on earning a living as a ride-hailing driver using a car purchased on installments,” Hani Al-Sawi, an Egyptian Uber driver, who was working with his own private car told Ahramonline last year.
“Their revenue cannot cover operating costs, due installments, and their need for a livelihood, and so they have sold their cars to pay the installments and are now looking for another job,” added Abdel-Aziz, another Uber driver.
Last year November, Tony West, Uber’s senior vice-president, said as one of Uber’s top 10 markets globally, Egypt is “one of the most important markets for the US-based ride-sharing company in the Middle East.” His statement is evident in the $3.1bn acquisition of Careem, Uber’s Middle Eastern rival in the ride-hailing business.
Across the sea to Kenya, the stories are the same for drivers. Starting from 2016 through 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and now 2021, it has been endless strikes and protests for all digital taxi drivers.
“The fare prices keep on reducing because of the competition with other apps,” Denis, an Uber driver was quoted as saying during the 2018 protest. “ In the long run, it is us, the partners and drivers, who are losing. We are being oppressed,”
Paul Oyer, Stanford Graduate School of Business professor, who has written extensively about the gig economy, believes this.
“It doesn’t make a lot of sense to go out and invest a lot of money in a car for the sake of driving it for Uber — there isn’t enough money to be made for your time and the costs of car ownership,” he said.
Comparing Africa‘s attempt to regulate Uber, other ride-hailing companies with the rest of the world. Source: — Daily Mail
Redesigning A Model Free From Excessive Control
One thing is certain from all these: the days of excessive controls over drivers by digital ride-hailing companies are numbered, not with the mounting tides of pressure from drivers’ unions.
Therefore, at this stage, one particular element that the entire gig economy, especially the ride-hailing apps should consider while building their products, to run away from this precedent set by the UK’s supreme court is the element of control.
S/N
Types of Control
Conclusions by the UK Supreme Court in Landmark Case, Uber BV and others (Appellants) v Aslam and others (Respondents)
1
Can drivers determine their remuneration, in any way?
No
2
Are contractual terms of engagement with drivers negotiable?
No
3
Do drivers have absolute control over acceptance or cancellation of trip requests?
No
4
Do drivers have a choice of vehicle types, routes they follow?
No
5
Are ratings on drivers by customers used to whip drivers into performance?
Yes
6
Do drivers have any say in communications with riders, regarding pay, complaints, contact details, etc?
No
The element of control in digital ride-hailing services has become so important that it cannot be continued to be ignored. “The greater the extent of such control, the stronger the case for classifying the individual as a “worker” who is employed under a “worker’s contract”.”— the court in the case above stated.
Charles Rapulu Udoh
Charles Rapulu Udoh is a Lagos-based lawyer who has advised startups across Africa on issues such as startup funding (Venture Capital, Debt financing, private equity, angel investing etc), taxation, strategies, etc. He also has special focus on the protection of business or brands’ intellectual property rights ( such as trademark, patent or design) across Africa and other foreign jurisdictions. He is well versed on issues of ESG (sustainability), media and entertainment law, corporate finance and governance. He is also an award-winning writer
Uber drivers kenya Africa Uk Uber drivers kenya Africa Uk Uber drivers kenya Africa Uk
The pressure is mounting, and gradually ride-hailing drivers are questioning the entire construction of the gig economy. Next stop is the UK, after platforms such as Uber and Lyft had a field day in California last year. In a landmark judgment, the highest court of the United Kingdom has ruled that a group of former drivers for Uber Technologies Inc. were entitled to a minimum wage and other benefits while working for the company. Although the case specifically concerns the 25 drivers who instituted a case against Uber a few years ago, the judgment has set a dangerous precedent against the entire gig economy especially in the United Kingdom, where mushrooms of cases could spring up leaning on the court’s latest judgment.
“New ways of working organised through digital platforms pose pressing questions about the employment status of the people who do the work involved. The central question on this appeal is whether an employment tribunal was entitled to find that drivers whose work is arranged through Uber’s smartphone application (“the Uber app”) work for Uber under workers’ contracts and so qualify for the national minimum wage, paid annual leave and other workers’ rights; or whether, as Uber contends, the drivers do not have these rights because they work for themselves as independent contractors, performing services,” Lord Leggatt, noted in the lead judgment.
What Do We Learn From The Court’s Judgment?
While there are so many insights to be gleaned from the judgment, the following points stand out:
From California To The UK, The Central Question Has Always Remained: Are Gig Workers Really Independent Contractors And Not Employees; And If Not, Why?
Although the UK case has been on for as far back as 2018, it fundamentally asked the same question asked by drivers in the US state of California recently. The question is as to whether drivers, based on the nature of their engagement with Uber, Lyft and others, are not employees but independent contractors.
The Californian controversy started when the state’s parliament passed a law, popularly referred to as Assembly B5, which laid out new rules for classifying a worker as an independent contractor.
Under the rules, for a Californian company to classify a worker as an independent contractor, it must prove three things (you may hear this being called the “ABC Test”). If they can’t, then the worker is treated as an employee.
First, companies must prove that “the worker is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work.” In other words, companies can’t manage contractors the way they would employees. As an example, if a catering hall contracted a chef to prepare food events, but controlled how the chef prepared the food — giving them custom orders from customers, giving a strict schedule for production, and instituting standard procedures — they would likely not satisfy this part of the test.
Second, companies must prove that “the worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business.” This means that a company like Uber has to prove that driving users from location A to location B is outside the company’s usual course of business. Uber said as much in a press release, contending that the company is actually a “technology platform for several different types of digital marketplaces.”
Third, the companies must prove that “the worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed.” For example, an electrician doing contract electrical work is still a contractor. It’s unclear if ride sharing or meal delivery companies will be unable to clear this bar.
Consequently, under the law, all of these independent contractors could earn employee status if the companies can’t satisfy the ABC test.
But the controversies surrounding the new rules have long been laid to rest in California following the success of Proposition 22. Proposition 22, conducted at the same time as the US general elections on November 3, 2020, invited eligible voters in California to vote, for or against, on whether Uber and Lyft be granted an exemption from the law.
Now, the UK case continues on the same trajectory. That is, in arriving at whether Uber drivers are employees and not independent contractors, the court followed almost the same methodology used by lawmakers in California.
It asked whether the drivers could be called employees and not independent contractors under the UK law. After a very strict interpretation of all the applicable laws, it ruled that the drivers are not employees strictly so-called, but workers.
In arriving at this conclusion, the court was assisted by the fact that drivers provide their own car, meaning that they have more control than would most employees over the physical equipment used to perform their work.
The implication of this conclusion — of calling Uber drivers workers — is, therefore, that although the drivers are not entitled to rights available to a full time employee, they are entitled to general rights available to workers under the UK laws— such rights include rights to minimum wage, annual paid leave, among others.
One fundamental element which, however, easily assisted the court in reaching the above conclusion is the element of “control”, which we would consider next.
The Element Of Control Is Uber’s Final Nail In The Coffin
At this stage, one particular element that the entire gig economy, especially the ride-hailing apps — mostly in the UK — should consider while building their products, to run away from this precedent set by the country’s supreme court, is the element of control.
If Uber had been loose around how its controlled drivers using its apps, the latest judgment would have ended up in its favour.
More particularly, the court noted that since Uber:
Controlled the remuneration paid to drivers for the work they do and the drivers have no say in it (other than by choosing when and how much to work);
Controlled the contractual terms on which drivers perform their services;
Controlled the choice of a driver about whether to accept requests for rides once a driver has logged onto the Uber app;
Controlled the driver’s rate of acceptance (and cancellation) of trip requests;
Controlled the types and quality of car that may be used by the drivers;
Controlled communication between passenger and driver to the minimum necessary to perform the particular trip and took active steps to prevent drivers from establishing any relationship with a passenger capable of extending beyond an individual ride;
then it could not be said that Uber’s drivers enjoyed an independent contractor status. Consequently, the court ruled that they are workers.
It Is Interesting To Note That By Comparing Uber’s Case With Other Gig Economy Models, The Court May Have Narrowed The Battle Down To Uber And Its Competitors And Not The Entire Gig Economy Generally
This is one part of the judgment that leaves hope for other gig economy models, which are not Uber or its type of ride-hailing. For those others, the court emphasized the element of choice or freedom as the single most powerful element that defines whether the relationship they maintain with their users is that of an “employee” or an “independent contractor”.
“It is instructive to compare Uber’s method of operation and relationship with drivers with digital platforms that operate as booking agents for suppliers of, for example, hotel or other accommodation. There are some similarities,” the court said. “For example, a platform through which customers can book accommodation is likely to have standard written contract terms that govern its relationships with suppliers and with customers. It will typically handle the collection of payment and deduct a service fee which it fixes. It may require suppliers to comply with certain rules and standards in relation to the accommodation offered. It may handle complaints and reserve the right to determine whether a customer or supplier should compensate the other if a complaint is upheld.”
However, the court noted that such platforms differ from Uber in how they operate in several fundamental ways.
“Customers are offered a choice among a variety of different hotels or other types of accommodation (as the case may be), each with its own distinctive characteristics and location. Suppliers are also responsible for defining and delivering whatever level of service in terms of comfort and facilities etc they choose to offer…They are properly regarded as carrying on businesses which are independent of the platform and as performing their services for the customers who purchase those services and not for the platform,” the court said.
Finally, We Learn That The Fate Of Uber And The Entire Gig Economy Is Almost Always Jurisdictional
This point is noteworthy because what may be classified as “employee” in the UK, may not be so in Brazil, India or even across the states of the United States. It then behooves players in the entire gig economy ecosystem to evaluate their models in light of existing national and local laws applicable to their territories of operations. This will assist them in adapting their products to fulfil existing legislations as well as help them to innovate ahead of potentially bad legislations.
Find out how the gig economy might be interpreted in Africa’s leading economies — Nigeria and South Africa — in light of national labour laws here.
Comparing Africa‘s attempt to regulate Uber, other ride-hailing companies with the rest of the world. Source: — Daily Mail
UK’s Uber And African Ride-hailing Startups — What Is The Likely Fallout Of The Supreme Court’s Judgment?
There are already signs on the wall that UK court’s latest judgment may be replicated in Africa. At least, governments of all major African countries and cities housing the continent’s gig economy ecosystems have spent the past few years caressing and testing their power to make laws which will severely touch tech startups wherever they may be located in the world.
Lagos, Africa’s most valuable startup ecosystem, recently introduced a set of new regulations which took off from August 27, 2020. The regulations, among other things, state that each e-hailing company must pay N8 million ($20.5k) per 1,000 cars as fresh licensing and renewal fees; that the companies will have comprehensive insurance for each driver while the driver is working with them; that a flat fee of N20 ($0.052) per trip, called a Road Improvement Fund, will be levied per trip.
Under South Africa’s National Land Transport Amendment Bill, which has been passed in parliament and sent to South Africa’s president for assent, drivers on car-hailing platforms like Uber and Bolt who do not have operating licenses — not driving licenses — may incur a fine as much as R100 000 ($6000) for those platforms (Uber, Bolt and others), which would definitely be levied against the affected drivers directly or indirectly.
In Ghana, from Uber to Bolt to Yango, drivers who rely on ride-hailing to sustain their livelihoods would start paying a mandatory GHC 60 ($11) annual fee, in addition to their cars undergoing roadworthy tests every six months. Ghana’s Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA), which imposed the GH¢60 ($11) annual fee noted that the guidelines will cover the current ride-hailing platforms like Uber, Bolt, and Yango and will also cover companies who intend to operate ride-hailing platforms in Ghana in the future.
Therefore, it is only a matter of time before African governments’ regulatory attention reaches across to this spectrum. It is also noteworthy that judgments of English courts (UK by implication) are highly persuasive to most courts of former British colonies, a majority of which are in Africa.
The Bottom Line
As startups practicing in this sector, the “control” of gig workers is everything. InDriver is leading by example and may survive the new tests being rolled out across multiple jurisdictions. Its only challenge may be that it is Russian.
Charles Rapulu Udoh
Charles Rapulu Udoh is a Lagos-based lawyer who has advised startups across Africa on issues such as startup funding (Venture Capital, Debt financing, private equity, angel investing etc), taxation, strategies, etc. He also has special focus on the protection of business or brands’ intellectual property rights ( such as trademark, patent or design) across Africa and other foreign jurisdictions. He is well versed on issues of ESG (sustainability), media and entertainment law, corporate finance and governance. He is also an award-winning writer
UK Court ride-hailing Africa UK Court ride-hailing Africa UK Court ride-hailing Africa UK Court ride-hailing Africa UK Court ride-hailing Africa UK Court ride-hailing Africa
The heat is getting intense. Anytime soon, car-hailing companies (such as Uber, Bolt and others) in South Africa and in Nigeria’s most populated city, Lagos, may be in for a tougher set of laws which will regulate their operations.
Fikile Mbalula
‘‘UBER, Taxify, BOLT and others will be regulated by Government.
These amendments seek to provide for e-hailing services regulation, also to empower provinces to undertake new contracts which was absent in the principal Act.
Under South Africa’s National Land Transport Amendment Bill, which has been passed in parliament and sent to South Africa’s president for assent, drivers on car-hailing platforms like Uber and Bolt who do not have operating licences may incur a fine as much as R100 000 ($6000) for those platforms (Uber, Bolt and others).
In Nigerian, under a new set of regulations, which should have been in place from March 1, 2020 (but for some intense lobbying) drivers on ride-hailing platforms are required to have LASDRI card and a driver badge issued by the Department of Public Transport and Commuter Services of the Ministry of Transport.
In Ghana, from Uber to Bolt to Yango, drivers who rely on ride-hailing to sustain their livelihood would start paying a mandatory GHC 60 ($11) annual fees for ride-hailing platforms in the country, in addition to their cars undergoing roadworthy tests every six months.
Image for: South Africa issues notice to regulate Uber, others
Here Are The New Regulations In Details
South Africa
Under Section 66A of the Amendment Bill, e-hailing services are now expressly mandated to protect consumers using their platforms. According to the new law, e-hailing or technology-enabled ride-hailing companies must — (a) have the facility to estimate fares and distances, taking into account distance and time, and must communicate the estimate to passengers in advance electronically; (b) communicate the final fare to the passenger or passengers at the conclusion of the trip electronically, and (c) provide the prescribed details of the driver of the vehicle to the passenger or passengers electronically.
Where a person conducts a business providing an e-hailing software application, that person — (a) may not permit an operator to use that application for a vehicle for which the operator does not hold a valid operating licence or permit for the vehicle, or whose operating licence or permit has lapsed or been cancelled, and (b) must disconnect the e-hailing application immediately and keep it disconnected until a valid operating licence has been obtained for the vehicle.
Consequently,operating an e-hailing service without the proper operating license or permit could result in a fine not exceeding R100 000 or a period of imprisonment not exceeding two years.
The law also empowers provincial regulatory authorities in South Africa to withdraw or suspend an operating licence from an operator which has contravened the National Land Transport Act or the Roads Traffic Act.
Image for: These are examples of ride-sharing startups in Africa, (including Uber) the laws seek to regulate
Nigeria: Lagos
Although Nigeria as a country is still silent on regulating the activities of ride-hailing companies, Lagos, the most populated city in the country is reportedly mulling a set of local regulations targeting car-hailing companies operating within the city. As reported by local news media:
Under the proposed new regulations, drivers on ride-hailing platforms are required to have LASDRI card and a driver badge issued by the Department of Public Transport and Commuter Services of the Ministry of Transport.
The vehicles on such platforms must also have permits issued by the Lagos State Motor Vehicle Administration Agency and be fitted with a tag to be issued by the said department of transport.
The new regulations will also mandate third-party operators like Uber and Bolt to pay N10 million naira ($27k) and an annual renewal fee of N5 million ($13.5k) if they have less than 1000 drivers.
Third-party operators that have more than 1000 drivers will pay N25 million ($67.8k) licensing fee and N10 million annual renewal fee.
Operators who directly own their cars and employ their drivers will pay only the license fee of N5 million if such operators have below 50 drivers.
Those who have more than 50 drivers will pay N10 million for the operating license.
Under the new regulation, the state government will also earn 10% on the fee of each trip.
The new regulation (if it ever comes into effect) is coming on the heels of the Lagos state government ban on commercial tricycles and motorcycles, popularly known as okada from operating in six local governments — Apapa, Eti-Osa, Ikeja, Lagos Island, Lagos Mainland and Surulere.
Image for: Comparing Africa ‘s attempt to regulate Uber, others with the rest of the world. Source: — Daily Mail
Ghana
In Ghana, drivers who rely on ride-hailing to sustain their livelihood would start paying a mandatory GHC 60 ($11) annual fees for ride-hailing platforms in the country, in addition to their cars undergoing roadworthy tests every six months. Ghana’s Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA), which imposed the GH¢60 ($11) annual fee noted that the guidelines will cover the current ride-hailing platforms like Uber, Bolt, and Yango and will also cover companies who intend to operate ride-hailing platforms in Ghana in the future.
The fee is being imposed as part of new guidelines introduced by the Ministry of Transport, National Road Safety Commission, and the MTTD of Ghana Police Service.
In addition to the annual fee, owners of vehicles who use ride-hailing platforms will have to obtain a registration certificate at the Digital Transport Center at DVLA’s Headquarters in Cantonments for “verification and authentication.”
The DVLA also stated that ride-hailing cars must undergo roadworthy examinations and certifications every six months, making it twice a year roadworthy renewal.
Under the new guidelines, only vehicle owners can be represented by for purposes of such examinations and certifications. The representative must however go along with a duly signed Power of Attorney document as well as a valid national ID document.
Thereafter, a special sticker will be issued to vehicles that have completed this process to be pasted “on the windscreen at all times.”
On the other hand, drivers would have to be present at the Digital Transport Center themselves for their verification and authentication.
“Unlike in the case of the vehicle owner, the driver must be physically present for this activity…..Drivers must ensure that, at all times, they possess a valid Driver’s Licence,” Ghana’s Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA) noted in a statement.
The Authority also added that companies that operate the digital transport platforms must only work with drivers who have been verified by the DVLA.
“Once you are signed on, only verified and approved vehicles and drivers must be enrolled on your platform…The DVLA data system becomes the only valid source for verifying the authenticity of a driver’s license or a vehicle’s registration. Submit quarterly reports in the form as agreed with the Authority.”
The Bottom Line
Regulating ride-hailing companies such as Uber, Bolt and others in Africa is a step in the right direction provided such regulations only serve to establish a standard framework for the operations of those companies, and not to impose excessive levies and taxes or create monopolies to discourage innovation as it presently appears to be the case in the city of Lagos, Nigeria.
Charles Rapulu Udoh
Charles Rapulu Udoh is a Lagos-based lawyer who has advised startups across Africa on issues such as startup funding (Venture Capital, Debt financing, private equity, angel investing etc), taxation, strategies, etc. He also has special focus on the protection of business or brands’ intellectual property rights ( such as trademark, patent or design) across Africa and other foreign jurisdictions.
He is well versed on issues of ESG (sustainability), media and entertainment law, corporate finance and governance.
He is also an award-winning writer.
He could be contacted at udohrapulu@gmail.com
With the series of regulatory clampdown it is suffering in some matured markets, the leading ride-hailing company Uber is hastening efforts to open up services in Africa especially as competitors are fast at its heels. To this end, it expanded its operations in West Africa with the launch in Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire. A moved observers say is overdue, especially with Abidjan’s metropolitan status and presence of Africa’s premier development financial institution, the African Development Bank (AfDB).
Alon Lits, Uber’s general manager for sub-Saharan Africa
According to Uber, Abidjan, a commercial hub of nearly 5 million people, was a “perfect fit” adding that more than 50,000 people had tried to use its app there in the past year. “This means that for the thousands of taxi operators in Abidjan, there will be new clients for every single driver, in addition to the number they already have now,” Alon Lits, Uber’s general manager for sub-Saharan Africa, said.
With this entrance into Cote d’Ivoire, Uber is now in three West African countries after its initial launch in Nigeria, and later in Ghana. Abidjan now brings to 16, the number of cities with Uber services across sub-Saharan Africa. This means that for the thousands of taxi operators in Abidjan, there will be new clients for every single driver; in addition to the number they already have now.
There are also plans to launch in Dakar Senegal hopefully by 2020. Market watchers say that Uber wants to cover as much grounds as it could especially with Bolt coming up with nerve wrecking competition in Africa. Moreso, in places in Nigeria, there are other local competitions springing up some of which may venture outside Nigeria soonest, posing bigger threats to Uber’s market share.
Uber has experimented with new services in Africa, including ferries across the lagoon in Nigeria’s traffic-clogged megacity of Lagos, in a bid to woo the continent’s fast-growing population. This opens the door for Uber to innovate according to specific market needs.
Kelechi Deca has over two decades of media experience, he has traveled to over 77 countries reporting on multilateral development institutions, international business, trade, travels, culture, and diplomacy. He is also a petrol head with in-depth knowledge of automobiles and the auto industry
The world’s largest e-hailing firm, Uber has said that Africa is principal to its growth expansion plans inspite of concerns about profitability, noting that the company sees a very bright future in the continent. To this end,Uber has promised that it is firmly committed to the African market because it holds huge prospects for its growth strategy inspite of the growing competition by both global brands and emerging local services. With 2.7 million active monthly riders and just over 59,000 drivers, Uber says its commitment to the African market remains undaunted.
Since taking the plunge into Africa in 2013 with its first e-hailing service in Johanessburg South Africa, Uber has expanded into 14 cities in sub-Saharan Africa while consolidating its grip on major hubs such as Cape Town, Nairobi and Lagos. It has also started moving into ancillary cities such as Benin City in Nigeria, and Kumasi in Ghana with the broadening of its offer beyond the saloon cars that make up most of the markets. Recently it veered off its traditional market of car taxi’s to offer water transportation in Lagos Nigeria which shows its dexterity and ability to make adjustments to meet customer needs. This decision according to the company is because a that a lot is happening in the transit space with things like buses and waterways opening up as potential modes to overcome traffic restrictions and challenges.
The Uberboat Lagos which is in partnership with the Lagos State Waterways Authority and Texas Connection Ferries is available on weekdays for now. It was a child of necessity aimed at helping majority of Lagosians who want to escape the ubiquitous Lagos road traffic snarl. In East Africa, Uber offers the UberBoda, a product allowing riders to hail motorcycle taxis, while UberPoa caters for the humble tuk-tuk (auto rickshaw) market. These flexible offerings show the company’s efforts to meet the expectations of local consumers informed the introduction and were informed by the culture of cash payments in a continent where credit card ownership remains low. This according to Uber was after analyzing feedbacks it got from its riders on the need for an alternative payment system.
The company is aware that with all these changes, and also the fact that it is operating in a continent with more least developed countries (LCD’s) in the world, it will affect its profitability margin in the short to medium term, but with hope that all these innovations and flexible offers will become profitable in the long run. Behind the issue of profitability, the company also face the potential limitations of a commodified taxi product that could be undercut on price by competitors such as Lyft and Bolt (formerly Taxify) which made market watchers to speculate that Uber may eventually develop into an integrated platform for multiple transport and delivery services.
Kelechi Deca
Kelechi Deca has over two decades of media experience, he has traveled to over 77 countries reporting on multilateral development institutions, international business, trade, travels, culture, and diplomacy. He is also a petrol head with in-depth knowledge of automobiles and the auto industry.
David Cohen is the founder and co-CEO of Techstars. He has founded several companies and has invested in hundreds of startups such as Uber, Twilio, SendGrid, FullContact, and Sphero. In total, these investments have gone on to create more than $80 billion in value.
Prior to Techstars, David was a co-founder of Pinpoint Technologies which was acquired by the publicly listed ZOLL Medical Corporation in 1999. Later, David was the founder and CEO of earFeeder, a music service that was sold to SonicSwap. He’s also the co-author (with Brad Feld) of Do More Faster; Techstars Lessons to Accelerate Your Startup.
Techstars today has 49 accelerator programs in 35 cities across 16 countries, including in Paris, Berlin, London, and Lisbon. It invests €72 million into nearly 500 startups annually. Last week, Techstars announced they just raised €38 million to accelerate even more startups in Europe and across the globe. Good timing for an interview with Techstars founder and co-CEO David Cohen.
David, please take us back to the very beginning of Techstars. How did it all start and how did the Techstars model change over time?
Brad Feld, David Brown, Jared Polis and I started Techstars in order to create a better way to do early-stage tech investments as well as to improve our local startup community in Boulder, Colorado. I pitched Brad Feld on the concept early on and he committed to invest in our first 10-minute meeting.
We then recruited experienced mentors and in our first year had 302 applicants. Of that first group of 10 companies, 5 had successful exits (and one of the other five is still thriving today).
We then began scaling the platform to what you see today, given the impact on the communities and the success of the approach. In 2012 we increased the amount of capital we invest per company to today’s figures and started doing corporate partnerships (our first one was with Microsoft to power their Kinect and Azure accelerators).
Today we work with around 100 corporate partners. In the last year or so, we’ve launched several new products alongside our accelerators like Techstars Studio, Techstars Talent, and Techstars Ecosystem Development.
Can you share some numbers about the current state of Techstars? Like a number of startups, raised capital, number of exits, etc?
See techstars.com/companies — it’s always up to date — we’re very transparent here. Skip past the top 50 companies to see stats. At the moment, about 7.9 billion in capital raised. 186 exits by M&A/IPO. 1,759 companies that finished Techstars (another few hundred in programs now globally). Their enterprise value is about 22 billion. Check the page mentioned for more stats/data.
What differentiates Techstars from most other accelerators out there. Why and which startups should apply at Techstars?
Our network is global. We have activity in 120 countries annually, with accelerators in 16 countries. 10,000 mentors. An enormous talent network. I think our track record also differentiates us significantly. And, instead of us trying to fund 100+ startups in one room, we fund just 10 in a consistent model in each community that we participate in.
What would you say are the main differences between the US startup ecosystem and the startup ecosystems in Western Europe? What are some of the major changes you are spotting?
In some cases, there are still significant regulatory differences. We run into challenges in some countries with very high legal costs, challenges with employment structures, etc. These seem to be heading in the right direction, but unfortunately today you still can’t think of the EU as “one market” — there are significant operational complexities to invest throughout Europe that still create challenges. However, it’s amazing to see the growth in early-stage funding that is available — this is quite healthy now.
How important is location for the success of a startup? Would you recommend startups to move to one of Europe’s leading startup hubs like London or Berlin, or maybe even to Silicon Valley?
No. We believe that more and more, great startups are being created everywhere. As long as you have a vibrant startup community, you don’t need to move away. Live where you want to live. This is part of the freedom of entrepreneurship.
You just raised €38 million for Techstars to accelerate even more startups in Europe and across the globe. What are your plans and goals for the next 3 years?
We’ve been consistently profitable since inception which has allowed us to get to the scale that we have today. This cash injection won’t be used to invest in startups (we have $500M AUM to do that), but rather to scale our footprint and product offerings. We’ll certainly want to grow to more European locations over the next few years, perhaps doubling our existing footprint in that timeframe. But we’ll also be offering more resources to our founders and partners, such as Techstars Studio, Techstars Ecosystem Development, and Techstars Talent, in the region.
What is your take on equity crowdfunding as an alternative or additional funding source for startups? Do you think it will become more relevant over the coming years?
I’ve always believed it’s a nice addition and we’re supportive of it. I think it’s reached a more or less steady-state, where some startups are able to add on a bit more capital if they want more of the “crowd” involved.
Could you recommend our readers one or two books that helped you during your entrepreneurial endeavors?
Well, we just released the 2nd edition of “Do More Faster” that I wrote with Brad Feld, and of course new to the Techstars series of books is also “Sell More Faster” by Amos Schwartzfarb. Outside of self-promotion, I’m a huge fan of “The Soul of Money” and “Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance” for entrepreneurs.
Charles Rapulu Udoh is a Lagos-based Lawyer with special focus on Business Law, Intellectual Property Rights, Entertainment and Technology Law. He is also an award-winning writer. Working for notable organizations so far has exposed him to some of industry best practices in business, finance strategies, law, dispute resolution, and data analytics both in Nigeria and across the world.
