Transportation Network Companies & Accessibilty:

How Other Jurisdictions are Navigating Accessibility Issues in an Evolving -For Hire Industry & Ideas for B.C.

Prepared by Daniel Ward for the B.C. Transportation Branch. ii Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility iii

About the Author Acknowledgement

This report stands as my capstone project: the culmination of 24 consecutive months Daniel Ward is a Masters Student at the School of Community and of studying community planning. This project would not have been possible without the Regional Planning (SCARP) located at the University of British Colum- openness and interest of the B.C. Passenger Transportation Branch, specifcally, Registrar bia (UBC), Vancouver, Canada. Prior to attending SCARP, Daniel worked Kristin Vanderkuip, to receive this information and provide assistance along the way. I in the outdoor education feld, combining his passions for the environ- would also like to acknowledge SCARP colleague, Victor Ngo, whose past research on TNC ment, education and working with youth. He completed his Bachelors regulatory frameworks sparked this project idea, and whose initial encouragement motivated at Concordia University in Montreal, Canada, studying political science me to stick with it, and Riley Iwamoto, for helping my report design process progress and urban studies. After graduation, Daniel worked for the City of Van- smoothly. Finally, thank you to my project and academic supervisor, Professor Jordi Honey- couver and the Vancouver School Board, where he helped expand rec- Rosés, for his feedback on the upcoming pages, assistance in helping me develop previous reational opportunities for persons with disabilities and support this project proposals, and excellent support and guidance throughout my time at SCARP. population academically in school. Daniel’s current research interests I am indebted to my friends and family, who have been a source of immense support include: sustainable transportation, community-based social market- through my time at SCARP. In no particular order, thank you to my parents, Doug and Jennifer, ing as a means to encourage sustainable behaviors, and how technolo- for your endless encouragement, Frances, for helping me spark my initial interest in planning gy can foster greater public engagement in planning decisions. Daniel and policy; my sisters, Ariel and Anna for sticking with me so long; and to Brad and Kajsa is also a member of the Persons with Disabilities Advisory Committee at for helping me relax. I also want to thank Vancouver’s most generous landlord, Karen, for the City of Vancouver. slashing my rent during school, allowing me to live within the city; my neighbours, Matt, Dani and Frankie, for being some of the best; and to my part-time roommate, Stanley, for making the water-saving switch from drinking from the toilet to the shower, showing me that even cats can adopt more sustainable behavior. Finally, to my partner Holly, whose support with this project and all others is a constant reminder of how fortunate I am. Disclaimer

Photo Credits

This report was prepared for the British Columbia Passenger Transportation • Cover (modifed): Peter Sinclair, Flickr Branch under the advice and interest of the Registrar, Kristin Vanderkuip. All elements • New Mann Bridge (modifed): Waltersenf (Accessed via Flickr have been produced by a graduate student at the School of Community and Regional • Skytrain Platform: Andrew Ferguson (Accessed via Flickr) Planning located at the University of British Columbia. All policy suggestions and • Orange Wheelchair Accessible Taxi: Accessed via "Wheelchairtravelling.com" opinions do not necessarily refect the views of the Passenger Transportation Branch, the School of Community and Regional Planning or the University British Columbia. All feedback should be directed to Daniel Ward at [email protected]. iv Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility v Table of Contents

About the Author...... II

Disclaimer...... II 6. Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility...... 14 Acknowledgements...... III 6.1The Accessibility Challenge...... 15 6.2 What are TNC's Doing?...... 15 1. Executive Summary...... 6 6.2.1 App Accessibility Features...... 16 6.2.2 Employment for People with Disability...... 16 6.2.3 Accessible Platforms...... 16 2. Introduction...... 7 6.3 What are Other Cities Doing...... 17 2.1 Purpose of the Report...... 8 6.3.1 City of Ottawa...... 17 2.2 Scope...... 8 6.3.2 City of Portland...... 17 3. Research Design...... 8 6.3.3 City of Toronto...... 19 3.1 Methodology...... 8 6.3.4City of Seattle...... 21 3.1.2 Literature Review...... 8 6.3.5 City of Edmonton...... 21 3.1.3 Interviews...... 9 6.3.6 City of Austin...... 22 3.1.4 Focus Group...... 9 7. The Accessibility Challenge in Vancouver...24 3.2 Research Questions...... 9 7.1 Challenges...... 25 3.3 Limitations...... 10 7.2 Strengths...... 26

4. Context...... 10 8. Analaysis and Recommendations...... 27 4.1 in Vancouver...... 10 8.1 Suggested Actions...... 30 4.2 Accessibility Concerns...... 11 8.1.1 Policy (PO)...... 30 4.3 B.C. Vehicle For-Hire Regulatory Context ...... 12 8.1.2 Process (PR)...... 31 4.4 Taxi VS TNC Driver Training...... 12 9. Conclusion...... 34 5. Transportation Network Companies...... 13 6 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 7

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2. INTRODUCTION

The vehicle-for-hire industry has undergone dramatic change in very short Within the last decade, the modern “sharing economy” has developed a ubiquitous presence order. Advances in mobile technologies and the corresponding ascent of the smart- in our everyday lives. People rent nearby to get from A to B, tourists book a stranger’s studio phone have opened up new innovations that allow digital platforms to dynamically apartment for the weekend through Airbnb, and hobbyists crowdsource funding for their latest en- 1 deavor through Kickstarter. While the sharing economy is not new (Craigslist and other non-digital connect spare capacity with those who need it. These changes have spawned com- forums have facilitated the exchange of goods and services for many years), technological change panies like Uber and (also known as transportation network companies or TNCs) has allowed it to evolve into something entirely diferent and at a rapid pace. Between 2015 and and their growing array of services, which have been well received by consumers. For 2025, the valuation of the sharing economy is expected to grow by USD $320 billion to a total of $335 persons with disabilities, however, for whom on-demand transportation options are billion.2 This new iteration of the sharing economy is being driven by the rapid adoption of mobile critical for their engagement in regular activities many non-disabled people take for technologies and the seamless transactions facilitated by companies such as Airbnb and Uber. granted, these new services have received mixed reviews and governments have been A changing consumer culture and corresponding shift in how many people access goods and services has fundamentally transformed the power dynamics between consumers, companies challenged with how to address these concerns in their regulatory overhauls. and government.3 This means traditional regulatory approaches are challenged in intervening and In recognition of this challenge, the B.C. Passenger Transportation Branch addressing what government agencies have determined to be in the public interest. This is most (PTB)—an administrative unit that supports activities relating to the regulation of prominently exemplifed by jurisdictions’ response to the spread of ride-sourcing services such as commercial passenger transportation—partnered with a graduate student (herein UberX around the globe and Lyft in the United States. The regulatory approach that has long ap- referred to as “the researcher”) at the University of British Columbia’s School of Com- plied to the taxi industry to help maintain sufcient service levels, safety, fairness and—in some munity and Regional Planning to study the issue of accessibility and the associated cities—accessibility to persons with disabilities, has proven difcult to transfer over to the new peer-to-peer transportation platforms, e.g. UberX. challenges with the emergence of transportation network companies. As part of the As public opinion continues to lean in favour of an expanded vehicle-for-hire industry PTB’s mandate for policy research, the PTB directed the researcher to survey regulato- that includes TNCs, such as Uber, and technology continues to transform our transportation sys- ry changes that have occurred in other jurisdictions in light of the technological and tem, governments are feeling pressure to examine the topic. In British Columbia, the Ministry of economic changes taking place in the vehicle-for-hire sector and report back regard- Transportation, and major cities, such as the City of Vancouver, have initiated a regulatory review. ing how these jurisdictions have addressed issues associated with accessibility to Amongst the several public interest considerations, accessibility to persons with disabilities in persons with disabilities. The researcher examined six jurisdictions: three in Canada the vehicle-for-hire market has been an important issue on the agenda. Regionally, both the City of Burnaby4 and the City of Vancouver5 have outlined this issue as a crucial consideration moving and in from the United States. In helping frame the issue for B.C. and—more specif- forward. Indeed, it has been a fundamental consideration in regulatory reviews across Canada, ically—the Vancouver metropolitan area context, the researcher conducted primary such as in the City of Edmonton6, London7, Waterloo8, Toronto9 and Ottawa10. Major concerns have research to understand the accessibility challenges in the regional context and to been raised regarding the potential impacts the entrance of TNCs could have on accessible vehi- help frame the topic of accessibility within the for-hire sector. 2 PWC, The Sharing Economy—Sizing the Revenue Opportunity. Accessed May 14: http://www.pwc.co.uk/issues/ megatrends/collisions/sharingeconomy/the-sharing-economy-sizing-the-revenue-opportunity.html This report found a range of approaches and actions in the six cities that were 3 Sunil Johal and Noah Zon, (2015), "Policy Making for the Sharing Economy: Beyond Whack-A- Mole", The Mowat Centre, p.4 . Accessed on March 20, 2016: https://mowatcentre.ca/wp-content/uploads/ studied. Here are some key fndings: publications/106_policymaking_for_the_sharing_economy.pdf • Five out of six cities had policies that included the establishment of a publicly 4 City of Burnaby , (Oct. 22, 2014), "Uber Ride-sharing Service", Memo. Accessed June 1, 2016: https://burnaby. administrated accessibility fund, which would receive revenues from the vehicle- civicweb.net/document/15149/2014%2010%2027%20-%20Uber%20Ride%20Sharing%20Service%20(2).pdf?handle=- 0D3A2835E0894B86ABC9677C427A620B for-hire sector that would be used to improve accessible transportation options. 5 City of Vancouver. (Oct. 15, 2015), "Taxi Service Review and Report Back", Council Report. Accessed March 17. • Half of the cities require TNC’s to provide accessible service. 2016: http://council.vancouver.ca/20151020/docume • Utilization of taxi wheelchair accessible (WAVs) is important to success 6 City of Edmonton, (2016), "Bylaw 17400-Vehicle for Hire Bylaw, Further Revisions", p. 2. Accessed June 1, 2016: http://webdocs.edmonton.ca/siredocs/published_meetings/91/519956.pdf of TNC’s WAV service. 7 City of . G. Kotsifas. P. Eng.. "Vehicles for Hire, New Technologies, 2015", Accessed March 13. 2016: https://www.london.ca/newsroom/Documents/Uber-sept2915.pdf 8 Regional Municipality of Waterloo, (March 29, 2016). Licensing and Hearings Committee. Accessed June 16, 2016: http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalGovernment/resources/License/RM2016-0329.pdf 9 City of Toronto, (2015), Ground Transportation Review, http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2015/ls/bgrd/back- 1 PWC, Consumer Intelligence, The Sharing Economy. Consumer Intelligence Series. Accessed groundfle-83268.pdf March 3, 2016: https://www.pwc.com/us/en/technology/publications/assets/pwc-consumer-intelli- 10 City of Ottawa, (2015) Taxi and Regulation Service Review, Accessed June 3, 2016: http://app05.ottawa. gence-series-the-sharing-economy.pdf ca/sirepub/cache/2/n5o3pop1qhirlv5uplikps42/35380506242016113333622.PDF 8 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 9 cle-for-hire service. disabilities may be impacted by TNC services ongoing and rapid pace jurisdictions around discussions focused on specifc sub-questions to and outline what actions other jurisdictions North America have been working to revamp ultimately help address the main question: “What Change can impact groups in very un- have taken to address accessibility concerns. their regulations to better respond to the new does “great” accessible transportation look like in equal ways. For disadvantaged groups, such as challenges presented by TNCs, news reports and Metro Vancouver over the medium- (one year) and people with disabilities, individuals can be more commentaries from news websites were given long-term (two-plus years), keeping in mind cost, susceptible to negative impacts. Take, for ex- 2.2 Scope more attention and found more relevant to this time, design, availability, reliability, safety and In addressing the central research theme, ample, the event of a broken at a Sky- review. Local laws that set the regulatory context how might Uber or other private companies ft in?” this report focuses only on the experience of . For a younger, more able-bodied in cities reviewed were, of course, also critical in The author’s observations from this event select North American jurisdictions, excluding individual travelling with a bike, this is a minor this survey. are used to help characterize the accessible other examples throughout the world. This is annoyance, requiring them to carry their bike up transportation challenges within the local Metro justifed by the fact that TNC’s services have the stairs. For someone with signifcant mobility Vancouver context. While the results of the existed in North America longer than anywhere 3.1.3 Interviews challenges, the station is rendered completely breakout groups are the main sources used from else, and carry greater relevance and grounds for inaccessible. this event, presentations from Uber staf were comparison than most international examples. Interviews with jurisdiction ofcials and In transportation, vulnerable and disad- also used to help ground the author’s under- While the U.S. cities examined may have disability community representatives were fun- vantaged groups, such as persons with disabil- standing of accessibility within their business, several rideshare companies in operation in damental in understanding the policymaking ities, typically have fewer options to utilize for especially within the Toronto context. their jurisdictions, Uber and Lyft stand out, process, what the major issues were afecting mobility. Many are unable to drive or, indeed, Issues raised at this event are summa- accounting for the vast majority of the TNC ser- people with disabilities, and the efectiveness are unable to aford access to a personal vehicle. rized in section 7 of this report. vices. Among these two companies, Uber is the of policies seeking to address accessibility con- While public transit services such as TransLink only one to have expanded internationally and cerns within the TNC regulatory framework. are required to accommodate with has gained a signifcant presence in the Cana- The interview subjects fell into two main disabilities, transit often does not meet the dian cities it operates in. As such, and given the groups: 1) jurisdiction ofcials, and 2) disabili- needs of a person with a disability. In the same company’s ongoing eforts to expand into British ty community advocates. Jurisdiction ofcials way an able-bodied rider may opt for booking a Columbia, references to TNC’s will be focused were primarily local government bureaucrats Car2Go on their phone over taking the SkyTrain, primarily on Uber. closely involved in the creation of their local someone with a disability also requires on-de- TNC regulations. These individuals provided mand transportation options. Translink does 3. RESEARCH clarity regarding their rules and gave insights not fll this need. For many people with a into their policy development process. Dis- disability, taxis are the only option for on-de- DESIGN ability community advocates were individuals mand transportation. Within this group, only who work professionally as advocates in orga- Uber and SCI-BC co-hosted a discussion on the the much smaller pool of wheelchair acces- 3.1 Methodology nizations that seek to represent the interests of future of accessible transportation in Vancouver. sible vehicles (herein referred to simply as persons with disabilities, for example, the Coali- “WAVs”) are available to many of these pas- This report is based on a mixed-research tion of Texans with Disabilities. The individuals sengers. methodology comprised of a literature review, helped provide context into the local private-for- 3.2 Research Questions So the question is: How can the acces- interviews and focus-group observations. hire transportation challenges faced by those sibility issue be most efectively addressed as with disabilities, as well as insights regarding This report seeks to address one central the vehicle-for-hire industry undergoes its the efcacy of local TNC regulation in address- question and several sub-questions. The main latest major transformation? 3.1.2 Literature Review ing accessibility. research question: The literature review includes academic In jurisdictions where TNC’s operate, what strategies to address equity and accessibility con- and gray literature, as well government pol- 3.1.4 Focus Group 2.1 Purpose of this Report icy reports, local laws and news articles. As cerns are being used? This report looks to examine the im- transportation network companies have only plitions of transportation network company been operating for a few years, little academic Information was also collected during a In addition to the main research question, this (TNC) services on transportation outcomes research exists on how the emergence of these disability forum in Vancouver, hosted by Uber report seeks to address several sub-questions. for persons with disabilities. It seeks to deep- services have impacted transportation outcomes Canada and Spinal Cord Injury BC (SCI-BC), titled Through conversation with the Passenger Trans- en and inform an understanding concerning for persons with disabilities. What writing does “Improving Accessible Transportation in Metro portation Branch (PT Branch) and the disability this issue for the Passenger Transportation exist centers on the “sharing economy” at large Vancouver” (herein referred to as “the forum”). community, several specifc challenges associ- Board and other British Columbia regulators and the implications it has for governments, The event included opening presentations from ated with the peer-to-peer ride-sourcing mod- by studying policy responses to TNC services business and consumers. This broad focus on representatives of Uber, SCI-BC, and the Ontario el were identifed. These are refected in the in other jurisdictions. This report will pro- the sharing economy was the subject of much of College of Art and Design’s (OCAD) Inclusive sub-questions: vide insight into to what extent persons with the grey literature reviewed as well. Given the Design Institute, followed by three breakout • How have other jurisdictions addressed 10 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 11 the challenges of fuctuating rates bility in the TNC sector. Specifcally, there is no tors. While some of the obstacles attributed to order for passengers to have a safe and comfort- (i.e Uber’s “surge pricing” or Lyft’s academic or grey literature documenting these TNC services also exist in the local traditional able trip. The minimal training provided to the “PrimeTime”)? issues in this way. As such, data collection was taxi-cab sector, the accessibility challenges vast majority of TNC drivers about assisting peo- • TNCs reliance on smartphone apps can limited to primary sources—bylaws, ordinances, presented by TNCs are unique. The peer-to-peer ple with disabilities is a concern to many. While disadvantage persons with disabilities interviews—and references in news articles. nature of app-based services like UberX and Lyft critics acknowledge that specialized who generally have lower incomes, may present a fundamental problem to riders seek- services are the best ft for some individuals not have a credit card, and/or may face ing wheelchair accessible service: drivers use with disabilities, they argue the majority of peo- challenges operating a smartphone. 4. CONTEXT their own cars and very few people have WAVs. ple with disabilities can be served quite easily in How have other jurisdictions addressed There have also been several accounts in conventional ground transportation. Disability these challenges relating to dispatching a other North American cities of drivers discrim- advocates in B.C. have pointed to the training TNC vehicle? Are there examples where 4.1 Uber in Vancouver inating against passengers with disabilities. In required by the City of Vancouver and delivered traditional phone-call- based dispatching these cases, drivers would allegedly cancel trips by the Vancouver Taxi Association, “Ask, Listen, Uber began operating in May 2012 as a services exist for TNCs? Are they efective? via the apps upon seeing that their prospective Act” (ACT), as a straight forward and efective luxury sedan service in the City of Vancouver • Given the high-cost and degree of rider was disabled. Other times drivers would re- training program. and continued for six months until enforcement specialization of wheelchair-accessible fuse to take passengers in manual wheelchairs, by B.C. Passenger Transportation Branch (PTB) vehicles (WAVs) and the fact that TNCs despite the fact that these chairs can be easily Dispatching + Payment in November for violating commercial pas- drivers are independent drivers using folded and stowed into any sedan. While these One of the defning features of TNC ser- senger transportation rules.11 These violations their personal cars, WAVs are not naturally incidences appear to be rare, they have high- vices is the exclusive use of apps for summoning included not having a vehicle-for-hire licence, present in TNCs services, how have TNCs or lighted for policymakers and TNCs the discrim- a vehicle. Payment is also cashless and is co-or- sufcient insurance coverage required of private- other jurisdictions managed to provide or ination and barriers faced by some people with dinated through the dispatching company’s app. for-hire vehicles and not charging board-ap- coordinate WAV services? disabilities looking to use these services. Passen- The credit card linked to the profle that sum- proved rates. Again, in 2014, rumours surfaced gers with service animals have also been refused moned the vehicle is debited upon completion that Uber was planning to relaunch, this time rides from TNC drivers.13 Incidences like these of the ride. This system presents many barriers throughout Metro Vancouver and on Halloween. 3.3 Limitations have resulted in several lawsuits against Uber for people with disabilities. Firstly, individuals During this time, Transportation Minister Todd and Lyft in communities across the U.S.14 who have cerebral palsy, arthritis or multiple A desire to deliver fndings in step Stone reafrmed the province’s position and Below are the main concerns disability sclerosis, for example, have dexterity challeng- with the Government of British Columbia’s said that an unauthorized entry would result in communities have expressed realting to TNC es that can make dispatching a vehicle through policy- development process for the evolving legal action.12 The City of Vancouver had also services: the app by hand a challenge. People who are vehicle-for-hire industry limited the project’s expressed concern over the unregulated entry of partially sighted or blind may use the voiceover timeline. The cities and regulatory frameworks Uber into the city. Wheel-chair accessible vehicles (WAV) in iOS and TalkBalk in the Android OS, which examined do not represent a comprehensive Ofcials with the City of Vancouver and This issue is by far the most widely dis- has varying functionality depending on the app survey of how accessibility has been addressed other B.C. transportation authorities have since cussed concern for people with disabilities. being used. Secondly, due to lower and often in North America’s entire TNC industry. This been studying the issue to better understand Because TNCs are a peer-to-peer service, indi- fxed incomes, people with disabilities are less limited sample was due to constrained timeline the challenges and opportunities presented by viduals are driving their personal vehicles which likely to have a smartphone or use a credit card. and resources. As well, the voluntary nature of the proliferation of peer-to-peer ride-sourcing are seldom wheelchair accessible. The lack of At present, the use of cash and TaxiSavers are this survey resulted in many jurisdictions not re- services in major cities across the world. WAVs ofered by TNCs has limited the ability for common methods of payment for people with plying or declining to participate in the research. people who use wheel chairs to use the services disabilities using HandyDart and taxi services in Secondly, interviews with individuals ofered by companies such as Uber. B.C.. who work in disability advocacy were surpris- 4.2 Accessibility Concerns ingly difcult to obtain. A desire to speak with The issue of accessibility to people with Driver Training Dynamic Pricing advocates both familiar with disability issues disabilities remains one of the most signifcant People with disabilities often have special During busy periods, ride-sourcing com- and ongoing transportation reviews in their challenges for TNCs and transportation regula- needs that drivers may have to assist with in panies commonly increase their prices for short respective cities often directed the researcher to 11 Stephen Chelling, (Nov. 28, 2012), "Uber Town- periods of time to entice more drivers to pick up council advisory groups, the members of which Service Shut Down in Vancouver by B.C. Passenger Trans- 13 Salvador Rodriguez.( Aug. 13, 2015), "For Uber. . This dynamic pricing event is called “surge were most often uncomfortable or unwilling portation Board." The Georgia Straight. Accessed June 18. Lyft Riders with Disabilities. Discrimination Often Comes pricing” by Uber and “PrimeTime” by Lyft. Dy- (some are prohibited from engaging with any- 2016: http://www.straight.com/news/uber-town-car-ser- Included." International Business Times. Accessed June 1, namic pricing has drawn concern from many one other than council or city staf on these vice-shut-down-vancouver-bc-passenger-transportation- 2016: http://www.ibtimes.com/uber-lyft-riders-disabili- people in the disability community who say it matters) to discuss the topic. board ties-discrimination-often-comes-included-2052675 12 Sam Cooper, (Nov. 2, 2015), "How Vancouver Taxi 14 Jen Wieczner, (May 22, 2015), “Why the Disabled unfairly and disproportionately impacts people Lastly, little research exists cataloguing Companies are Beating Uber." The Province. Accessed May are Suing Uber and Lyft”. Time. Accessed June 1. 2016: with disabilities, who may not have the same the diferent approaches to addressing accessi- 25, 2016: http://www.theprovince.com/business/Vancou- http://time.com/3895021/why-the-disabled-are-suing- fexibility to travel outside peak travel times or ver+taxi+companies+beating+Uber/11490241/story.html uber-and-lyft/ 12 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 13 access afordable alternatives. drivers are subject to. What is considered one of the greatest strengths of TNCs, its low barrier to entry, which includes minimal to no train- 4.3 BC Vehicle-for-hire Regula- ing requirements, is also regarded as a major tory Context weakness for those concerned with the indus- try’s ability to provide service to persons with a The B.C. Passenger Transportation Board disability (see Table 1 for summary comparison of training). In British Columbia, the licensing of private There are several fundamental diferenc- commercial passenger transportation rests with es between taxi driver training and TNC driver the B.C. Passenger Transportation Board (PTB), training (see Table 1). Firstly, regular Uber driv- an independent tribunal created under the Pas- ers (UberX) are not required by the company to senger Transportation Act. Taxis, , undertake any training. There are no required charters and interregional need to ap- readings or videos. Only where jurisdictions ply and obtain licenses from the board in order require TNC drivers—through a licensing to legally operate in the province. scheme—do drivers actually have to receive any training. Taxi drivers, on the other hand, in many B.C. municipalities, are required to have 4.3 Taxi VS TNC Driver passed exams and taken a designated taxi driver Training training program, which in the Vancouver met- This clear diference in training, required There are signifcant diferences between ropolitan area, is one-week long. Secondly, while versus voluntary, in person and assessed ver- local taxi driver training and the training Uber’s taxi driver training is an in-person and assessed, sus a simple video one can watch at home, has UberX driver training is comprised of a short understandably raised concern amongst gov- 5. TRANSPORTATION Table 1: Driver Training Comparison: Lower Main- video. ernment ofcials and others concerned with land cdsand broader public safety issues. 15 Uber claims its NETWORK rating system—whereby users and drivers rate TAXI DRIVERS* UBER DRIVERS each other (and give additional feedback if COMPANIES (TNCS) they desire) after each ride—serves as powerful incentive that supports a service that is supe- Definition TaxiHost Pro (ofered through the Justice Uber training video (not mandatory unless rior in customer service, including to people In 2013, the State of California became Institute of B.C.). jursidiction requires it) with disabilities. This is supported by a focus the frst jurisdiction to create a legal framework group-based survey commissioned by the City of under which so-called ride-sharing services (i.e., 5 day training program including modules on: The basic training video, “The Complete Uber Ottawa where Uber products had “resoundingly UberX, Lyft, Sidecar) would operate within. The driver safety, customer service, serving custom- Partner Guide” includes sections that cover the higher customer service and customer experi- California Public Utilities Commission created 16 ers with disabilities and collision avoidance following general topics: customer service, how ence ratings” over taxis. While the survey did a new category of business, “Transportation driving. to properly use the app, navigation tips, how not address specifc disability issues nor is it Network Company,” which has now become the payment through the app works, how to return clear whether any participants had a disability, it standard legal term for app-based dispatchers lost items, safety. speaks to the efectiveness of Uber’s (and TNCs’ that use a peer-to-peer model, such as Uber, in general) rating system and its potential as a across most U.S. states. The video makes clear that service animals responsive system that can beneft all custom- The State of California defnes TNCs as the fol- MUST be accepted. ers. lowing:

ICBC Commercial Drivers License Road Test, 15 TNC’s, such as Uber, ofer several products. Uber- “[A company] that provides prearranged trans- ASSIST, a product geared to older adults and people with Knowledge Test and Inspection Test. disabilities does require more comprehensive in-person portation services for compensation using training. Sub-section 4.3 describes the training of UberX an online-enabled application (app) or plat- “Ask-Listen-Act”- Enhanced taxi driver training drivers, Uber’s main and most widely available product. form to connect passengers with drivers using for people with disabilities and seniors (City of 16 City of Ottawa, (2015), "Customer Experience", their personal vehicles.” Vancouver only). Taxi and Limousine Regulations and Services Review, p. 1.Ac- cessed May 24, 2016. http://documents.ottawa.ca/fles/ * : Refers to Taxi Driver training that exists in jurisdic- documents/otlrsr_customer_exp_en.pdf While “TNC” has become established in the reg- tions in the BC Lower Mainland, not province-wide. ulatory lexicon across the U.S., varying terms are 14 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 15 still used in diferent jurisdictions to refer to contend with at least one or two fundamental A cursory read of news and government 6.2.1 App accessibility features18 peer-to-peer transportation services such as barriers: 1) Can the vehicle physically accommo- reports on the topic of TNC regulation is quick UberX. The evolving regulatory frameworks date them (for example: Can the taxi accommo- to highlight accessibility as a major issue in the • VoiceOver (iOS) TalkBalk (Android) emerging across municipalities in Canada, like date their motorized wheel chair?); and 2), Can vehicle-for-hire sector. The City of Ottawa, for compatibility (can be used in conjunction Edmonton, Toronto and Ottawa, have thus far the operator sufciently provide service to the example, held up “accessibility” as a “guiding with wireless braille display). opted for the term “private transportation com- passenger in a safe and dignifed manner. This principle” in the development of its new vehi- ◊ These features are essential panies” (PTCs) or “private transportation provid- frst barrier has been reduced through licensing cle-for-hire regulation. In the United States, the for visually impaired users. er” (PTP), as is the case in Edmonton, to refer to a greater percentage of WAV vehicles in taxi National Federation for the Blind’s class-action Description of buttons are read the app-based services. feets. The second has been addressed (with lawsuit against Uber (settled April 201617) has aloud when touched and users can varying degrees of suc- also been heavily reported, as have numerous dictate information into required 6. TRANSPORTATION NETWORK cess) by some jurisdic- reports highlighting instances of service denial felds, such as the destination. tions and taxi companies of people with disabilities and other issues. Users can also hear the estimated COMPANIES AND ACCESSIBILITY who have incorporated The main challenge is rooted in the fact prices and summon their ride disability training in that TNCs have an entirely diferent relationship through these features. their driver training programs. As TNCs become to feets than do traditional taxi companies. The • High contrast colour scheme.19 6.1 The Accessibility Challenge a major provider of passenger transportation, TNC has no real relationship to those who drive • Option for inputting additional how can these accessibility challenges be ad- for them nor the vehicles that their drivers drive, instructions to driver (Uber presentation, dressed? other than that which is mediated through A person with a disability who uses a taxi iCord) their app. Because the standard TNC service has to contend with at least one or two funda- • For deaf or hard-of-hearing drivers model is entirely reliant on independent driv- ◊ “Beethoven”20, a special feature for ers, connected to the TNC through their driver drivers who are hearing impaired Media coverage on the topic. app, the availability of WAVs is equivalent to the › Uber Partner app (app for The photo illustration below is from a story amount of non-commercial WAVs seen on the published in The Daily Beast. It highlighted legal drivers) delivers a fashing road today. Additionally, the part-time status of challenges against Uber from disability groups, LED light to alert drivers of including the National Federation of the Blind, the vast majority of TNC drivers and the high new trip request. who Uber recently settled with. cost of operating and obtaining a WAV leaves › Uber Partner app can be no commercial rationale for drivers ofering confgured to allow riders wheelchair-accessible service. TNCs reliance on to only text driver special non-professional drivers has also raised concern instructions, as opposed regarding the ability of drivers to safely stow to calling, allowing hard of passengers’ mobility aids and treat passengers hearing drivers to ensure they with respect and dignity. receive information from riders. ◊ Delivers additional prompt to 6.2 What are TNC’s doing? riders informing their driver is deaf or hard of hearing. Legal challenges, negative press and a desire serve a wider market has resulted in TNC’s 18 The following represent features present in Uber’s enhancing some aspects of accessibility in their driver and partner apps. Many of these features may also products. Given the primacy of technology in be present in other TNCs’ and apps. TNCs service delivery, most of these enhance- 19 Jon Rempel, (June, 2014), "A Review of Uber. the ments have been through the app. Growing Alternative to Traditional Taxi Service." Prod- uct Evaluations and Guides. AFB Access World Magazine, American Federation for the Blind. 15 (6). Accessed June 10. 2016: http://www.af.org/afpress/pub.asp?DocID=aw- 1506toc&All#aw150602) 17 Chris Danielson, (April 30, 2016), "Groundbreak- ing Settlement to End Discrmination Against Blind Uber 20 Uber, (Mar. 16, 2016), "A new way to explore the Riders Who Use Guide Dogs" (Press Release), National Uber app for our deaf or hard-of-hearing partners", Uber. Federation for the Blind. Accessed May 14. 2016: https:// Accessed July 2. 2016: https://newsroom.uber.com/can- nf.org/groundbreaking-settlement-end-discrimination- ada/a-new-way-to-explore-the-uber-app-for-our-deaf-or- against-blind-uber-riders-who-use-guide-dogs hard-of-hearing-partners/ 16 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 17 Some of these features have been around Notably, these services are only ofered in a mi- persons with disabilities have a variety of difer- was “accessibility.”25 for several years, for example, Voiceover iOS nority of markets. ent needs, UberASSIST provides an accessible compatibility, whereas other features, such as option for those who do not need a WAV. This No Requirement for Accessible Service improvements to the Uber Partner app, were UberWAV training is not standardized, however. Training The City of Ottawa’s regulations do not established in early 2016. While the standard UberX platform can stipulate any requirement for PTCs to ofer ac- accommodate passengers using conventional cessible service. Council has accepted an accessi- 6.2.3 Employment for People with Disabilities manual wheelchair (chairs that can be easily bility recommendation made by KPMG that says Transportation network companies have folded and secured in trunk), motorized wheel- where a PTC does not have at least 15 per cent of highlighted their value as employers for people chairs or riders who need to stay seated in their its service hours represented by accessible vehi- with disabilities.21 The fexible and relatively wheelchair require specialized vehicles to be cles, the PTC must charge a surcharge to fund an low barriers to entry (no interview, easy to appli- transported. “Accessible Services Support Fund.” The 15-per- cation process, see Appendix D for a summary The launch of UberWAV in 2014, which cent accessible vehicle standard is the same reg- of the steps needed to become an Uber driver) followed months of legal challenges in Califor- ulatory standard applied to city taxi companies, and the app accessibility features the driver app nia, Arizona and Texas where plaintifs chal- which currently exceed that standard at 15.7 per (outlined above) make it a viable opportunity for lenged Uber alleging they were in violation of for UberASSIST is always developed in partner- cent.26 some people with a disability to generate addi- the American Disabilities Act,24 has brought ship with a local disability advocacy organiza- At present, the City of Ottawa is not tional income. WAV service to customers. The reliability and tion resulting in diferent training which vary authorized to charge such a levy. As such, this Individuals who are deaf or hard of hear- availability of this service, however, varies city to from place to place. surcharge will have to be implemented by Uber ing appear to account for the largest group of city. voluntarily, an action city staf say the company drivers who have disabilities. A group 80 deaf The vast majority of UberWAV vehicles has agreed to do. and hard of hearing Uber drivers from Montréal are wheelchair-accessible taxis registered on have been vocal about their support of compa- the UberWAV platform. As such, the existence 6.3 What are other Surcharge nies like Uber. These drivers say not having to of UberWAV and the number of vehicles on the cities doing? The exact amount of the surcharge is still obtain a commercial license and Uber’s accessi- platform in cities it is ofered is often positively under negotiation with Uber. KPMG has rec- ommended 30 cents per trip, an amount equal ble app features put a job that was otherwise out correlated to the number of wheelchair-acces- As services such as UberX have taken up a 22 to ’s equivalent PTC levy. This of reach within reach. role similar to taxis in cities they have begun op- amount is much more than the 5 cent fgure erations in, policymakers have had to confront foated by MLA, Tim Hudak, in his “Sharing 6.2.2 Accessible Platforms many of the accessibility issues outlined above Economy” report, which made reference to Otta- In addition to app accessibility enhance- and, in doing so, re-evaluate their regulatory wa’s accessibility fund.27 ments, Uber has established additional prod- regimes to account for this new business model. Council has directed the responsible of- ucts geared towards providing more accessible The remainder of this section will out- fce, General Manager of Emergency and Protec- service. These include a wheelchair-accessible line aspects of new regulation in several North tive Services, to convene accessibility advisory service, usually known as UberWAV, and Uber- American cities and describe how each regula- groups and public paratransit providers to devel- ASSIST, a “door-to-door service” “designed to tion has addressed issues concerning accessibil- op a strategy that includes how these revenues provide additional assistance to seniors and peo- sible taxis in the region. In many cases, Uber ity to people with a disability within their vehi- 23 could ofset costs for accessible transportation ple with disabilities.” UberASSIST drivers also also partners with organizations that operate cle-for-hire framework. receive additional accessibility-related training. WAV vehicles, such as Dignity Transportation in programs, “including but not limited to enhanc- Toronto or First Transit in Portland. ing the taxi coupon program.”28 21 Uber, (Dec. 2, 2015), "Inclusion Matters: Access 6.3.1 City of Ottawa and Empowerment for Riders and Drivers with Disability in Australia", Uber, Accessed June 1, 2016: https://news- UberASSIST Uber began operating in the City of room.uber.com/australia/inclusion-matters-au/ ; Uber, UberASSIST bills itself as a service for 25 City of Ottawa, (2015), "Final Report", Taxi and Ottawa in October 2014. In recognition of ma- (Sept. 22, 2015), "Uber & Enabled Employment: A New those needing extra assistance, such as “seniors Limousine Regulations and Services Review. p. 1. http:// Kind of Mobility," Uber, Accessed June 10, 2016: https:// jor changes taking place in the vehicle-for-hire and people with disabilities.” With training documents.ottawa.ca/sites/documents.ottawa.ca/fles/ newsroom.uber.com/australia/uber-enabled-employ- industry, council engaged KPMG to undertake beyond what typical Uber drivers have, Uber- documents/TLRSR_fnal_report_en.pdf ment-a-new-kind-of-mobility/ comprehensive review of the city’s and 22 CTV Montreal, (May 29, 2016), "Deaf Uber drivers ASSIST drivers ofer door-to-door service. As 26 City of Ottawa, (2015), "Accessibility", Taxi and hope the Quebec gov't will consider their livelihoods." limousine industries towards the development Limousine Regulations and Services Review. p. 6. Accessed CTV Montreal. Accessed June 2. 2016: http://montreal. 24 Nina Strochlic. (May 21, 2015). "Uber: Disabil- of a “sustainable and efcient” service that June 3, 2016: http://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/docu- ctvnews.ca/deaf-uber-drivers-hope-the-quebec-gov-t-will- ity Laws Don’t Apply to Us." The Daily Beast. Accessed meets “the evolving needs of residents and vis- ments.ottawa.ca/fles/documents/otlrsr_accessibility_ consider-their-livelihoods-1.2922143 March 5. 2016: http://www.thedailybeast.com/arti- itors”. Notably, council included three guiding en.pdf. 23 Uber. "Uber Assist". Uber. Accessed July 10 2016: cles/2015/05/21/uber-disability-laws-don-t-apply-to-us. principles to guide KPMG’s review, one of which 27 Personal interview. City of Ottawa http://ubermovement.com/uberassist/ html 28 City of Ottawa, "Final Report", p. 3 18 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 19 6.3.2 City of Portland For the frst 30 days, TNC’s only had to reach In December 2014, the City of Portland requests for WAVs with “reasonably prompt ser- convened a citizen task force to examine and vice.” For the next 30 days, “reasonably prompt provide guidance and recommendations to service” became defned as service no greater council regarding how the private for-hire than 30 minutes above non-WAV requests. As Figure 1: Average vehicle regulatory framework should evolve in the pilot went on, these performance measures Monthly WAV Wai- response to changes in the industry. One major became more stringent, eventually requiring times during the City TNCs to serve WAV requests in a time no greater of Portlands TNC proposal was that the city run a pilot program, Pilot. Source: City of temporarily permitting Lyft and Uber under cer- than 10 minutes over non-WAV service. Portland. tain conditions. Accessible Service Results Pilot program The pilot saw TNCs provide 15 per cent of Commencing in April and running to all WAV trips provided by TNCs and taxis. This August 2015, the pilot program took place for was achieved through the TNC companies part- four months and required both taxis and TNCs nering with organizations that have WAVs as to share signifcant amounts of data during set well as using taxi drivers with operating WAVs. intervals of the trial. TNCs provided consistently shorter wait times for on-demand WAV requests when com- An interim set of rules was created to outline pared to taxis (see Figure 1). service and operational requirements for TNCs. Accessible Transportation Fund al license. These included: Similar to many other cities that have Uber began operating its peer-to-peer • TNC vehicles were required to pass safety tests recently overhauled their vehicle-for-hire reg- service UberX in Toronto in 2014. Within a year, and receive standardized safety certifcates from ulations, Portland “will establish an Accessible it quickly grew, capturing approximately 17,000 New Regulation professional mechanic. Transportation Fund with revenue generated trips per day and drawing the attention of the Based on the analysis of 120-day pilot, • TNCs had to certify driver background checks. by a mandated, minimal fare fee on all taxi and local taxi industry and government ofcials council passed a new set of vehicle-for-hire rules • Drivers had to complete knowledge, safety TNC trips.” Revenue is planned to be “used as an concerned about the approximately 10,000 un- in December 2015 where TNCs would be per- and customer-service training through incentive to help ensure that the highest cost of licensed vehicle-for-hire drivers operating in the mitted. The regulations maintain many of the Transportation Bureau-approved tests. providing WAV trips is not a barrier to providing city.31 In July 2015, city staf conducted a Ground requirements outlined in the pilot. • TNCs were required to provide service 24 hours WAV service.”30 Nickole Cheron, Program Coor- Transportation Review32, which examined the Regulations state that TNC’s: a day and accept any request received anywhere dinator in Portland’s Ofce of Equity and Human implications of TNCs for the public interest, as • “must operate a feet of wheelchair-accessible within the city. Rights, and someone closely involved with the well as the existing taxi and limousine indus- vehicles or partner with a WAV transportation development of this regulation, says the sur- tries. operator to accommodate all WAV requests.” The pilot also outlined specifc “equity and in- charge has been planned to be 25 cents. Once in • Are prohibited from applying dynamic pricing, clusion principles.” Among them: place, this would be one of the highest per trip UberWAV and UberASSIST in Toronto like Uber’s surge pricing, to WAV trips. • “TNCs will implement service performance accessibility surcharges, just below New York On the heels of Toronto’s Ground Trans- • Maintain a local customer service ofce. measure to provide timely and equitable service City’s 30 cent surcharge. portation Review, Uber launched its main to persons with disabilities” accessible service platforms—UberWAV and Additionally, the ordinance states that the Bu- • “Equitable service is defned as responding UberASSIST -- in October 2015.33 It is important reau of Transportation will establish an “Ac- 6.3.4 City of Toronto to requests for wheelchair-accessible vehicle to understand that, given the diferent regula- cessible Transportation” fund. Revenue will be On May 3, 2016, the City of Toronto in- service within the same amount of time as tory environments and strategies Uber uses to generated from fee added to all taxi and TNC troduced new regulations to be included in an comparable requests for non-wheelchair procure drivers for UberWAV and ASSIST across trips and will be used to ofset the higher costs of updated vehicle-for-hire bylaw that comes into accessible vehicle service.”29 , North America, these services may vary slightly providing WAV service. efect July 15 2016. Following suit with other Canadian cities such as Edmonton and Ottawa, city to city. The following paragraphs describes During the pilot, TNCs were given some leniency the service as it has been established in Toronto. Portland’s prohibition on dynamic pricing for the regulation includes a new licensing category, as they worked to come into compliance with WAV trips has not been observed in any other “private transportation company” (PTC), under 31 City of Toronto, Ground Transportation Review, p. the equitable service performance measures. jurisdiction and is a clear refection of a regula- which both PTC drivers and the PTC companies, 10. 29 City of Portland, "Private for For-Hire Transporta- such as Uber, will be required to obtain an annu- 32 "Ground Transportation Review". tion Innovation Pilot Program: Transportation Network tion that has an emphasis on equitable transpor- 33 Uber, (Oct. 30, 2015), "Improving Accessible Service Guiding Regulatory Principles", Bureau of Transpor- tation outcomes. 30 City of Portland, (Oct. 29, 2015), "New Rules for Transportation Options in Toronto", Uber. https://news- tation, p. 9-10. Accessed May 4. 2016: https://www.portlan- Private For-Hire Transportation", Bureau of Transportation, room.uber.com/canada/accessible-transportation-in-to- doregon.gov/transportation/article/526684 p. 1. Accessed April 15, 2016 ronto/ 20 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 21 Table 2: Summary of wait times from the Uber Toronto app According to Uber, their accessible vehicles are available when requested has been limited. This is because one of main Toronto UberASSIST service is de- within wait times that are comparable to non- features of TNC apps—the rating system—is livered by over 1,000 of the compa- TORONTO accessible services and at fares that are the same expected to naturally provide incentive and ny’s top-rated afliated drivers. The # Of Time WAV Assist Taxi UberX as basic non-accessible services.” feedback to drivers (and customers, for that company states this Toronto service Ober- (00:00) • “ ‘Comparable wait times’ means no more matter) to be courteous and respectful. Seattle’s is readily available, with wait times vations than the average industry wait time for non- regulations are notable for their more expansive of less than six minutes.34 I examined approach in this category, listing several stan- 1 2015 5 7 3 3 accessible service, as determined by the this claim through the app during Executive Director of Municipal Licensing and dards TNC drivers are required to uphold. Nota- several periods of the day, over 2 1600 2 9 3 3 Standards” (MLS). ble examples: multiple weeks and found average 3 1745 4 7* 2 4* • Te PTC has to report on its accessible service • “must help passengers by placing luggage or wait times to be within 2 minutes of 4 1400 3 7* 2 2* delivery, including the wait times of accessible packages that weigh less than 50 pounds in and Uber’s stated wait time 75% of the 5 1610 2 9 2 2 PTC vehicles, regularly as directed by the out of the vehicle.” time with an average wait time of 6.9 6 1700 6 7* 2 2* Executive Director of MLS. • “must not refuse to transport groceries, minutes (Table 2). packages or luggage when accompanied by a 7 1600 4 7 2 5 2. Accessibility Fund passenger.” Unlike UberX drivers, Uber- 8 2134 7 11 4 3 The second method is the development ASSIST drivers must receive special 9 2320 5 10 3 5 of an accessibility fund, which is to be funded by Accessibility Fund in-person training to support their 10 1110 5 4 2 2 a 10-cent trip levy that applies to all non-WAV ability to serve seniors and persons 11 1230 7 5 3 3 vehicle-for-hire trips, including taxis, PTCs and As other cities have done, Seattle’s 2014 with disabilities. In Toronto, this limousines. Revenues would be used to subsi- ordinance that legalized TNCs also brought in a 12 1545 3 8 2 3 training has been developed with dize PTC, taxi or limousine drivers wishing to new per-trip surcharge whose funds will go into an advisory committee consisting of 13 1722 5 N/A 3 5 purchase a WAV.35 an account designated for improving the avail- several Ontario disability advocacy 14 1036 2 2 2 1 ability of wheelchair-accessible service. Seattle’s organizations. 15 1505 3 8 2 3 6.3.5 City of Seattle “Wheelchair Accessible Services Fund” will be To provide UberWAV in To- 16 1720 4 8* 2 2* based on a surcharge of 10 cents per trip. 36 ronto, Uber utilizes two diferent 17 1909 5 7* 2 2* In 2013, major TNCs such as Lyft and groups: 1) drivers operating accessi- Uber, as they have in most US jurisdictions, be- Here are the key details: 18 1348 3 7* 3 4* ble taxis and 2) drivers with Dignity gan operating their peer-to-peer services before • Applies to all vehicle for-hire trips, including Transportation, a specialized accessi- 19 1230 6 10 3 5 local county and city authorities had regulations taxicab and TNCs, WAV and non-WAV. ble transportation provider. 20 2020 7 7 2 5 in place. • Funds will be directed towards ofsetting 21 1720 4 6 2 2 Regulation came in 2014, codifying many the “higher operational costs of wheelchair New Bylaw 22 950 5 5 3 2 of the conditions other cities have introduced. accessible taxi services” Toronto’s new bylaw looks to 23 1217 3 3 2 2 For example, Seattle introduced the need to • Funds will be issues through reimbursement. enhance accessible service through obtain a TNC license, which is contingent on • Te Director of Finance and Administrative 24 1440 16 2* 5 4* the inclusion of general public-safe- successful vehicle inspection from a city-ap- Services has considerable powers regarding how ty-related requirements, consum- 25 1850 5 10 2 4 proved mechanic and the completion of a train- funds are distributed and for what costs they are er-protection-related rules, and also ing module. applicable towards. specifc accessible-service require- Avg. wait time 4.84 6.9 2.52 3.12 • Afer one year, the director may adjust the ments. (minutes) Customer Service surcharge rate based on certain conditions. Toronto’s bylaw uses two % of time within 2 minutes 75% Among the cities whose regulations main strategies to support accessible of 6 minute benchmark have been studied in this research, the topic of During an interview, a Seattle spokesperson ex- vehicle for-hire service: 1) Accessible plained that it is still unclear how this fund will *= a period of higher than normal fares (aka: "Surge") customer service, while present and articulate Service Requirements, and 2) Utili- on fundamental principles, such as the require- be deployed. She also described how staf are ex- zation of revenue from Accessibility ment of taking the most direct route as possible ploring other avenues for improving accessible Fund. vice requirements for PTCs: or transporting someone who has a wheelchair service in ways that give funds to riders instead • “Any PTC that has more than 500 vehicles if it can be folded and secured in the vehicle, of operators. Such a method would be outside 1. Accessible Service requirements afliated with or registered to provide 35 City of Toronto, (May 3, 2016), "A New Vehi- 36 City of Seattle, Municipal Code, "Wheelchair Ac- Toronto’s bylaw outlines accessible ser- transportation services [is] required to provide cle-for-Hire Bylaw to Regulate Toronto's Ground Transpor- cessible Services Fund", S 6.310.175. Accessed July 3, 2016: wheelchair-accessible service to the public.” tation Industry" S99. Accessed May 10, 2016: http://app.to- https://www.municode.com/library/wa/seattle/codes/ 34 Uber Presentation at Disability Forum, Van- • “Accessible PTC services means that wheelchair- ronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2016. municipal_code?nodeId=TIT6BURE_SUBTITLE_IVNELI- couver, B.C.. LS10.3 CO_CH6.310TAFREVE_IGEPR_6.310.175WHACSEFU 22 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 23 the conditions of the WASF, which is limited to unclear, however, as the City has no idea how Unlike the City of Portland, Austin did to transportation options: The TNC shall subsidizing “owners and operators,” but could be many commercial and regional PTPs may enter not complete an ofcial summary of results report to the City the efectiveness of this explored through other funding methods. the market. from its pilot program. outreach quarterly.” The accessibility surcharge is waived 6.3.6 City of Edmonton for PTPs that ofer WAV service that meets Accessibility Austin’s requirements to conduct and standards required of taxicab companies. The report back on specifc outreach activities are On January 27, 2016, the City of Edmon- accessible-service standard required is that the Both the previous and the latest TNC unique among the cities examined in this re- ton became the frst Canadian city to legalize company must operate enough WAV vehicles so ordinance in Austin feature a section on accessi- port. In particular, the explicit inclusion of an Ube2r under a new bylaw that brought what that at least one vehicle is always available for bility. These two ordinances are notable in how action that seeks to address socioeconomic in- Edmonton calls Passenger Transportation Pro- dispatch. they difer on fundamental accessibility-relat- equality relating to transportation sets Austin’s viders (PTPs), such as Uber, and traditional ed regulations. While Austin’s frst ordinance accessibility language apart from other cities regulated vehicle-for-hire groups under one Dispatch (which is the one preferred by major TNCs such whose equivalent sections—with the exception bylaw.37 UberX had been operating in Edmonton Edmonton also allows PTPs to provide a as Uber and Lyft) includes a small per-trip fee to of Portland’s prohibition on dynamic pricing for since late 2014 when council directed staf to telephone-based dispatch service. The option to fund accessible service improvements, a feature accessible service—have been agnostic to socio- create a new bylaw in response to the evolving use this traditional dispatch method has been of TNC regulations in many other jurisdictions, economic issues. vehicle-for-hire industry. Uber continued to highlighted by persons with disabilities as an the latest ordinance has removed this, instead, operate in Edmonton until March 1, 2016, the day important feature to removing barriers for those inserting a requirement that the TNC implement UberWAV and UberASSIST Edmonton’s bylaw came into force and its op- wanting to summon an app-based vehicle for- an “Accessibility Plan” within 6 months. The erations fell out of compliance. This is because hire services but who may not have the smart- ordinance continues and says that if “a TNC has Prior to suspending operations in May, the province of Alberta has not yet approved the phone required to do so. an existing accessibility plan on feld in another Uber operated its WAV and ASSIST platforms type of insurance product Uber has stated its jurisdiction, the TNC must adapt that plan for in Austin. In contrast to other cities, these ser- business model requires. 6.3.7 City of Austin use in the City [of Austin]”. 41 The ordinance does vices were only visible on the app to users once not defne what is included in an “accessibility they had entered a specifc promo code within Edmonton’s bylaw makes an important In May 2014, the City of Austin initiated plan”. the app. Uber provided these services through distinction between two types of PTPs: regional a process to develop a stakeholder group that a partnership with a non-emergency medical and commercial. Regional PTP’s are smaller, would prepare a framework for a TNC pilot Additional accessibility regulations: transport (NEMT) company. dispatching fewer than 200 vehicles. Commer- program.38 Before this process was complete, • “Within three months of obtaining a TNC cial PTPs are larger companies, such as Uber, council approved an interim TNC program, operating authority, an accessible- service- which dispatch 200 vehicles or more. Fees vary which began in October 2014. Council replaced request indicator must be available on the depending on which of these categories a PTP these regulations by passing a new controversial app. If a driver cannot provide a passenger falls under. ordinance in December 2015, 39 which brought a requested accessible ride, the TNC must in fngerprinting requirements for TNC drivers. identify an alternative transportation Accessibility After a local ballot to amend Austin’s new ordi- arrangement for the passenger.” The central tool the City of Edmonton has estab- nance failed to land in Lyft and Uber’s favour in • “A TNC shall conduct outreach events lished for improving accessible service in the May 2016, the companies temporarily suspend- to community organizations with ADA vehicle-for-hire industry is an annual $20,000 ed their service.40 [American Disabilities Act]-compliant accessibility surcharge that applies to commer- vehicles to publicize the TNC’s need for cial PTP’s. Regional PTPs will also be required to 38 City of Austin, (Aug. 3, 2015), "Transportation ADA vehicles and drivers with the goal of contribute to this fund, to the amount of $50 per Network Companies-ATD Staf Recommendation Up- providing services to all passengers. A TNC date", Austin Transportation Department. Accessed June 3. vehicle. According to Garry Dziwenka, Direc- 2016: http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/pio/document. shall report back to the City on the results tor of Business Licensing and Vehicle-For-Hire cfm?id=2355 of this outreach quarterly.” at the City of Edmonton, the fund will be used 39 City of Austin, (Dec. 2015), Municipal Code, • “A TNC shall conduct outreach events to “develop a program to facilitate the further "Transportation Network Company Service", S 13-2, to communities that are of lower social provision of accessible taxi service.” How this A4. Accessed May 21. 2016. https://www.municode. economic strata without adequate transit com/library/tx/austin/codes/code_of_ordinances?no- money will be distributed or the number of deId=TIT13TRSE_CH13-2GRTRPASE_ART4TRNECOSE options with the goal of increased access dollars this surcharge is expected to generate is 40 Associated Press, (May 9, 2016), "Uber and Lyft 41 City of Austin, (Feb. 1, 2016) "An Ordinance 37 Elise Stolete, (Jan. 28, 2016), " Edmonton becomes halt service in Austin, Texas, after voters embrace back- Amending City Code Chapter 13-2 Relating to Transporta- frst city in Canada to pass Uber-friendly bylaw", National ground-check rules", published in Los Angeles Times. tion Network Companies (TNCs) and Terminating Operat- Post. Accessed May 1, 2016: http://news.nationalpost.com/ Accessed May 9, 2016: http://www.latimes.com/business/ ing Agreements", Ordinance No. 20151217-075. Accessed news/canada/edmonton-becomes-frst-city-in-canada-to- la-f-tn-uber-lyft-suspension-austin-20160509-snap-story. June 3. 2016: https://www.austintexas.gov/edims/docu- pass-uber-friendly-bylaw html ment.cfm%3Fid=245769 24 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 25 7.1 Challenges a group of able-bodied individuals would be able 7.0 THE ACCESSIBILITY CHALLENGE IN to receive. This example demonstrates a trans- portation barrier some people with disabilities Suburban areas have less accessibility face when engaging in social activities. VANCOUVER While Translink’s bus feet is now univer- cle-for-hire sector requires an sally wheelchair accessible, lower densities in Vehicle-For-Hire understanding suburban areas mean larger distances between Training bus stops and declining levels of service. Par- Participants discussed concerns around of the local context in which ticipants said that lower service levels were not driver training, both for HandyDart drivers— they operate. As such, this just a challenge for bus riders, but also Handy- which include the contracted accessible taxi section will report on accessi- Dart riders. For example, HandyDart operates providers and the HandyDart minibuses oper- bility in the Vancouver met- only two trips from the Tri-Cities to the City of ators—and for taxi drivers, saying they need ropolitan area context. Vancouver each day.42 This provides signifcant more training in securing passengers safely. On April 18, 2016, barriers for riders who may have to work down- There was signifcant discussion regard- members of the disabili- town, attend appointments and complete other ing the need for improved taxi-driver training. ty community convened to errands in the metro core. Given these challeng- Participants acknowledged that drivers operat- discuss “Improving accessi- es, on-demand vehicle-for-hire services take on ing in the City of Vancouver were better trained ble transportation in Metro elevated importance for people with disabilities (the City of Vancouver delivers its own acces- Vancouver.” The event was in suburban areas. hosted by Spinal Cord Injury sible-taxi driver-training program through the Vancouver Taxi Association) but that training BC (SCI-BC) and Uber Can- “The Last Mile” across suburban municipalities was not the ada and drew approximately The “last mile” (or “frst mile”) refers same and stressed this needed to be harmonized 60 people, including many to the challenge—one that is especially pro- across the Lower Mainland. participants who depend on nounced in suburban areas—of getting passen-

accessible transportation gers to and from the departure points of public Availability of Wheelchair Accessible options in the region. transit. If these distances appear too great or Vehicles During the discussions, inconvenient to prospective riders, they may opt The goal of taxi regulation has long been several issues came up nu- to drive. For people with disabilities who have to ensure that passengers are safe, service is merous times and received limited mobility, the “last mile,” due to a lack reliable and the industry is economically sus- wide acknowledgement of appropriate sidewalks, a lack of a “walkable” tainable. Limiting the supply of taxis has been within the group as chron- and connected grid, or simply being too great a one strategy used to achieve an economically ic challenges for accessible distance, can render transit inaccessible. transportation in the region. sustainable industry. In the Vancouver metro- Participants also agreed on politan area, the number of taxis is capped and Group Travel taxis are restricted to specifc service areas. As features that were good. A lack of options for people in groups a result, wait times become longer during regu- These are all described below. who use wheelchairs was identifed as another lar peak times, like rush hours, and even longer major challenge. The problem is not necessarily during infrequent and irregular peak periods, that there is a lack of vehicles they can all travel such as during cruise-ship arrivals in the City together in. Rather, it was that it was virtually of Vancouver, and other events that take place impossible for them to all obtain rides and to that make the rush hour an even busier period. travel to particular destination within a similar Forum participants stated that the wait times window of time. One participant gave the exam- for people needing a WAV were excessive and ple of a group of people at the Blussom Spinal twice as long as those not requiring a WAV. This Cord Centre in Vancouver looking to travel to BC claim is not unfounded. According to a Hara and Place for an event. They said it would not be pos- Associates study, wait times for accessible taxis sible to receive enough wheelchair spots from are twice as long compared to regular taxis. The WAV taxis within a window comparable to what study also reports that 30 per cent of passengers 42 Paul Gowan, (nd),"HandyDart Service Bumps requiring a WAV taxi wait longer than 15 min- Across Borders", Disability Foundation. Disability News. utes, exceeding the PT Board’s metric for reason- Addressing accessibility within the vehi- Accessed June 5. 2016: http://www.disabilityfoundation. org/news/040305_handydart.html able service of no more than eight per cent of 26 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 27 passengers waiting more than 15 minutes. 43 option: taxis. Though HandyDart and taxi trips utilized Lack of on-demand transportation options with Taxi Saver coupons are not directly com- The lack of opportunity to access on- petitive (HandyDart is not an on-demand service 8.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS demand transportation is an overarching like a taxi is), it is reasonable to assume that some trips taken using the Taxi Saver program challenge connected to many of issues above. are trips that might have otherwise been booked Participants with disabilities emphasized through HandyDart. Participants highlighted their need and desire for spontaneous trips, the fact that given the higher per trip cost of stating “that this is not available to us as it is for HandyDart, a trip diverted from HandyDart to everyone else.” Whereas most non-disabled taxi may represent a cost savings to government people have access to a range of transportation and a preferred trip for the passenger—a win- options, disabled passengers, for many win. reasons, depend on taxis almost exclusively for their on-demand transportation needs and Accessible Public Transit System therefore require a system that can serve them. In general, participants regard public transit in the Vancouver metropolitan area as relatively accessible. A universally accessible 7.2 Strengths bus feet, SkyTrain and Seabus system position the region ahead of other cities when it comes to While there are ongoing struggles for public transit accessibility. those in need of accessible transportation op- tions across the Vancouver metropolitan area, focus group participants highlighted some aspects that are working. These are described below. a sample of the measures taken by jurisdictions This section will expand on select top- to address the accessibility challenges in their ics touched on in previous sections and, based TaxiSaver Pro- respective vehicle-for-hire markets. Because on data collected from interviews and online gram these regulations have been in place for such a sources, focus particularly on how accessible People short period of time it is not yet possible to assess TNC services have been rendered in jurisdictions with a perma- how successful they have been. Other factors, included in this report. nent disability such as the limited amount of publicly available are eligible for data on key accessibility indicators such as wait Accessible Service Translink’s Taxi times and number of fulflled and unfulflled Among the cities that were examined, Saver program requests, as well as more qualitative feedback the ones that have objectively greater levels of which provides on areas such as the level and sufciency of care accessibility in their vehicle-for-hire markets riders with cou- and service being experienced by customers have are those that permitted TNCs on the condition pons that give made it difcult to draw conclusions. The outlier that they provide such services. This is the case them 50 per cent in this regard is the City of Portland, which did in Portland and Toronto. It is critical to note that of taxi fares. collect and has released signifcant amounts of in both of these cities, Uber’s WAV service is Participants data, some of which was summarized and shared contingent on the availability of a pre-existing were unanimous above. For the other cities, interviews with policy- pool of WAV vehicles. As well, taxis play a major in their support A wheelchair accessible taxi in makers and disability advocates can help enhance role in providing this service through the Uber for this program. This program gives persons Vancouver. our understanding of how policies have played platform. Other cities have been at a disadvan- with disabilities greater access to what is can out thus far. Additionally, interviews with indus- tage. As staf from the City of Ottawa explained often be their only on-demand transportation try stakeholders like Uber can provide insights in an interview, “We can’t do the same thing as 43 Hara and Associates,(2014), “Assessment of Pub- into how regulations have specifcally been met Toronto. In Ottawa, taxis are unionized. They’re lic Need for 78 Vancouver Accessible Taxi Licences”, cited on the operations side. not allowed to drive for other companies.” While in "Vancouver Taxi Service Review and Report Back", City of Vancouver, 2015, p.14 B.C. does not have this same barrier, it is unclear The cases highlighted in this report represent how willing B.C. taxi companies and taxi WAV 28 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 29 drivers would be to make their vehicles available that is, regular independent drivers not under Table 3: Summary of Wait time Observations ramp.”47 This program was also highlighted at through the Uber platform. contract to Uber, are also receiving fnancial for WAV vehicles in Portland and Toronto (in the forum as a key option for people with dis- Even if taxi companies in the Vancouver subsides to provide accessible services. Accord- minutes) abilities who do not need a WAV vehicle. area were willing to make their services avail- ing to Bryce Bennett, Uber operations manager PORTLAND TORONTO able through the Uber platform, geo-fencing—a in Oregon, peer-to-peer drivers on the Uber- This emphasis and focus on Uber- practice employed by regulators that restricts WAV platform receive a per-trip incentive from UberX WAV WAV UberX ASSIST as the “accessible” option for where certain vehicles can pick up fares—may Uber.46 8 15 5 3 people with disabilities who do not need a WAV vehicle, however, problematically complicate the ability for WAV taxis on the Uber - 21 2 3 suggest that the company’s ubiquitous platform to provide service across the region. Has UberWAV decreased wait times for Acces- 5* 14 4 4* (and most available) product, UberX, is In addition to taxis, UberWAV has been sible Vehicles? 3 NTL 3 2* not for people with a disability and that reliant on other accessible transportation pro- While data from Portland’s pilot reveals a person with a disability should choose viders. This includes non-emergency medical a decrease in wait times for on-demand WAV 5 8 2 2 “ASSIST” if they need a ride. While Uber transport (NEMT) companies such as Dignity trips, Toronto has not released information on 4 12 6 2* and other TNCs advise all their drivers Transportation in Toronto and First Transit in how, if at all, wait times have changed for WAV 3 13 4 5 that they cannot discriminate against Portland, as well as non-afliated individuals trips since Uber launched its WAV service in the 5 25 7 3 riders with a disability, encouraging peo- who have WAVs and register their vehicles city. During the forum, however, an Uber repre- ple with a disability to connect with their through the Uber platform. These partnerships sentative in the Uber focus group said Toronto’s 4 14 5 5 specialized services, instead of the basic with NEMT companies are a major beneft to UberWAV platform was providing an average 3 16 5 2 service, can foster a two-tiered system on-demand accessible transportation as they ETA of eight minutes. This number is corrobo- 2 27 7 3 where one is for “easier” fares and people increase the availability of these vehicles and rated by data collected by the researcher in June who do not require any extra assistance, bring consumer costs down signifcantly. 2016 (see Appendix C) based on ETAs observed 5 13 3 3 while the other is for those that do need through the Uber app in downtown Toronto. 5 NTL 5 5 an “extra hand,” as Uber’s Assist product Private Subsidy for Accessible Service As shown in Table 3, these low wait times 3 29 2 1 puts it. in Toronto contrast with times observed in 3 21 3 3 People with a disability want the same It is important to remember, however, Portland. Average TNC-dispatched wait times options that people without disabilities that accessible services have higher costs. The during the latter stages of Portland’s pilot hov- 2 9 4 2* have. This has been a common refrain, basic costs of running an accessible vehicle are ered around 18.5 minutes and appear to have 7 NTL 5 2* one that was repeated by stakeholders more higher. They are more expensive to buy, only dropped slightly during data collected this 2 11 3 4* from the forum, and one that has been to insure, to maintain, and to fuel. Then there is month. 4 10 6 5 observed in summaries of other similar also time both before the fare starts and after the Perhaps the most signifcant factor in stakeholder meetings in other regions.48 fare ends where drivers must assist disabled pas- Toronto’s lower ETAs for WAV vehicles is Uber 3* NTL 7 5* Indeed, the idea that TNCs may enhance sengers. For example, passengers may require Toronto’s signifcant utilization of WAV taxis in 5 7 4 2* this choice for people with disabilities more time to get from their door to the vehicle its local UberWAV service. While Portland has 1 30 5 2* is central to people with disabilities that and may need more assistance getting settled partnered with one taxi company that ofers 3 24 3 2 support the entrance of TNCs. before the vehicle can leave—all parts of the trip WAVs, Toronto has a large number of WAV-driv- If TNCs basic services are to be accessi- that are not usually part of the fare. To ensure ing taxi operators who have made their vehicle 5 15 16 4* ble for those who can access conventional drivers accept these more costly fares, many available on the UberWAV platform. With 550 6 - 5 4 vehicles, careful attention needs to be jurisdictions, like Seattle, ofer a subsidy, which accessible taxis operating in Toronto, many of *= a period of higher than normal fares (aka: "Surge") given to ensuring TNC’s are providing gives taxi drivers operating accessible vans a these are now available for dispatch through NTL = No time was listed. sufcient disability-related training to all per-trip ($15) and per-shift ($20) bonus.44 the Uber app. This may partially explain why of their drivers—not just for drivers with To ensure the availability of accessible the UberWAV ETAs closely track taxi ETAs and their specialized services, such as UberAs- services, TNC’s have subsidized accessible trips. remain quite low (Table 3). can accommodate wheelchairs—many individ- Trips with Dignity Transportation in Toronto, for uals with a disability do not use a wheelchair or 47 City of Mississauga, (Mar. 2, 2016), "Appendix example, start at around $30 but are available require a ramp. In recognition of this, Uber of- G: Response to Uber Comments", in agenda package for While discussions concerning on-de- fers UberASSIST in many cities, which the com- "General Committee", Accessed on June 4, 2016: http:// through UberWAV at costs equal to UberX—the www7.mississauga.ca/documents/agendas/commit- 45 mand accessible transportation have an obvious company’s basic service. Peer-to-peer partners, pany has described in letters to governments as tees/general/2016/03_02_2016_GC_Agenda.pdf 44 Personal Interview, City of Seattle focus on vehicles that are “accessible”— that, an “option that is designed to provide additional 48 City of Mississauga, (Feb. 2, 2016), "The Study 45 Jessica Smith Cross, (Jan. 17, 2016) "Accessibility is those that have a ramp or a hydraulic lift that assistance to seniors and people with disabilities of Regulations of Transportation Network Companies", advocates welcome UberWAV service in Toronto". Metro uberwav-service-applauded-by-toronto-accessibility-advo- that do not require a vehicle with a hydraulic lift/ prepared by Windels Marx, p. 3., Accessed on June 5, News Toronto. January 17. 2016. Accessed May 27. 2016: cates.html 2016: http://www7.mississauga.ca/documents/agendas/ http://www.metronews.ca/news/toronto/2016/01/17/ 46 Personal Interview, Uber Oregon committees/general/2016/03_02_2016_GC_Agenda.pdf 30 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 31 sist and UberWAV, for example. Here is an example of how this might be would therefore also require a phone-based makers would have to address important con- Regulators have an important role to play phrased: mechanism of dispatching. siderations around the scope of such a policy. in making sure TNC products can properly serve Would it apply to all people with a disability or people with disabilities no matter which options "That WAV service dispatched by TNCs 2) Organization-linked dispatch: This just individuals accessing a wheelchair-accessi- they choose to hire. A policy approach to this is are at comparable wait times and at the same approach has already been used in Toronto. Ac- ble service? If such a regulation would apply to discussed in the recommendations (see Policy 5 price as the company’s non-accessible, non-pre- cording to Jared Schachter, operations manager all individuals with a disability seeking a trip, below). mium service, i.e. UberX." at Uber Toronto, the company has partnered how would their eligibility be defned? By ap- with an assisted-living facility where staf are plying this regulation only to people taking TNC Consider using performance standards that fo- able to dispatch Uber vehicles to the facility WAV trips, Portland simplifes and reduces the 8.1 Suggested Actions cus on the result and not how it is achieved. The on behalf of their residents. Such an approach defnition to people who use wheelchairs. More Suggested actions have been prepared “command and control” paradigm of regulation could be expanded to other institutions, such specifcally, because people in manual chairs based on the research methods outlined at the has been highlighted as a potentially inefective as community centres, where customers may can also receive service from regular sedans (the beginning of this report. Specifcally, these rec- approach to regulation in the “sharing econo- already have a membership and an account for wheelchair can be folded and go in the trunk) ommendations are derived through two central my.”49 In the case of the policy suggestion above, the services they access there. In this case, front- Portland’s regulation reduces this policy to a areas of information: 1) transportation con- rather than requiring X number of accessible desk staf could order a TNC vehicle for their specifc segment of population who use mo- cerns and challenges expressed by the disability vehicles, require that the appropriate service be account on behalf of eligible patrons. Once the tor-assisted wheelchairs. A policy like Portland’s, community in the Vancouver metropolitan area, provided within set amount of time a specifc rider’s trip is complete, the community centre while making strides to advance equity for peo- as well as through interviews with advocates in percentage of the time. would see the total price charged and could ap- ple with disabilities, efectively ignores a large other cities; and 2) the TNC regulations of other ply it to their client’s account. group of people with disabilities who do not use jurisdictions. PO 2. Require large TNCs to explore partner- wheelchairs and who would therefore be subject These actions have been divided into two ships with appropriate public facilities, like PO 3. Prohibit Dynamic Pricing for Accessi- to dynamic pricing. categories: libraries, universities, community centres, bility Focused Products Given the above, two specifc options area 1) Policy: These are specifc regulations and other facilities, like healthcare facilities, Transportation Network Companies highlighted: that could be explored and incorporated into stadiums and arenas, major transportation regularly temporarily increase the price of their regulatory documents. hubs, hotels, and so on, and fnd opportuni- services during periods of high demand. By do- 1) Adapt Portland’s “no dynamic 2) Process: These are suggested actions to ties to centrally dispatch TNC vehicles for ing so, companies can adjust both the demand, pricing for wheelchair-accessible service” pursue and deemed necessary to better under- disabled customers. by forcing others to opt for a cheaper alternative, policy and apply it to UberASSIST or oth- stand the challenges and develop policy op- This recommendation looks to support and the supply, by incentivizing more drivers to er companies’ equivalent services. tions around accessibility in the evolving vehi- people with disabilities who have limited access activate their driver apps and make themselves cle-for-hire industry. Each recommendation also to a smartphone by increasing their opportuni- available to prospective riders. Disability advo- Pro: This would be a relatively includes a suggestion for which organization ties to connect with accessible app-based dis- cates have expressed concern over this feature straightforward way to ensure a larger should take the lead on implementation. patchers. Companies such as Uber require riders as it has a disproportionately negative impact on percentage of riders with disabilities are These actions are summarized in Appen- to register with their app and create a credit-card people with disabilities. not subject to dynamic pricing. dix A. linked profle. This limits access to people with Among adults of working age, people disabilities who may not have a credit card or a with disabilities are more likely to be under the Con: It would exclude people with 8.1.1 Policy (PO) smartphone. In facilities that interface regular- poverty line than non-disabled individuals.50 disabilities who do not book a wheelchair ly with people with disabilities, there could be Furthermore, people with disabilities have fewer accessible service or services specifcally PO 1. Require large TNCs to provide wheel- ways these facilities could book a TNC vehicle on opportunities for on-demand transportation and designed for people seniors and people chair accessible service behalf of their disabled patrons. also face for more obstacles in administering with disabilities (eg. UberASSIST) The provision of wheelchair-accessible Two potential opportunities: their day-to-day activities than the population services by TNCs is critical if accessibility is to at large. From an equity and social-justice per- 2) Prohibit dynamic pricing for improve in the vehicle-for-hire sector. Cost and 1) TNC Phone: Similar to the taxi phones spective, subjecting people with disabilities to people with disabilities registered with wait times are a critical aspect to this. Regula- that have been long established in places dynamic pricing is unjust. This is why the City HandyCard. This approach would only tion should help reduce the much longer wait like hotels and hospitals, TNCs could provide of Portland has prohibited dynamic pricing for be possible if TNC providers were able to times people requiring WAVs are subject to and phones in key institutions that directly connect wheelchair-accessible vehicle trips. eliminate dynamic pricing on their apps should ensure—as all cities examined have with a dispatcher who may connect users with In developing such a regulation, policy- for certain riders. In this case, registered done—that people requiring WAV service do an accessible TNC service. For this to exist, TNCs 50 Council of Canadians with Disabilities. (nd), "As a HandyCard users with Translink would not pay more for the service than people using Matter of Fact: Poverty and Disability in Canada". Council receive a unique code that could be in- similar non-WAV options, despite the higher 49 Sunil Johal and Noah Zon, (2015), "Policy Making for of Canadians with Disabilities. Accessed May 20,. 2016: putted into the “promo” feld of their TNC the Sharing Economy: Beyond Whack-A-Mole", The Mowat operational costs of ofering this service. http://www.ccdonline.ca/en/socialpolicy/poverty-citizen- app. Once entered, the code would verify Centre, ship/demographic-profle/poverty-disability-canada 32 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 33 them as a registered HandyCard user and objective is to improve the availability of on-de- Table 4: Accessibility Fund Comparison eliminate occurrences of dynamic pricing mand accessible transportation services, then on their apps. funds should go towards improving WAV for- Accessibil- Austin Edmonton Ottawa Portland Seattle Toronto hire services rather than supporting a service ity Levy Pro: Riders would have access like HandyDart which, while accessible, does not to full spectrum of services available to provide on-demand service. Yes or No --- other users and without being subject to See Table 2 for summary of how other ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ dynamic pricing. cities have set up funds like this. Frequency --- per year / per per trip per trip per trip per trip Con: Would not capture people PO 5. Require TNC’s deliver training that enables vehicle with disabilities who are not registered them to provide sufcient service to passengers Amount --- $20k for "com- TBD TBD 10 cents 10 cents with HandyCard. with disabilities mercial" PTC/ $50 p. vehicle Con: HandyCard is TransLink Sufcient driver training for riders with for "regional" program and is therefore restricted to disabilities includes safety issues, such as do- PTC the Vancouver metropolitan area. Such ing a proper tie-down of a rider’s wheelchair or Alocation --- TBD TBD TBD Partial reim- Grants to- an approach could not easily be applied securing other mobility, and customer-service bursment for wards WAV across other B.C. jurisdictions. issues, such as having the requisite sensitivity higher opera- vehicle pur- training that allows drivers to assist and interact tional costs chase competently and efectively with riders with a PO 4. Establish an accessibility levy for vehi- disability. cle-for-hire trips While municipalities play a larger role in Both major North American TNCs, Uber and One of the most common outcomes of determining training that drivers have through Lyft, ofer corporate accounts, Uber Business jurisdictions’ vehicle-for-hire regulatory re- their permitting schemes, the PT Board also and Lyft Business. According to Michael van views has been the institution of an accessibility plays a role in ensuring high standards for Hemmen, Uber’s B.C. operations manager, Uber fund with revenues generated from the vehicle companies that operate accessible vehicles. The Business allows the initiating entity to set a for-hire industry. Regulators clearly like the companies must provide an Accessible Services percentage it wishes to cover the cost of as well accessibility levy. This approach links the fund’s Plan, which must include descriptions con- as which service may be selected (eg. UberAS- revenues to TNCs economic activity and can be cerning the training that operators receive. The SIST or UberWAV). Utilizing a version of these designed as very fexible tool able to be allocated Accessible Services Plan requirement could be services, a subsidizing entity (government or to programs that improve accessibility. Trans- adapted for TNCs and be a mechanism through NGO) could simply set a subsidy rate through portation network companies seem to appreci- which the PTB could receive information and their corporate account that would be applied to ate this tool too. It is easy to implement, can be ensure training is sufcient to serve people with linked users’ trips. easily passed onto the consumer, and is a policy disabilities using TNC services. tool they are now used to and familiar with. PR 2. Engage TransLink in Accessible Transpor- tation Dialogue In Austin, TNCs counter-proposal to the city’s 8.1.2 Process proposed operating framework is a testament to Due to TransLink’s central role in the pro- vision of accessible transportation in the Van- their preference to the accessibility levy, which PR 1. Examine ways people with disabilities can couver metropolitan area and the importance they lobbied for as an alternative to an “accessi- access all vehicle-for-hire (including future TNC of on-demand vehicle-for-hire services in the bility plan.” platforms) services at subsidized rate. accessible transportation system, major changes Most cities have adopted a per-trip Lead: Translink, Ministry of Transportation to vehicle-for-hire regulations need to be done charge, often 10 cents, that applies to all for-hire in consultation with TransLink. trips or all non-accessible trips. While improv- Currently, Taxi Savers ofer eligible riders Lead: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastruc- ing accessible transportation has been a consis- 50 per cent of taxi services. In anticipation of ture tent goal of these funds, jurisdictions difer in an expanded vehicle-for-hire system, regula- Other: TransLink how this is best achieved. tors should explore how this program might be In deciding where and how this money is expanded so that people with disabilities can distributed, regulators need to consider what the have access to the full range of appropriate vehi- objectives are, as this will guide decisions about cle-for-hire options. the most appropriate action. For example, if the 34 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility

9. CONCLUSION 10. APPENDICES

Appendix A: Summary of Suggested Actions

This report has characterized how governments have sought to address accessibility-related Code Action Rationale Level of challenges amidst an industry under rapid changes. To increase understanding of how other ju- implemen- risdictions have sought to address accessibility-related challenges in their evolving transportation tation dif- industry, this reported examined 6 cities, outlining their specifc regulations to address the present culty and prospective challenges faced by persons with disabilities. PO1 Require large TNC’s • Wheelchair access is critical Low Following research from around North America, interviews with stakeholders and review of to provide wheelchair component to accessibility the context in the B.C. lower mainland, this report presents 5 policy actions and 2 process actions accessible service at no to be considered by the Passenger Transportation Branch in its ongoing assessment and research extra cost to rider towards a new regulatory framework that addresses TNC’s. As the reader is likely aware, vehicle for- hire policies are changing and being reworked at an ongoing and rapid pace. As such, this report • TNC’s in many other cities have shown has only been able to capture a portion of the policy responses that have occurred, some of which an ability to provide WAV service will undoubtedly be refned and modifed in light of the outlined policies’ efectiveness. • Ensures people that use wheelchairs While the presence of strong consumer support for TNC’s is a positive indication that they are not subject to increase costs provide a quality service to the consumer, the existence of signifcant approval should not necessar- in on-demand transportation and ily be taken as a sign that the nascent sector does need a careful assessment. synchronizes this policy across vehicle for-hire system i.e. taxis, and TNCs As always, there are many other experiences and those from disadvantaged groups can be PO2 Require large TNC’s to • Allows people with disabilities, who Medium easily overlooked amidst the chorus of praise from mainstream consumers. The longstanding pres- explore partnerships may not have a smartphone or may ence of public oversight in the vehicle for-hire industry is a testament to the important public inter- with appropriate public have limited capacity to use it, to still est implications that need to be considered. As discussed in this report, on-demand transportation facilities (eg. libraries, receive service from certain locations. options are critical to persons with disabilities to have meaningful social and economic opportuni- universities, commu- ties and carry out their day-to-day activities. Because of this, the PTB and other regulatory agencies nity centers) and other and governments in B.C. need to give special attention to ensuring these services meet the needs to facilities (eg. healthcare persons with disabilities in a fair and equitable manner. facilities, stadiums and arenas, major transpor- tation hubs, hotels, etc.) and fnd opportunities to centrally dispatch TNC vehicles for dis- abled customers. • Public facilities have unique responsibility to assist in delivery of important public services. • Some private facilities (eg. Large hotels) have a history of provide a public service in the past (eg. payphones, washrooms, direct taxi lines) and therefore may be amenable to partnering for this type of service. • Limited precedent already exists between Uber and assisted living facility. Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 37

PO4 Establish an accessibility • Providing accessible service, Low Appendix B: Informants levy for vehicle for-hire whether it be through the use of trips WAV or not, is more expensive due to extra unbilled time and/ or higher operating costs. Levy- funded revenues can be used to ofset this cost. Name Title Afiation/ Ju- Interaction Interview Date risdiction • Relativley simple to implement with many examples from other Adam Blinick Public Policy Uber Email jurisdictions. Lead, Uber Can- ada PO5 Require TNC’s deliver trai- • Accesible service encompasses ning that enables them to more than accessible vehicles; Bryan Hockaday Policy and Com- City of Portland Phone interview, 22-March-16 provide sufcient service to provide accessible vehicle munciations email to passengers with disabi- for-hire system, TNC drivers Advisor, Ofce lities need to have disability training of Commissioner at par with taxi drivers. Steve Novick • Strengthen accessiblity beyond Bryce Bennett Operations Man- Uber Portland Phone interview, 3-May-16 TNC’s “accessible” products ager email (eg. Uber’s ASSIST and WAV) Carlton Thomas Infrastructure City of Austin Phone interview 14-June-16 by ensuring solid baseline of Operations Divi- disability-related training. sion Manager PR1 Examine ways people with • Would improve opportunities Medium Carolyn Bauer General Manager, Yellow Cab, In person discus- 6-July-16 disabilities can access all for people with disabilities Yellow Cab Van- Vancouver Taxi sion vehicle for-hire (including to travel and enhance their couver Association future TNC platforms) ser- opportunities. Chase Bearden Director of Ad- Phone interview 21-April-16 vices at subsidized rate. vocacy, Coalition of Texans with Disabilities Christine Hartig Strategic Support City of Ottawa Phone Interview 6-June-16 Coordinator, General Manag- er’s Ofce, Emergency and Protective Ser- vices Doris Sundquist Deputy Registrar, Province of B.C. In persons dis- 6-Jan.-16 B.C. Passenger cussion (project Transportation scoping) Branch Garry Dziwenka Director of Busi- City of Edmonton Phone interview, 11-April-16 ness Licensing email and Vehicle for- hire 38 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 39

James Wiseman President, United Phone interview 18-March-16 Spinal Association Appendix C: Portland and Toronto Wait Time Observations Kristin Vanderkuip Registrar and Direc- Province of B.C. In person discussion 6-Jan-16 to tor, B.C. Passenger (project scoping); Aug-16 Transportation Email, draft feed- Date Time WAV Assist WAV UberX Time WAV Assist (Taxi) UberX Branch back June 8 1542 10 None NTL 4 Michael von Hem- Public Policy Man- Uber Email men ager, Uber Canada 1715 15 16 NTL 8 2015 5 7 3 3 Nickole Cheron Program Coordina- City of Portland Phone interview, 23-Mar-16 June 9 1300 21 17 23 1600 2 9 3 3 tor, Ofce of Equity email 1445 14 10* NTL 5* 1745 4 7* 2 4* and Human Rights June 10 1100 NTL 2 9 3 1400 3 7* 2 2* (Formerly Disability 1310 8 N/A 10 5 1610 2 9 2 2 Coordinator) June 11 1400 12 9 NTL 4 1700 6 7* 2 2* Vanessa Fletcher Policy and Planning City of Toronto Phone interview, 21-Apr-16 Advisor, Ofce of email June 14 1300 13 12 5 3 1600 4 7 2 5 the Executive Direc- 1834 25 10 19 5 2134 7 11 4 3 tor 2020 14 8 NTL 4 2320 5 10 3 5 Municipal Licensing June 15 810 16 7 NTL 3 1110 5 4 2 2 & Standards 930 27 5 NTL 2 1230 7 5 3 3 June 20 1245 13 16 5 5 1545 3 8 2 3 June 21 1422 NTL N/A 6 5 1722 5 N/A 3 5 June 22 736 29 N/A NTL 3 1036 2 2 2 1 June 23 1205 21 10 NTL 3 1505 3 8 2 3 1420 9 N/A NTL 2 1720 4 8* 2 2* 1609 NTL N/A NTL 7 1505 5 7* 2 2* June 24 1048 11 7 NTL 2 1348 3 7* 3 4* June 26 930 10 15 NTL 4 1230 6 10 3 5 (major event) 1720 NTL 13* NTL 3* 2020 7 7* 2 5* June 27 1420 7 N/A NTL 5 1720 4 6* 2 2* June 28 650 30 5 5 1 950 5 5 3 2* July 5 917 24 8 NTL 3 1217 3 3 2 2 July 6 1140 15 15 10 5 1440 16 2* 5 4* July 8 1550 13 6 NTL 6 1850 5 10 2 4 Surge = higher than normal prices NTL= the screen shows a button that says “Request Now” but does not display approx. None= Screen simply displayed”unavailable” or “no cars available” 40 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 41 Appendix D: How to Become an Uber Driver* BIBLIOGRAPHY Government and Grey Literature

Image Source: Uber Canada City of Austin, Austin Transportation Department, Transportation Network Companies-ATD Staf Recommendation Update, August 3, 2015, Accessed June 3, 2016: http://www.austintexas.gov/ edims/pio/document.cfm?id=235537

______, Municipal Code, Transportation Services, Ground Transportation Passenger Services, Transportation Network Company Service, 13-2, 4. Accessed May 21, 2016. https://www. municode.com/library/tx/austin/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT13TRSE_CH13-2GRTR- PASE_ART4TRNECOSE

______, Ordinance No. 20151217-075, An Ordinance Amending City Code Chapter 13-2 Relating to Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) and Terminating Operating Agreements, February 1, 2016. Accessed June 3, 2016: https://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm%- 3Fid=245769

City of Burnaby, Uber ride-sharing service (Council Report). Accessed, June 4, 2016: https:// burnaby.civicweb.net/ document/15149/2014%2010%2027%20-%20 Uber%20Ride%20Shar- ing%20Service%20(2).pdf • Tis comprises of a criminal City of Edmonton, Bylaw 171400, Vehicle for Hire Bylaw, p. 2, Accessed May 13, 2016. http:// record check webdocs.edmonton.ca/siredocs/published_meetings/91/519956.pdf completed at no cost to the City of London, G. Kotsifas, P. Eng., Managing Director of Development and Compliance applicant and Services and Chief Building Ofcial, Vehicles for Hire, New Technologies,2015, Accessed March 13, which can be 2016 https://www.london.ca/newsroom/Documents/Uber-sept2915.pdf done online. City of Mississauga, Commissioner of Transportation and Works, Regulation of Transporta- * = this is the basic process for drivers in On- tion Network Companies, Appendix G., March 2, 2016. Accessed June 1-, 2016: http://www7.missis- tario, Quebec and Alberta. sauga.ca/documents/agendas/committees/general/2016/03_02_2016_GC_Agenda.pdf

City of Ottawa, Taxi and Limousine Regulation Service Review, December 31, 2015, http:// app05.ottawa.ca/sirepub/cache/2/n5o3pop1qhirlv5uplikps42/3696700714201609391041.PDF

______, Taxi and Limousine Regulation Service Review: Accessibility, http://app05.ottawa.ca/ sirepub/cache/2/n5o3pop1qhirlv5uplikps42/36969207142016094335787.PDF

City of Portland, Bureau of Transportation, Portland’s Private for-Hire Transportation Market: Sum- mary Report of the PFHT Innovation Pilot Program, October, 2015. Accessed April 20, 2016: http:// www.portlandmercury.com/images/blogimages/2015/10/19/1445275712-pbot_tnc_data.pdf

______, Bureau of Transportation, Private for For-Hire Transportation Innovation Pilot Program: Transportation Network Service Guiding Regulatory Principles, Accessed, May 4, 2016: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/526684

City of Seattle, Municipal Code, Taxi Cabs and Vehicle For-Hire, Wheelchair Accessible Services Fund, 6.310.175, Accessed June 15, 2016: https://www.municode.com/library/wa/seattle/ 42 Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility Transportation Network Companies and Accessibility 43 codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT6BURE_SUBTITLE_IVNELICO_CH6.310TAFREVE html

City of Toronto, A New Vehicle-for-Hire Bylaw to Regulate Toronto’s Ground Transportation Rempel, Jon. “A Review of Uber, the Growing Alternative to Traditional Taxi Service,” Product Industry Section, City Council Decision, May 3, 2016, Section 3, 46., Accessed June 2, 2016: http:// Evaluations and Guides, American Federation for the Blind, June, 2014, 15 (6). Accessed June 10, app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2016.LS10.3 2016: http://www.af.org/afpress/pub.asp?DocID=aw1506toc&All#aw150602)

______, Executive Director of Municipal Licensing and Standards, 2015 Ground Trans- Rodriguez, Salvador. “For Uber, Lyft Riders with Disabilities, Discrimination Often Comes In- porta tion Review, Taxis Limos and Uber, 2015, September 8th. Accessed June 1, 2016. http://www. cluded,” International Business Times, August 13, 2015. Accessed June 1, 2016: http://www.ibtimes. toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2015/ls/bgrd/backgroundfle-83268.pdf com/uber-lyft-riders-disabilities-discrimination-often-comes-included-2052675

City of Vancouver, Taxi Service Review and Report Back (Council Report), October 15, 2015. Schelling, Stephen. “Uber Town-Car Service Shut Down in Vancouver by B.C. Passenger Accessed March 17, 2016: http://council.vancouver.ca/20151020/documents/rr3.pdf Transportation Board,” The Georgia Straight, November 28, 2012. Accessed June 18, 2016: http:// www.straight.com/news/uber-town-car-service-shut-down-vancouver-bc-passenger-transportati- Hara and Associates, “Assessment of Public Need for 78 Vancouver Accessible Taxi Licences”, on-board 2014, as cited in City of Vancouver, Taxi Service Review and Report Back (Council Report), October 15, 2015. Accessed March 17, 2016: http://council.vancouver.ca/20151020/documents/rr3.pdf Stolte, Elise. “Edmonton becomes frst city in Canada to pass Uber-friendly bylaw,” National Poast, January 28, 2016. Accessed June 3, 2016: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/edmon- PWC, The Sharing Economy, Consumer Intelligence Series, April, 2015. Accessed March 3, ton-becomes-frst-city-in-canada-to-pass-uber-friendly-bylaw 2016, https://www.pwc.com/us/en/technology/publications/assets/pwc-consumer-intelligence-se- ries-the-sharing-economy.pdf Strochlic, Nina. “Uber: Disability Laws Don’t Apply to Us,” The Daily Beast, May 21, 2015. Ac- cessed March 5, 2016: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/21/uber-disability-laws-don- News Media and Advocacy Groups t-apply-to-us.html Associated Press. "Uber and Lyft halt service in Austin, Texas, after voters embrace back- Wieczner, Jen. “Why the Disabled are Suing Uber and Lyft”, Time, May 22, 2015. Accessed ground-check rules", published in Los Angeles Times, May 9, 2016. Accessed May 9, 2016: http:// June 1, 2016: http://time.com/3895021/why-the-disabled-are-suing-uber-and-lyft/ www.latimes.com/business/la-f-tn-uber-lyft-suspension-austin-20160509-snap-story.html Uber Associated Press. "Uber and Lyft halt service in Austin, Texas, after voters embrace back- ground-check rules", published in Los Angeles Times, May 9, 2016. Accessed May 9, 2016: http:// Uber, “A New Kind of Mobility,” Uber, June 24, 2015. Accessed June 20, 2016: https://news- www.latimes.com/business/la-f-tn-uber-lyft-suspension-austin-20160509-snap-story.html room.uber.com/a-new-kind-of-mobility/

Cooper, Sam. “How Vancouver Taxi Companies are Beating Uber,” The Province, November 2, Uber, “A new way to explore the Uber app for our deaf or hard-of-hearing partners,” March 2015. Accessed May 25, 2016: http://www.theprovince.com/business/Vancouver+taxi+companies+- 16, 2016. Accessed July 2, 2016: https://newsroom.uber.com/canada/a-new-way-to-explore-the- beating+Uber/11490241/story.html uber-app-for-our-deaf-or-hard-of-hearing-partners/

Cross, Jessica Smith. “Accessibility advocates welcome UberWAV service in Toronto”, Metro Uber, “Inclusion Matters: Access and Empowerment for Riders and Drivers with Disability in News Toronto, January 17, 2016. Accessed May 27, 2016: http://www.metronews.ca/news/toron- Australia,” Uber, December 2, 2015. Accessed June 5, 2016: https://newsroom.uber.com/australia/ to/2016/01/17/uberwav-service-applauded-by-toronto-accessibility-advocates.html inclusion-matters-au/

CTV Montreal, “Deaf Uber drivers hope the Quebec gov’t will consider their livelihoods,” Uber, “Uber & Enabled Employment: A New Kind of Mobility,” Uber, September 22, 2015. CTV Montreal, May 29, 2016. Accessed June 2, 2016: http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/deaf-uber-drivers- Accessed June 10, 2016: https://newsroom.uber.com/australia/uber-enabled-employment-a-new- hope-the-quebec-gov-t-will-consider-their-livelihoods-1.2922143 kind-of-mobility/

Danielson, Chris National Federation for the Blind, “Groundbreaking Settlement to Uber, “Uber Assist”, Products. Accessed July 10: http://ubermovement.com/uberassist/ End Discrmination Against Blind Uber Riders Who Use Guide Dogs” (Press Release), April 30, 2016. Accessed May 14, 2016: https://nf.org/groundbreaking-settlement-end-discriminati- on-against-blind-uber-riders-who-use-guide-dogs

Gowan, Paul. “HandyDart Service Bumps Across Borders,” Disability Foundation, Disability News, (nd). Accessed June 5, 2016: http://www.disabilityfoundation.org/news/040305_handydart.