Taxi, Limo, Rideshare, Vehicle for Hire, Private Transportation Company…as the terms get more complicated, concepts get more confused

Mayor Olivia Chow’s admirable attempt to cap the number of rideshare vehicles cruising city streets perversely resulted in a halt in the licensing of drivers for Accessible Taxis, perhaps the driver category needed most urgently in Toronto.

The Law of Unintended Consequences strikes again. Ouch.

“What is this, ‘Vehicles for Hire’? Abdul Mohamoud of Co-op Cabs asked me in the middle of a call in 2020. “Why don’t they just say ‘Taxi’ or ‘rideshare’? We’ve been calling Taxis ‘Taxis’ for a hundred years. Suddenly, they are not ‘Taxis’ anymore they are ‘Vehicles for Hire’?”

I had to laugh at his practical assessment. It’s true, people have been calling Taxis “Taxis” for a hundred years – even longer, I’m sure. People who drive them for a living call them “Taxis” and people who hail them on the street call them “Taxis.” Calling a Taxi a “Vehicle for Hire” confirms we have reached a whole new level of pretentiousness in a world that desperately needs more plain language.

When Uber arrived in Toronto, a new term was needed to describe the new “rideshare” business model. Instead of the dedicated vehicles with roof lights, obvious paint patterns and 24/7 commercial insurance represented by Taxi, rideshare vehicles had no roof light, any and all paint colours, and personal insurance with a “wrap around” policy.  

To add to the confusion, rideshares are also referred to as “Private Transportation Companies,” or PTCs. By dictionary definition, Taxis are also private transportation companies, just not the way Toronto uses the term.

In 2016, Toronto had capped approval of Taxi plates at 5,500 but quickly allowed more than 80,000 rideshare vehicles (or PTCs or VFHs, according to your definition). The number of rideshares has since been adjusted to 54,620.

Discussing 5,500 legal Taxis in the same breath as 55,000 rideshare vehicles gives rise to some painfully obvious questions, such as: how could a city which claims it wants to reduce emissions permit 55,000 rideshare vehicles to cruise the streets?

How could a city which is working to reduce gridlock permit 55,000 rideshare vehicles to cruise the streets (empty about half of the time spent cruising)?

Well, clearly it can’t. If Toronto is serious about reducing emissions or gridlock, it can’t allow 55,000 rideshares on the street. The number of rideshares must be capped; or Toronto must abandon the “Net Zero” fiction.

Enter the term, “Vehicle for Hire.” In April, 2023, Toronto didn’t have 5,500 legal Taxis and 78,000 rideshare vehicles. It had 85,000 Vehicles for Hire, don’t you know, and what applies to one category apparently must now apply to both, right? Toronto is a fair and equitable city.

At Council on October 13^th, astonished City Councillors and Mayor Olivia Chow tried to discuss “Net Zero” emissions, only to learn that Toronto had approved unleashing tens of thousands of rideshare vehicles onto the streets AT THE EXACT SAME TIME IT WAS TRYING TO REDUCE EMISSIONS AND GRIDLOCK.

Kudos to Mayor Chow, Councillors Bravo, Perks and others who called the previous Council out for its hypocrisy in talking about emissions while refusing to cap the number of rideshare vehicles. Chow showed leadership in capping the number of rideshare vehicles “at the present number.” (“The present number” on October 13^th was assumed to be somewhere around 52,000; the number provided to Taxi News on November 7 was 54,620.)

You’d think it would be a no-brainer, to put a cap on the number of rideshare vehicles which had, up until now, never been capped.

The number of Taxi plates in Toronto have always been capped, most recently at 5,500. One metal Taxi plate is screwed onto one Taxi vehicle and can’t be moved without permission. The number of rideshare vehicles was NEVER capped, before October 13^th 2023.

So, apparently thinking went, if you leave the 5,500 cap on Taxis alone but cap rideshare vehicles while staff figure out what the ideal number of rideshare vehicles for Toronto is, we’d be all good, right?

No.  It can’t be that simple. Directed by Council to cap the number of “Vehicles for Hire,” MLS staff capped the number of Taxi drivers, as well. Taxi News first learned of this when a brokerage looking for licensed Accessible Taxi drivers couldn’t hire any, because Toronto had stopped issuing Taxi driver licenses.

So, Chow’s valiant attempt at capping the number of rideshare vehicles cruising Toronto’s streets resulted in a halt in the licensing of drivers for Accessible Taxis, one of the most urgently needed categories of drivers….wait, what?

A flurry of emails and updates has occurred since November 3^rd; I’ll post the latest staff response in its entirety in order to reduce the risk I’ll create further confusion by trying to interpret it.

At the end of the day, I suggest, Toronto was better off with distinct categories and clearly defined terms. Taxis are one group; Limos are another. Rideshare is another. The conglomerate term “Vehicle for Hire” only causes confusion, and should be dispensed with. Same with “Private Transportation Company.” The last two terms technically apply to every category and do nothing but sow confusion (which might actually have been the intent, under John Tory).