Charles McCann has become something of a familiar face behind the wheel of ride-hailing service Uber in Mobile. The 68-year-old manages a storage facility by day and drives for extra income on the side, and since Uber began operating in the city, he says he has earned close to $400 over more than 30 trips. He is hoping the arrangement sticks around.
A Mobile City Council committee is set to take up an amendment that would let drivers like McCann, who work for what the industry calls “transportation network companies,” operate legally within city limits. Until that vote happens, though, drivers are working in a gray area, with little clarity about how existing law treats app-based ride services.
“I don’t mind doing whatever they want us to do, really,” McCann said from behind the wheel of his Buick. “I would hate for them to throw us out now because I’ve started going.”
Uber representatives argue that local rules simply need to catch up with a new kind of transportation option, while some existing operators, including shuttle services, taxi companies and limousine businesses, contend the ride-hailing model is functionally the same as what they already offer and should be regulated the same way. The council’s public safety committee moved up its review of the proposed ordinance to address the issue sooner rather than later.
In the meantime, Uber vehicles continue to operate on city streets without the markings traditional taxis carry, a detail that has drawn complaints from some residents and competitors. The company said this week it would offer free rides in Mobile for a short period, framing the move as a gesture of good faith while the city works out new rules.
The proposed ordinance, which would create a distinct legal category for smartphone-based services like Uber and Lyft, was introduced this week by Mayor Sandy Stimpson and Councilman Levon Manzie. Stimpson has said the goal is to let the companies operate “in a manner that is safe, convenient and best serves the citizens of our city.” Some council members, however, have expressed frustration that the company began operating before receiving formal council approval, and internal correspondence has pointed to friction between the mayor’s office and members of the council over how the rollout was handled.
The mayor’s office has said Uber is operating while the ordinance works its way through the approval process, a pattern it says has played out in other cities weighing similar rules. If the ordinance fails to pass, officials have indicated they would consider regulating ride-hailing vehicles under the same rules that apply to other vehicles for hire.
Not everyone is waiting patiently. An attorney representing a local transportation company sent a pointed letter to the council, its attorney, the mayor’s office, the police chief and the city attorney, warning that the company could seek a court order halting Uber’s operations in Mobile. The attorney said litigation remained a last resort for now rather than an immediate step.
Cities elsewhere offer a mixed track record for how these fights play out. Ride-hailing companies have reached workable arrangements with local governments in places like New Orleans, Chattanooga and Pensacola, while other cities have seen more contentious standoffs. Mobile’s council is expected to weigh those examples as it decides how to proceed.