Overcharging, arguments affect commuters as cabs, autos go on strike in city
A woman on her way to a doctor near Amanora Mall said she was mistreated by some autorickshaw drivers on strike. "I had hailed an auto and was on my way to the doctor when a group of other autorickshaw drivers stopped the driver. They snatched his cellphone and forcibly tried to pull me out of the vehicle, stating that a strike was on," she told TOI, choosing anonymity.
"They paid no heed even when I said I had a doctor's appointment. When I screamed, they backed off a bit. The auto driver took the opportunity to drive off. How can they indulge in violence like this?" she said.
Indian Gig Workers Front
has called the strike in Pune, Mumbai and Nagpur demanding fare-by-meter system acknowledgement by state govt and scrapping of e-bike taxis .
This story continues on page 4 in the newspaper. For your reading convenience we have added it below.
No relief likely from cab & auto strike till Tuesday
Pune: The strike called by cab and auto drivers affiliated to aggregator apps led to major inconvenience for commuters in the city on Friday.
For instance, in the morning hours, a ride from NIBM Road to Pune airport (around 15km) by auto showed a fare of Rs430 against the normal Rs240 on the Uber app. If one booked an Uber XL, the fare reflected a whopping Rs1,461, and a ride via an Uber Sedan showed a fare of Rs777. A ride via UberGo showed a fare of Rs739, and if one wanted to ride in the Uber Premier category, the fare showed Rs1,096. Elsewhere in the city as well, auto prices almost doubled - a short ride from Karve Road to FC Road cost at least Rs70-80 by auto, versus the usual average of Rs40-50 on aggregator apps. By meter, the same cost comes to around Rs30.
Arriving flyers at the airport in the early hours of Friday were especially hassled. Vivek Purekar, who had to go to Kothrud from the airport, said, "I booked an Uber cab, for which the fare is locked advance. Upon reaching the AeroMall from the arrival area, I was told that cab drivers were on strike and I had to take another mode of transportation. Many other flyers besides me were clueless about this. I then wasted around 30 minutes trying to cancel the pre-paid ride and had to take pre-paid autorickshaw to my destination."
Ajinkya Bhavane, who came from Delhi and wanted to go to Kalyaninagar, was in for a shock too. "The cab pickup area at the AeroMall was practically empty, and even after repeated attempts over 30 minutes, I couldn't get any cabs. I came outside with my luggage and found an auto driver who asked me to pay Rs500 for the short distance, saying that there was a strike going on. I was in a hurryand had no choice," he rued.
Ankit Rai, a Pune resident, wrote on X, "There are no cabs available to commute to work. The aggregator applications are showing triple times surge, and striking drivers are stopping cabs and assaulting the non-striking drivers and also passengers, resulting in passengers being left stranded on the road."
Sonu Pandey, who was at the airport late on Thursday evening, also shared his plight on X and posted: "Last night, I witnessed five or six individuals acting like thugs, threatening and physically assaulting cab drivers, forcing them to cancel rides. Meanwhile, regular cabs were charging exorbitant fares - upwards of Rs2,000 for a mere 10km ride. This is a complete disaster."
Keshav Kshirsagar, president of the Indian Gig Workers Front, accepted that incidents of violence occurred. "We have been appealing to striking drivers not to indulge in any violence and will continue to do so. On Friday, we also met some officials of the transport department who said they could arrange a meeting with all stakeholders by Tuesday. So, at present, the strike will be on until Tuesday at least until our demands are met," he told TOI.
Earlier this year, the Indian Gig Workers Front announced that from May 1, cabs of Ola, Uber and Rapido should charge fares as per state govt-approved rates.
App companies had said that for autos, they had already switched to a SaaS (software as a service) model, wherein commuters could book autos via the apps but then fares would be decided by mutual understanding.
On May 1, the Gig Workers Front launched the website 'onlymeter.in' on which govt approved fares would reflect when details were entered.
Pune RTO officials had told TOI that once the state aggregator policy comes into effect, this confusion will be cleared. "Once it comes into play, apps will have to adhere to norms and apply for a licence," Pune deputy RTO Swapnil Bhosle had earlier told TOI.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
9 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Uber in talks with banks, private equity firms to fund robotaxi expansion
Uber is in talks with private equity firms and banks to secure funds to build its robotaxi business, CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said, as the ride-hailing giant bets on a mass roll-out of the nascent and much-scrutinized technology. Uber, which offers robotaxis from Alphabet-owned Waymo, has been strengthening its foothold in the self-driving taxi industry through partnerships with automakers such as Volkswagen and Lucid, just as Tesla seeks to expand its fledgling robotaxi business. Mr. Khosrowshahi on Wednesday (August 6, 2025) pitched the tie-ups as part of a larger plan that involves three robotaxi business models: paying partners that own such vehicles a fixed rate, sharing revenue with fleet operators and owning vehicles while licensing software for self-driving technology. "We are talking to private equity players, we have talked to banks," the CEO said. "Once we prove the revenue model, how much these cars can generate on a per day basis, there will be plenty of financing to go around." For now, Uber said it was planning on using a "modest" portion of its around $7 billion in annual cash flows to fund deployments. It might also sell minority stakes in companies to aid the expansion, it said. Analysts have said that mass robotaxi deployment could lower driver-reliant Uber's operating costs and boost profitability. The company has been offering Waymo robotaxis on its ride-hailing app in Austin, Texas and Atlanta, Georgia. In April, Uber entered a deal with Volkswagen for thousands of autonomous electric vans in the United States over the next decade. It also struck a $300 million partnership in July that will allow it to deploy more than 20,000 autonomous taxis, made by EV startup Lucid and powered by self-driving tech from Nuro, over six years. Despite strong regulatory scrutiny, doubts about wider adoption, and high costs forcing many firms to shut down, Tesla and Waymo have been pushing to expand robotaxi services, a business Elon Musk has said could be worth trillions of dollars. Waymo is present in five U.S. cities, including San Francisco, while Tesla launched a limited robotaxi service in Austin in June and started ride-hailing operations in the Bay Area last month. Uber said it has not yet seen any changes in demand trends in Austin or San Francisco since Tesla's services were launched in the cities. "To a lot of these companies, it does seem this will be a worthwhile endeavor ... as there are lofty predictions about the robotaxi industry's total addressable market," said Ken Mahoney, CEO of Mahoney Asset Management.
Economic Times
2 days ago
- Economic Times
Insurance claims not restricted to third party in motor accidents: SC
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Supreme Court held that motor vehicle insurance policy holders can claim compensation and referred the issue of claims against injury or death to the policyholder themselves in a road accident to a larger bench, saying that such cases have contradict judgements in the SC, while hearing the compensation plea of a minor girl, who lost both her parents in a car accident while her father was driving, a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran said section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act could be invoked for such a claim, adding that it is a special provision which overrides not only all the provisions of the Act but also any other law in force for the time minor was provided with the compensation by the insurance company for the death of her mother but not for her father as he was himself the insured bench said: "... a claim under section 163A, as per the words employed in the provision, according to us covers every claim and is not restricted to a third party claim; without any requirement of establishing the negligence, if death or permanent disability is caused by reason of the motor accident. This would also take in the liability with respect to the death of an owner or a driver who stepped into the shoes of the owner, if the claim is made under section 163A dehors the statutory liability under section 147 or the contractual liability as reduced to writing in an insurance policy".The insurance company, however, had held that the petitioner, having succeeded to the estate of the owner of the vehicle who died in the accident cannot at the same time be the person who has the liability and is the recipient of the compensation."It would override the provisions under sections 147 & 149 along with the other provisions of the Act and the law regulating insurance as also the terms of the policy confining the claim with respect to an owner-driver to a fixed sum. This according to us is the intention of incorporating the non-obstante clause under Section 163A providing for no-fault liability claims , the compensation for which is restricted to the structured formula under the IInd Schedule. It is a beneficial piece of legislation brought in, keeping in mind the enhanced chances of an accident, resulting from the prevalence of vehicles in the overcrowded roads of today. It was a social security scheme, brought about considering the need for a more comprehensive scheme of 'no-fault' liability for reasons of the ever-increasing instances of motor vehicle accidents and the difficulty in proving rash and negligent driving," the bench said.(With TOI inputs)
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Insurance claims not restricted to third party in motor accidents: SC
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Supreme Court held that motor vehicle insurance policy holders can claim compensation and referred the issue of claims against injury or death to the policyholder themselves in a road accident to a larger bench, saying that such cases have contradict judgements in the SC, while hearing the compensation plea of a minor girl, who lost both her parents in a car accident while her father was driving, a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran said section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act could be invoked for such a claim, adding that it is a special provision which overrides not only all the provisions of the Act but also any other law in force for the time minor was provided with the compensation by the insurance company for the death of her mother but not for her father as he was himself the insured bench said: "... a claim under section 163A, as per the words employed in the provision, according to us covers every claim and is not restricted to a third party claim; without any requirement of establishing the negligence, if death or permanent disability is caused by reason of the motor accident. This would also take in the liability with respect to the death of an owner or a driver who stepped into the shoes of the owner, if the claim is made under section 163A dehors the statutory liability under section 147 or the contractual liability as reduced to writing in an insurance policy".The insurance company, however, had held that the petitioner, having succeeded to the estate of the owner of the vehicle who died in the accident cannot at the same time be the person who has the liability and is the recipient of the compensation."It would override the provisions under sections 147 & 149 along with the other provisions of the Act and the law regulating insurance as also the terms of the policy confining the claim with respect to an owner-driver to a fixed sum. This according to us is the intention of incorporating the non-obstante clause under Section 163A providing for no-fault liability claims , the compensation for which is restricted to the structured formula under the IInd Schedule. It is a beneficial piece of legislation brought in, keeping in mind the enhanced chances of an accident, resulting from the prevalence of vehicles in the overcrowded roads of today. It was a social security scheme, brought about considering the need for a more comprehensive scheme of 'no-fault' liability for reasons of the ever-increasing instances of motor vehicle accidents and the difficulty in proving rash and negligent driving," the bench said.(With TOI inputs)
