Along with allegations about sexual harrassment, improperly acquired licences, etc., there were also recent claims that Uber drivers were involved in far more traffic accidents than black cab drivers. It was suggested that this may be because they don't do "the knowledge" but rely entirely on sat navs.
I know there are many people who use Uber - my son does - but my feeling is that if proper safety measures are not being enforced then it would be irresponsible to continue to licence the company without evidence that these matters were being dealt with.
GracesGran re the anti-trust comment that you heard in an interview, Wikepedia says "In the late-nineteenth century, several large businesses, including Standard Oil, had either bought their rivals or had established business arrangements that effectively stifled any competition. Standard Oil organized itself as a trust in which several component corporations were organized under the supervision of one board of directors, and several other businesses followed suit. While Congress had passed the 1890 Sherman Antitrust Act to provide some federal regulation of trusts, the Supreme Court had limited the power of the act in the case of United States v. E. C. Knight Co.[21]."
I'm not quite sure how this relates to Uber, unless it is said that it is operating in such a way as to "stifle competition" by undercutting the traditional black cabs (and presumably doing so by mean of underpaying drivers and flouting safety regulations.)
It is quite understandable tha many people need to keep their costs down and are therefore tempted to go for the cheapest option but surely this is all part of the "race to the bottom" that is often talked about?
