operator Ryan Hashagen.
(Photos © J. Maus)
Last week, we published an interview with Portland Cascadia Pedicabs owner Ryan Hashagen. In it, Hashagen shared serious concerns about new policies being crafted by the City of Portland’s Revenue Bureau that would bring pedicabs under regulation for the first time.
Hashagen told BikePortland, and many other local media outlets, that if the regulations went forward as currently proposed he (and other pedicab company owners and pedicab operators) would “cease to operate”*. Hashagen feels that they have not had enough time to digest proposed changes and influence the policy-making process.
Because the proposed new regulations involve licensing of pedicabs, the policy is being written by the city’s Revenue Bureau. On Friday afternoon, I received an email from the Revenue Bureau that refutes all of Hashagen’s allegations.
Hashagen has claimed that the regulations “do not address our safety concerns.” The Revenue Bureau says that the new regulations would require safety inspections of pedicabs along with criminal background checks of operators and “proof of traffic law knowledge” which could come as either a driver’s license or completion of a “Bureau-approved in-house training by the pedicab company.”
Regarding background checks, the Revenue Bureau wrote that they were “not willing to exempt pedicab drivers from criminal background checks considering that they are transporting tourists and citizens and safety is paramount.” In their email, the Revenue Bureau characterized Hashagen’s concern about this as stemming from the fact that, “several of his drivers would not have met this requirement”.
When I asked him about this today, Hashagen said, “Of course, I don’t want criminals on my crews”. But Hashagen feels the City is mis-characterizing his perspective. He says pedicab operators brought up a concern about a section of Code (16.40.080, Sec. E (1, A)) that says someone cannot get a permit if they have a misdemeanor “involving theft, robbery, burglary, assault, sex crimes, drugs, prostitution, or weapons” going back 5 years.
Hashagen says those operators are young and that some of them have midemeanors for Minor In Possession of alcohol and that one operator got caught shoplifting for food when he first moved to Portland, “because he was broke”.
The proposed regulations initially required a driver’s license, but the city says they removed that requirement after hearing feedback from pedicab industry reps that many operators didn’t have one.
Hashagen has also said that the new regulations are “purely focused on generating revenue for the revenue bureau.” In response, the City summed up the fees — $25 for drivers, $25 per pedicab, $100 for a pedicab company, and so on — which they say “amounts to approximately 14 cents per day”.
(By comparison, permit fees for sedan drivers are: $100 for drivers, $225 per vehicle and $500 per company.)
“The City agreed to modify every section that he had concerns about with the exception of his request that we remove criminal background checks for drivers, since several of his drivers would not have met this requirement.”
— from the Revenue Bureau’s email response to Ryan Hashagen’s allegations
At $25 per pedicab operator, the Revenue Bureau says they will “actually lose money” after expending the staff hours and resources to conduct all the background checks, skills tests, take permit photos, and so on. They also pointed out that the permit price does not take into account the resources they’ll need to enforce the permits and/or make random checks.
When asked about this today, Hashagen said he has no problem with the permitting fees. What he’s concerned about are the fines for “driver conduct” that are being proposed. A $500 fine for “being discourteous to a passenger” is being proposed and Hashagen says he’s worried that this will compromise his driver’s ability to “establish a safe space [in their pedicab] through assertiveness”.
Another allegation made by Hashagen was that the City had not “done their homework” by talking with existing stakeholders. To counter that allegation, the City detailed their involvement with pedicab business owners dating back to October 2008. At that time, they say Casey Martell of PDX Rose Pedal Pedicabs approached them and said he wanted to set up a meeting with the Revenue Bureau. “City staff agreed to attend the meeting,” they wrote in an email to me Friday, “but Mr. Martel did not set one up.”
The City also outlined that they have held eight public workshops and monthly Revenue Board meetings and that all the information has been posted on the Bureau’s website and emailed to all parties.
However, Hashagen still maintains that he and others have not been adequately informed and included in the process, especially compared to other stakeholders like limousine and taxi drivers. He says the eight public workshops were well attended by taxi, towncar, and shuttle operators but that “we had no idea this was going on.”
As for Hashagen’s claim that the City wanted pedicab operators to “have pollution control devices and fire extinguishers”, the City says he simply misread the proposed Code and that they were, “not mandating that new equipment be installed”.
Hashagen has also publicly alleged that the City wants to require pedicab operators to have auto insurance. The Revenue Board refutes this allegation. They say they are still researching how best to handle the insurance question and that they are still working to finalize the Code language (a fact they say has been made clear at meetings where pedicab company owners have been present).
The final allegation made by Hashagen in our video last week was that the Revenue Board would only meet once more at a work session “with no public comment allowed”. The Revenue Board says that allegation is also untrue. On April 15th, the Board is meeting for public input and discussion. After that meeting, they say they will issue a new draft version of regulations that “take into account these comments and discussion.”
I discussed the Revenue Bureau’s challenges to Hashagen’s allegations at length with him today. He remains very frustrated and says that the City is only “covering their butts and backpedaling” now that the story is out in the media.
Hashagen maintains that the first time he saw draft Code language was on February 22nd and that he was told back then that the City wasn’t even sure they would be regulating pedicabs. Hashagen then says he was not notified of any new proposed Code until about 10 days ago. He says he only had a few days to get up to speed and comment on 38 pages of new Code that impacted his business.
Now, he says, “I’m as involved as I can be now that I know this is all happening.”
Hashagen feels like the pedicab industry has not received the same level of communication and involvement with this process as other private, for-hire vehicle interests. “Why do these other stakeholders deserve a 2-year long process,” he wondered, “and we can just be thrown in at the last minute with no thought, no invitation, and no correspondence?”
Hashagen says the City has not done an adequate job including pedicabs because they have had their hands full dealing with myriad other groups that also have a stake in these new policies. “They just don’t want this [pedicab stuff] to be an issue…so copy and paste policy is what they’re doing. This is last-minute legislation for us.”
At this point, Hashagen is hastily organizing with other pedicab company owners to form a new association that can represent their interests. Because of his many concerns with the proposed Code, Hashagen wants the Revenue Board to completely exclude pedicabs from this round of new regulations and form a pedicab policy task force that would then work with the Revenue Board on any future policies.
The new pedicab association is set to meet this week.
— Download a PDF of the latest draft of the new “Private For Hire Proposed Code Rewrite”.
[*Note: (4/14, 9:30 am): I initially reported that Hashagen said the new regulations would “kill his business”. Hashagen never said that. It was my mistake. I have edited the story and I regret the error.]
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
1640.40.420 A. Pedicab Insurance
2. Pedicab Insurance. All for-hire company permit holders, (all pedicab drivers must individually), regardless of
whether the company holds title to a pedicab or not, must provide the City
with a copy of a valid (!)Commercial Auto Liability(!) policy reflecting a
Combined Single Limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for claims
arising out of, but not limited to, bodily injury and property damage incurred
from the business use of any scheduled, non-owned, and hired automobile in
the course of the vehicle’s use as a for-hire transportation vehicle. The
Commercial Auto Liability policy must comply with the mandatory laws of
the State of Oregon and/or other applicable governing bodies.
1640.40.420 A. Pedicab Insurance
2. Pedicab Insurance. All for-hire company permit holders, (all pedicab drivers must individually), regardless of
whether the company holds title to a pedicab or not, must provide the City
with a copy of a valid (!)Commercial Auto Liability(!) policy reflecting a
Combined Single Limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for claims
arising out of, but not limited to, bodily injury and property damage incurred
from the business use of any scheduled, non-owned, and hired automobile in
the course of the vehicle’s use as a for-hire transportation vehicle. The
Commercial Auto Liability policy must comply with the mandatory laws of
the State of Oregon and/or other applicable governing bodies.
While this may rule and others still be up for debate internally, we should ALL be invited to the table as stakeholders to create viable policy.
Uh, why should pedicad drivers not have to have insurance? Why should they not have to have a liscence?
As a public road user, these don’t seem unreasonable?
Why do you need government to do what you could easily do for yourself? You really should be capable of ensuring your own welfare without calling upon government to do your bidding by applying force, violence and/or coercion to those you would like to control. Violence begets more of the same.
anonymous,
perhaps my story wasn’t clear.
this isn’t about simply not having insurance or a license. this is about how policy around those issues is being written and how much input various stakeholders are having in the process.
Anybody who actually bothers to read the proposed regulations can see that Ryan Hashagen is blowing smoke.
The “required” pollution control device? The code requires vehicles to be equipped with all “originally-installed” pollution control devices. That fine for “being rude”? It is a fine for “profane or offensive language that offends the passenger,” not a fine for “assertiveness.”
There is a fine for “violating the laws” of the city or state, and after seeing pedicab operators ride through stop signs while carrying passengers, or passing vehicles on the right and then making u-turns across their path, I can understand his concern about that part of the proposed regulations.
Finally, the real stumbling block here appears to be the required insurance, which, the Revenue Bureau’s denials notwithstanding, does include auto insurance, at least as drafted. And for pedicab passengers, that’s not a bad thing, taking into account the fact that (1) a passenger in one of Ryan’s pedicabs was killed in Seattle last year, and (2) at least some pedicab operators aren’t observing the traffic laws.
Anonymous,
Also Ryan’s point is that the city is requiring commercial auto liability insurance. There are many flavors of liability insurance that could cover the liability needs of pedicabs. The auto insurance (i.e., insurance for motorized vehicles) requirement seems out of place.
Once again we have an example of how human-powered vehicle operators are being forced to contend with a transportation infrastructure that is designed for motor vehicles.
Whether or not Ryan’s points are all salient, the fact remains that the pedicab business cannot operate as an official “industry” in most large cities without some kind of regulation. It was only a matter of time before this all came down and I am not the least bit surprised at any of it.
How enforceable is it? Well, let’s see.
The most radical approach would be for would-be pedicab operators to go completely underground. Strip off the logos, get rid of your advertising, and do everything by word-of-mouth. Put out feelers in the punk/d-i-y scene and go from there. If you’re stopped, be like the nice folks in the early days of Grey Rabbit/Green Tortoise and tell ’em your passengers are just friends and riding for free.
Punk/d-i-y action is still possible IF you’re willing to keep things small, unobtrusive and close to the ground. But if you want to grow, and turn it into an “industry” and perhaps make enough of a profit to actually live off the proceeds, then regulation (including registration, insurance and city fees) will likely be the price you have to pay.
Good luck.
In Portland, I see pedicabs operating with poor lighting; very small, often dim tailights. I’ve heard some of them have electrical turn signals. That’s good if true. Really, they should be as big and bright as those that motor vehicles have. There should be no skimping on brakes either. The safety of passengers is the concern here.
Can pedicab companies give their pedicab operators better pedicab training for operating pedicabs on the street than the DMV could? If they can, fine. Personally, the quality of pedicab in traffic operation I’ve seen concerns me. These rigs are big and bulky. When they don’t have electrical turn signals mounted on on the back of the vehicle, it can be hard to see the pedicab-op’s hand signals beyond the vehicle cab.
“The proposed regulations initially required a driver’s license, but the city says they removed that requirement after hearing feedback from pedicab industry reps that many operators didn’t have one.”
This is surprising, and certainly indicates a receptive ear on the part of the city.
The requirement of a driver’s license seems quite reasonable and appropriate, considering the context of the street.
Safety is the number one concern, so, sorry if that eliminates some drivers … they can go get a DMV license, no?
The requirement for ‘auto’ insurance is pretty unclear. It would be interesting to see what is required, or has been volunteered by pedicab companies, presently.
“On April 15th, the Board is meeting for public input and discussion.”
When and where?
Also, when and where for the new pedicab assoc.? Or just contact info if you have it, thanks.
It would be interesting to hear from the other operators in town to see if they have similar perspective as Ryan.
After reading the article about the pedi-cab fatality in Seattle, it does not seem that the proposed requirements are that intrusive. It takes money to regulate an indutry, and given the number of companies and drivers, it does not seem like a money making affair. In fact it seems as if the City is subsidizing the presence of predi-cabs in Portland.
wonder if the city will start up a horse carriage service soon 🙂
Hope all gets resolved amicably, would hate to see the bike carriages go away.
Bill (#9),
I would think the contention about the DL is likely not the traffic law knowledge, but rather the skills test. To me, it makes sense to have a pedicab license that is analogous to a DL “learning permit.” Pass the knowledge test, but forgo the irrelevant auto operation skills portion. Of course to have something official like this, it would require the involvement of Salem.
All Pedicab Companies have liability insurance already, so additional “auto” insurance policies on the actual pedicabs would be supreflous.
A pedicab is not an automobile Taxi. It is not capable of the speeds that an automobile travels at nor the damage that the mass of an automobile at speed is capable of. It should not be insured in the same way. Also because it is not an automobile, you should not need an automobile license to operate one, especially considering that operation a pedicab is more like ridng a motocycle than it is driving a car.
However I do think there should be some sort of Pedicab Operator’s license, many states have them, so I’m sure Oregon will find some way to make it more convoluted, difficult, and expensive to get one than it is anywhere else.
Insurance is not “superfluous” if the policy limits of the pedicab company are not sufficient to pay for the damages to passengers if there are serious injuries or fatalities arising from a collision caused by the pedicab operator.
Uh, Skidmark, while pedicabs are not capable of auto speeds, they are capable of getting somebody killed as in the Seattle accident. If you are ferrying people around for profit in city traffic, you should have the same insurance as other carriers have. By the way, motorcycle licenses are pretty much like auto licenses.
WTF do you think the Pedicab Liability Insurance is for? It’s for injuries to patrons, damage caused by the pedicab, injuries to the operator, and damage to the pedicab itself. See? Already insured. Therefore, a second insurance policy for the exact same thing would be superfluous. It’s very expensive, which is why pedicab operators lease their cabs, to insure yourself independently would be cost prohibitive.
old&slow: Uh, you have to get a car license before you can get a motorcycle license. I have both.
Do you really think the existing Pedicabs in town are driving around without insurance?
I find that I don’t have much sympathy for the owners of the pedi-cab businesses.
There are a lot of hoops that business owners have to jump through to start and maintain their businesses.
Insurance (worker’s comp, property, liability), business licenses, professional licenses, not to mention taxes, taxes, taxes.
So the City wants to bring the pedi-cabs more in line with the other service-transportation businesses. Safety of the passengers seems like a good thing, and I’m surprised that the owners of the pedi-cab businesses aren’t taking point on this issue and being proactive.
Yes, J.Maus, I understand that you were taking the angle of how policy is created, but the whole article came off as a pity-party for the pedi-cabs.
what i think a lot of the legislators fail to realize here is that pedicabbers do not make much money. i know because i am a pedicabber. they are essentially trying to get blood from a stone on some of the individual insurance issues. we do not operate on a set fee according to distance or anything like that. we just hope that people tip us, and often times that comes out to sweating and groaining your way across town for three dollars. this is something that we do because we love being active, interacting with the community, and having a positive influence on people’s lives by helping them get quickly and enjoyably from one place to another. pedicabs decrease needless shuttling around in cars from bar to bar by increasingly intoxicated bar patrons and in general allow downtown to operate more smoothly. if nothing else we are sober and alert and we are out there trying to help. some of these regulations are reasonable, others (like the auto insurance thing) are so financially unfeasable that they would eliminate the possibility of doing this job, which i think would be a loss for everyone. all we are asking for is a chance to fairly discuss these issues and come to a reasonable compromise instead of being lumped in at the last minute with a lot of regulation that just doesn’t make sense for our particular business.
“…incurred from the business use of any scheduled, non-owned, and hired automobile in the course of the vehicle’s use as a for-hire transportation vehicle.” (emphasis added)
If the text of the law is indeed what Ryan posted above (#1), then I don’t think it applies. As far as I can see, the term “automobile” is not legally defined in ORS, which means the dictionary definition holds. In my dictionary, that’s a four-wheeled self-propelled vehicle for carrying passengers. That does not include bicycles or pedicabs.
shit, i liked pedi-cabbing because as an occupation it’s accessible, it’s in many senses underground, and not yet subject to heavy regulation. some of the same reasons i like riding a bike better than driving and owning a car. so sue me.
Come onnnnnnnnnnnnnn
You’re saying in this economy, with all the cyclists who would LOVE to ride a bike for a living, that the owners of these pedicab companies can’t find people without criminal records who are willing to work? Now I’m not saying it’s fine to ban someone from being a pedicab operator for stealing food 5 years ago because that’s not fine, but if that’s the law that is forced upon you then hire some guys who don’t have criminal records. With all the people looking for work, and all the people who love riding bikes in this town, I find it hard to believe this would cripple any pedicab company.
skidmark, if you both licenses why can’t they get one? What is the problem? Having no insurance, nobody does that do they? WTF, are you talking about! That is why they need some regulation, so somebody makes sure they have insurance in case they decide to ride down 20% grades like they did in Seattle.
riding a pedicab is hard work. really hard. and you don’t make much money. and it IS in fact hard to find people who physically can do it and are willing to do it on a regular basis for the measly tips we make.
1. If the city says they have changed the regulations in question (or most of them); why haven’t they posted the new ones instead of continuing this bickering? and if they have posted the changes, GREAT! Where can I find them? and why is the city still bickering?
2. When is the state going to understand that some people will never fit the 9-5 mold? In order to keep those people as participating members of society–rather than transforming them in perpetual criminals, we (as a society) should embrace their funkyness and allow them to make a living in a productive manner. Personally, I don’t want to bother. but if some dude wants to set up a company, get insurance, train these little monkeys, and hold them accountable for their actions, I say THANXs!
3. in response to krampus comment. You may find it hard to believe that it is hard to find workers; but the truth of the matter is: that is there are illegal workers on other industries. people that are qualified to do certain jobs don’t do them if the compensation isn’t enough. right now, the pedicab bussiness is based on tips and safe fun. if you add a bunch of penalties for talking like a sailor and requirements like $50 fees, then there is no money for the Revenue to tax!
I’m a strong supporter of cyclist rights, and an everyday commuter that does not own a car. I am also a cab driver, and have had to contend with a lot of shady operators and often hear stories from fares about the horrible experiences they have had with less respectable outfits. Some regulation is clearly needed. I’m curious as to what Mr. Hashagen thinks a god level of regulation is.
b,
Hashagen also wants regulation, he just wants to make sure it is created with adequate insight and feedback from all stakeholders.
Sorry for the long post to my West coast riders. I and others on the East Coast in the pedicab industry can’t believe this story is getting this kind of kid-glove treatment.
Cascadia’s owner should be jumping through hoops of file to work with the city’s regulatory agency to regulate pedicabs and ensure passenger safety following the fatality of one of its passengers last year operated by its unit in Seattle. Not challenging the logic of it on Youtube!
This accident has created a ripple effect throughout the entire industry–nationwide. And for the most part, we’ve kept quiet and observed out of respect.
What has become of the affected family and of the driver? We lost one of our Northeast residents, Mr. Peter Dzioba, of Connecticut. How about some follow up there? Granted, it’s a Seattle story, but it’s playing out in Portland now.
But you be the judge. Read below.
-pm
1 killed, 5 injured in pedicab collision
One person was killed and five injured when a pedicab collided with a van shortly before 7 p.m. Wednesday at a busy Belltown intersection.
By Jack Broom
Seattle Times staff reporter
PREV of NEXT
GREG GILBERT / THE SEATTLE TIMES
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008096958_webpedicab.html
[enlarge the image and inspect it for yourself]
The damaged pedicab lies on its side in the intersection of Western Ave. and Cedar St in Belltown Wednesday evening.
Map data ©2009 Tele Atlas – Terms of UseSee more mapped stories
One person was killed and five injured when a pedicab collided with a van shortly before 7 p.m. Wednesday at a busy Belltown intersection.
Seattle police spokesman Jeff Kappel said preliminary witness statements indicated a pedicab with two passengers may have suffered an equipment failure and was coming downhill westbound on the sidewalk of Cedar Street when it entered the intersection with Western Avenue against the red light. The pedicab, a tricycle-like vehicle which seats passengers behind the rider, collided with a white van.
A scooter also traveling in that direction “entered the intersection and collided with the overturned pedicab,” said department spokeswoman Reneé Witt.
Police have impounded the pedicab for inspection. Officers do not believe alcohol or drugs were a factor in the crash, said Sgt. Sean Whitcomb.<
A 60-year-old male passenger of the pedicab died at the scene. A female passenger, also 60, and the male pedicab driver, 23, were transported to Harborview Medical Center. A hospital spokeswoman said today that the woman remains in satisfactory condition and the male driver is in serious condition and is likely to be moved out of the intensive care unit. The male scooter driver, 57; the male van driver, 20; and his female passenger were all treated at the scene.
Ryan Hashagen, the owner Cascadia Cabs, which operated the pedicab involved in the crash, said this morning that he is working with their insurance company and preparing a statement about the incident.
When asked how he and employees are doing, Ryan Hashagen said “It’s not about us right now.”
Vinnie Brassesco, who lives in an apartment building at Western Avenue and Cedar Street, saw the aftermath of the accident.
“I was sitting in my apartment, and I heard a boom. Really loud. I looked out. One guy was under the van, the other guy was pressed up against the front tire, and the lady was laying in the road,” he said.
Another witness, Deborah Hudlow, who was sitting on the 11th floor deck of her condominium, said “The first thing I heard was a scream. It sounded like a woman. And as I turned my head I heard the impact. And then I saw the pedicab pretty much up in the air.”
Jack Broom: 206-464-2222 or jbroom@seattletimes.com
Fall Guy
Current and Former Employees Question Pedicab Company’s Statements
by Eli Sanders
Concerned that the driver of a pedicab involved in a fatal crash in Belltown on August 6 is being set up as a fall guy in the accident, a now-former worker for the same pedicab company has told The Stranger that it’s just as likely the accident was caused by shoddy maintenance and lax safety.
Referring to the owner of Cascadia Cabs, Ryan Hashagen, this former employee said: “I’ve been reading what Ryan has been saying to the media and I want to say the other side of it… He’s blaming the driver when I think that there are poor management practices that are actually to blame for the accident.”
According to an August 7 report by KOMO News headlined “Pedicab owner: Driver at fault in deadly crash,” and still posted on the station’s website, Hashagen placed blame for the accident squarely on the driver of the pedicab: “There were no mechanical problems with a Cascadia Cabs pedicab involved in a deadly collision with a minivan Wednesday in Seattle, says the owner of the company, who blames the driver for the crash.
“Ryan Hashagen of Bellingham, the company’s owner, said the brakes of the three-wheeled touring vehicle were working properly, and that the driver should never have taken the pedicab down such a steep slope.”
The former employee, who spoke to The Stranger in our offices on the condition of anonymity out of fear of legal retribution, worked at Cascadia at the time of the accident. The former employee, along with a current employee whose employment could not be verified by press time, said Cascadia doesn’t provide enough braking mechanisms on its pedicabs, relies on inexperienced bikers, and is insufficiently thorough in safety training.
Cascadia’s pedicabs have only a simple braking mechanism: a metal bar connected to a leather strap. There are no hand brakes on the pedicabs.
The August 6 accident occurred when the pedicab, apparently out of control as it headed down a hill in Belltown, ran a red light and collided with a minivan. A 60-year-old man, in Seattle to celebrate his anniversary, was killed. He had been riding as a passenger in the pedicab with his wife, who was injured in the accident. The driver of the pedicab was also injured.
Contacted by The Stranger on August 12, Hashagen, who runs Pedicab operations in five Northwest cities, said he could only read a prepared statement.
“Our heart goes out to all those affected by this incident,” Hashagen said. “We want to get to the bottom of this situation as much as anyone. We are conducting a full investigation into what has occurred. We are cooperating with all relevant local authorities investigating this incident.”
Told of the former employee’s specific complaints, which included concerns that pedicabs are allowed onto the streets of Seattle without proper maintenance and sent into traffic with poorly functioning brakes, he said: “Our company policy is safety first. We have a motto. That is, ‘Be safe, have fun, and make money.’ …[Drivers] are not allowed to leave the shop with nonfunctioning brakes.”
He also said that drivers are told to avoid hills like the one that was apparently a factor in the August 6 crash. “All of our drivers receive extensive training and extensive ongoing training and are told, ‘If you can’t go up it, don’t go down it,'” Hashagen said.
But the former employee who spoke to The Stranger said: “They do do a very short training, but they never tell you not to go down hills.”
The former employee, along with a second current employee, also said that Cascadia Cabs called some pedicab drivers into a meeting on August 8 and asked them to sign an agreement limiting what they could say to the media about the accident. The former employee who spoke to The Stranger decided not to sign the agreement. Hashagen said there was a safety meeting on August 8, but that pedicab drivers were not asked to sign a confidentiality agreement.
The former employee also told The Stranger that another pedicab driver recently had to hop off his pedicab and stop the vehicle with his hands because the brake had failed. This could not be verified.
“It’s not something that’s inherently dangerous with pedicabs,” the former employee said. “It’s just this company.”
eli@thestranger.com
The Olympic Village is trying to have 100-400 pedicabs so as to have an eco-friendly environment,” said Friedel Schroder, managing director of BugBugs, the market leader in creating pedicabs since 1998.Life is not so easy for pedicab drivers who often have to struggle to earn a meagre income.Gokhann, 20, a Turkish national, clad in blue jeans and a black turtleneck sweater , stands in front of the Leicester Square tube station. He has been waiting for two hours for a customer to hitch a ride on his pedicab.
A pedicab, a sort of cycle rickshaw, on the streets of London.