In April, we were notified that Judge Romine of the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) made an unprecedented proposal to categorize Uber – a technology company – as a common carrier, imposing antiquated regulations on our decidedly modern industry. Maryland is the first state in the U.S. to come to such a finding – one that will not only restrict transportation options for Maryland riders, but will also limit economic opportunities for Maryland drivers.

We have always focused on serving the needs of riders and our driver partners, so appealing this flawed proposal was an easy decision. On May 27, we set the wheels in motion and filed our notice of appeal, and on Friday, June 6, we submitted our memo of appeal to the PSC.

• Uber is not a common carrier – a fancy name for a transportation company. The proposed order relies on a common carrier statute that is a relic of the early 20th century and was not designed with technology platforms like Uber in mind. Trying to regulate Uber as a common carrier is like trying to regulate Orbitz, an online travel booking platform, as an airline, simply because the company books flights out of BWI. For a weekend in 2013, Uber partnered with the city of Baltimore so that riders could access the city’s water taxis using the Uber app. If Uber is categorized as a common carrier, would this mean Uber is also a boat company? Important distinctions were overlooked when squeezing Uber into the common carrier category, including the fact that Uber does not own vehicles or manage/control drivers.
• Uber is a technology company – we do not own vehicles or manage/control drivers. We partner with existing transportation companies, and UberBLACK and UberSUV drivers use Uber’s technology platform to increase earnings during otherwise underutilized time. Drivers have complete control over their business, including whether to join Uber, how many hours they work, where they work, and when they work. UberBLACK and UberSUV drivers are not employees of Uber – they do not work for Uber, but rather with Uber. These drivers are entrepreneurs and have built their businesses over many years, if not decades. The effect of the proposed order would mean that Uber’s partner drivers are no longer able to own and operate independent companies.
• The benefits Uber brings to consumers, the market, and the economy are undisputed. Uber provides riders in Maryland with a seamless and efficient transportation alternative – something Marylanders value – and provides partner drivers with the option to expand their economic opportunities. Overall, Uber promotes consumer choice and competition – both of which have been recognized by the General Assembly and the PSC as matters of compelling public interest.
• The result of the PSC’s proposed order will protect special interests, not promote public safety. All UberBLACK and UberSUV partner drivers are already screened and licensed by the PSC. We take public safety extremely seriously and partner with the best transportation companies to deliver safe, convenient, and reliable rides at the touch of a button, with full transparency throughout the entire process. We have an immediate and continuous feedback loop where riders can rate their drivers to ensure we only keep the best drivers on the Uber platform.

We hope this has provided additional insight into the current situation Uber is facing in Maryland. We appreciate the support we have received thus far and will continue to work our hardest to ensure that Maryland remains a part of the innovation economy. We are confident that in the end, consumer choice and competition will prevail in Maryland.