AUTOMATED TAXIS IN THE UK: Can traditional human taxi and PHV services survive?
- Perry Richardson
- Jul 26
- 4 min read
Updated: Jul 29
With so much change on the horizon, taxi drivers and private hire drivers are understandably asking if there’s a future for them in the age of autonomy. The short answer is yes, at least for many years ahead, human drivers will continue to play a major role, though the landscape of their industry will evolve.
Even the most bullish AV supporters concede that the rollout will be incremental. The UK Government’s own timeline anticipates full commercial deployment no sooner than 2027–2030, and that assumes all goes well with trials. In the meantime, millions of trips will still require a human at the wheel. Uber’s strategy of a hybrid network suggests that the company sees human drivers as indispensable for the foreseeable future. For potentially the next decade or more, we are likely to see a mixed fleet, where autonomous cars service some rides (perhaps in certain areas or at certain times where they operate best) and human drivers cover everything else – including all the trips that are too complex or outside the AVs’ operational limits.
It’s also important to recognise what current AV technology cannot yet do. Self-driving systems, impressive as they are, still struggle with many real-world variables like bad weather, unclear road markings, unexpected obstacles, or the subtle eye contact and decision-making that human drivers use to negotiate busy city streets. Human drivers excel at handling highly complex, unstructured situations and at providing customer service.
Traditional taxis, especially London’s black cabs, offer services that a robo-taxi cannot (currently) match, such as assisting a passenger in a wheelchair, or simply the human touch and local knowledge. During the initial AV trials, there is no requirement that the vehicles be wheelchair- accessible or meet other accessibility needs, meaning segments of the population (e.g. wheelchair users) will still rely on human-driven accessible taxis. Unless and until the autonomous fleets are equipped and mandated to serve those needs, drivers who can assist disabled, elderly, or other SEND passengers will remain vital. Furthermore, many customers might prefer a human driver for reasons of comfort, trust, or even social interaction – a robotaxi ride is a very different experience from a friendly chat with a cabbie.
Regulatory and market forces could also preserve a role for human drivers. If authorities see that unlimited AV proliferation might harm mobility workers or cause other issues, they may introduce policies to moderate the transition (such as limiting AV fleet sizes or requiring a licensed operator to employ a certain number of human staff for oversight). Also, new types of jobs might emerge: for example, remote vehicle operators or supervisors who monitor multiple autonomous cars, cleaning and maintenance crews for AV fleets, or customer service agents to assist riders of driverless cars.
Some professional drivers might transition into these roles over time. The Government’s outlook is that the AV sector will create tens of thousands of jobs, though admittedly those are not driving jobs in the traditional sense. Still, driverless technology is not purely a job destroyer; it will shift where labour is needed (from driving to tech and support services).
In the long term, looking 15 or 20 years out, it is possible that the number of human-driven taxis will decline if robotaxis prove consistently safer, cheaper, and more efficient. Companies like Uber ultimately aim to increase automation because a driverless fleet could operate at lower cost per ride. However, how fast we reach that point is highly uncertain. To date, even the most advanced robotaxi services (in U.S. cities like San Francisco and Phoenix) operate in limited areas and still encounter mishaps and public backlash. One major player, GM’s Cruise, halted its autonomous taxi operations after acknowledging the “considerable time and resources” still needed to scale the business.
These setbacks suggest that autonomous taxis are not an inevitability everywhere, and that conventional drivers may have more breathing room than tech optimists predicted. Indeed, the LTDA’s McNamara may be exaggerating when he says “come back in 2040”, but he taps into a real possibility: the road to full autonomy could be longer and bumpier than expected, especially under Europe’s stricter safety expectations.
Traditional taxis and human-driven PHVs can survive, and dare we say even thrive, in the coming years, but they will face a changing environment. The introduction of autonomous taxis in the UK will likely be a gradual evolution rather than a sudden revolution. During that evolution, human drivers will continue to be in demand for a host of reasons: technology limits, customer preferences, and the need for a fallback when automation falls short. The challenge for the taxi and PHV workforce is to stay adaptable. The industry may need to upskill drivers (for instance, training them to interact with new technologies or to take on complementary roles) and to fight for policies that ensure they are not simply cast aside. Regulators, for their part, are already considering how to balance embracing innovation with protecting workers and the public interest. As one example, the idea of taxi drivers owning medallions that could be leased to AV operators shows an attempt to give drivers a stake in the autonomous future.
Whether through such schemes or other measures, the hope is that today’s drivers won’t be left stranded.
