2011 Bmw M3 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

ROEV lets you use multiple charging networks with one account

It may be a textbook case of a first-world problem, but any EV driver who doesn't want to carry two or three plug-in vehicle charging station cards when one would do is about to get a little smile on their face. This morning at the LA Auto Show, the new ROEV Association was announced that will let EV drivers carry just the one card. While you would think the all-caps ROEV stands for something, none of the pre-announcement materials nor the website explain it that way. Instead, it seems to just be a play on rove, which makes a lot of sense. There are three charging networks involved in ROEV: Blink, ChargePoint, and EVgo. Conveniently, these are the three largest in the US and have a combined 17,500 public chargers across the country. If you've got an account with one of these three networks, once ROEV goes into effect (expected in the spring of 2016), you'll be able to use that card at any participating charger without signing up for another account. Your personal details are kept private, ROEV says, and the companies coordinate behind the scenes to make it work. Pricing details were not disclosed. Besides the three main charging networks, two automakers are also founding members of ROEV: BMW and Nissan. ROEV says that Audi and Honda have also have already joined the Association and the organization wants to pull in all EV stakeholders to make electric vehicle charging easy. Fans of EV technology will note that ROEV has nothing to do with promoting either the CHAdeMO or the SAE Combo (CCS) fast charging standard. The Leaf is a CHAdeMO car while the i3 uses CCS, for example. The charging networks, of course, provide both kinds of plugs and don't promote one over the other. Tesla and its Supercharger network are not involved in ROEV, but Tesla drivers can, of course, participate in ROEV.

BMW wants to expand DriveNow carsharing program to 25 new cities

Daimler's Car2go car-sharing service just announced that it will debut in Rome, its 26th global city. Now, BMW says it wants to expand its own carsharing program to, wait for it, 25 more cities. Coincidence? We think not. BMW is looking to bring its DriveNow carsharing program, with its Mini Coopers and 1 Series, to as many as 15 new cities in Europe as well as 10 in the US, Bloomberg News says, citing comments BMW executive Peter Schwarzenbauer made at the Geneva Motor Show last week. The service is now operational in Berlin, Hamburg, Cologne, Munich, Dusseldorf and San Francisco and serves about a quarter-million people. Of course, it's that last city, where DriveNow started operations in August 2012, that's been somewhat problematic. San Francisco has tough guidelines when it comes to where the cars can be parked, with so few public parking areas to choose from. DriveNow charges $39 for membership in San Francisco, then $12 for the first half hour of driving and 32 cents for each additional minute. DriveNow competes directly against Car2go, which charges around $25 to become a member and then 41 cents a minute to rent a Smart ForTwo.

BMW slapped with discrimination suit by EEOC

According to a report from CNNMoney, BMW has been hit with a lawsuit from the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission after revised criminal background check policies resulted in the dismissal of 88 contractors, 70 of whom (that's about 80 percent) were black. A total of 645 contractors were required to submit to background checks at BMW's facility in Spartanburg, South Carolina after BMW switched contract companies at its plant.
Though the 88 persons who were not rehired by the new contractor all had criminal records, that may not necessarily be a legal way to screen applicants, as the EEOC counters: "BMW's policy has no time limit with regard to convictions. The policy is a blanket exclusion without any individualized assessment of the nature and gravity of the crimes, the ages of the convictions, or the nature of the claimants' respective positions."
BMW's actions were in violation of the Civic Rights Act of 1964, according to the EEOC, because they utilized "a criminal conviction policy that disproportionately screened out African-Americans." A recent bulletin offering guidance from the EEOC on the Civil Rights Act can be found here, but the EEOC's stance on the issue has been the same for years: "Since issuing its first written policy guidance in the 1980s regarding the use of arrest and conviction records in employment decisions, the EEOC has advised employers that under certain circumstances, their use of that information to deny employment opportunities could be at odds with Title VII."