Taxis and e-hailing services can co-exist in peace
This reader provides suggestions on how the government can effectively put an end to the present stalemate between taxis and e-hailing services.
By CY Ming
Deputy Transport Minister Aziz Kaprawi says the Transport Ministry will assist taxi associations to develop mobile apps and encourage taxi companies to do the same.
He added the move would open up the market by encouraging healthy competition while preventing the possibility of market monopolisation by a certain few. The first such app is expected to be launched next month.
He urged taxi operators to embrace technology to remain competitive in a market revolutionised by the mobile app-based services such as Uber and Grab.
In an online survey by the Land Public Transport Commission (SPAD), 80 per cent of respondents said they preferred e-hailing services such as Uber and Grab over that of taxis.
However, if the survey was carried out by the roadside, more than 80 per cent would have said they preferred hailing a cab rather than booking via mobile apps.
Many taxi drivers and those active in taxi associations can easily become popular by championing their cause.
Although the intentions of taxi associations and the authorities may be good, they are inadvertently misleading taxi drivers who will continue to face disappointment.
Already, there may be too many mobile apps for booking taxis in the local market. The first was rolled out in early 2013 by the Sunlight taxi group using the brand Unicablink. Another taxi app known as EzCab was introduced by Public Cab.
These are additions to other home-grown taxi apps such as TaxiMonger and MyTeksi, apart from Rocket Internet’s Easy Taxi that originated from Brazil. Taxi apps were already in the local market before Uber was introduced to Malaysia in 2014.
The latest is Oride, which is the official app appointed by Gabungan Persatuan dan Syarikat-Syarikat Teksi Semenanjung Malaysia (Gabungan), a taxi association.
A proliferation of taxi apps will not promote a healthier market as it will reduce the number of participating taxis for each app.
It will transport taxi drivers back to the old days when there were too many radio taxi companies and the chances of getting one was slim when demand peaked.
The radio taxi model would have been very successful if there was only one number to call and electronic messages transmitted calls to all participating taxis.
Unlike radio taxi companies using phone operators as intermediaries and slowing the process, mobile apps can handle a huge number of transactions simultaneously.
As such, having two or three good taxi apps will be more than enough, as it is the quality of monitoring drivers that determines its popularity.
However, those preferring Uber or Grab will not switch to taxi apps simply because they are attracted by rates lower than regulated fares.
As such, calling on taxi drivers to improve their service so that passengers will return, does not hold water.
Such action is similar to those who buy counterfeit goods or pirated software and blame the brand for not offering competitive pricing or better customer service.
Uber operates anywhere it can, including in cities with the best taxi service in the world and has no regard for local laws or the welfare of taxis and its own drivers.
In Malaysia, it conveniently styled itself as the antidote for a toxic taxi system and gathered many sympathy votes.
Gullible private car drivers found that out too late when their vehicles were impounded for providing illegal chauffeur driven services.
Giant corporations operating in cyberspace should be more sincere. Apart from registering locally and paying taxes, they should provide RM100,000 personal accident insurance (PAI) plus RM10,000 medical expenses for each passenger.
Such PAI cover is far superior to the legal liability to passengers as required by law for all buses and taxis, which insurance companies only pay compensation for when the driver is at fault and not driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
The laws need to be amended for private cars to provide chauffeur-driven services. Drivers would then have a choice of operating licensed taxis or private cars with conditions.
The restriction on metered taxi permits in the Klang Valley should be lifted but should be limited to drivers who can show proof that they have driven taxis for more than five years.
Those who chose taxis should be given individual permits and enjoy excise duty exemption for the new taxi. They get to pick up passengers off the streets and use taxi apps but will get fewer bookings due to regulated fares being higher.
Those who prefer using private cars must meet conditions, including no display of e-hailing logo or name on vehicle. They are not entitled for excise duty exemption and cannot pick up passengers off the streets but will get more trips from lower rates and no longer operate under a cloak of fear.
CY Ming is an FMT reader.
Stay current - Follow FMT on WhatsApp, Google news and Telegram
With a firm belief in freedom of expression and without prejudice, FMT tries its best to share reliable content from third parties. Such articles are strictly the writer’s personal opinion. FMT does not necessarily endorse the views or opinions given by any third party content provider.