Philippines Gives Uber Its First Legal Framework To Operate In Asia

An anonymous reader writes: The Philippines has given Uber a rare boost in its hard-fought Asian territories, by granting new legislation that provides rules within which it may legally operate. To this end the country's Department of Transportation and Communications has created a new category of ride called the Transportation Network Vehicle Service (TNVS) classification — whilst at the same time mollifying beleaguered indigenous taxi-services by creating an equivalent classification for an app-hailed taxi able to accept credit cards. As with all its other negotiations in Asia, the fruits of Uber's consultation with the Philippine government was prefaced by unorganized invasion, trade complaints, bans and general conflict.

Comments

Provides rules?

[Nidi62]

Uber is given rules within which they can operate in pretty much every state they have gone into. They have just simply decided to ignore those rules in most cases. Any time Uber is barred from operating in a city/state is completely of their own doing.

Re:Provides rules?

[Maxwell]

It sounds like you have failed to pick up on the obvious: Uber's business model is to break the rules, expose their mass stupidity and unfairness and then get the rules changed to benefit their customers. Why do it this way? Because the only way to change the rules is to break them thus getting the attention of the rule makers... You think the taxi lobby in would be willing to allow TNVS under any other circumstances?

Re:Provides rules?

[easyTree]

How is this a troll?

"I own a taxi company and don't want anything to change as I'm raking it in" != "this post is a troll."

Re:Provides rules?

[drinkypoo]

Uber is given rules within which they can operate in pretty much every state they have gone into.

False. Uber can't reasonably operate within those rules in every case. Whether they should be allowed to operate is, I think, a separate argument. I argue yes, strictly because taxi licensing doesn't do any of the things it's supposed to do. I see the theoretical public value in it, but it never seems to live up to what's on the tin.

Re:Provides rules?

[easyTree]

I bow to your superior inability to use mod points correctly, sire.

Re:Provides rules?

[Nidi62]

Uber is given rules within which they can operate in pretty much every state they have gone into.

False. Uber can't reasonably operate within those rules in every case.

And my new business of providing people with very cheap cars that have been "lost" by their previous owners can't reasonably operate within rules. Does that mean I can just keep going stealing and reselling car while I lobby to make car theft legal? You have no right to have a business plan that is inherently sound and profitable, and if your business requires you to skirt and ignore local laws and regulations in virtually every jurisdiction you are trying to operate in globally then there is probably a fundamental flaw in that plan.

Re:Provides rules?

[drinkypoo]

You have no right to have a business plan that is inherently sound and profitable,

And you have no right to interfere with a business plan. Because rights are things which don't exist.

and if your business requires you to skirt and ignore local laws and regulations in virtually every jurisdiction you are trying to operate in globally then there is probably a fundamental flaw in that plan.

Only if it fails. If they successfully create a change in transportation, and then subsequently profit from it, then it's a good plan. In the process, the average person stands to gain substantially by gaining the right to utilize their own car in any manner they see fit. Taxi licensing programs do not do what they claim to do, and represent a simple cash grab by various interested parties. No one should be more or less permitted to operate a vehicle in an unsafe manner because they are or are not involved in commerce, if they live in a capitalist society in which it is a crime to be broke.

Let's not forget outright crime

[Anonymous Coward]

Korea is busy indicting Kalanick for breaking the law.

They should have tried the legal route first, but here we see that breaking the law is a minor inconvenience for people with money.

Uber-Jeepney?

[G-Man]

Seems like a natural fit for the Philippines, given the blessed anarchy of the Jeepney:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...

Disclaimer: I spent a couple of years in the Philippines as a child, but haven't been back in decades. So Jeepneys may not be as widespread/chaotic as I remember.

Re:Uber-Jeepney?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing's changed!

The Jeepney is just as widespread and (probably) as chaotic as you remember.

Re:Uber-Jeepney?

[jblues]

Seems like a natural fit for the Philippines, given the blessed anarchy of the Jeepney:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...

Disclaimer: I spent a couple of years in the Philippines as a child, but haven't been back in decades. So Jeepneys may not be as widespread/chaotic as I remember.

Oh there's still literally millions of them, most with very poorly tuned engines belching out smoke and driving chaotically with no indicators. While I love the idea of an elastic, demand based, self adjusting dispatch system for mass transit, I'm not sure how Über would help in the Jeepney probelm. There's usually such a demand for jeeps, that it takes less than a minute or two to catch a ride. They drive well-defined routes with a regulated fee, and transfer from residential areas onto these thoroughfares is done by tricycles. I think it would be better to concentrate on:

• * Get the tricycles to use well-tuned, and definitely not two-stroke engines, and drive safely. Progress is being made here.
• * Using well maintained, less polluting Jeeps. There are standards for this but they are not enforced. Its easy to bribe your way through a smoke belching test.
• * Having Jeeps stop only at dedicated bus-stops, instead of suddenly and randomly halting anywhere. So as not to hold up other traffic, including other jeepneys
• * Where appropriate using larger buses, instead of mini-bus sized vehicles.
• * Improve comfort to encourage people who use private vehicles to instead take public transport.

As freeways are being built, some of the long jeepney routes are being replaced with air-conditioned buses. And the rail network is improving. While there's a huge demand for public transport, there's also massive private vehicle congestion. Meanwhile, in Tokyo, which is about the same size as Metro Manila (somewhat larger actually), you can walk less then 200 meters to catch a high-speed train. Amazing.

But then...

[Anonymous Coward]

Taxi drivers here have to pay a massive fee just to be able to operate as Taxi drivers.. then these nobodies come in with an app and anybody can just be a driver... Countries that allow this essentially destroys the taxi industry.

Re:But then...

[pete6677]

That's not a bad thing. Cab Mafias are the same worldwide, and are in bad need of technological crushing.

Re:But then...

[Anonymous Coward]

Taxi drivers here have to pay a massive fee just to be able to operate as Taxi drivers.

Take away the massive fee then - problem solved. If government want a cut, they can tax the profits as usual. No need for a special taxi fee.

Re:But then...

[mjwx]

That's not a bad thing. Cab Mafias are the same worldwide, and are in bad need of technological crushing.

First thing,

Taxi mafias are not the same world wide. The actual Mafia's operating in SE Asia that use violence, threats, intimidation, bribery and coercion are very different to regulated fake taxi "mafias" in the west where drivers must be trained, insured, licensed and customers have a means of addressing grievances.

Second thing, this is the Philippines.

There is a saying about the Philippines, "The Philippines has an excellent legal system, but a terrible justice system". It means that the legal framework is as good as any western country, in fact its based off US laws. However the laws are not applied equally, every level of the police and judiciary are corrupt, laws that people dont agree with are outright ignored (and the police are paid to look the other way) there is an unofficial bias to the system (locals and wealthy will have more rights than foreigners and poor) and the existing Mafia is too well entrenched.

That last point is important. The Jeepneys are not threatened by this. There's no way Uber is going to be cheaper than that, however the existing taxi/trike industry wont take kindly to competition, they never have and have never had any compunction against using violence as a first resort. Another unwritten rule in the Philippines (for foreigners) is that you never get between a man and his money. When I lived in the Phils, I knew two people who were shot because they forgot this rule. Uber drivers who aren't part of the taxi mafia will be taken out and beaten until they get the message.

Editorial Slant

[flopsquad]

As with all its other negotiations in Asia, the fruits of Uber's consultation with the Philippine government was prefaced by unorganized invasion, trade complaints, bans and general conflict.

I guess nobody ever said it was unbiased news for nerds...

I do rather like the image of hired transport modernization as a seething horde of goblins, unorganizedly invading Asia with scavenged weapons and half-assed catapults.

Huh?

[easyTree]

The Phillippines don't have an incumbent, protectionist taxi industry and easily-bribable politicians? Shame on them - that's not very democratic/free/American, is it?

Re:Huh?

[h33t l4x0r]

They do have easily bribable politicians, apparently Uber has deeper pockets than the individual taxi operations.

Re:Huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

They also have significant number of cases of taxi drivers hijacking and in some cases killing thier passengers. So much so that folks like myself are warned never to get into a taxi alone. Taking a taxi here is like rolling the dice. Uber is just going to make this worse.

As election time comes up, and the political candidates start to need funds, the number of kidnappings and bank robberies rise significantly.

Re:Huh?

[tshawkins]

Example case

http://www.wheninmanila.com/uk...

Framework already existed

[tompaulco]

What a waste of time. The framework already existed for Uber to operate, Uber just chose to illegally ignore it.
So now, I suppose that the legitimate taxi operators who had to front money for licensing and insurance can expect some sort of reimbursement for all of those fees. Alternatively, I guess the legitimate taxi operators can develop an app for hailing a cab and then suddenly they don't have to have permits, licensing or insurance.

Re:Framework already existed

[Anonymous Coward]

American in the U.S. here.

I think one issue is that insurance doesn't cover something if you operate in a commercial manner. However, I think a compromise would be if we amended the law to require insurance companies to permit this sort of stuff if it's less than $200/month in income. Then we'd also permit that personal auto insurance would be allowed if the individual is earning less than $200/month (averaged over a three month period) in this activity.

Example for my idea...
Let's say someone has earned $159, $208, then $199. Then they're fine. However, let's say they earned $199, $201, $200, then they'd need to get commercial auto insurance, perhaps a CDL, etc. If they drop back below $200/month for three months, then they can go back to non-commercial insurance.

What I'm getting at is that maybe a dollar threshold where they can operate as a hobby.

HERE

[Whiteox]

Uber wants to buy Nokia's HERE maps. Personally I don't trust them. HERE maps are excellent and I'm afraid that Uber will stuff them up somehow like MS did with Skype.

Uber net worth skyrockets to $100billiongazillion

[Anonymous Coward]

Fascinating how a virtual cab company can be worth so much.....

What really happened: Uber paid somebody off

[Anonymous Coward]

You can bet some Phillippino pols and bureaucrats are whooping it up, counting their graft.

Direct democracies

[DrYak]

Why do it this way? Because the only way to change the rules is to break them thus getting the attention of the rule makers...

Nope. No.
Some of the jurisdiction in which Uber is trying to enter market are pure direct democracies. (e.g.: Switzerland).
The proper procedure there for *anyone* (that even includes Uber) wanting to change any law, is to gather the necessary number of signatures and then submit their new law project to public voting.
Changing the law there - if indeed the law is as unfair as said - is the easiest possible thing to do.
But Uber instead acts stupid.

You think the taxi lobby in would be willing to allow TNVS under any other circumstances?

- in direct democracies, the voting population gets the final say on anything. Lobbies don't have much power.
- in other countries where Uber has been, there aren't very power taxi lobbies in place.