Saturday, October 25, 2014

Uber Officially Responds to LTFRB Sting Operation


Over the past few days, car-sharing company Uber became the victim of a sting operation by the Land Transportation Franchising Regulatory Board or LTFRB. During the said operation, an Uber driver was fined and his vehicle impounded. In light of this matter, we have sought the official statement from Uber’s Press Office. This is their official response:

“Uber has been embraced in 222 cities in 45 countries around the world, and in many of those cities we are challenging outdated (pre-mobile era) regulations that are unable to keep up with technological advancement.  Uber is committed to put the interest of consumers and their communities as priority by bringing something fresh and new to a sector that is characterized by stagnation. Safe, reliable, and convenient transportation options – something that Filipinos have been demanding for a long time now. We are disappointed that the government has taken action against a technology service that is better for riders, drivers and the community. Around the world, Uber is working with governments to achieve common goals, focused on safe, reliable and efficient transportation options, that are regulated. It is our mission to work with like-minded individuals, like the Metro Manila Development Authority and others to encourage new policies that welcome innovation and improve transportation options while putting consumer safety and driver opportunity first for all Filipinos. ”
- Mike Brown, Regional General Manager, Southeast Asia & Australia, Uber Technologies

Probed further whether Uber is suspending their operations in Manila, their official response:

“Uber will continue to provide Filipinos with access to safe, reliable, affordable transportation options through our technology platform. The service is not suspended. It never was. Also, the number of cars that has been reported is incorrect - many reports gave 200 as a number. In reality it was only one car that was affected.”
- Karun Arya, Communications Lead - South Asia

Uber is calling all citizens of Manila to make their voice heard and support Uber. Make sure you share your thoughts on Social Media using the hashtag: #WhyIUber. Make sure you also make your voice heard by sending your thoughts to the following Twitter accounts: @LTFRB_Chairman and @DOTCPhilippines.

For more information on Uber’s position in this matter, click here for their official statement.

9 comments:

  1. On the contrary, Uber is also being charged for colorum in other countries. I saw it in international news (about France) a few weeks before this issue came up locally.

    It is true though. Uber should pay the corresponding tax for the income they collect (just like any other legal business). Get a franchise and don't go under the radar "as a private vehicle" but charge like a public vehicle! If it's technological advancement you say, then there's grabtaxi. Sometimes Filipinos are quick to complain about the authorities. I agree with LTFRB on this one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. speaking like a true capitalist

      Delete
  2. People will not be quick to complain if they see the authorities are doing their job. Lets not be hypocrites to accept the fact that they are not "after the welfare of the people" because if they did, they should have been doing a good job even before this uber issue came out.

    And just one point - the uber case, it was taxi operators association that filed a complaint at LTFRB. But for the commuters, they are the ones who file numerous unresolved complaints against taxis. So if its welfare for the people, whould it be the other way around? Get yourself in one of the taxis during rush hour i dare you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Uber car summoning services is reliable and comfortable to use.

    Having said that, the company still violates the fair competition law. Some of its vehicles are private cars which do not have franchise to operate. It means colorum sila. They will say its a sort of car pooling, but really it isn’t.

    Don't include in the argument that Uber is efficient and safe. It’s off topic. Legality is the issue.

    I hope LTFRB sits down with Uber team and sort things out because I like uber's services.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Curious question regarding for hire services that are not taxis.

    1) Do hotel car services offered to patrons also obtain a license to operate from the LTFRB as if there were taxis? I am curious as I believe there is a parallel to what the service Uber offers with what hotels offer as well. They need a special venue to actually accomodate the request/transaction. The hotel's is of course the hotel while Uber is their app and basically internet.

    2) I have not tried Uber but would a regular taxi fare from point a to b (including their flag down rate) be of the same total php amount when you use Uber? Or does Uber cost more?

    3) If Uber manages to secure taxi fleets/operators to work under their umbrella (as long as they are up to snuff with Uber standards for Uber rides - if ever that exists), how would it work if the charges for a regular taxi rate/hire is not the same with an Uber hire (assuming one is charging higher than the other). I am curious for this scenario.

    For now those are my questions.

    I would assume of course that if Uber manages to get a taxi operator/fleet to work with them then LTFRB has less issue with those vehicles being "colorum" since they also have license to operate already. I forgot which nation did it like this to get into a compromise agreement with their taxi operators.

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://www.phillymag.com/news/2014/10/26/uber-philadelphia-uberx-ppa-sting-impounds/

    ReplyDelete
  6. http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/10/20/uber-driver-forcibly-pulls-rider-from-his-car-smashes-her-phone-after-disagreement-over-directions-in-san-francisco/

    ReplyDelete
  7. http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/nevada-puts-stop-ridesharing-uber-now

    ReplyDelete
  8. what about if a driver or passenger is a criminal?

    ReplyDelete