Changing taxi drivers

TS,Thursday July 21, 2011 

Based on my experience, the authorities are unlikely to respond to the three recent letters concerning taxis published in The Star. 

Granted that taxi issues are difficult to resolve, the authorities should at least provide some answers to show that they are working towards it. 

Over the years, the Commercial Vehicle Licensing Board (CVLB) has been engaging with taxi associations. 

The results have always been dismal and it is easy to know why as CVLB was entrepreneur-driven and officials from these associations, some claiming to represent the drivers, are owners of taxi companies with the sole aim of getting more taxi permits. 

A well-known head of a taxi association recently proposed for a RM3 surcharge at the new Low Cost Carrier Terminal that will be ready next year. 

I agree that using the meter is better than fixed-fare coupons that are often unfair to either the drivers or passengers. 

I proposed that passengers unhappy with the taxi or the driver seek redress with the appointed operator and was surprised to hear that they will not entertain complaints, as it was the responsibility of the authorities and not theirs. 

Taxi companies treat drivers as customers, not employees. Their business model is to find drivers with valid driving and Public Service Vehicle (PSV) licences to sign up, make a down payment and drive off the taxi. 

The drivers are then left to their own devices as long as they keep paying the rental purchase installments on schedule. 

After several years, the driver gets to own the vehicle and the company transfers the permit to another taxi. 

Only those who subscribe to the radio-cab service will have to adhere to rules in determining which driver gets to pick up the passenger after a mad rush by several taxis to reach the destination first. 

The writer of “Provide stats on errant taxis” (The Star, July 18) will be waiting in vain for the reply from CVLB, which is now defunct as taxi matters are under the Land Public Transport Commission (SPAD) since early this year. 

SPAD should focus on moving forward rather than be bogged down by forensics. 

Its decision should not be based on expediency as experience has shown that displaying a toll-free number for the public to complain will not automatically rein in the drivers. 

I agree with the writer of “A bad image for the country” (The Star, July 18). 

If it is any consolation, errant taxi drivers will try to rip off just about anyone, foreigners or locals, illegal immigrants or refugees, rich or poor. 

Lastly, to the writer of “We need to fix this problem of rude taxi drivers” (The Star, July 19), I would say that we have the solution but not the will. 

In the past, CVLB may have been short of enforcement officers but we do not need a whole army of them to monitor all taxi drivers. 

They do not have to wait for the public to complain either. All they have to do is to masquerade as passengers and pick on the drivers touting outside their taxis at places like KLCC, KL Plaza and Chinatown. 

Most passengers who have been ripped off treat all taxi drivers with suspicion. 

Rude taxi drivers are but a reflection of our society. As long as there are too many of them, we will not succeed in transforming ourselves or achieving the aims of Vision 2020. 

I hope that SPAD is more than just an amalgamation of several bodies. 

Change will come when more caring Malaysians step forward to make their contributions to society. 

It is our personal social responsibility to make our nation a better place for its citizens and welcoming visitors to our country. 

How can we be proud when we have rude taxi drivers, snatch thefts, traffic violations, littering and discourteous behaviour occurring unabated? 

YS Chan

Kuala Lumpur