TMM,Monday 7 February 2011
Poor taxi service as bad as dirty loos, streets, beaches and the environment, and may scuttle 2020 tourism target
The new Low Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) is scheduled to be ready in 2012.
Already, taxi associations are calling on the authorities not to repeat the mistake of allowing the new facility to be monopolised by a single taxi operator.
They are also rejecting the coupon system as practised at several places, such as the Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA), KL Sentral and several shopping centres in the city. Instead, they are proposing cab fares be based on the meter with a RM3 surcharge.
In a monopoly, the fleet of taxis owned by the exclusive operator would not be able to cope with the sudden surge in demand over a 24-hour period or during peak seasons.
No doubt, an oversized fleet can be acquired with a huge capital outlay but the business and operations would not be sustainable. Drivers would not stay when their taxis are idled half the time, as they would suffer a corresponding drop in income.
Passengers needing a taxi at KLIA have little option with regard to the vehicle or driver. Worst-case scenario, they may find themselves standing in a long queue.
Such indefinite wait is very taxing and it is really a shame our prestigious international airport is often dragged down by the airport taxi service.
The coupon system based on the average fare covering a wide zone and a 10 per cent surcharge is usually not fair to either the passenger or the driver.
Drivers cashing in the coupons are happy with the much-needed money in their pockets but are often saddened the operator, which they likened to be a rent-seeker, deducts 10 per cent
As such, passengers would be paying less when the 10 per cent levy is replaced with a RM3 surcharge and drivers keep all the cash collected at the end of each trip. Such an arrangement should be welcomed if the appointed operator manages the whole system well.
Firstly, the plan to open up the airport taxi service at the new LCCT to all licensed metered taxis should be lauded as it is fair and deserves all round support. However, there must an automated system to ensure blacklisted drivers and taxis are barred.
Prior to picking up passengers, the taxis should be inspected for cleanliness, condition of tyres, seats, body and paint; validity of road tax and Puspakom sticker; Commercial Vehicle Licensing Board, Public Service Vehicle and driving licences; driver’s card; and the taximeter printing out a correct receipt.
The drivers should be properly attired, without body ordour or smelly clothes and is not under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Those who appear sleepy or exhausted should be ordered to rest.
Such on-the-spot checks, however, would not be able to determine whether the taximeter would run correctly for the distance travelled.
As such, if any passenger suspects he or she is paying much more for their normal journey, it would be better to obtain the refund from the airport taxi operator with the receipt as proof, than argue with the driver.
Should the operator refuse to entertain complaints and merely deflect them to the authorities, we would be back to square one.
As it is, most passengers find it too troublesome or pointless to complain to the authorities. They would rather seek recourse with the operator for a quick resolution to their grievances.
The current metered taxi system failed due to a variety of reasons. It is amazing that it has not changed for the better over the years even after so many meetings and dialogues between the authorities and taxi bodies.
Many people may not be aware nearly all taxi companies do not employ or control the drivers. Drivers are treated as customers and they may drive away a new or used taxi after paying a deposit of several thousand ringgit and signing a rental-purchase agreement.
The drivers would then be left to their own devices as long as they continue with the monthly payments.
After several years and the installments fully paid, the driver get to fully own the vehicle, minus the taxi licence.
All maintenance costs including repairs for accidental damage, would have to be borne by the driver as the taxi is insured for third party cover only. With their meager income, they would not be able to cough out a large sum of money for major repairs while suffering a loss of income.
As such, it is no surprise that taxi drivers fall easy prey to loan sharks as they are often hit by such double whammies. Desperation often compels an average person to throw caution to the wind, and together with greed and dishonesty, the number of errant taxi drivers continue to grow.
In some neighbouring countries, taxi drivers are employed and controlled by taxi companies. Successful operators police their own drivers and have built up a good reputation so much so their taxis are the preferred choice.
Back home in Malaysia, our authorities and taxi companies continue to blame to each other. As such, the pendulum has swung from issuing taxi permits to companies in order for them to control the drivers, to issuing permits directly to the drivers to cut off the rent seekers.
Swinging the pendulum and introducing push-button management would not end the woes of the long-suffering public. If the same set of people continue to determine the taxi system, it is likely to remain status quo, which has served their vested interest well.
The nation’s interest should be placed above all else and the Land Public Transport Commission can only transform the taxi system through innovation and bold actions. Public transport affects our productivity and competitiveness greatly and taxis are an important cog.
Poor taxi service is just as bad as dirty toilets, streets, beaches and environment. Combined, they are a looming threat to our tourism industry and may scuttle our plans to attract 36 million foreign tourists and RM156 billion in tourism receipts by 2020.
YS Chan
Kuala Lumpur
No comments:
Post a Comment