Uber, Grabtaxi, and other apps

I was lining up in a taxi stand in Ortigas last week, about 30 persons behind the first, trying to be patient as I inch my way up the queue for the last 20 minutes. At 6:30 p.m., taxis come in in trickles as the metropolis was into the height of its daily peak-hour traffic. Suddenly a taxi came in but wouldn't accept passengers. A lady somewhere in the back, i-phone in hand, broke out of the line and boarded it. "Grabtaxi," the security guard explained.

I was very sure all of us ahead of her felt a sense of unfairness on the incident. Actually, it happened 3 more times before I reached the top of the line, 45 minutes later. People used technology to improve their chances of getting a ride, or getting it sooner. They line up in stands, but also use a smartphone app to call a taxi. If a taxi responds and arrive soon they get the ride, otherwise, they're still on the line. It would seem unfair to those of us who are not high-tech (I'm still bound to the traditional 12-key tactile keypad). Actually, it's not.

And this is not about fairness or lack of it (and that's why we can only grumble but can't complain). More and more people are using smartphone apps to get their rides, as more and more taxi drivers use theirs to enhance their getting passengers, too. We can't complain on something which is beneficial to many. As in many other phenomena, this may create a disparity, both for drivers and passengers, between those who could afford smartphones and those who don't. But life's like that, and the latter will just have to hail their taxi the usual way.

Then comes another wonderful idea – why not use other private vehicles, which are idle most of the time anyway, to transport passengers, taxi-style? This will increase the existing fleet size, give customers choices, and provide income to car-owners and drivers alike. Throw in the perks of smartphone apps, the ability to pay by credit card, and somewhat lower fares, and you have a new worldwide fad. And since, private cars are generally "cleaner" than taxis, you would understand Uber's appeal. In just 5 years' time, Uber is present in more than 200 cities all over the world. It's being debated in Manila; I haven't heard it operating in Cebu yet.

Of course, taxi companies (and drivers) are up in arms against Uber, not only in Manila but in many other cities worldwide, even in advanced cities like Germany, France, and England, even to a point of being banned in Spain. And the disputes are not only with existing taxi operators but also government regulatory bodies, including those of the US The issues are more on the lack of regulation and passenger safety (and security). Even in Manila, LTFRB is yet to issue a categorical ruling on its operations. Until it can, Uber remains illegal.

We have to understand the "public" side of it, besides the benefits to "private" users. Does it improve transport and mobility and alleviate traffic congestion? The answer is no. In fact, there is a bigger probability it will even worsen the latter. The entire concept of transport and traffic efficiency is to increase person-trips per vehicle. In short, to shift to public transport. Taxis, while public in nature actually act like private cars in their contribution to traffic. This is because they carry few passengers for the required road space. Uber is no better.

And because Uber is "better" in terms of passenger experience, it might even entice more people to shun public transport, thus worsening congestion. It's a case of something maybe good for the "individual" citizen but maybe bad for the "whole" citizenry. This is especially in the already congested cities of the world.