By Lorenz S. Marasigan and Joel R. San Juan
TRANSPORT-network company (TNC) Uber Philippines launched on Wednesday a new ride-sharing option that allows commuters heading in the same direction to share a ride even as a Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Quezon City judge advised a drivers and operators group to sue the TNCs whose operations are adversely affecting their livelihood.
Uber Philippines General Manager Laurence Cua said the new service, called uberHOP, “empowers commuters with smarter mobility choices within areas that are chronically underserved.” At P75 per head, uberHOP is currently available in Makati and Bonifacio Global City.
The new service makes use of high-capacity vehicles, which results in more savings and fewer cars on the road.
“By making it convenient and affordable for people to share rides, we can get more people into fewer cars,” he said. “With uberHOP we are providing viable alternatives to car ownership that can improve quality of life.”
Manila becomes the third city in the world, after Toronto and Seattle, and the first in Asia that has seen the introduction of uberHOP.
By putting more riders into fewer vehicles, “uberHOP helps ease congestion by making transportation more efficient, while providing another reliable alternative to Filipinos for their daily commute,” Cua said.
Traffic in Metro Manila is tagged as the “worst in the world,” by global-positioning system-based navigation application Waze. The congestion in the capital will cost P6-billion daily loss in productivity costs come 2030, from the current P2.3-billion losses posted every day from the chronic bottleneck.
Meanwhile, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Quezon City on Wednesday said the failure of Angat Tsuper Samahan ng mga Tsuper at Operator ng Pilipinas Genuine Organization (Stop and Go) to implead TNCs Uber and Grab may be fatal to its bid to halt their operations.
During the hearing at the sala of RTC Branch 84 in Quezon City presiding Judge Luisito Cortez, Stop and Go urged the court to extend the temporary restraining order (TRO) against Uber and Grab, saying their operations has been adversely affecting the livelihood of their members.
Cortez then asked Stop and Go whether Uber and Grab were impleaded in their complaint, to which the group replied, no.
In its complaint, Stop and Go assailed the legality of Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) Order 2005-11 that allows the Transportation Network-Vehicle Service (TNVS) to operate even without certificates of public convenience (CPC) and franchises.
The group also sought to invalidate the memorandum circulars issued by the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) allowing Uber and Grab to merely secure a provisional authority for their units to be allowed to operate.
The group noted that the DOTC memorandum and LTRFB circulars resulted in the decrease in the income of taxi drivers by P600 a day since their net earnings is from P1,200 to P1,500.
The petitioner said since Uber and Grab were allowed to operate, their net income is now around P600 only, while the drivers of UV Express now earn only P1,200 instead of P2,500 to P3,000.
The group also blamed the heavy and chaotic traffic situation in Metro Manila to the 2,900 to 6,000 TNVS units plying Edsa and other routes.
“How come they are not impleaded as party if their operation is adversely affecting the income of petitioners,” Cortez asked.
Stop and Go lawyer David Erro said they did not implead Uber and Grab since the group is also questioning the orders issued by the DOTC allowing TNVS to ply the streets.
The court, however, pointed out that the DOTC has already given authority for TNVS to operate.
“It will constitute a violation of contracts of government without impleading those parties,” Cortez explained.
He added that assuming that the DOTC followed the TRO previously issued by RTC Branch 217 in Quezon City last year, the government agency could be sued by the TNCs for violation of the contract.
“So, it would be better that the court’s hands can also reach Uber and Grab,” Cortez said.
Even if the court issued a writ of preliminary injunction to indefinitely stop Uber and Grab’s operation, such order cannot be enforced on them since they are not parties in the case.
“No way in heaven’s name can the court enjoins them to stop operating,” Cortez said during the hearing.
“That is very basic in the Rules of Civil Procedure whether they are indispensable, necessary or nominal party because they are the ones operating, not the DOTC,” the judge said while noting that this was just his preliminary view.
It can be recalled that RTC Branch 217 in Quezon City presiding Judge Santiago Arena last year issued a 20-day TRO against the enforcement of the government order and circular allowing the existing operation of TNVS.
Arenas, however, inhibited from the case when the TRO had lapsed.
Image credits: AP