Taxi driver characters analysis-ifukynox’s blog. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =====> Download Link taxi driver. Off he taxi and the taxi driver went to Hotel Elory hurriedly CHARACTERS Taxi Driver The passenger Lay Choo SETTING Place – Singapore Main setting – Inside the Taxi THEME Changes Parenthood Youth Prostitution POINT OF VIEW 1st person point of view -Maibigay ang buod ng mga.
SINGAPORE: Ang Istorya Ng Taxi Driver Literature of the World Subject pushes me to publish this short Singaporean story which has very hard to find an, thus I am picking up M.R. Avena Tagalog revision. SINGAPORE: Ang Istorya Ng Taxi Driver By Catherine Lim Revised By: M.R. Avena (1) Ayos, Ma’am.
Sigurado-Darating kayo sa miting ng mas Maaga sa t’yempo. Dito tayo dumaan, Ma’am. Konting Trapik, konting bara ng mga kotse. Medya-ora lang, Naro’n na tayo.
Kaya h’wag kayong mag-alala, Ma’am (2) Ano yon. Ha, ha-dalawampung taon Na ‘kong taxi driver, Ma’am. Panahon pa ng kopong- Kopong. Di pa ganito ang Singapore-nanikip sa tao, Bising-bisi.
Noon mas tahimik, kokonti pa lang ang taxi Drivers, at di-masyadong maraming kotse at bus AUTHOR Catherine Lim Poh Imm, writer of nine collections of short stories, five novels and a poetry book. She has won national and regional book prizes for her literary contributions. She is best known for her collection of short stories Little Ironies: Short Stories of Singapore and Or Else, The Lightning God and Other Stories.
Early career Teacher, St. Andrew’s School, St. About HEY THERE! EUTS: or Everything under the sun, this blog can give you everything under the sun; popular emails, texts, personal experience, celebrity update, showbiz news and other funny and most memorable happenings here, there and everywhere, EVERYTHING as long as it is UNDER THE SUN THE AUTHOR: im TANOM, an Associate in IT Grad a former DOST Scholar a former DOST Officer (2006-2007) a former DOST SA CEBU Officer (2006-2007) a former CAT Col. A current IT Client and Engineering Support a current BSIT student of Cebu Institute of Technology a proud OFFICER/FOUNDER of.
Hello fellow TNVS Partners and Peers! First, “congrats” to the partners who got their Provisional Authorities (P.A.) already! You are now legit and you can now ply the roads without worry;P If you want to check if your TNVS Application is approved, you can see the. If you want to track the status of your application, Uber is now implementing their online.
If you need help and guidance for your TNVS application, just refer to our. Being accredited with LTFRB means that we’re now subject to their rules and regulations. And speaking of regulations, did you know that there’s a new Memorandum (M.C.
2015-025) that requires TNVS (vehicles with Uber, Grab and other TNCs) to put “markings” OUTSIDE and “display” INSIDE their vehicle while on a pre-arranged trip in addition to the required trade dress. A photo of M.C. 2015-025 is shown below.This memorandum is actually an amendment to previous memoranda (M.C.
2005-006 and M.C. 2012-008) that requires “markings” for all public utility vehicles to prevent/minimize abuses of public utility drivers. This (supposedly) encourages the commuting public to report erring and abusive drivers in order to maintain safe, convenient, and comfortable public land transportation. Refer to this tweet from LTFRB Chairman: All PUVs must bear LTFRB’s Hotline Numbers “1342”. For TNVS, applicable provisions are paragraphs 1(b), 2, 4 & 5. — LTFRBCHAIRMAN (@LTFRBChairman) You know those markings on public utility vehicles?
Photo from www.philippinestaxiservice.com Here are the highlights of the LTFRB M.C. 2015-025 (refer to the picture below): 1. According to Section 2, TNVS vehicles are required to display the trade dress, which is issued by Uber, AND LTFB markings during a pre-arranged ride. According to Section 1.b, ALL public utility vehicles (INCLUDING TNVS by virtue of Section 2) like sedan, vans and similar units, shall have the LTFRB “markings” refer below. LTFRB 24/7 Hotline: 1342 Text/Viber Hotlines: 0917-550-1342 0998-550-1342 This should be displayed in the following specifications: Height: 3 inches Width: 1 inch Thickness: 0.5 inch Color: Green Location: Rear windshield (upper location), and at both sides.
VERY IMPORTANT NOTE: We clarified this with LTFRB, the markings on the upper rear windshield and both sides are OUTSIDE the vehicle. But this can be removable. We suggest, you can have customized refrigerator magnets, you know, like those they usually giveaway as event souvenirs. According to Section 5, ALL PUVs INCLUDING TNVS, should display INSIDE the vehicle the details below. As to what display should we put INSIDE the vehicle, LTFRB said TNVS MAY USE laminated notice, a sticker, a magnetic removable display, etc for as long as it’s inside and it contains the info prescribed. THEREFORE, no need to paint the interiors. ? Vehicle Plate Number LTFRB 24/7 Hotline Operator’s Number Notice on the grant of 20% fare discount to senior citizen, PWD and student.
If you applied for an authority to operate from Central Office or NCR, you have 60 days to comply after you’ve been issued the authority to operate. If you applied for an authority to operate from Regional Office, you’re given 90 days to comply after you’ve been issued the authority to operate. So, if you already have authority to operate, you need to comply ON or BEFORE December 29, 2015.
ANOTHER IMPORTANT NOTE: We believe the deadline only applies for those who are already “authorized” to operate, we believe this is for those who have already. Because technically,.
THEREFORE, we think if we don’t have authority to operate= CPC Franchise yet, no need for the markings YET. We’ll clarify this with LTFRB, watch out for their response. Naghihintay pa lang ako ng approval pero ayoko na”hello uber” pa lang sana pero “goodbye na”, sayang super excited pa naman driver kopagod na pagod na sya sa jeep dahil sa init at hirap sa jeep, kahit papano sana giginhawa hindi man siguro yung kita niya e sa katawan at kalusugan man lang sanaI feel sad for him and to me as well, kahit papano e makakatulong sana sa MA ng car ko. Maganda sana yung hangarin nila para sa safety ng public dawbut this was never became true with TAXI’s which were from the very beginning was marked everywhere.
Ni hind nga nila pinapansin mga text sa kanila na may abusado, isnabero, magnanakaw at kung anu-ano pang reklamo sa mga taxi drivers e.parang an tapang nila at ang gagaling kung magsabi ng mga patakaran nila pero hanggang dun lang naman. Sa tagal kong sumusubaybay sa kwento ng mga riders ng taxi at UBER and from my experience myself ay milya-milya yung satisfaction ng mga rider ng Uber kesa taxi na may napakalalaking markings. LTFRB, ang masasabi ko lang e magpakatotoo kayo, pwede ba?para sa kapakanan ng mas nakararami. Feeling ko sa inyo.power tripping, sorry to say.
Tama ka sa lahat ng sinabi mo Ms. A dress code of any sort have never and would never been a deterent for a taxi driver to abuse tjeir passenger. Mas effective pa yung apps. Uber can immediately act on any misconduct their partners act towards their passenger or the riding public, infact i know naka link ang uber sa network ng ating kapulisan and everybody knows that kaya sinong disente at matinong driver partner ang makakaisip mangwalanghiya ng pasahero nya. Ang mga taong gusto lang kumita ng disente at may dignidad ay hindi magiisip ng mga bagay na ikapapahamak nila at ng kanilang mga kliyente. Minsang nga sila pa yung naaabuso ng ilan nating kababayan na gumagamit ng apps bilang mga pasahero. What is No.3 in the article which says: ” All PUVs except TNVS ( during pre-arrange ride ) shall also indicate”?
I think it simply says that TNVS are not part of the OUTSIDE markings, isn’t it? Further in No. 4, ” All PUVs including TNVS ( during pre-arrange ride ) shall be required to paint/display the following information INSIDE the car “.
Logically, TNVS are not totally PUVs though they may serve public but they have the option to when to serve or not since they are really private vehicles. So removable marking maybe valid ONLY WHEN IN PUBLIC SERVICE.
Please raise an appeal with LTFRB, in order to fight for the right of UBER partners. Otherwise, business will be lost. This was similar to the case of the UV express services before which initially started as a Garage Service until it became Vehicle for Hire and now became UV Express Service where they eventually required all vehicles to get a franchise.
You also have to pay at least 100,000 php for the franchise alone and will be required to get all those markings on your vehicle otherwise, huhulihin ka nila madalas if you don’t comply. We already have an active account with UBER and is now working on the vehicle to use, however, assessing on this issue, I am now having second thoughts in continuing our partnership with UBER or this business in general. This is another corrupt initiative of the government which not beneficial for everyone. It clearly supersedes the TNVS purpose, I hope Uber will do something about it before it’s too late. So frustrating. I’m a qualified marine instructor. I bought a new car (top if the line) because u want to drive and earn money to pay my monthly amortuzation.
I had already had two cars but older than 2012. I love my new car.
I think this is not a good idea to have private cars marjed with useless ltfrb nos. Then i will be same level with nitmal taxi drivers. Whats the use of having tnvs. If uber drivers do not behave it’s up to uber to give them penalty or deactivate their account.
As for myself i cannot misbegave myself since my car is hulugan. What is Uber management gonna do about it? Will you protect us from this nonsense? What are markings for? We are only visible online don’t they know that? What is this? Are they trying to make themselves look authoritative?
They can’t even regulate the service of jeepneys and taxis all these years! Has anything improved while they “regulated ” the transport franchise business? The quality of the service suffered through the years and they never took action to improve on it. Or maybe that’s not part of their job? Their job is simply to collect?
Now all of a sudden they will impose markings on uber cars? I wanna be proven wrong because I think the idea is nonsense. Let them explain the virtue of markings and show us it’s not a stupid idea. Meanwhile, Uber management, please don’t let them impose things just because they are a government institution.
Uber is redefining the transport system, using the latest technology. This is an improvement to an industry that they have left rotting. Now they want to impose nonsense?
Please don’t let this happen. Please enlighten me with regards on the markings on the rear windshield? Does it mean 3 markings? ( one at upper) rear windshield and the other two will be at the rear window of the car? If this is removable, I understand that Uber suggested to make customized just like from ref magnets, I didn’t get this one because magnets will not stick in glass (windows/windshield), what do you call that kind of magnets that you are suggesting. What is the specific name of it?
I hope abiding by the rules, we can also pick up passenger from the airport because we are no difference from other white/yellow taxis with all these marking, the essence of the private car was long gone. PLEASE FIGHT FOR IT UBER!! Please also enlighten me with the 20% discount for senior citizen and student, does it mean the credit card owner should be the senior citizen/student to avail the discount? What if the person who queue for a ride is a senior citizen/student but the rider, he or she queued for is not a senior citizen or a student? Guess this 20% discount thing is the next update for UBER?
Your response will be highly appreciated. What’s your response and your plans about this admin? You should be firm on your stand that that’s not how the uber business operate and work. Please protect the uber partners or else these business will die. The customers should contact the uber if they have any concerns regarding their trip or uber partner not the ltfrb.
Because Uber should be the middle man between the customers and ltfrb. The ltfrb should understand and respect how this business work and uber should not let the ltfrb dictate them on what to do, what rules should be implemented even manipulating and changing the uber’s own rules and regulations. Remember, we are using private vehicles here. If you don’t protect this business and your partners, better change the name from uber mnl to LTFRB MNL. Bakit kaya si admin parang masaya pa? Siguro nagtataxi ka noh?!
Pero taena talaga dami ko na nagastang pera at oras sa application ng uber ko tapos ganito lang pala mangyayari, pati amortization ng accent ko kasisimula ko lang tapos lalagyan lang ng call taenang ltfrb hotline na yan!!!! Eh wala naman silbi yung hotline nila e. Mga call center nila bisaya na walang alam at ang hirap pa kontakin tapos pag may nireport kang barumbadong jeepney or taxi driver, labas lang sa kabilang tenga nila walang nangyayari! Taena naman talaga yan oh! Dapat sa mga taga gobyerno i firing squad sa luneta eh, tapos nasa gitna yung abnoy na pnoy na yun eh, pati tax ayaw nya pabawasan para mas marami mauwi mga empleyado.
Kung anu anu na nasasabi ko, siguro frustrated na talaga ako eh, kakakuha ko lang kasi ng accent ko tapos ganito lang pala. Pag nakita ko c pinoy sagasaan ko yung ayup na yun eh pati director ng ltfrb.
Lakas talaga ng mga association ng mga taxi at jeep sa gobyerno. Sila sigurado ang nagpetisyon nito sa uber. In the end mautak nga naman yung mga 1 utak na yun. DEAD BUSINESS UBER! I’m sorry uber if this will happen its a GOODBYE. UBER is worldwide and i tried uber in other country and its a private car as it ses and we promise riders! NO MARKINGS AT ALL!
First of all its a private car why the heck will we put markings on our private cars! KA CHEAPAN NG PILIPINAS!!! 2nd do you think the passengers would like to ride in a private service with MARKINGS like taxi? Especially in such events? 5 STAR HOTEL PICK UP SERVICE? HAHA EEEEWWWW! UBER, i think you’re the only one who could deal with our stupid corrupt government and i say if you don’t want to loose partners then make a way not to let this happen or else GOODBYE!
I say BANKRUPT on your side. FOR US, we can still put our cars into RENT A CAR. Not as much earning as like we have in uber but BETTER compare to BABUYAN MODE! So please UBER as a PARTNER please deal as much as you can not to let this happen. THANK YOU and that’s my disappointed and pissed opinion. Hi po sa lahat, suggestion lang po kung pwede. Operator din po ako.
Bakit ba ginagawa eto ng ltfrb? Para pag may complain or suggestions, tama po yun. Ano ang gagamitin mo para mag complain o meron kang suggestion? Telephone di ba? Ano ba ang gamit ng pasahero ng uber? Telepono di ba.
Bakit di nalang sa apps idagdag ang hotline ng ltfrb kagaya ng drivers rating sa ganun direkta na sa operator, uber at ltfrb. At least kita na agad ng pasahero ang hotline at sa ganun hindi pa rin madudumihan ang sasakyan mo. Suggestion lang po.
As an UBER rider, I totally disagree with this stupid idea of LTFRB. I understand that Uber is considered as PUV. However, there’s a big difference between a taxi, jeepney, buses or whatnot as PUVs compared to a private car servicing in public. And that’s what sets Uber and GrabCar apart from the regular PUVs.
Uber and Grab have elevated and revolutionized the transportation here in the Philippines and that’s the reason why riders choose this ride sharing apps as part of their lives on a daily basis because of its image and the satisfactory service. Putting such trash on a private vehicle is totally ridiculous as this defeats the sole purpose of the business and its private image. UBER, you might want to hear out your UBER-Peers and UBER riders. Make an appeal to LTFRB. Don’t you have a word on this?
This kind of situation jeopardizes not only your image but as well as your profit. Someone should learn to speak up for once and oppose such process that is not favorable for both entrepreneurs and clients. We can only see two paths which is very apparent. It’s either amendments or loss of business. We can’t continue to process all my documents.my car is a private.
Why you put puv? Baboyin nyo sasakyan namin?huh?oo nga pala c uber wala naman pakialam about sa car may pakialam lang sila sa 20% na kinikita nila. Heeeyyy uber kaya kami pumasok sainyo kci akala namin ay makaatikim na kami ng maginahawang buhay un pala kayo pa lalo nag pahirap samin. P8nakagat nyo lang ang driver kunwari sa incentive nyo. E pano naman kami mga operator?samin maintenance samin gas.tapos laspag p car namin. Pag dating ng 1 to 3yrs tatangalin nyo na sa uber.
Waaaaa d ano naman nagyari samin????nabauon sa utang. Haizzt isip isip din kci.
Kaya ngayon habang fpa uuli ang lahat. Tigil nalang cae. Opinion ko lng po ito. Any comments, suggestions and violent reactions are welcome. First, kahit anung salita na siguro ang ibato natin sa kahit anung ahensya ng gobyerno natin dito sa pilipinas wala nang mangyayari.
Manhid n po sila at ang tanging laman ng mga mapupurol, tuyot, singaw (at kung anu ano pa) na utak ng mga nakaupo dyan sa gobyerno ay kung paano nila mapupunan ang mga nagugutom na bulsa nila. Sa totoo lng wala nman silang pakialam sa lipunan o sa mga tao, ang mahalaga lang sa kanila ay ang PERA ng taong bayan. Hindi nman ho siguro kayo mga bulag at tanga (sorry for the wordings) para hindi makita. Ganito lng po yan eh. Sa tingin nyo ba kahit i-appeal ni UBER sa ltfrb yang required markings n yan (kahit hindi nman nararapat) ay mahihimok pa sila na wag ng ipatupad? I dont think so.para ka lng nagsayang ng laway kakadaldal sa isang taong hindi nman nakikinig sayo (as simple as that). At sa tingin nyo ho ba ilalabas ba nila ang memorandum na yan kung hindi pa sila desidido na ipatupad yan?
Ibig sabihin hindi na ho sila magbibigay ng pagkakataon sa mga tao n makaapila pa, wala k ng magagawa. WALA NG PAGASA ang pilipinas na umangat o umunlad dahil talamak na ang corruption. Ikaw na individual na nangangarap umunlad ang buhay o kahit man lng makaahon ng kaunti sa hirap ay hanggang pangarap na lng. Pangalawa, sa tingin ho ba natin may magagawa pa (o gagawin pa) si UBER para mapigilan ang LTFRB sa anu mang mga rules and conditions na gustong ipatupad nito?
Sa accreditation pa lang wala ng nagawa si UBER kung hindi sumunod so, ibig sabihin nagpatali na si UBER sa LTFRB. UBER wont have any choice but to follow whatever rules the LTFRB would implement or else they loose the business (make sense?). Here’s another horriying/disgusting fact.
Sa tingin ho ba natin UBER would care if we (drivers/partners/operators) follow or not the LTFRB’s rules? Because what’s important for them is they are able to cut 20% out of your earnings, whether you follow ltfrb’s rules or not. Third, for us drivers/partners/operators, do we think may kikitain pa tayo sa business na to? Siguro noong mga nakaraang buwan (from April to September) OO dahil sa mga incentives na binibigay ni UBER if you meet the weekly/daily quotas along with the requirements. Pero unti unti nilang pinababa ang incentive hanggang sa mawala na pgdating ng October.
Sa ngayon, kapag bumyahe ka and get only a normal rate (fare) parang abunado ka pa, kumita ka man hindi worh it. You’ll spend 1000php (average) for the whole day n byahe, hindi pa kasama gastos mo sa pagkain, inumin, laundry (for you daily clothing), cellphone load at kung anu ano pa. Then, let say kumita ka ng 1500 to 1700php (normal rates lng to walang surge) sa loob ng 12 to 16 hours tapos kakaltasan ka pa ng 20% ni UBER. Try nyo po icompute kung magkanu kikitain in a day and think if feasible pa ba ang business na to. Probably, others would ask what about during peaks hours and may SURGE. Okay, sabihin na nating may makuha kang trip na may surge rate na x1.5 (1 out 10 or 15 lng ang rider na kumakagat sa surge rate na x1.7 pataas, tama o mali?). Isama mo na ang trapik during the trip, distance at duration.
Example computation: 10km + 45mins x 1.5 (surge rate) + 40 base fare – 20% =? After ng trip na may surge rate, next trip na nakuha mo was normal rate lang and the trip took more than an hour because of the disgusting traffic condition.
Good luck sayo. Do we think it still worth the effort and the time? This is another ridiculous provision by LTFRB.
May utak ba mga tao doon? Kaya nga ride sharing e.
Riders already know that they are safe even without those shitty markings that when you try and text or call those numbers no one even answers. It’s a useless marking.
Also, we are private cars that’s why we joined Uber. We’d like to have our cars to look as private as possible. And Uber riders like that especially. I do hope that the voices of Uber Partners and Uber Riders ( I’m a rider myself who joined Uber as a partner) be heard through you, Uber or Grab.
This is too much. We gave a hand, now they want the whole arm. Kulamos on November 15, 2015 at 6:04 pm kung pagmumukain nilang taxi mga auto dapat ang rate ni uber parehas narin sa taxi o mas mahal pa dhil free pick up sa eskinita mga pasahero kung pwede lang sa loob mo pa ng bahay pickupin e. I definitely agree on this. No bad feelings po sana from the riders pero ito kasi ang isa sa mga issues ng mga drivers.
Bukod sa mababang rate (na hindi pinapansin dati dahil nagbibigay p ng incentives si UBER) kelangan p pickupin sa loob ng village or mga eskinita (minsan masisikip) ang mga riders. Hindi naman kasi bayad ung travel from current location ng driver going to the pick up location ng rider.ok lng sana kung less than 5minutes away lang at walang trapik. Pero madalas 10 to 15minutes away ang pick up at trapik pa.
Isama mo pa ang 20% deduction ni UBER. Ending walang kinita si driver/partner/operator. Si UBER lng kumita. Going back to the ltfrb marking issue. Wala nman ho talagang maitutulong (to either rider or driver) ang mga markings n yan (regardless if its permanent or temporary). Safe and secured na ang mga riders with UBER’s existing app security features kaya hindi na dapat makialam ang ltfrb. LTFRB kung pwede manahimik ka na lang sa lungga mo (lahat kayong mga buwayang nakaupo dyan na mga utak kulangot!) hindi pa kayo patay pero sinusunog na mga kaluluwa nyo.
Kinukulang na ba kayo ng pundo para sa mga bisyo nyo at kelangan nyo nang gipitin ang mga individual na nangpapakiharap kumita ng maliit na pera makasurvive lang? Mas makapal pa sa mga kalsadang gawa dito sa pilipinas ang mga mukha nyo.yong kalsada madaling madurog pero mga mukha nyo wala yatang makakadurog eh.mga inutil! Does UBER or GRAB has challenged the action of LTFRB, legally? Because the purpose and objective of the memorandum is to protect the riding public. The big question is “Which gives more protection to the riders, the markings or the system of the UBER AND GRAB?” under the current system UBER AND GRAB gives more protection than the “MARKINGS”.
The markings does not even work as intended, in most cases markings are ignored by the riders. With UBER OR GRAB the riders could easily recall all information by the driver and the car through the system of the UBER OR GRAB. Actually riders are safe than our partners/drivers? Grabe sa dami ng papers na naisubmit sa UBER di pa ba sila maging safe niyan? At take note our riders are PRIVATE individual needs PRIVATE and SAFE vehicle too.They TRUST UBER.UBER must Talk to LTFRB regarding before implementing this rules; LTFRB can contact UBER if they have PROBLEMs encountered by riders.BEC all the info needed was already submitted to UBER. Sana magawan at magkaroon ng ACTION ang UBER regarding this matter or else TRUST of RIDERS at UBER will LOST.
Wala akong nakikitang magandang rason kung bakit iniimplement to ng gobyerno! Sino makikinabang nito? Hindi to kailangan ni rider since lahat ng info nasa app na. Mga buwayang taga gobyerno at buwayang inforcer lng ang makikinabang nito. Pwede lng nilang gawin to sa taxis, jeep and other PUVs since walang ibang mabilis na paraan para maireport ni rider si abusadong driver.
Sa uber at grab, part na ito ng feature ng app, napakabilis mgreport at mgaksyon ni uber. Hindi mo kailangan tingnan ang markings, nakikita ang name at picture ng driver, at plate number ng sasakyan at nakasave pa ito sa history ng app.
Anytime pwede kang mgcomplain. Uber please do something! Di pa ako nakapag umpisa dahil wala pa akong PA alalahanin natin ang uber ay private vehicles. Kung magkakaroon ng markings sa labas,baka maraming magba backp out lalo na uber black at suv’s. Di naman kasi yung iba full time, di ba yun din ang slogan ng uber drive kung kailan mo gusto? Dapat siguro i appeal ng uber ang memo na ito.
Puede siguro sa loob yung magnetic na markings. At isa pa mahirap manloko ng riders ang uber partners dahil pati riders alam nila ang complete details ng driver at vehicle pag kumuha sila, di ba? Ang maganda sigurong gawin ng uber ay i appeal ang memo na ito otherwise baka marami ang mag backout. Sa loob ok lang ang magnetic markings.o kaya sticker na lang na sa windshield lang ilalagay mas acceptable siguro yun sa mga uber operators. Yung sticker size yung madaling ma identify huwag naman sana yung malaking malaki salamat po i hope uber will consider my suggestion for the benifit of uber and uber-operators- partners. The very reason why Uber became a hit is because it is safe and secure for both drivers and riders.
THAT SAFETY IS SOMETHING NO LTFRB MARKING/HOTLINE CAN OFFER AS EVIDENT IN THE CURRENT TAXI SITUATION. So putting those has no point. Let the LFTRB be aware that if riders have complaints, they report straight to Uber and Uber responds very promptly that the day will not end without getting an action. I doubt LTFRB can provide such quick response. People has no faith in your abilities.
So unless you can convince a majority of uber riders AND drivers that those markings are EFFECTIVE and NECESSARY, let the people, who you supposedly serve, provide for our own safety. Not all Uber vehicles are operating full-time.
You do not want your Fortuner or Montero vandalized right? Transportation has changed. Do not pull it back in a rut. Your standards do not apply here because your standards have been proven to be useless! Di ako sang ayon sa markings di ba sabi nga ito ang makabago sistema ng transport. Tsaka di natin kailangan ng markings kasi kumukuha tayo ng pasahero gamit ang internet di tayo pumipik-up sa tabi tabi so di natin kailangan ng markings para makita nila. Pangalawa bakit kailangan ilagay ang contact number nila eh sa sistema lang ng uber madaling malaman ang info ng driver at pasenger dahil sa makabagong sistema nga.
Dapat ipa intindi iyan sa ltfrb na pag may reklamo ang pasahero madaling malaman kung sino. Pangatlo pag di umaksiyon jg malupit ang uber dito baka magulat na lang uli tayo na required na rin tayo na palitan ang plaka natin sa dilaw. Ang kailangan lang naman nila ay maregister at masingil ng pera ang mga uber partners. Bagong sistema ang uber di natin kailangan sumunod sa makaluma nilang sistema. Kailangan lalong manindigan ng uber sa sitwasyong ito. TNVS should not be considered as public transportation because it does not serve majority of the public but only for those who have credit cards or shall we say middle class riders wherein they can’t afford to put their safety and security at risks. Riders safety is at stake here especially that the public is not assured of their safety.
Government should focus on safety & security of their constituents. About the markings, there’s no need to have it on TNVS because Uber app itself has that information and all riders has the copy of the plate no of the car, profile of the driver, trip history and etc.so what’s the purpose of that markings? Persons with disabilities like me are the ones who benefit most from this transportation service from Uber, it makes us feel safe and free from arrogant taxi drivers who sometimes refuse to take us in. As far as identifying the vehicles as uber rides, this would actually expose us, i.e.
That we are travelling alone and easy prey to hold uppers and robbers. An incident happened to me once inside a taxi when someone tried to open my door by inserting his hand inside the window of the driver and the driver did not do anything!
Whereas, if inside a private car, I feel safer that people do not know that I travel by myself. I hope LTFRB Chairman Gines would reconsider this Memo circular. I don’t agree with this memo. Kaya nga kami nag Uber para Hindi magmukhang ordinary taxi ang sasakyan namin.
At para magamit pa rin namin privately ang sasakyan. Kung ganyan nman pala eh di sana nagtaxi nalang talaga kami. Hindi na sana kami nag Uber. Saka kung for safety purposes un, bakit ung mga ordinary taxi matagal nang may markings pero marami pa rin ang nadidisgrasya o naaabuso sa kanila, both driver and riders. Di nman nla nasolusyunan ang mga krimen sa mga taxi. OK nman ang standards ng Uber for the safety of riders and drivers.
Uber should act on this matter. We have complied all their requirements nung sinabi nlang dapat may franchise, wag naman na nilang isama pa ung markings! Having magnetic magnetic sheet would not be practical. At first maybe, but on in the long run. Magnetic sheets are not cheap. Street kids can easily peel them off and run away with it.
I just called their “hotline” numbers. And guess what? It rings once then goes busy Personally, trying to impose something that does not work is plain stupidity. Based on the memorandum, the markings are intended to prevent or minimize abusive drivers. I strongly believe that UBER already has this in covered through the UBER app and rider-driver rating / feedback system, which I find more efficient that LTFRB’s markings (which, again, DOES NOT WORK!!!). I would say No, because the markings only applies to public vehicles while Uber cars are still owned by private individuals so they have the right to say no to it.
If the goal is to ask riders about their driving experience, they should review the Information Architecture/Structure of the Uber App. There’s a scenario where every rider needs to rate every ride they booked, this is the same thing with “How’s my driving” marking on the puvs just presented in a different way. I am a designer myself, it’s important to know the message being delivered but also present it in different ways. I think it’s another way for the LTFRB to make money, abusive of their power to regulate such rules even when the rules are not being implemented to the sectors that falls into the right category.
Hi sir marco i think you got it wrong. This memo was applied to existing “PUV’s” a couple of years ago and only implemented strictly now. Here in marikina city sticker makers and printers had their fill lately of clients e.g. Shuttle, fx, taxi and more. In my opinion sec 1b is for existing PUV’s and not us TNVS.
We are included in Section 2 however this is not permanent its the “trade dress” w/c is mentioned in TNVS memo i think in 2015 -017?(forgot). The trade dress is the Uber logo being displayed by drivers like in the states and london during “pre arranged rides”. It can also be obtained thru Momentum Magazine.its Ubers new publication designed specifically for Uber Partners.
I believe the markings like LTFRB.fares and etc. Will only be added to this logo “trade dress”.
And not on the vehicle. Riders like riding unmarked vehicles maybe for privacy, safety or just plainRIDESHARING. Hi ka-ubers i’ve been a partner driver since August of 2014. We had our share of the ups and downs of being a partner.met fellow would be and excited partners at Sunlife financial bldg (former uber office) and was manned by only 3 personnels like Mikel, Laurence and forgot her name. There were only a few of us like 15 persons attending the onboardings, actual vehicle inspection and IPad issuance.i also saw some of the fellow partners who gave up and have their vehicles repossess due to incentives where stopped without any notice, we where then making trips. For almost 3 months with fares lower than that of taxicabs.
It was a test of enduring the hardship now with all that we experienced and achieved. Overcoming obstacles suddenly our operation is almost legal my point is let us share news ideas and opinions in a careful, well studied and responsible manner and not start an issue that will bring anxiety and negative thoughts Lets have a positive disposition on things that matter to us as partners/driversthis is the future of the transportation sector.Mobility as a Service.Rideshare thru relays. The right to choose. Shake the transport sector by abolishing the Boundary system. Let ordinary drivers be their own boss too and Your Car U Drivejust sharing my opinion ka-ubers. A Big “NO” I think UBER management should act on this. Bakit kailangan baguhin patakaran ng UBER sa ibang bansa nman hindi sila pinwersa ng country nila na lagyan ng kalokohang steaker na yan para lng sa anong dahilan??
Para din kumita ang gobyerno? Sobra nman ito hindi na nalalayo ang class ng uber sa mga regular na taxi.
Sa isang banda parang malalagay pa sa kapahamakan ang mga sasakyan nmin dahil madali ng makilala ng mga masasamang loob na pangpasahero ang kotse nmin at dahilan payan ng pag ka holdup at carnap ng sasakyan nmin Please UBER management hwag kayo pumayag. I disagree on LTFRB’s ruling re:markings.
For one, TNVS should not to be categorized as PUVs because TNVS are private vehicles accredited to a TNC for public use but not on a fulltime basis they are still primarily PRIVATE VEHICLES. Thus, I think TNVS are accountable to TNCs where they are accredited and TNCs are accountable to LTFRB. Following that order of accountability, TNCs should propose & submit guidelines to LTFRB on how they will police TNVS for the protection of the riding public, and these guidelines should not include markings as a requirement in consideration to private vehicle owners. So, I suggest that TNCs need to have a talk with LTFRB re:markings & other similar concerns to differentiate PUVs from TNVS. Currently, TNCs are doing a great job in implementing discipline to their accredited TNVS through their seminars for both operator & drivers and the rating system which is nonexistent to most, if not all, PUVs which is probably the reason why most, if not all, PUV drivers are undisciplined (pasaway). Hey, LTFRB people, wake up to this reality: TNCs are better in terms of implementation of discipline and public safety.
The riding public, including me, can attest to the fact that we feel good everytime we get an UBER/GRAB ride, instead of any PUVs, in general. This means that “markings” are irrelevant at all for whatever reason you might say. Di nyo ba pinag isipan ang desisyong yan? Kya nga may standard na pinatutupad ang uber mula pa sa maunlad na bansa ang operation nyan. Bakit nyo itutulad sa commom taxi yan na puro burda ng LTFRB? Una may standard model ang uber at pano magiging dignified ang mga pasahero kung wala na ring pinag iba sa taxi? Sa taxi marami sa driver ay walang seminar at walang sinusunod ng rules kaya di nyo dapat itulad.
Kung ganun lang pala e di sana kahit mga lumang model o bulok na sasakyan e payagan nyo nang mag uber! Pasintabi sa maraming tattoo, e sa inyo man humarap ang dalawang tao at humingi ng favor kanino kayo maniniwala? Syempre sa walang tattoo. E bakit nya tatatuan ang uber? Mag isip naman kayooooooo!!!
Hi Uber, putting those markers outside the vehicle would be a big disadvantage for us partners. Imagine people who are not familiar with the app based transport sharing system and try to flag you down but will not stop at them to take them and because they see those markings outside your vehicle and report you to the LTFRB as a PUV that ignores passenger/s especially during rush hours. This could easily be a good reason for LTFRB to revoke our license/permit to operate once they have accumulated a number of reports from unknowing passengers of the way we operate. What is your take on this?
Syempre, panalo nanaman ang mga big taxi operators na may dakma sa mga bayag ng mga taga LTFRB. Pag may sticker na, malamang ma turn-off tayong mga partners na mag Uber dahil ayaw natin ng mga ganyang markings dahil private nga ang sasakyan natin. Ayaw din ng mga riders to kasi magmumukha nga na nag ordinaryong taxi lang sila. That’s three of the two biggest appeals of Uber gone. Dahan-dahan nilang pinapatay ang Uber by slowly implementing rules para pahirapan ang pag-pasok sa Uber.
Less Uber operators, more customers para sa mga taxi operators. Besides, sa mga sandamakmakang colorum at barumbadong PUV drivers eh wala silang magawa, sa atin pa kaya? Alam pa ba nila na operators tayo? I have been an uber rider for a year and a half already.
I totally disagree with having ltfrb markings on uber cars or any marking at all other than license plates and lto stickers. I use uber because it’s almost like riding a private car not a commuter vehicle. Having no markings on cars separate uber from taxi cabs. How will they be any different? It defeats the very sense of your tag line “everyone’s private driver” and “arrive in style.” Why can’t uber come up with something else that won’t sacrifice the very reason they have the most number of clientele?
Grabe naman pasakit ginagawa nitong pulpol na ahensya na to. Sa New York pag uber black kelangan mo lang ng limousine licence, that’s it. Pahirapan na nga pag rehistro sa LTFRB tapos dagdag pa yan.
If the admin hack of putting magnetic stick ons work, I’m ok with it. Pero I think pwede ito matanggal pag hinangin. As for the whole concept, that defeats the purpose of ride-sharing kung may visible markings pa. Please search on YouTube – Mr Ginez interview with Daniel Razon. Tinawagan nya mismo live on-air ang LTFRB hotline. Pero not in service daw.
He tried it a few times pa. Wake up Mr Chairman. Hindi puro kalagayan na lang ng mga elitista, big taxi operators, at mga monopolista ini-intindi niyo! Give chance to small entrepreneurs. I actually not in favor of this memo. Uber transactions are online right? So, what is the purpose of that markings?
Lahat ng transactions are done online. In fact, the rider can rate the driver right after the trip.
I think this LTFRB markings is just useless for uber partners. Ang maganda po since we are dealing our clients online why not upgrade the apps and place the LTFRB hotline? Kasi lahat ng transaction natin ay online tama? Sa totoo lang po binibigyan lang natin ng way ang “kutong enforcers” na kutungan tayo eh.
May i suggest po, dapat po uber will contest or make an appeal on this matter. Ipaglaban nyo naman po sana kaming mga partners ninyo since po sa inyo namin pinagkatiwala ang pag process ng mga documents namin. Kayo lang po ang pwedeng gumawa ng action tungkol dito. You can appeal to LTFRB stressing that we are doing business online and instead of putting markings on each partners vehicle mas maigi naman siguro na ilagay na lang sa apps ang hotline ng LTFRB. In such case, mananatili pong private ang mga sasakyan namin and another thing, some of the riders chooses uber kasi hindi masyadong identified ito na nagta taxi sila eh. Sa totoo lang po, ang isang reason kung bakit ang dami pong nagkaka interest maging partner sa uber is because of extra income we can possibly have in return of a ride service we can offer to riders pero nanatili pong private ang aming mga sasakyan. Sana po uber management will make an appeal.
Lahat naman ng problema ay may solusyon. You need to protect the privacy of your riders din. Sana po we can receive a positive news in the coming days regarding this. Having marks inside or outside – be they removable or not is the biggest JOKE this great agency can do.
What’s in the markings? Hotlines of the agencies that do not respond or may respond but would take forever? Uber simply has to argue how riding with Uber is done if any from LTFRB hasn’t tried Uber yet. You have the driver details, plate number of the vehicle, contact info of the driver, and on the electronic receipt, you’d have the business name of the operator. All Uber needs to propose is to include the hotlines of these.bs# agencies. For those who are creating these memos or orders, Uber needs to provide them free credits for COMMON SENSE. Di kaya nagkamali ang uber sa pag allow ng operators with huge number of cars under them?
As in as many as 200 na vios (alam nyo na kung sino yun) under 1 operator? Kasi hindi na yun Personal car na nag share ng ride. It’s totally off the original concept of ride sharing. If there were 10,000 car owners with just one car each to share, siguro hindi yun pwede pakialaman ng LTFRB? At siguro mas lalong di pwede pakialaman ng LTFRB kung hindi nag open ng office dito sa Manila ang uber? If it were simply a Web- based car sharing scheme, LTFRB would not have suddenly found it their obligation to protect the riding public by “regulating” (kuno) the new uber transport scheme. I totally agree with you Fred, I really believe that Uber was to shake the antiquated, monopolistic and boundary based schemes transport industry.
That is why there are numerous complains regarding too many smart drivers who are “utak taxi”, The essence of ridedsharing has not been met here. See my comment “pappi jt on November 17, 2015 at 2:00 am”. I even gave up my day job as a Programmer last 2014 because the add was “Do you own a car? Want to earn EXTRA” was supposed to be Your Car You Drive.
Uber is designed originally to be a limousine service. The concept is its a hired personal vehicle only for a defined period of time. Globally that’s the Uber concept and that is the international standard. Why do we have to veer from that. Might as well remove Uber as a service if you change the concept to a taxi.
It will defeat the purpose of why riders want to ride Uber. The privacy, the discretion as though its your own vehicle. What is the difference anyway if its LTRFB marked or not? There is no VALUE add that that agency provided for riders and drivers the like. Hold ups still happen, kidnapping likewise still happen. It’s just showing how the Philippines is unable to adapt to the fast evolving market. Its short of saying, “Lets go counter-progressive and still operate using land lines as contact centers for complaints (expecting to be “after the fact” should incidences happen.”” Its so reactive rather than preventive.
Halatang pinipilit lang sarili nila in a fast moving industry.