PHP600, a Vlogger, and Our ‘Tolerance’

By Ray Adrian Cadiz Macalalag

In early January, prior to the influx of tourists for the Dinagyang Festival, social media was abuzz with a video posted by a vlogger expressing dismay at the lack of meter usage by taxis in ferrying passengers to Iloilo International Airport. The journey, which commenced from a popular hotel along Senator Benigno S. Avenue (Iloilo Diversion Road) and costed PHP600, was met with swift defense from Ilonggos. However, this defense raises questions about the true nature of the situation and the extent to which Ilonggos are accurately representing the taxi drivers.

Opinions on the taxi service and drivers are divided, with the majority defending the current status quo. However, a select few have rightly pointed to the government’s inadequate provision of public services. While it is illegal for drivers to exceed meter rates, they claim financial losses when using meters for trips to Iloilo International Airport. We empathize with their situation and permit them to transport us at their pre-determined prices. Although these fares may be higher, passengers retain the right to decline the offer before embarking on the journey. An alternative mode of transportation is vans, but they are often overcrowded and poorly maintained.

This predicament serves as a stark reminder of the challenges stemming from the government’s failure to provide a comprehensive and affordable transportation system. While some individuals can afford the PHP600 fare or own private vehicles, others are left at a disadvantage. This ongoing tolerance of these practices diminishes the pressure on the government to address transportation issues effectively. This tolerance is also reflected in the “resilience” card that we erroneously celebrate.

To effect meaningful change, the current level of tolerance must be terminated. Individuals should demand better solutions and address these issues to the appropriate authorities. The problem extends beyond taxi services and necessitates government intervention to prioritize transportation. Significant transformations are required, including subsidizing transportation costs and modernizing public transport infrastructure. For instance, the Department of Public Works and Highways continues to receive substantial budgets, while the transportation sector’s budget remains comparatively small.

Regarding the case of the taxi driver, I hope that the Land Transportation Office’s show cause order dated January 17, 2025, to revoke the driver’s license will be reconsidered. Furthermore, other penalties should be administered in a humane manner. While the order aims to rectify behavior, the widespread practice of non-use of meters at Iloilo International Airport has been documented. Social media testimonies from patrons support this claim, with some defending the rates and empathizing with the economic challenges faced by taxi drivers.

The role of taxi operators in addressing these challenges should be thoroughly examined. If there is indeed prima facie evidence that the net take-home income of taxi drivers is not competitive, strategies to mitigate income gaps and corresponding regulatory reforms should be formulated and implemented by the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB). It is unjust for a single driver to bear the consequences of a widespread issue. He is not the savior of taxi drivers.

Furthermore, it is untenable to simply tolerate a flawed system and adapt to unwritten rules. We should not defend something erroneous and merely accept it as the status quo. The LTFRB is correct to blame the riding public for tolerating the system in one of its interviews, but it also implies a lack of proactive measures on their part to ensure fairness for all. They acknowledge the reality, yet they await formal complaints to be filed.

This transportation issue is as a reminder of the government’s persistent failure to address pressing concerns despite the substantial infrastructure expansion and burgeoning tourism industry. It also pushes the need for a paradigm shift in the mechanisms that prompt government action, moving from a reactive approach to a proactive public service.