Article by Mr. Dinh Hong Ky posted in the PERSPECTIVE section – vnexpress.net e-newspaper on February 5, 2018. Will stop serving in Quebec if the government does not cancel the new requirements for Uber. That was the statement of Jean-Nicolas Guillemette, Uber’s general manager in Quebec, Canada last year.
That was when the Minister of Transport required the company’s drivers to undergo 35 hours of training, the same as traditional taxis.
This is not the first time Uber has threatened to leave Quebec, nor is it the first time the provincial government has placed additional requirements on the company. Previously, the government announced that Uber drivers must be checked by the police and issued a criminal record, must have a class 4C license like traditional taxi drivers; they must undergo thorough training as well as ensure health and insurance regulations; the vehicles used must be inspected every 12 months. Uber is not allowed to apply fares many times higher than normal prices during emergencies such as storms, floods, heavy rain and wind. The Quebec government also only issues a limited number of Uber driver’s licenses. Each license requires paying a fee to the province for each trip. These are much stricter requirements than many other countries where the company operates.
“Bye-bye, I don’t care, don’t threaten me” – Montreal mayor Denis Coderre replied to the American technology company.
My son lives in Montreal. He texted back, saying he regrets that Uber is threatening to leave Quebec. People are at risk of losing a cheap, convenient transportation service that has existed for nearly 4 years. But surprisingly, besides that regret, when I came to Canada and “pocketed” the people and followed the story in the press, the opinions were all in support of the government. Ms. Luu Lan, a Vietnamese expatriate who has lived in Montreal for more than 20 years, confided that whenever she needs a taxi, she still calls a traditional taxi instead of Uber because she feels sorry for the traditional taxi drivers. They have spent a lot of money to buy a car, pay fees, and commit to strict conditions to operate a taxi. Now, a student who only needs a car can take the driver’s job.
Ms. Lan and many others believe that the state’s demands are all aimed at ensuring the interests and safety of citizens when using travel services, not for the benefit of any local transportation company.
In the end, after all the above events, the local government remains steadfast. People still use both technology and traditional taxi services. Uber remains in Quebec and accepts the game. And most importantly, the tax policy for Uber in Quebec has been applied exactly the same as traditional taxis, not inconsistently as in Vietnam.
I have been a long-time customer of technology taxis and I am not convinced by the argument about “difficulties” of representatives of some traditional Vietnamese taxi companies. But I understand that traditional taxis are not upset for no reason. To be able to operate, they have to pay taxes, fees, conditions for drivers, infrastructure costs, parking lots, dozens of regulations on transportation business conditions, are restricted from traveling on some routes, and are not free to adjust fares.
The game in Vietnam has not had effective State intervention like in Quebec. I wonder, is it because of that gap that driver strikes are taking place, while traditional taxi businesses are still “crying for help”? We have no reason to maintain the mindset: using technology taxis for the benefit of the sharing economy, or using traditional taxis for “sympathy”. Managers can completely come up with a fair game rule.
Certainly, to deal with foreign giants, traditional taxis need to quickly put aside their “ego”, innovate technology, service attitude, and goodwill with competitors for the sake of other benefits. However, the objective, transparent and honest regulatory role of the state management agency is indispensable in some market situations.
Because besides the “invisible hand” of the market, the visible hand – the regulatory hand of the State, when given promptly and in the right dose, will help all parties: the State, the transport and tourism industry, businesses, and consumers. No one deserves to fall into a war where there is no winner.
Dinh Hong Ky
