The space resembled a typical “tambayan.” Equipped with a wall fan, and a water and a charging station, it was enough for the weary riders to rest and recharge before the “merienda” and dinner orders trickled in.

A former security guard, a factory worker, and a barangay employee were all brought there together by an app. Every day, they crisscrossed the bustling city, waited at their designated spots in restaurants and cafes, and brought food to customers right at their doorstep.

Rico (not his real name) joined GrabFood in 2019. The platform gave him a way out of his rigid and gruelling job as a bank security guard. (GrabFood is one of the more popular food delivery services in the Philippines and among those offered by the superapp Grab.)

Melinda (also not her real name) joined the platform, which gave her the flexibility she needed as a mother of two aside from its promise of better pay.

Another rider, Lara, was doing OK with her job in a barangay, but she got enticed when Grab came in. The idea of not having a boss was undeniably appealing to her.

Having no boss, the freedom to choose working hours, and the promise of a higher income have drawn Rico, Melinda, Lara and many more Filipinos to the growing gig economy.

The term “gig” used to refer to a band’s performance typically scheduled after work hours or on a weekend. Now it has expanded to a wide variety of tasks, often done through digital platforms 24/7.

Gig work is driven by a confluence of several factors. Customers—those who can afford—increasingly want convenience and services on-demand. Workers are seeking alternatives from the traditional 9-to-5 job. Companies aim to cut costs.

Digital platforms have bridged all these needs. They capitalize on this trend by connecting merchants like restaurants and cafes to customers. In between are the so-called gig workers.

In the gig economy, workers carry out task-oriented and time-bound delivery services without signing long-term contracts. This allows them to choose when and where to work, making it an ideal side hustle for those with regular jobs.

From October 2023 to June 2024, the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) interviewed dozens of workers for this report. The benefits are indeed undeniable for riders and drivers who treat this kind of work as a sideline to earn extra income in their spare time. But for many Filipinos, gig work is not simply a “raket”—it has become their main source of income.

This is a big deal especially when unemployment and underemployment persist. But because tech-driven services have far outpaced existing rules and regulations, workers are often disadvantaged.

Food-delivery and ride-hailing workers in the Philippines, whose daily routine is dictated by an algorithm, struggle with uncertain pay, indebtedness, and the physical toll of chasing incentives.

The risks of gamification

Lara, the former barangay worker, earned more than P1,500 the day before she was interviewed by PCIJ. For the 22 deliveries she made that day, she earned P1,372, plus P200 in incentives for making a certain number of trips, and a P20 tip, for a total of P1,592.

The minimum daily wage in Metro Manila was P610 at the time. At first, it would seem that Lara earns a lot, but after all expenses—gas, food, maintenance, etc.—her take-home pay could be lower.

In cases where they do earn more than the minimum wage, the riders complain about the gruelling 12-15 hours they had to hurdle.

For customers, it might seem as simple as thinking about what we want for lunch, opening the app, searching for a restaurant, choosing from the menu, and in a few minutes, a rider will be assigned to get your food for you. But there’s a lot more going on behind the scenes than we realize.

At the heart of these apps are algorithms that suggest merchants to customers, assign riders and drivers to passengers, and compute fares and incentives. This innovation makes things efficient and convenient for everybody. But it’s also intended to make money.

Our research shows that platforms like GrabCar, GrabFood, MoveIT, Joyride, and Angkas implement various incentive schemes designed to encourage workers to complete more orders and bookings every day. These incentives are offered on top of their standard pay, functioning as “bonuses” awarded to workers who meet specific delivery or ride targets—much like a game.

And because companies can restructure or reduce fares or for example, more recently, deduct the senior citizen and person with disability discounts from the workers’ pay, many workers really go for the app’s incentive program.

The implications are potentially serious. It could pose health risks and occupational danger to the workers and by extension, customers.

These incentive programs may also discourage workers from “multi-homing” or the practice of working on different platforms, which further limits their flexibility and earning potential.

Out-of-town drivers

Arnold (not his real name) spent two decades as an overseas Filipino worker. Now, he drives a GrabCar. The car is owned by his sibling to whom he remits a P1,000 “boundary” (a quota fee) daily.

Arnold is from Batangas, a province south of Manila. To save on costs and complete as many trips as he can, he sleeps in his car and goes home to the province only during Wednesdays, his coding day. There are others like him who by now already know most of Metro Manila by heart and the places where they can park their car and not get towed, take a bath, and rest.

Arnold says he is looking for a place to rent. The problem however is finding parking space too.

“Kasi mahirap naman tutulog ka nang sarap na sarap ‘yung tulog mo. Hindi na sasakyan naman eh, iiwan mo lang kung saan, ah, hindi safe. Para hindi ka rin makatulog ng, ano, hindi kagaya dito, kahit na, dito na, tulog sa kalsada,” he said.

Because he practically lives in his car, he gets to drive whenever he can. Admittedly, sleep is far from comfortable.

Arnold is able to reach his target income, including the P1,000 boundary a day. Not all drivers own their vehicle. Many drive other people’s cars and remit a boundary at the end of the day. Another setup is called “boundary-hulog” where a driver pays both boundary and “hulog” for the car so they get to own it after a few years.

Silver, gold, platinum

With GrabCar, drivers can reach higher tiers—silver, gold, or platinum—based on the number of rides they complete. The higher the tier, the lower the “kaltas” or the commission Grab deducts from their earnings, with the standard rate being 21%.

A driver needs to make 450 rides a month to reach platinum, the highest tier; 400 for gold, and 250 for silver.

Food delivery has a similar incentive scheme. In rider parlance, they call it “butas.” On their phone screens, there are round icons that can be unlocked by earning gems. One ride earns 10 gems. The more rides they take, the more gems, the higher the incentive.

In 2019, the riders interviewed said they could easily earn P800 in incentives a day. But Grab has changed this scheme several times. The same number of rides would earn them a lower amount now.

Riders also try to reach a higher tier to earn other rewards such as insurance, which at the time of the interview, was provided to those who have gold and platinum status. Similar to GrabCar, workers first enter as members, and can then move up to the silver, gold, and platinum tier. To reach platinum, a rider must make 480 rides in one month.

“Mangyayari hindi ka na matutulog kasi isang buwan, 480 rides,” Rico said.

“Ako po sa personal, ilang beses ko po naranasan na tumatakbo po ako, minsan hindi, nakaidlip, nasa gutter na po ako,” Carlos said.

“Saka minsan, minsan nga, pag nagbibiyahe ko, naka-pikit lang ako yun,” Lara said.

“Pinipilit na bumiyahe para mahabol yung… target na incentives. Yung gems,” Rico said.

Now, the riders said this number is hard to reach especially if they serve an area outside the most busy cities like Makati, for instance.

Grab: ‘Safety first’; Joyride, Angkas: mum on issue

PCIJ reached out to Grab about the incentive program. We asked how the company ensures that the app’s algorithm does not cause harm or encourage behavior that might pose risks to its workers.

Grab said it has always prioritized passenger safety.

“… we have implemented several measures to safeguard our drivers and passengers. Our platform includes features that monitor driver activity and prompt breaks if prolonged driving hours are detected. Safety features are part of our commitment to preventing fatigue-related incidents,” Grab said in writing.

Grab also said that it “continuously assesses and evaluates the safety records of our drivers to ensure that only drivers with excellent driver safety records are allowed to service commuters.”

PCIJ also asked the company if it has tested these kinds of incentive programs and their potential impact on workers before implementing them. For instance, does the company track the number of hours workers spend on the road?

According to the response: “Our incentive programs are designed with the well-being of our driver-partners in mind. We regularly review and refine these programs to ensure they promote safe and sustainable driving practices. While specific operational details are confidential, we assure you that our policies are aligned with the industry’s best practices and regulatory requirements.”

Angkas had initially entertained our request for an interview but did not grant one eventually.

Joyride has not responded to a similar request as of press time.

Fairwork Philippines findings

A 2023 study published by Fairwork Philippines, a project led by the De La Salle University with the Ateneo de Manila University, University of the Philippines Diliman, and partners from the University of Oxford, reflects PCIJ’s findings.

The report evaluated Angkas, Borzo, GrabCar, Grab Food and Grab Express, FoodPanda, Joyride, Joyride Car, Lalamove, Maxim, and TokTok, and how these platforms meet the five principles of “fair work.”

The five principles of “fair work,” composed of fair pay, fair conditions, fair contracts, fair management and fair representation, were developed through an extensive literature review of published research on job quality and meetings at UNCTAD and the International Labor Organization and in-country meetings with local stakeholders.

The table below shows what each principle corresponds to. A platform is awarded a first point if evidence suggests that it does meet the condition. The second point under each principle can only be awarded if the first point for that principle has been awarded. If there is no verifiable evidence available that meets a given threshold, the platform is not awarded that point. A platform can score a maximum of 10 points.

Only GrabCar, Grab Express, GrabFood, Lalamove, and Angkas managed to earn points but even these are too few for the workers in these companies to be considered as receiving fair work.

While these platforms offer workers the opportunity to secure their families’ needs in the context of poor employment alternatives in the country, they face “multiple occupational health and safety risks” daily on the road, along with shortcomings in terms of basic safety protections from accidents, illnesses and death, the report found.

Similar to our research, Fairwork Philippines found that “(g)ig workers tend to stretch their working hours to secure more gigs to earn what they need to remain afloat amid fluctuant rates, opaque pay structures, rigid ratings, and increasing competition.”

In addition, the report emphasized that workers are compelled to do this not only as a “free” choice, but also due to unfair or predatory pay and incentive structures. “The lack of measures to protect workers’ safety heightens their vulnerability, and the absence of safety nets implies that any sudden inability to work redounds to livelihood insecurity,” the report said.

Inherent ‘asymmetries’

According to a Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) research, the problems encountered by the riders and drivers are caused by “asymmetries” inherent in many apps or platforms.

These asymmetries give rise to “structural inequalities,” where companies—like Grab, Angkas, Joyride, and FoodPanda—benefit the most. Followed by merchants—like our go-to restaurants and cafes—and then, us, the customers.

At the bottom would be workers, who also grapple with having the least information and understanding about how things work on the platform such as how fares are calculated, why they are getting pick-ups that are too far, how to contest low ratings, resolve disputes, address account suspension and termination.

Read more: Displacement, commute woes plague communities near delayed MRT-7 project

The post When apps are gamified, workers rarely win appeared first on CoverStory.

Having worked with local government units and partnered with key cities such as San Juan, Taguig and Manila in building more bike-friendly infrastructure, Allianz now expands the initiative with a program that promotes livelihoods in bike repair.

Ride Safe 2.0 offers specialized livelihood support to selected beneficiaries of the Family Strengthening Program of SOS Children’s Village Pilipinas, who wish to pursue bike-related enterprises. 

It is designed to empower the participants, particularly women, with the necessary skills in setting up their own bike shops, and is aimed at addressing their daily needs while providing a pathway to establish a sustainable income source.  

The project’s core components include technical entrepreneurship skills development through training programs on business management, financial planning, and bike maintenance and repair at the Hermann Gmeiner National Training Center in Lipa City. The participants are able to gain knowledge through apprenticeship opportunities with experienced bike mechanics and entrepreneurs. 

Ride Safe 2.0 also grants successful participants seed capital to cover essential start-up costs.

“Our aim with Ride Safe 2.0 is to establish a solid foundation on economic independence and sustainability through bike-related ventures,” says Ramon Lee Cualoping III, the national director and CEO of SOS Children’s Village Pilipinas.

Ride Safe 2.0 was launched in partnership with SOS Children’s Village with family participants in certain cities in the Visayas. 

In Barangay 97-Cabalawan in Tacloban City, three beneficiaries of SOS Children’s Village became bike-repair entrepreneurs after undergoing comprehensive training. They were supported in their learning journey with allowances to cover food and transportation.

In Purok Avocado, Barangay Tawason, Mandaue City, aspiring entrepreneur Joseph Salonoy received technical and entrepreneurship skills training, plus P120,000 in two tranches as his capital for his bike-repair business. 

The Ride Safe 2.0 grant also empowered Jeram Tubongbanua, Regen Rubin, Renato Gadot Jr., Ricky Natalio, and Fermin Lintuco Jr. to establish thriving bike shops in Iloilo. Armed with initial seed capital, essential tools, and comprehensive training, they not only secured additional income to support their families but also became vital contributors to their communities. By offering essential bike-repair services and affordable bike parts, they have filled a critical gap in the market while promoting sustainable transportation.

“Their success stories underscore the power of collaboration, skills development, and community engagement in driving progress,” Allianz CEO Joe Gross said, adding: 

“The Ride Safe 2.0 grant has empowered them, ignited a ripple effect of positive change, inspired others to pursue entrepreneurial ventures, and contributed to the betterment of their communities. This is aligned with Allianz’s global strategy and commitment to investing in communities to foster resilience and confidence for a better tomorrow.” 

Allianz PNB Life is a joint venture between Allianz Group headquartered in Munich, Germany, and the Philippine National Bank. It was established in the Philippines in 2015 and currently operates 12 business centers in key cities nationwide.

For more information on Allianz PNB Life and the Ride Safe 2.0 campaign, visit www.allianzpnblife.ph.

The post ‘Ride Safe 2.0’ expands the initiative on bike safety appeared first on CoverStory.

“It’s suffering before the success,” 19-year-old Abad said. He leaves his home at 4 a.m. to get to his 8 a.m. class at the University of the Philippines Diliman. 

Soreto also wakes up early to arrive at her 8 a.m. class at Polytechnic University of the Philippines. She anticipates and dreads the heavy traffic. 

In true Manila fashion, both students allocate an extra hour in their commute “in case” the already grueling journey is further disrupted. Ironically, what has now become a long-distance commute for residents in San Jose del Monte north of Metro Manila is attributed to a railway project that is decades in the making. 

The Metro Rail Transit Line 7 (MRT-7), a 22.8-kilometer railway link between Quezon City and San Jose del Monte, promises to provide better commutes with faster and more convenient travel. Yet, its long overdue completion has exacerbated existing transportation problems. Construction has left roads torn up, disrupted familiar routes, and significantly extended travel times.

For example, to get to school now, Soreto has to take at least three rides.

“I take a tricycle to the highway, then a jeepney to Tungko, and another to Litex. Before the MRT-7 construction, it took about 30 minutes to reach SM Fairview. Now, it’s over an hour,” she said in Filipino. 

For Abad, the eldest of seven siblings, the additional expense strains his P320 ($5.47) daily commute allowance, which often means skipping lunch.

The railway’s development also raises concerns about its impact on local communities. Its proposed route cuts through residential areas, threatening to displace many families. Homes along the planned path have been marked with red lines, reportedly placed by contractors. To residents, this is an ominous sign of uncertainty.

For many in San Jose del Monte, the MRT-7 project represents more than just a faster commute. It’s a lifeline to opportunities in the capital, allowing access to better jobs and education without uprooting their lives. However, it is also emblematic of the growing pains of a region striving to keep pace with its burgeoning population.

See: Timeline of the MRT-7 as of 2024

Right-of-way issues

Universal LRT Corp. (ULC) set the groundwork for what would become one of the country’s most ambitious railway projects back in 2001. MRT-7 promised decongestion of the roads of Metro Manila, more efficient and reliable transportation along its corridor, and better economic opportunities for investors due to its connectivity. 

In 2004, the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) approved the MRT-7 budget of $1.2 billion, supposedly moving the project towards its first phase: a 22.8-km line from Quezon City, one of the densest cities in Metro Manila, to San Jose del Monte in Bulacan, a highway and an intermodal transport terminal.

The railway would carry 850,000 passengers per day and shorten travel time from Bulacan to the Metro from two hours to just 34 minutes. Its capacity would be more than double that of the MRT-3, which runs along Edsa with an average daily ridership of 357,198 in 2023.

As an unsolicited public-private partnership project, most of the project funds come from foreign assistance loans. 

In 2012, San Miguel Corp. (SMC), one of the largest conglomerates in the Philippines which later acquired ULC, secured funding from the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and a P100-billion loan from Philippine banks.

Construction commenced only four years later, toward the end of President Benigno Aquino’s term, formally marking the beginning of the project in April 2016. Right-of-way issues, however, continue to stall the project.

The first station, North Avenue, is meant to act as a grand central terminal connecting three train lines—MRT-3, LRT-1 and MRT-7. Its original location, according to survey plans, was supposed to be in front of SM North EDSA, a shopping mall owned by the Sy family. When construction began, it was relocated in front of the adjacent Trinoma Mall with the Department of Transportation (DoTr) citing economical reasons. Ayala Corp., owned by the Ayalas, operates the Trinoma Mall. 

SM Prime Holdings Inc. filed a temporary restraining order, which the Supreme Court later lifted, seeing that the construction was already ongoing.

In 2020, Quezon City Mayor Joy Belmonte issued a cease-and-desist order on the construction of the second station to be built aboveground inside Quezon Memorial Circle. Belmonte ordered a reevaluation of the project since the plans greatly exceeded the proposed area it would occupy.

The mayor lifted the order after the design for the aboveground structure was revised. This was done so as not to obscure the Quezon Memorial. But according to official alignment maps, the train station is planned to be built underground.

The land-use plans of both Caloocan City and San Jose del Monte reflect the original alignment of the MRT-7 along Pangarap Village. In 2021, the project was realigned to run along the Quirino Highway.

As of this writing, the station in Tala, Caloocan, has not yet been completed, while the location of the SJDM station has not yet been resolved. 

On the red line

The MRT-7 is expected to be fully operational by 2028 at the latest. Remarkably, despite the reported completion progress of 69.7%, construction of the 13th station at Tala has yet to start. 

The proposed railway connecting it to the final destination in Bulacan is expected to pass through Barangay 185, potentially displacing numerous families. Homes along the planned route have already been marked with red lines.

Among those who would be affected is Myla Lopez, 43, a barbeque vendor whose home and livelihood are now at risk. For the past 20 years, the mother of two has lived in the community within the marked zone for the new railway.

“The National Housing Authority called a meeting. They did not ask us if we were in favor of the new zoning. They just said our homes would be affected,” Lopez said in Filipino. “Asking questions would be useless since there were no MRT officials present during the meeting.”

Last March, the lines were redrawn near her house. She recalled asking the officials why? They told her that the space required for the MRT-7 has increased, engulfing their entire property.

“I said, ‘I already know that, what the changes in the measurements mean that all of my house will be taken, even up to the end.’ So, I wasn’t wrong, they marked it up to here,” she added, pointing to the newly drawn lines.

In its 2019 guidelines on involuntary resettlement, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) recommended a holistic approach that includes financial compensation, livelihood restoration programs, and continuous monitoring of resettlement outcomes.

“Involuntary resettlement safeguards call for meaningful consultation with affected people; compensation of losses and provision of assistance to and benefit sharing with displaced persons, and special measures for the poor and vulnerable,” according to the ADB.

The relocation threat brings more than logistical challenges. This is particularly pertinent for individuals like Lopez, who was concerned about the safety and the inconvenience on her children in going to school. 

Despite the promises of compensation, the seller remains skeptical. 

“For me, honestly, they can just keep their money because I won’t leave here. Do you know that I’ve always expected that in my life, I will die here?” she said.

Even with potential support, she believes that the emotional toll and disruption to their lives are more significant.

Like Lopez’s case, Jay Arniño’s home stands in the path of the planned railway. When asked about his feelings on his situation, he said he felt that his father’s efforts would be wasted “since he put a lot of effort into building our house.”

“When I found out that the house would be demolished to make way for the MRT, I felt regret and a little anger,” he said in Filipino.

Other San Jose del Monte residents—mostly farmers—have also expressed concerns about the effects of urbanization on their livelihood and homes. They cited fears of being ousted from their farmlands once the landowners decide to convert their property for commercial use.

Berto Monteroyo, a farmer in Barrio Bisaya, Tungkong Mangga, has a farm a few kilometers away from the initial proposed location of one station. But he still worries about the impact of the MRT-7’s construction and the urbanization that comes with it on the lives of farmers like him. 

“The thing about MRT-7 is that they will establish buildings and establishments once it’s here. Where will we be placed then?” the 75-year-old farmer said in Filipino.

Project delay entails economic cost

Cresencio Montalbo Jr., a professor at the UP School of Urban and Regional Planning, explained that addressing these constraints required a thorough study of both opportunities and challenges, with corresponding costs for remedies.

“They will have to be compensated for the resettlement, for the relocation. May cost lahat ‘yan (Everything has a cost),” he said, underscoring that the financial implications must be weighed against the benefits.

Montalbo cited a 2019 JICA study on the severe traffic congestion in Metro Manila. The study estimated that the daily cost of transport was P3.5 billion, or $69 million. “Mobility in large cities the size of Mega Manila is impossible without a network of mass rail transit system[s],” it said.

With the MRT-7’s prolonged delay, its promise to alleviate traffic and economic gains are yet to be realized. 

“The fact that the project is still under construction means that the project is not yet generating the intended benefits … [the MRT-7] cannot carry passengers to their destination simply because it is not finished,” Montalbo said. “That is [a] huge economic cost because of the delay.” 

Transport economist Robert Siy of Move As One Coalition, a civil society transport group, echoed the concerns of many about the project’s delays. 

“When you count the hundreds of thousands of people who are stuck in traffic, waiting in queues and also stalled in whatever public transport they’re using, this is where we are actually wasting so much of our resources, wasting opportunities,” Siy said. “We are also, I think, foregoing many economic opportunities when people suffer that type of inefficiency and that type of delay.”

Ways forward

Since the project had been put on hold for years, several things should have been done, according to Montalbo. “Three things: persistent [and] consistent communications; very strong, very close collaboration among the different stakeholders; [and a] champion.”

To avoid delays such as the one experienced by the MRT-7 project, communications strategies must have been put in place to make sure that the different stakeholders are on board or are supportive of the project, he said.

These include those affected by the project, like the residents and the local government of San Jose del Monte.

“[First], there must be clear knowledge on who the stakeholders are,” Montalbo said. “Second, it’s important to know what the issues of each of these stakeholders are … Third, how do we address such issues? … Based on that we develop a good communications plan.” 

The longer the delay, the farther the project strays from the solutions it promised to the people. In the time that it takes from project proposal to completion, several local government administrations would have already changed hands.

“Many people misinterpret what the project is all about because of the long time … the young people who used to support before are now older, there are now more people who have no knowledge about the project,” Montalbo said.

He attributed San Jose del Monte’s pushback on the proposed location to the lack of proper education from the MRT-7 proponent. He said that information about the project needed to be conveyed to the people affected so they could understand its rationale and benefits. This, he believed, was missing.

Furthermore, the national government must closely collaborate with the local government, he said. As the MRT is to be built on a national road, there will have to be cooperation from the local governments where its rail line passes. 

Lastly, the project needs personalities to face the public and endorse the project. Montalbo cited the mayors of Quezon City as being generally supportive of the project. In contrast, SMC, which won the bid to construct the MRT-7 and is one of the proponents of the PPP, rarely mentions its progress.

“Any big change that is introduced to disrupt the status quo would need a physical leader,” said Montalbo. 

Ideally, for projects of this magnitude, the right-of-way ought to be secured before the budget is approved. Montalbo admits that “it is next to impossible to secure the entire right-of-way,” especially for mass transits.

The urban planning professor expects that once the Quezon City segment starts operating, the local leaders of San Jose del Monte will see that the rail system works and that they are preventing their constituents from benefiting from the MRT-7. He added that the operation may soften their “hard stance,” allowing the MRT-7 to be completed.

From the Grand Central Station to the 12th Station, the Quezon City segment will operate approximately 18 kilometers, about 80% of the total length. 

‘Transport is transformational’

Looking at the already existing train lines in the Philippines, one might notice that wherever there are railways, there is significant economic activity. 

“Transport is transformational,” Montalbo said, pointing to the economic benefits of a mass-transit project to its location. “You make an area accessible, that area will change.”

Even before transport projects become operational, the approved locations of the terminals/stations already attract investors and real estate developers in anticipation of the increase in population and foot traffic. 

In Barangay Tungkong Mangga, the site for the initially approved location of MRT-7’s last station, several commercial establishments have been built as the construction progressed over the years, with more on the way. 

In 2013, Ayala Land Inc. launched Altaraza—a 71-hectare development which now has three neighborhoods namely Amaia Steps Altaraza, Avida Settings Altaraza, and the newly-established Miravera Altaraza.

SM Prime Holdings Inc. opened its third mall in Bulacan in San Jose Del Monte back in 2016.

However, as the wheels of progress and development continue to roll through SJDM, there is a group of people that are at risk of being run over and left behind. 

Responses to delays

San Jose del Monte Mayor Arthur Robes said in a recent interview that the route was realigned without informing the local government.

He said the city called the attention of the DoTr to request for a consultation when they realized that construction had already begun.

Transportation Secretary Jaime Bautista recently addressed the issue during an interview with reporters. He acknowledged the opposition to the construction from building owners along Quirino Highway because it will cause a heavier traffic flow, given that it’s a narrow road.

“They provided us with options which we are going to study,” he said.

According to the original plan, MRT-7 was not supposed to traverse Quirino Highway, but the plans have been revised due to conflicts. 

“In 2016, the route was not supposed to cross Quirino Highway. They were supposed to traverse the land of the Araneta, along Pangarap, which is why they fall under the aforementioned 33 hectares and why Tala Station would not be utilized,” Robes said in Filipino.

The original plan was revised due to disagreements in the supposed settlement fees that would be given. 

The plan in 2007 was to complete the project in 2012. When the project broke ground in 2016, it was targeted to be fully operational by 2019-2020. As of this writing, the latest target date for the partial operations (first 12 stations), with the pandemic severely affecting construction, was set to the end of next year, with full operations eyed by 2027-2028. The MRT-7 is projected to be fully operational by 2028, according to the DOTr.

Bautista said they will explore options provided by the San Jose del Monte local government. “We are not in a hurry because our target is really to operate up to the Lagro station by 2025,” he said.

Robes stressed that the city was not against the construction of MRT-7. “In fact, we are very much in favor. We would like to, however, be part of finding a better location where the posts of the train tracks will be placed.”

Reporters requested interviews with the DoTr’s and SMC. Nicole Alfiler, officer-in charge of the DoTr’s Right-of-Way and Site Acquisition Division, responded through Viber, saying they have an inter-agency committee for right-of-way committees that are collaborating with other agencies for all national railway projects.

SMC has yet to respond as of this writing.

Still waiting at platform’s edge

For Montalbo, travel is a means to an end, not the end itself. It is important to realize that commuters do not travel for the sake of traveling; they struggle with their daily commute to reach their destination.

With that in mind, it is vital that the authorities prioritize mass transportation systems to provide reliable modes of transport. Noting the transformative power of transportation, an efficient railway system equips the country and its people with less travel time, less traffic congestion and more room for economic opportunities.

However, that was not the case for the MRT-7 project.

Since the project’s approval in 2004, two decades have passed. Commuters have yet to hear it barreling down the tracks, carrying the 850,000 daily passengers it promises to transport.  Every delay costs not only the contractors more, but also the commuters who were promised a fast and efficient mode of transport.

While many citizens view the infrastructure project that will pass through the heart of the metro and act as an artery to the upper provinces of San Jose del Monte as ultimately beneficial, its delay and construction has caused much distress on the commuters in the form of heavier traffic—the complete opposite of what it aims to accomplish.

From a student’s perspective, Jay Arniño said, “The time I spent in traffic, I could’ve used to do my assignments instead.”

This story project was produced with support from the Earth Journalism Network.

Read more: Humanizing Metro Manila’s transport system

The post Displacement, commute woes plague communities near delayed MRT-7 project appeared first on CoverStory.

“I don’t want my son to go through all those because it saps his energy or sours his mood. He should be in high spirits and excited for school, but because of the commute, he might not look forward to studying anymore,” the mother of two said in a mix of English and Filipino.

Torres took taxis from time to time, but she often avoided them because of drivers known for gouging passengers with high fares. “Hangga’t maaari, Grab ‘yung kinukuha namin (Whenever possible, we always take Grab),” she said.

The Torreses’ experience is a common example of what it’s like to navigate Metro Manila. Notorious for its poor public transportation, the metropolitan region composed of 16 cities and a lone municipality had the world’s worst metro traffic in 2023. 

A traffic index found that a motorist spent 240 hours driving on average last year, with almost half of that time stuck on the road. So, when ride-hailing firms like Uber and Grab entered the Philippines, they thrived. The service they offered simply made sense for commuters like the Torreses.

But the family’s travel routine wasn’t sustainable. While their home is only seven kilometers away from school, booking a GrabCar ride meant leaving very early to avoid rush hour. They also spent at least P600 a day on the app alone. That’s roughly the minimum daily wage in Metro Manila.

Torres said she used to pay Grab about P270 going to school and roughly P290 going home at the start of the school year. A few months later, she noticed the fares rising to P310 and to as high as P350. She couldn’t understand the increase when she and her son took the same route every day. 

At one point, Torres got curious. She checked the receipt sent by the Grab app to her email, but she had no way to verify the amount.

“I didn’t have any basis or a reference to compare the fare, whether it could still go down or if there’s anything I could contest, so I just let it be. Besides, I didn’t really have another choice. I would take it (Grab) anyway,” she said.

For years, Grab’s seemingly steep fares driven by surge pricing have become a common commuter woe. Because no other firm has been able to threaten Grab’s dominance in the four-wheel transport network vehicle service (TNVS) market, customers are often left without other options. As of April 2024, there are 23,000 TNVS units, and the majority of those are Grab’s.

Behind Grab’s multibillion-dollar business is its data and algorithm-based approach to matching drivers and customers. This is how it is supposed to work, according to Grab: “When demand outpaces supply, the higher fares help to signal for more driver-partners to turn on their apps and join the flow.”

The idea makes sense. After all, Grab offers a service that isn’t the same as those offered by taxis, for instance. But the lack of transparency on how its algorithm defines surge rates has left many customers like Torres baffled.

An algorithm is a sequence of rules performed to carry out a certain task. It generates an output from a given input, similar to solving a mathematical problem or cooking a meal through a recipe. However, there is little people know about how these algorithms really work. This is why they are often called “black boxes.” 

While the inputs and outputs of an algorithm are often known, the process that turns the input into output is unknown. In the case of Grab, the firm uses driver and customer data to derive the surge rate. But how it computes those rates is unclear.

To test and learn more about how this algorithm works, PCIJ collected Grab’s pricing information by attempting to book rides for 10 routes across Metro Manila nearly every hour from 6 a.m. to midnight for one week. PCIJ also obtained data from Grab’s Farefeed application programming interface (API) every 15 minutes every day for the same routes during the same period.

Our investigation revealed that GrabCar rides always included surge fees, and when fares were high, waiting times did not always become shorter. The data suggested that the algorithm behind surge pricing did not always work the way Grab had advertised it to work. Customers still often had long wait times even when surge rates applied. 

Since its founding in 2012 by Harvard Business School graduates Anthony Tan and Tan Hooi Ling, Singapore-based Grab has become a multinational company. Originally designed as a ride-hailing app, Grab has since expanded into a “super app” offering food delivery and mobile wallet services. In the Philippines, Grab’s local subsidiary is MyTaxi PH, a homage to the app’s original name, “MyTeksi.”

Pricing probe still pending

Lawyer Ariel Inton was not surprised by PCIJ’s findings. It reflected the same complaints that his organization, the Lawyers for Commuter Safety and Protection, has been receiving. 

In 2022, the lawyers’ group raised questions about Grab’s surge fees along with other pricing concerns to the Land Transportation and Franchising Regulatory Board (LTFRB), the government agency that regulates public transport utilities. They wanted to know how Grab’s surge rates were determined.

There is still no information about how the LTFRB will resolve the questions about surge pricing. PCIJ’s interview and records requests with the agency have not been granted as of posting time. LTFRB only acknowledged our letter.

Inton said his group filed a motion to resolve the matter in January. There has been no news since.

“Two Christmases passed by already and there’s still no decision… We want to know when the surge [charges] should be implemented. Our focus then was that Grab supposedly applied surge charges because of supply and demand. But is it true every minute of the day? What we’re telling the LTFRB was for them to define surge. There has to be a limitation,” Inton said.

Ronald Gustilo, spokesperson of advocacy group Digital Pinoys, said he didn’t think the LTFRB was able to check how the Grab algorithm worked because of the fact that a complaint about it had been filed. 

“The fact that they are not addressing the complaint only shows that they don’t really know how or when surge pricing should be activated. Grab always says it depends on supply and demand, but in the first place, how do we know if there are indeed fewer drivers,” he said. 

In a written reply to PCIJ, Grab’s Philippine operations said it had “fully cooperated with the LTFRB’s inquiry” by participating in the hearings. “We remain committed to working with the LTFRB and other regulatory bodies to ensure our pricing mechanisms are fair, transparent, and compliant with all regulations,” the response stated.

Grab said it “strictly follows the fare matrix” set by the LTFRB, which includes provisions for surge pricing. The company also claimed that fares were shown upfront on the app “to provide transparency and allow for informed choices.”

The infographic below shows the information provided by Grab upon booking and when the ride is completed. The cost given by the app can indeed be broken down using the government-approved fare matrix, but only up to a point. 

Like other modes of public transportation, Grab’s fare is a combination of the base fare (P45) and increments based on distance (P15 per kilometer) and duration (P2 per minute). But unlike jeepneys, buses, and taxis, the company applies “surge pricing” that is supposed to be based on supply and demand. This part is opaque.

Grab had applied surge rates even before the guidelines for TNVS were drawn up, said Inton, who used to serve as board member of the LTFRB. When the LTFRB stepped in, surge pricing was retained in addition to the standard base fare and distance and duration rates. The LTFRB approved a surge that could only be up to twice the cost per kilometer and per minute.

Data: Grab rides always include surge fees

PCIJ’s data gathering yielded 1,328 data points from the Grab app and 6,720 through Grab’s fare check API. While our collection represented a small portion of the ride-hailing firm’s data, it offered useful insights into the inner workings of its algorithm.

Across all the rides we tried to book that week in February, data showed that surge charges were always included in the fares. Following Grab’s explanation, this suggested that booking requests always exceeded available cars nearly throughout the entire day—even early in the morning and late in the evening, even on weekdays and weekends. But it’s difficult to find out if demand did outpace supply because only Grab has access to this data.

According to data obtained from the app, the surge multiplier averaged at 1.51 times taking into account the rates for distance and duration of all the rides we had attempted to book. The rate tended to be in the lower range for a few hours in the morning.

The lowest surge multiplier we found was 1.19 times and the highest, 1.98 times, or almost twice the per-kilometer and per-minute cost. This is the maximum surge rate allowed by the LTFRB.

A Flourish heatmap

The surge charges customers paid for trips significantly differed depending on where they got picked up, the data showed. Passengers from Makati, Taguig, Las Piñas City, and Pasig paid higher surge rates on average. Meanwhile, lower multipliers were recorded in pick-up locations in Manila, Parañaque, Pasay, and Valenzuela.

For example, a six-kilometer ride from Makati to Taguig on Feb. 17, 2024 at 5 p.m. cost P381. Without a surge, the ride should cost about P215. The estimated surge rate was P166 or 1.98 times the distance and duration fees. ​​The surge fees on this day ranged from 29% to 44% of the whole fare.

Roughly the same trip distance within Valenzuela on the same date and time incurred a P64 surge fee. This was 1.5 times of the per-kilometer and per-minute cost. Grab charged P239 on the app. The surge fees on this day ranged between 23% and 31% of the entire fare.

A Flourish table

Verifying app fares with API data

As a way to verify, we compared the data collected manually from the Grab app with the data collected via Grab’s fare check API. The online tool as shown below provided estimates of the minimum and maximum fare and the duration of the trip.

When compared, the app fares were consistently above the minimum fare approximated by Grab in its own fare check page. This supports the finding that the rides PCIJ tried to book on the app always incurred surge fees. Moreover, it tended to be on the high side. 

The chart below shows that each booking (see black line) was also close to or more than the maximum fare estimated by Grab across the 10 routes.

A Flourish chart

API data: No surge?

Based on data collected from Grab’s fare check API, the company tagged each ride as “high surge,” “low surge,” or “none.” The same notices are not shown on the app, although it sometimes prompts customers to “beat high fares by booking later.”

Nearly two in three rides had a “None” surge notice in the API data, while the remaining rides were mostly “high surge” with a few “low surge”. This was inconsistent with what we found on the app where the surge fees were always added. Based on our data, there was always an extra amount charged on top of the P45 base fare, P15 per kilometer, and P2 per minute costs set by the LTFRB.

Curiously, the Makati-Taguig route in the API data registered a “high surge” throughout the week 24/7, every hour, even past midnight of the research period.

Grab did not directly address PCIJ’s question on why there was always a surge, but it did say that surge pricing was not predetermined by time but by real-time conditions.

“The discrepancy in surge notice(s) may result from variations in demand and supply at specific times and locations. The ‘High,’ ‘Low,’ or ‘None’ indicators are dynamic and can change rapidly as the system continuously processes new data to maintain balance and efficiency,” Grab said.

Grab added that its algorithm took into account a variety of factors, including traffic congestion, geographic location, the supply of drivers, and demand for rides.

“It operates dynamically to ensure that fare adjustments reflect the real-time market conditions. Surge is not manually set, but run by a real-time algorithm,” Grab wrote.

Gustilo, for his part, said that because algorithms are programmed by people, they need to be checked. Decisions driving their design will affect those who use the technology, he said.

Like Inton, Gustilo has been on the receiving end of complaints from both customers and drivers using the app. He himself found surge pricing puzzling as he had done his own fare monitoring. One time he checked the rate from his location to a destination hourly, from 5 a.m. until midnight. The data he collected showed that prices did not change much throughout the day, which led him to think that either no surge pricing was in effect or there was always a surge the whole day. 

“My point is, is Grab always on surge all day? Which is the same question asked by many passengers. Kasi nga, sobrang mahal na mag-Grab ngayon e (Taking a Grab now is so expensive.) Grab’s justification with surge pricing is demand. But drivers tell me, ‘Matumal ‘yung biyahe.’ So how do you reconcile that?” he said.

Does surge pricing get more cars on the road?

According to Grab Philippines, surge pricing is “an industry-accepted, sophisticated and scientifically developed algorithm-based feature driven by real-time supply and demand dynamics.”

“It ensures optimal allocation of resources by incentivizing more driver-partners to meet high demand, thereby enhancing service reliability. This mechanism is similar to economic principles applied in various sectors to balance supply and demand effectively,” the firm added.

If the algorithm was working as Grab had advertised, wait times should stay the same or become shorter when surge pricing took effect. However, relatively high surge multipliers lasted several hours without reducing wait times, the API data showed. This was not helpful for commuters because to realize a significant drop in the fare, they would have to wait much longer. 

For example, on Feb. 20, 2024 (a Tuesday) from midnight to 11:45 p.m., the Makati to Taguig City route recorded a notice of “High Surge” the whole day. The estimated average wait time was 3.4 minutes that day. It peaked at 11 minutes at 7:45 a.m., but didn’t go back to the average until 10 a.m. From 3:15 p.m. to 9:45 p.m. on the same day, the wait time averaged at four minutes. It wasn’t until past 10 p.m. when wait times generally dropped to a minute or two.

A Flourish table

Statistical analyses conducted by PCIJ did not yield conclusive results. The routes exhibited both positive and negative correlation between surge rates and wait times, which suggested that surge pricing did not always work to improve service quality, measured roughly as a reduction in wait time.

The routes that resulted in a positive correlation were pick-up points in the central business districts like Makati and Taguig. The surge rate and wait times in these areas tended to go in the same direction. It could be inferred that customers in these cities ended up waiting for a long time even with surge pricing.

Meanwhile, some routes did result in a negative correlation, meaning higher fares could be associated with shorter wait times. However, they were not substantial, which could mean that surge pricing had a minimal effect.

Grab acknowledges PCIJ finding

Sought for an explanation, Grab confirmed that surge rates could become “prolonged.”

“In some cases, high demand periods may persist, leading to prolonged surge pricing. The aim is to attract more drivers to areas with high demand, thereby reducing wait times over time. Continuous adjustments are made to ensure optimal service delivery,” Grab wrote in its response.

The firm said surge pricing was designed to address supply-demand imbalances but was not a static solution. The duration and impact of surge pricing depended on factors such as driver availability, demand surges in specific locations, and traffic congestion, it said.

On May 28, 2024, about a week after PCIJ wrote to Grab, the ride-hailing company was reported as asking the government to increase the number of TNVS vehicles in Metro Manila back to the pre-pandemic level of 65,000 to keep up with growing demand.

“Grab is struggling to serve the ride-hailing demand in Metro Manila, lamenting that TNVS supply is short of the pre-pandemic high of 65,000. The TNVS supply is around 40,000 slots as of end-2023,” PhilStar.com reported.

Persistently long wait times could also mean that drivers were not encouraged by surge pricing. At least a dozen drivers interviewed by PCIJ said that they didn’t necessarily go to “surge” areas or the areas marked red on the app map because that would mean getting stuck in traffic. 

They simply relied on the “bato” or the booking provided by the app, the drivers said. They spoke to PCIJ on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution.

Unchecked algorithms

PCIJ reached out to four relevant government agencies to learn more about how algorithms are regulated. Of the four departments, only the Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) and the Philippine Competition Commission (PCC) responded.

PCIJ has sent several requests and made follow-ups to the LTFRB since November 2023. The letters were acknowledged but not addressed. We wanted to ask the transport regulator about the status of its surge pricing inquiry and other related regulatory concerns.

The Department of Trade and Industry’s Consumer Protection Group asked for and was given a list of interview questions but did not respond to our request.

Only the DICT agreed to an interview. Assistant Secretary Philip Varilla said the department did not have a regulatory framework for ride-hailing applications. Its focus is on information shared by customers, he said. 

“Our attached agency, the National Privacy Commission, does some Privacy Impact Assessment. Basically, it is in relation to personally identifiable information. And with cybersecurity, we have our Cybersecurity Bureau, and they follow our Cybercrime Prevention Act, the National Cybersecurity Plan, as well as the Consumer Act of the Philippines to protect consumers. So, as for a regulatory framework specifically for ride-hailing applications, we don’t have one,” he said.

Making algorithms accountable

In the absence of regulations about algorithms, risks abound, according to experts. 

Dominic Ligot, co-founder of social impact technology company CirroLytix, said that while the Data Privacy Act and the Cybercrime Law cover abuses using technology or abuses on data, they do not cover algorithmic bias or algorithmic abuse. New laws are needed to cover algorithmic liabilities, he said.

Apart from legislation, designing an Algorithmic Impact Assessment or AIA might be helpful, Ligot said. It’s similar to the Privacy Impact Assessment under the Data Privacy Act. PIAs are a checklist of data being gathered, how they are processed, and who’s going to be accountable when there’s a data breach, for example.

An AIA can be a checklist that includes risks posed by an algorithm, among others, Ligot said. 

“Let’s spell it out. And then if we’re comfortable with the risk, sign, so that later if it blows up, ‘Okay, wait, who assessed this? And then we learn.’ At the bare minimum, we should have something like that for accountability and transparency,” he said.

This problem is not unique to Grab. Ride-hailing companies in other countries, like Uber, have been criticized for using surge or dynamic pricing to make a profit instead of managing supply and demand. 

Researchers have warned against algorithmic abuse in cases where companies raise surge rates more frequently than required due to weak regulation or the lack thereof. 

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for instance has highlighted concerns about the widespread use of algorithms in digital markets exhibiting characteristics that may lead to anti-competitive behavior.

Grab’s market dominance remains unchallenged

Grab not having a competition adds another layer to the problem. 

In 2018, the Philippine Competition Commission cautioned against Grab acquiring the Philippine operations of its lone and credible rival, Uber, stating that it would undermine competition. But the antitrust body later cleared the merger when Grab committed to address service quality and transparency concerns. Six years later, Grab’s market dominance remains unchallenged.

Indonesian ride-hailing startup Go-Jek, the only potential competition to Grab, tried several times to enter the Philippine market, but faced numerous roadblocks. 

The LTFRB in August 2018 imposed a moratorium on new applications from ride-hailing platforms, saying it needed to review the effect of the cap on the pool of the 65,000 approved TNVS units. 

Go-jek re-applied several times but was rejected because of the 40% foreign ownership limit for public transport services, according to Bloomberg. 

The Philippine Constitution requires companies to be least 60% Filipino-owned to operate public-utility services. Go-jek has a local subsidiary, Velox South-East Asia Holdings, but only about 20% of it was reported to have been owned by a Filipino shareholder.

Go-jek’s car-hailing unit, Go-Car, helped push Uber out of Southeast Asia and outgrew Grab as the most popular ride-hailing service in Indonesia, the Financial Times had reported.

Former LTFRB board member Inton said the exit of Uber ultimately favored Grab. 

“Why? Because it’s only Grab. There’s nothing else. But that situation should be regulated. Otherwise, Grab will be over and above regulation already. And Grab is so big now. The perception is that it is untouchable already, which should not be the case,” he said.

Inton urged the LTFRB to start scrutinizing surge pricing.

Grab violates commitments

Since the 2018 merger, the PCC has been looking into Grab’s operations and issuing penalties on the company because of its failure to comply with its commitments, particularly with pricing issues. 

The PCC explained in a written response to PCIJ’s queries that in principle, Grab must keep fares within a range as if a competitor like Uber were present in the market.

Asked how it monitors Grab’s compliance with its merger deal commitments, the PCC said it tracked Grab’s compliance through third-party monitors using reports generated by Grab. Grab submitted quarterly reports to the PCC. 

The PCC, in turn, furnished the monitor with copies of these reports. The monitor then informed the PCC of its assessment, including any findings of non-compliance. (The PCC declined PCIJ’s request for a copy of the quarterly monitoring reports because these are supposed to be “confidential.”)

The PCC said it had penalized and fined Grab for violations of its commitments in multiple instances. Fines have totaled P86.7 million over the years since the merger. The amount includes a P16 million fine in October 2018 for violating key provisions of the Interim Measures Order (IMO) during the merger review period and a P9 million fine in February 2023 for providing incorrect and misleading information in compliance reports and failure to comply with PCC orders.

The PCC has also ordered Grab to refund a total of P25 million to its riders for violating price monitoring commitments. Of this amount, P4.7 million will be remitted to the National Treasury because it was not claimed by eligible Grab riders.

According to Grab, all fines have been paid in full and on time, but the PCC clarified that Grab had yet to settle a P16 million fine, which is the subject of a petition for review before the Court of Appeals.

However, the PCC pointed out that Grab’s commitments to service quality and fare transparency have expired and were no longer being monitored by the PCC. The only remaining commitments under monitoring, it said, were about non-exclusivity and incentives. These pertain to drivers who are not supposed to be tied to just one ride-hailing company.

Grab buys Move It

Digital and transport advocates also claim that Grab has monopolized the four-wheel transport service and that the company will soon monopolize the transportation sector. This is in context of Grab’s acquisition of motorcycle taxi firm Move It.

Grab Philippines has a different perspective, pointing to a “competitive” market of 18 Transport Network Companies (TNCs) accredited by the LTFRB. As regards its acquisition of Move It, Grab stressed that the PCC, the competition watchdog, had cleared the transaction. 

“Digital ride-hailing services, both four-wheeled and two-wheeled, are just one segment of the entire transportation landscape. The sector remains competitive, with numerous players and options available to the public. Grab’s acquisition of Move It does not alter the conditions that have contributed to the competitiveness and dynamism of the transportation sector,” Grab claimed.

While it’s true that there are several other players in the Philippines, none have the financial and technical resources to threaten Grab’s market dominance.

Apart from legislation and setting up AIAs, the government needs to foster innovation, especially now when there isn’t much incentive to build competing apps, Ligot said. If there are no incentives, the Philippines will be beholden to foreign companies, he said.

“Grab had this first-mover advantage. Or rather second. Uber came first. And you can see how it really shredded the taxi industry. Partly because of the taxi industry also. It’s an ugly experience, right? They rig the meter. It’s inefficient. Suddenly, an algorithm comes and makes it efficient. But now we’re hostage to the algorithm,” he added. 

That’s a hard pill to swallow for many commuters, drivers, and riders to whom ride-hailing apps have become a lifeline. 

Torres’ family eventually decided to move to a place near the son’s school. She no longer takes GrabCar every day.

But she still takes it whenever she’s with her kids or family. “I would rather that I take Grab. (One main reason) is the traceability, in the event something happens.”

She’s hoping for alternatives. 

“Hopefully, once my kids are a bit older, maybe they can take a cab instead. But for now, that’s not the case yet,” the mother said.

This story was produced by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism in partnership with the Pulitzer Center’s AI Accountability Network. 

It was reported by Pulitzer Center’s AI Accountability Network fellow Karol Ilagan and data specialist Federico Acosta Rainis. 

Jabes Florian Lazaro contributed reporting and research for the article.

Data collection was done by Angelica Alcantara, Jay-ar Alombro, Donna Clarisse Blacer, Lyjah Tiffany Bonzo, James Kenneth Calzado, Gina de Castro, Maverick de Castro, Dominique Flores, Lois Garcia, Guinevere Latoza, Aya Mance, Faith Maniquis, Karmela Melgarejo, Gabriel Muñoz, Arone Jervin Ocampo, Matthew Raralio, Arriana Santos, and Angelica Ty.

Felipe Salvosa II was the lead editor. 

Photographs were taken by Bernard Testa. Illustrations were created by Joseph Luigi Almuena.

Data visualizations were designed by Karol Ilagan, Federico Acosta Rainis, and Kuang Keng Kuek Ser.

The post Grab fares surge under opaque algorithm appeared first on CoverStory.

This program seeks to replace jeepneys and other PUVs over 15 years old with modern vehicles that meet Euro-4 emission standards or run on LPG, electricity, or hybrid systems. It also mandates the consolidation of individual franchises into a single franchise via the organization of cooperatives or corporations.

Transport groups led by Piston, or the Pagkakaisa ng mga Samahan ng Tsuper at Operator Nationwide, have strongly opposed the PUVMP since its inception. Their actions, along with the Covid-19 pandemic, led to multiple deadline extensions for operators and drivers of traditional jeepneys to consolidate their individual franchises. The initial transition deadline of June 30, 2020, was extended to March 31, 2021, then to March 31, 2022, and finally to March 31, 2023.

In 2023, continued resistance from Piston, Manibela, and other transport groups as well as increasing protests involving transport workers, commuters, and mobility organizations prompted President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to pledge a program review, which did not materialize. The franchise consolidation deadline was shifted to June 30, 2023, and subsequent actions led to further extensions, ultimately reaching April 30, 2024. Operators failing to meet the consolidation deadline by April 30, 2024, risked franchise revocation, barring them from operating traditional jeepneys or PUVs, which will then be considered unauthorized or “colorum.”

Just transition. In December 2023, amid growing opposition, the DOTr issued DO No. 2023-022 renaming the PUVMP as the Public Transport Modernization Program (PTMP) and ensuring “just transition for all.” 

But “just transition” is not just about moving away from carbon dependency but also about eliminating systemic inequalities. It emphasizes that the transition must address both the climate crisis and existing social disparities. Since its inclusion in the Paris Agreement in 2015, “just transition” has become a common theme in climate discussions at all levels. But its widespread adoption risks misuse, as governments and corporations may coopt it for greenwashing or present it in ways that neglect social inequalities.

Silencing. Piston reports that jeepney operators who joined the modernization program fear speaking out lest they be expelled from their cooperative or corporation and their livelihood jeopardized. Its anecdotal evidence indicates that members of a consolidated transport service entity (TSE) seeking transparency or questioning management are often threatened with removal. TSEs are also barred from participating in protests against the modernization program. The LTFRB enforces a strict “no-strike” policy under its MC No. 2011-004, which considers any protest action that inconveniences passengers as a violation of the franchise terms.

The experience of Philip Burata and his group of jeepney operators in Bacolod City, who joined Choret Corp., exposes hidden challenges and injustices in the PTMP implementation. Choret, a transport corporation that was created for the modernization program, holds certificates of public convenience (CPCs) for 4 out of 24 routes in Bacolod. Burata has represented his group in hearings conducted by the House of Representatives’ committee on transportation to highlight these issues. Still, they say, injustices persist.

Traditional jeepney operators in Bacolod have opposed the phaseout even before the launch of the modernization program. As of May 2024, only 27% of traditional jeepneys in Bacolod had consolidated their franchises, leaving 73% (1,734 out of 2,313) vulnerable to apprehension; and risking the welfare of more than 30,000 individuals whose livelihoods are dependent on the traditional jeepney industry.

Forced consolidation. Jeepney operators felt compelled to join the program. They chose to join TSEs (such as Choret Corp.) with awarded CPCs and routes, which provided a quicker, more certain path to secure their operations. Independent applications for franchise consolidation posed risks, they say, as there was no guarantee of being awarded a CPC and route, especially if other applicants were deemed more qualified.

Jeepney operators forced to consolidate did so without proper training or guidance from the government. The focus of the PTMP implementers, as pointed out by jeepney operators, is on pushing individual operators to surrender their franchises and consolidate, without providing them the necessary support to navigate the complexities of forming and operating within a TSE. Effective functioning as a collective requires time and guidance to prevent operators from being misled, deceived, or exploited, and to ensure they understand how to operate effectively as a collective entity.

The pressure to meet the franchise consolidation deadline forced operators to make hasty decisions. Without proper support from PTMP implementers, operators were made more vulnerable to exploitation. For example, Philip Burata and his group believed they were part of the Choret Corp.  But after checking with the Securities and Exchange Commission, they discovered they were neither incorporators nor members. Burata and his group assigned their individual franchises and registered their modern PUVs with Choret Corp. They financed 44 modern PUVs through the Land Bank of the Philippines. But Choret Corp. claimed that they were merely employees, not owners of the units.

In December 2023, Choret Corp. charged four of the members of Burata’s group with 38 counts of carnapping under the Anti-Carnapping Act when the group asserted their claim to the vehicles. While 38 modern PUVs remained with the group, 6 were taken by the corporation.

When jeepney operators, like Burata and his group, raised their concerns, the LTFRB RFRO Region 6 dismissed these as “internal disputes” to be resolved within the transport corporation. This absolves the government of responsibility, despite the fact that it was the PTMP implementers who forced operators to consolidate in the first place.

Financial burdens. The PTMP forces operators like Burata and his group to bear significant financial burdens by compelling them to purchase numerous expensive modern PUVs often imported from foreign manufacturers, particularly China. As of April 2024, 34 out of 59 compliant models listed in the DOTr catalog are from China, averaging P2,697,812.50 each. 

Operators face high maintenance costs and challenges in replacing parts of modern PUVs. They have raised concerns with the air-conditioning units that often malfunction. These add to their expenses. According to Burata, the maintenance cost for a single air-conditioning compressor may reach P68,000. Moreover, use of air conditioning also leads to increased fuel consumption instead of reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Unlike traditional jeepneys, which can be easily serviced with locally sourced parts, modern PUVs needing replacement parts are often saddled with delays in acquisition, resulting in increased downtime and financial strain. 

Operators are anxious about the potential shift to electric PUVs before they can even recoup their investment in modern PUVs compliant with Euro-4 emission standards. The DOTr’s proposed guidelines for electric vehicles, pursuant to the Electric Vehicle Industry Development Act, indicate a move towards electric mobility. Consultations conducted by the DOTR PTMP National Program Management Office in May 2024 highlight this transition. Operators fear that their Euro-4 compliant PUVs may become obsolete sooner than expected, adding to their uncertainty and financial risk.

Loss of community and culture. Franchise consolidation disrupts long-standing connections within specific routes and among jeepney operators and drivers. There is also a significant cultural loss, as traditional jeepneys, iconic in the Philippines and a source of national pride, are phased out. PUVs were originally developed to address public transportation gaps and have become integral to Filipino heritage.

There is a glaring absence of justice for marginalized stakeholders, whose grievances have been persistently ignored despite their efforts to comply with the program requirements. The costs and risks imposed on them vastly outweigh their resources.

The current PTMP implementation, as evidenced in the case of Burata and his group, prioritizes expedient technological solutions over ensuring justice in the transition to decarbonized public transport systems. Government agencies must act swiftly to rectify these injustices, including suspending and thoroughly reviewing the program. Beyond mere token inclusion of justice-oriented language in guidelines, it is imperative that tangible justice is prioritized and experienced by the most vulnerable stakeholders affected by the transition.

This article is a summary of Rafael Dimalanta and Allan Morales’ discussion paper for the University of the Philippines’ Center for Integrative Studies, where Dimalanta is a researcher at the Program on Alternative Development.

Read more: Needed: a just transition for jeepney drivers and operators

The post The harrowing experiences of ‘consolidated’ jeepney operators appeared first on CoverStory.

Metro Manila was tagged as having the fifth worst public transportation system worldwide in the 2022 Urban Mobility Readiness Index launched by the Oliver Wyman Forum and the University of California, Berkeley. This study examined 60 metropolises across the globe to assess their public transport system, including, among others, the reliability of public rail systems, various modalities of transport (such as traditional and modernized jeepneys and mini-buses), and pedestrian lanes. 

There is no doubt that Metro Manila’s public transport system presents an ordeal to commuters, drivers, conductors, and all others who share the roads daily. Just for one example, during rush hour commuters regularly have to wait for at least 30 minutes to get a ride in a public utility vehicle (PUV) just for them to get to where they’re going in at least 45 minutes on average. 

The rapid urbanization since the 1980s due to deeply centralized employment opportunities in Metro Manila and Greater Manila, insufficient drainage that can cause heavy volumes of traffic once the rain pours, unstrategic placement of pavements, and lack of sustainable walkways for pedestrians to safely cross and walk on the streets, etc. are among the factors behind the still worsening public transport system in Metro Manila. 

Poor public transport dehumanizes pedestrians and passengers. In particular, it requires the conditional surrender of personal space in exchange for the opportunity to get to work on time and to arrive home and spend quality time with loved ones. Even the modernized minibuses and electric jeepneys tend to allow an unlimited number of passengers—highly evident during rush hour when passengers, regardless of pregnancy or disability, even stand right at the doorstep of the vehicle. This applies not only to modernized jeepneys but also to public railways where personal space is sacrificed for the sake of catching up with time.

Faltering modernization 

The modernization program, intended to replace traditional jeepneys with modern-type air-conditioned ones run by cooperatives, has done little to ease the problem. The continuous attempts of organized jeepney drivers and operators to express their dissent only show that the state is still unable to strategically align its policies toward a mass-oriented and collective form of development. The discourses on traffic reforms constantly point toward still-unrealized essentials: providing eco-friendly walkways and sidewalks that would encourage walking and biking.  

However, this has been easier said than done since the decentralization of local government units (LGUs), when the devolution that is manifested through public works often becomes a topic of comparison. For example, Marikina is often hailed as one of the cleanest and greenest cities in Metro Manila due to the public works initiatives of its LGU. But the situation is not the same with other LGUs in the metro that tend to focus their budgets on other projects such as social services. 

On the other hand, deregulation on the part of the state has also become a problem. For instance, the lack of car ownership regulations has resulted in the domination of automobiles in Metro Manila alone. The government, alongside the conglomerates, pushed for the construction of skyways on public-private partnerships and official development assistance (ODA) by intergovernmental agencies that aim to promote economic collaboration and leverage with developing countries like the Philippines. 

2-pronged approach 

Urbanization efforts and lack of decentralization in terms of development and employment opportunities have resulted in this structural and cyclical concern that even the “Balik-Probinsya” program, the Duterte administration’s attempt to encourage a return to the provinces, could not solve. 

Metro Manila’s horrendous public transport system needs to be addressed with a two-pronged approach. 

From the bottom-up perspective, the human agencies concerned with the improvement of the public transport system has to be fully harnessed. They can be a force to be reckoned with in terms of lobbying for relevant legislation and serving as avenues for reforms and necessary arrangements in policymaking and program implementation. Transport groups are equally vital key players toward reforms considering that they are waging their fight for better working conditions and opportunities for their very survival. 

From the top-down perspective, the state can take initiatives and recalibrate its current policies. For example, the jeepney modernization program is inhumane because of the non-consultative steps toward the phaseout of traditional jeepneys. A shift in policy may include full subsidies in the repair of traditional jeepneys, and ensuring that carbon emission tests are done regularly, drivers’ competence are monitored, and opportunities are provided for drivers to be compensated. As well, the state should boost the local market by choosing local firms to collaborate with. 

Consequently, a proper balance between state regulation and market control should be achieved. 

Consider this: Car and motorcycle ownership has no limitation per household. If a family has the financial capability, it can purchase more vehicles for each member. This example alone upholds the persistent social class divide—where automobiles that mostly carry one or two persons  dominate the road vis-à-vis commuters who are packed into PUVs that take up only a small portion of that road. 

Additionally, the decentralization of LGUs can be an opportunity for the state and its agencies to collaborate and form joint initiatives on public works management projects aimed at the creation of sustainable and smart walkways and pedestrian crossings, among others. 

One project that can serve as a starting point is the Pasig River Esplanade—a 25-kilometer walkway designed for cycling, walking, strolling, and other recreational activities for pedestrians to enjoy. At least 15 government agencies are collaborating on this project. Hence, humanizing our transport system is not a long shot. Revitalizing cities, and pathways, and reconstructing the metropolitan ethos toward sustainability and collective development should be taken into account. 

With the two-pronged approach, humanized communities can become humanized societies. 

Juniesy Estanislao teaches Araling Panlipunan at Barangka National High School in Marikina City. He is studying for a master’s degree in Philippine Studies, major in Development Studies, at the Asian Center, University of the Philippines, Diliman.

Read more: Transport groups ‘will continue to make noise’ vs modernization plan

The post Humanizing Metro Manila’s transport system appeared first on CoverStory.

When eFrancisco Motor Corp. chair Elmer Francisco rattled off their ejeep’s accessories during a virtual launch on the night of Nov. 30, Bonifacio Day, some viewers gasped in awe.

There’s nothing like it yet on the market. It’s got Wi-Fi, GPS system, CCTV, video and audio system, dashcam, AC. But that’s just the bling. 

The real deal lies under the hood: full-electric powertrain from Tembo e-LV, a global provider of electric utility vehicles. Unlike its aging, diesel-fueled cousin, the ejeep has no emission. It can travel up to 150 km after full charging, rev up to 120 kph, climb slopes at 50 degrees, and load up to 5,000 kg. 

With a gearbox nominal torque of 475 Nm, the ejeep can outmuscle traditional jeepneys even on Kennon Road’s tortuous zigzags. Traditional jeepneys’ torque is only up to 275 Nm. 

“It’s brand-new. No need to change oil after 5 or 10 kilometers. It has no motor oil,” Francisco told the crowd of mostly jeepney drivers, operators and members of transport cooperatives via Zoom. 

Unsurprisingly, a unit comes with a high price tag. 

That night, Francisco, 45, a Wharton-educated entrepreneur who cut his teeth in assembling jeepneys at 14 in the shadow of his father Jorge, made a special announcement: He’s selling a unit at a discounted P985,000 for the first 1,000 buyers.

“Francisco Motor is not selling a jeepney; it’s selling a livelihood,” he told the Zoom viewers, echoing his father’s sales pitch. (Jorge Francisco, together with his brothers Anastacio and Fernando, built Francisco Motor by churning out thousands of vehicles modeled on US military jeeps from 1947 onward.)

Economies of scale 

It’s the cheapest one can get on the market. 

To lower the cost to below P1 million from P3.3 million five years ago, Francisco got rid of extraneous fees—he ditched the idea of a showroom, among others—and transferred operations from Las Piñas to an export processing zone in Camarines Sur that offered tax breaks.

“We’re able to achieve that because of the economies of scale,” he said. “Economies of scale means we’re not going to make 100 jeepneys, or 1,000 jeepneys. We’re going to manufacture hundreds of thousands of jeepneys.”

To replace the 250,000 15-year-old traditional jeepneys plying Philippine roads, Francisco unveiled a plan to manufacture 25,000 ejeeps a year, or a total of 250,000 in 10 years. He plans to roll out 100 units by the second quarter of 2024.

In a sense, he’s offering both the government and the transport sector an eco-friendly solution to the years-long conundrum called the public utility vehicle modernization program (PUVMP). His solution also ensures that the “king of the road” isn’t written off the map, or the road. 

No doubt, Francisco Motor’s ejeep retains the iconic features of its “high-flying cousin”—the hood, headlights, and grill guard—but like a mini-bus, it has more head room.  It can seat 11 passengers on either side but leaves ample space in the middle for at least eight others to stand.    

Charging stations, powered by renewable energy such as wind and solar power, will be set up on the jeepney routes. The cost of charging will be twice as low as the cost of diesel for a 15-km route. But there’s a caveat: Don’t charge a unit at home, it’s going to cost a leg. 

“You’re going to regret it when your Meralco bill comes,” Francisco said.

The company is introducing an ewallet, called eFMC, for passengers to pay for their fare as well as for the jeepney drivers to pay for charging. 

What to do with the dilapidated jeepneys once the modernization is underway?

With some scrubbing and fresh paint, they can be turned into food vans by the government, and parked at tourist destinations or inside airport terminals and seaports, Francisco said. 

37,500 letters of intent 

But has anyone grabbed his offer of a discount?  

Francisco expressed hope that some 37,500 letters of intent he received from consolidated transport cooperatives and single operators in the runup to the virtual launch—including 701 from Lucena City—would translate into purchase orders. 

He acknowledged that only 15% of the jeepney market was “bankable,” or able to buy their own unit, but 85% could not.

Financing concerns were raised during the launch. One operator wondered if Francisco could help them secure bank financing and another asked if the “boundary payment” scheme would be an option given the long queues for bank-loan applications.  

“We want EVs too, but the price looks good, too,” one of them remarked.  

Francisco encouraged them to create an account at https://jeepney.io and earn commission from referring fellow operators to Francisco Motor, and from their “unli-rides” program.   

“If you’re able to refer many, you might get your jeep for free,” he said. 

To operators and drivers fretting about the government deadline to file their petition to consolidate themselves into cooperatives by Dec. 31, Francisco advised that they form one-person corporations.

“There’s now such a thing called sole corporation. Even if you’re just one person, you can form a corporation,’’ he told CoverStory.ph hours before the launch. “If you’re a single operator of one jeepney, you can form a corporation.”

Then you buy your own electric jeep, he added. 

Transport strikes

The past two weeks saw transport groups Manibela and Piston mounting separate transport strikes to protest the Dec. 31 deadline for the franchise consolidation applications under the PUVMP. They have announced plans for more such protest actions.

The goal of consolidation is to enable franchise holders to pool enough resources together to buy modern jeepneys. 

As of Oct. 31, 56.7% of public utility jeepneys and UV Express vans have consolidated to form cooperatives or corporations, according to an Inquirer report. The rest are still resisting the idea of consolidation that requires the surrender of their franchise—in essence, the sole power to run their own business.  

This early, Francisco said, the government should move the deadline and introduce the idea of “milestones” to the cooperatives and operators by way of cajoling them into embracing modernization. 

“That deadline has been moved three times because the government knows it’s impossible for all to consolidate by Dec. 31,” he said. “Surely they’re going to move it again. Why not move it now, in the spirit of Christmas?”

Francisco said that instead of imposing deadlines, the government should initiate ways to help cooperatives, operators and drivers “modernize” their units in batches. 

“If there’s anything that the Maharlika Investment Fund should invest in, it should be PUV modernization,” he said, referring to the controversial sovereign wealth fund established by the government. “It’s nation-building.”

Read more: Needed: a just transition for jeepney drivers and operators

The post Why not electric jeepneys to modernize the ‘kings of the road’? appeared first on CoverStory.

So the kapitan is now in custody, indicating that the procedure to determine accountability for the death by drowning of 26 or 27 persons (the reports vary) has begun. It’s unclear exactly when the official investigation started, and by which agency. The Aya Express’ safety certificate has reportedly been suspended by the Maritime Industry Authority. The Coast Guard station commander and one other officer have supposedly been relieved of their posts, but as of this writing there is neither photograph nor footage in the media showing them handcuffed and in the custody of law enforcers. It’s unclear who and where they are; the viewer recalls a survivor saying no Coast Guard personnel were present when the Aya Express left the port in Barangay Kalinawan and headed to Talim Island some eight kilometers away at about 1 p.m. 

Survivors said the boat had been draped with a tarpaulin—lona—to protect the passengers from the intermittent rain brought by Typhoon “Egay” in the course of its pounding the north and making its way out of the Philippine area of responsibility. When the Aya Express capsized, according to accounts, the tarp served to block the passengers from getting out from under the boat.

Familiar circumstances 

The circumstances of the tragedy are infuriatingly familiar, demonstrating once more the ever unsafe state of sea transport in this unhappy archipelago. Per some survivors’ accounts, as reported, the passengers were not wearing life vests; the boat that had the capacity for 42 passengers was carrying close to 70 persons, as well as sacks of rice or sand, even a motorcycle; there were no Coast Guard personnel at the port before the boat set off.

And one critical detail, as stated by the Coast Guard commandant, Adm. Artemio Abu, in an Inquirer report: “The Coast Guard no longer conducted an inspection. It’s a normal routine because what was indicated in the [manifest] was below the authorized number, As such the boat was allowed to sail.”

One wonders who gave the green light when there was no person in authority—the Coast Guard in this case—to give it. And in the terrible weather yet, with the typhoon “enhancing” the southwest monsoon and making possible for fierce winds to toss the Aya Express around like a paper boat in the lake.

Related: Remembering: logging concessions brought drastic change

In these parts, ordinary folks have long been boarding paper boats to get to where they need to go, putting their lives on the line and giving thanks to the Divine when they make it in one piece. At least two of the 40 reported survivors were heard saying they surrendered their fate to God at that point in the infinity between Kalinawan and Talim when the boat capsized—the middle-aged woman flailing about for anything to hang on to in the dark waters and espying a floating bag that turned out to be carrying the groceries she had bought and was bringing home to Talim, the young man catching a shaft of light through a tear in the lona and forcing himself through it with all his strength, to maneuver his way to the surface. 

Neither of them knew how to swim. Neither, it may be presumed, did most of the others who perished, simple folk who regularly took a motorized banca—the only means of transport, apart from private boat—in shuttling to and from the mainland and Talim. 

Small town

Described as the largest island in Laguna de Bay and the largest lake island in the Philippines, Talim (pop. 40,018 as of 2020) is hilly and volcanic in origin. It holds much potential for tourism in the form of pristine hiking trails and scenic views from certain high points on the island, according to a study, but plans to that effect have apparently moldered on the drawing boards, in the way of small towns that have dropped under the radar and continue to sink from the attention of authorities.

And as in other small towns, the story goes, the kapitan was on down-home mode. He was said to have turned his boat around, twice, to collect still more passengers from the port, apparently feeling sorry for those who would be stranded because of the “no sail” directive made imperative by the foul weather—the boat’s capacity, the raw weather conditions, the manifest be damned, in the course of living life on the edge, of trying to stay alive by the skin of one’s teeth. (Perhaps the additional fare was also a plus factor.)

Anain’s crew of two, reported only by their nicknames, were among those who died. It’s unclear exactly how many were on board the Aya Express when it capsized; the divers engaged in the retrieval operations were said to have been reduced to groping in the muddy bottom of the lake for bodies, so murky were the waters. It’s not known when the results of the investigation will be made public (granting that the inquiry is in progress), when accountability will be pinpointed, and when “justice” will be realized for all those who died (including children, it’s said). In these parts, as contemporary history will bear out, inquiries like this are notorious for taking months, years, to complete. 

But there will be “no sacred cows” in the conduct of the inquiry, Rear Adm. Hostillo Arturo Cornelio, commander of the Coast Guard District National Capital Region Central Luzon, has been quoted as telling reporters. And so it goes.

The post Death by drowning in Laguna de Bay appeared first on CoverStory.

This month Quezon City is the latest in Metro Manila to adopt the NCAP, after Parañaque in March 2018, Valenzuela in September 2019, and Manila in December 2020.

This system is operated by a 24/7 command center (one for each city) that controls dozens of high-resolution closed-circuit television cameras that are scattered across each city’s jurisdiction. Through these CCTVs, traffic violators are video recorded and photographed, and their plate numbers tagged for the corresponding traffic violation.

In Quezon City, be very attentive when driving along Quirino Highway especially since cameras are now installed at the intersections of Susano Road (Novaliches Bayan), Zabarte Road, and Tandang Sora (Sangandaan). There are also cameras along E. Rodriguez, particularly at the intersections of Tomas Morato, Gilmore, and Hemady streets.

On Aurora Boulevard, there are four intersections that you should be paying close attention to: Hemady, Gilmore, Broadway and 20th street. Along P. Tuazon, be mindful on 13th and 14th streets.

The intersections of West Avenue and Baler, East Avenue and BIR, and Kamias and Kalayaan are also monitored by cameras.

Wide support

The NCAP is gradually gaining wide support among local officials as a proven method of reducing collisions and enforcing traffic laws, freeing traffic officers to respond to more serious crimes. 

In Manila, for example, the city’s Traffic and Parking Bureau has observed a decrease of 25-31 percent in traffic violation citations during the first half of 2021, proving that drivers do modify their behavior when there are cameras around.

The absence of face-to-face interaction between traffic enforcer and driver also means no more arguments and excuses that often lead to the incidence of bribery, if not physical aggression. It’s also appropriate during this Covid-19 pandemic that appears to be making a resurgence.

But there’s also the expected blowback from drivers who will claim the intrusion of Big Brother and protest the sudden shift of the burden of proof (it used to be the traffic enforcer who must prove the motorist’s guilt).

Tricky option

In Quezon City, those who want to contest their NOV may file an appeal to the QC Traffic Adjudication Board within 10 days from receipt of the notice. This option is especially tricky for the driver who does not receive his or her NOV within 14 days. 

If the NOV is mailed weeks or months after the occurrence of the violation—a big possibility if you are not a Quezon City resident—the driver has the burden of providing pertinent details, recalling what he or she was doing or what was happening at the time of the purported violation, and reconstructing the scene.

This is equally hard for the registered owner of the vehicle who may not have been the one behind the wheel at the time of the violation. It can be incredibly difficult to explain to the adjudicator because the cameras are generally aimed at the rear of the vehicle, in order to capture its license plate, and often do not record the driver’s face with sufficient detail for positive identification.

For Quezon City residents, an option is to regularly look up nocontact.quezoncity.gov/home to check if one’s vehicle has been tagged with a violation, and if so, to immediately recall the circumstances and keep these notes until the arrival of the NOV in the mail.

A monthly penalty of 5 percent surcharge against violators for NOVs that remain unpaid beyond the 30-day period will be imposed. Considering that the original fine is already steep—P2,000 for the first offense, for one type of violation—such a surcharge could mean thousands of pesos for the driver or vehicle owner.

Motorists who have been fined rightly point out that road safety is not an enterprise to be milked for revenue. And then there’s one grating fact: The only possible target of the CCTVs are vehicles with plate numbers or conduction stickers, which means motorcycles and tricycles—whose drivers are quite regular traffic violators—are often spared because a lot of them have no identifiable marks.

The post No contact apprehension: Can cameras end the traffic mess? appeared first on CoverStory.