Taxi firm should post notices and retrain drivers | Inquirer Opinion

Taxi firm should post notices and retrain drivers

/ 09:40 PM June 29, 2012

This is in reaction to the letter titled “Who’s to blame for abusive cabbies” (Inquirer, 6/18/12). I can understand the letter-sender’sobservations and complaints. Last June 21, the driver of a taxi I took claimed it was his first day on the job. Before that, he was a family driver, he said, and so was not familiar with many streets and routes. And to think we were just going to Glorietta in Makati from Mandaluyong. I felt it was useless to argue with him about his “ignorance” of Metro Manila roadways.

On another occasion, I got into a taxi which reeked of cigarette smoke inside. The driver claimed it was caused by a hard-headed passenger who insisted on smoking inside the taxi despite being reminded he was violating a law. (I got the impression that it was the driver himself who had smoked inside the taxi before I boarded it.) After telling the driver that he should’ve just stopped the vehicle until the passenger got off the taxi or approached the nearest traffic enforcer he could find, I decided to transfer to another taxi.

But this one takes the cake. Last June 19, I was about to board an MGE taxi (with license plate number UVF-311), carrying some groceries bought from a supermarket in Makati.

Article continues after this advertisement

I motioned to the driver to open the car’s trunk so that I could put the groceries there. After he opened the trunk, he rudely asked (in Tagalog) if some of the plastic bags had meat (karne). I said, yes, there’s fresh chicken, aside from some vegetables and fruits.

FEATURED STORIES

When I asked him why he wanted to know, he replied that it was their company policy to refuse passengers carrying fresh meat. I assured him all the grocery items were wrapped in plastic and, on top of that, they were in a plastic bag. But he insisted on the policy, so I had to take another taxi.

I called MGE’s office the next day (June 20) and spoke to the person in charge of taking passengers’ complaints (Cynthia Balboa). She confirmed that their company indeed has such a policy, but that it applies to fresh fish and seafood only. So I pointed out to her several things that, as a company, MGE should do ASAP: (1) prominently post notices in all their taxis which should read, “WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE PASSENGERS CARRYING FRESH FISH AND SEAFOOD”; (2) reorient their drivers to implement their policy correctly; and (3) retrain their drivers to speak courteously to their passengers.

Article continues after this advertisement

It was the first time I heard of such policy, but the MGE driver sounded as if I should’ve known better.

Article continues after this advertisement

—ROBBY DECENA,

[email protected]

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

TAGS: Consumer issues, Letters to the Editor, opinion, transport

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.