Opinion: Stopping Uber is stopping traffic innovation

recently the Sao Paulo Court of Justice suspended application service Uber. If you haven't heard of the app yet, don't worry, there are reasons why. The first is that the Uber is a new service in Brazil. It arrived a year ago, and for now only an executive version works, the Uber black, at Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paulo, Belo Horizonte e Brasilia. The second, and more important, is that he is being attacked by a specific group, the taxi drivers, who are uncomfortable with the success of the service and have even demonstrated against its existence in the country.

O Uber it works like this. You say where you are, order a car, and the driver decides whether to take the order. Payment is made via credit card, which you give when registering in the app. And the selection of drivers is made by the company itself, which requires new cars and quality service to participate in the service.

Simple, no? Yet the mere existence of the Uber in the country is generating so much commotion that it ended up in court. The suspension request was requested by the Simetaxi – Union of Drivers and Workers Taxi Companies in the State of São Paulo. In the decision in favour, the judge Roberto Corcioli Filho, da 12th Civil Court of TJ-SP agrees with the taxi drivers union and says that the Uber is “performing a clandestine service, it seems”.

I am not a lawyer to question the judge's decision based on laws and other resources. But, as a Brazilian citizen, I can express my dissatisfaction with the judgment and support the activity of the Uber in the country.

The union's main argument is that the Uber offers taxi service without having authorization to do so and, consequently, does not follow the regulation or administrative control in relation to the prices charged. In other words, drivers of the Uber are not “qualified”, charging below market value.

Quality issue:

Let's go to the first point. Without proper authorization and registration to practice the transport, the drivers of the Uber would not be qualified for the service, say the taxi drivers. I can't speak for Belo Horizonte e Brasilia, but I have already taken taxis in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. There are good taxi drivers, of course, and these deserve all my praise. But on average, the service is anything but exceptional. I've had unpleasant moments with taxi drivers who tried to “stretch” the route, forget to turn on the meter and even complain about the race being short, long, or my choice of route being “wrong”. Cast the first stone whoever never felt cheated as soon as he looked for taxis when landing at airports in the Rio de Janeiro, for example.

A financial security It's not a strong point either. Respecting traffic rules is often optional – especially speed limits. And not only that: women have been complaining about the harassment of taxi drivers after using taxi apps.

A customer service of vehicles is also questionable, since it is common to find old and damaged cars in the fleet of any city. And, if you are in cities like the capital Salvador, be amazed: you will pay a fee if you want to escape the heat and ask the taxi to turn on the air conditioning.

If receiving a seal of approval, from a public agency or some union, were enough to say if someone is able to practice an activity, there would never be problems with taxi drivers. And we know very well that this is not so.

O Uber, in turn, does not do the training that the union has. But there's a Quality control done by the users themselves, who rate each trip from 1 to 5 stars. If a driver has a very low average, he can be disconnected from the platform. And a taxi driver? Once he gets the license, if no one sues him, he can continue to provide a low-quality service, periodically renewed with fallible tests.

Still, it's cheaper:

The other complaint of the taxi drivers is that the drivers of the Uber they charge below market value. In Brazil, the Uber is only available in an executive version, called Uber Black, with more comfortable cars. The minimum value of the trip is 10 reais, with a base fare of 5 reais and a cost per kilometer traveled and per minute, which varies according to the city. For São Paulo, are R$ 2,42 per kilometer traveled and R$ 0,40 per minute. Comparing with the taxi in the capital, the fare is R$ 4,50, with R$ 2,75 per kilometer, and R$ 33 per hour, which is R$ 0,55 per minute. Only then can it be seen that the values ​​of the Uber are actually more attractive to the public.

But nobody is there to lose money. Why does the taxi cost BRL 0,33 more per kilometer then? And that's just for the regular taxi, by the way. If we compare with luxury taxis, the difference jumps to R$ 1,73. Of course, taxis have to pay fees that the Uber don't charge. But if the business model of Uber works, so why do we have these fees? App drivers also pay IPVA, gasoline, mandatory insurance and other expenses that vehicles generate. If what Uber drivers are charged is cheaper, then taxi drivers should claim to lower taxi rates, not ban the app.. Wouldn't this be a good opportunity to discuss the abusive price of licenses de tributes?

Mobility Question:

Anyone who takes to the streets of São Paulo on foot, by bicycle, motorcycle, bus, car, taxi or any other means of transport sees an obvious truth: city ​​traffic needs to change. And, Uber and other car-sharing apps may well be part of the answer. The judge himself says that the sentence does not concern the business model of the Uber, but from a lack of regulation, and that does not depend on whether the app is “a service quite in line with today's society”. If that's the case, then don't ban the application, but reorganize and modernize our legislation to cover this aspect. On the contrary, the right of a company that wants to innovate and change the rules of the game to act in the Brazilian market was denied. And it is not the only action taken by the government against the Uber. Councilman Adilson Amadeu (PTB) is the author of the law No. 349 / 2014, which prohibits the use of private cars registered in apps for the paid individual transport of people.

It is clear that the Uber has its problems. The company's vice president, Emil Michael, is accused of persecuting a journalist who spoke ill of the app, and was even banned in India after a young woman was raped by a service driver. But forbid the advance because it "harm” a category that needs to change is certainly not the answer.

It's not just a question of taxi drivers' employment – ​​which in fact must be protected by the government. The main point here is that of change. Banning Uber does not mean improving the taxi service in Brazilian cities. On the contrary, it is an involution and setback to the progress of urban mobility.

What will happen when other new things arrive, like car loans, or driverless vehicles? Will we be left behind again, as is already the case with electric cars, for example? It's time to think not about banning, but about regulating correctly and creating rules that stimulate innovation and the development of our economy. We also need urgent initiatives to unlock traffic in Brazilian cities. Because, if we only depend on the traditional ways of locomotion, we will only be…. stopped.