Abolish taxi driver test?

Can deregulation bring improvements for taxi drivers?

In an interview with the daily newspaper "Der Standard", NEOS politician Sepp Schellhorn, State Secretary in the Foreign Ministry, proposed abolishing the mandatory tests for taxi drivers as a measure to reduce bureaucracy. In view of apps on mobile phones that take over navigation for the drivers, this is no longer up to date, says Schellhorn.

Taxi driver test: good rules protect everyone

Schellhorn's idea of opening up taxi driving as a profession for "everyone" sounds logical at first glance. However, it ignores how complex and responsible the profession actually is. However, this is exactly what the taxi driver exam is intended to prepare for, and that is why it includes many other contents in addition to local knowledge. For the exam, prospective taxi drivers must deal with the operating regulations, collective bargaining, the road traffic regulations, the Motor Vehicle Act as well as the basics of labour and social law, among other things. Practical topics such as passenger behaviour, duties when transporting luggage, handling the taximeter or the legal framework for the obligation to transport are also examined. This means that the training goes far beyond simply knowing addresses and routes and requires a well-founded overall understanding of the responsibility and requirements that working in the taxi industry entails. But how would a deregulation measure proposed by Schellhorn affect the industry in Austria? To this end, it makes sense to compare experiences from other countries. 

Uber & Co: new players, old problems

The proliferation of Uber, Bolt and similar platforms has led to a major upheaval in the taxi industry worldwide. In Paris, Uber's entry into the market already caused massive tensions within the industry, as the platform undermined the existing regulations of the taxi market – for example, by offering ride services without classic taxi licenses. A study on this topic showed that many drivers saw their economic existence threatened as a result and developed ambivalent attitudes: on the one hand, with sympathy for free-market freedom, and on the other hand, with strong criticism of the de facto dissolution of protective mechanisms in everyday work. The study also shows that deregulation did not lead to more autonomy for drivers, but above all exacerbated insecurity and social division within the professional group. 

Does less regulation mean less protection?

A relaxation of admission rules often does not lead to a "freer" market, but to less transparency and security. Another study from North America shows that the retreat of regulators in the training of drivers led to an increase in precarious working conditions and more unsafe working conditions, with consequences for drivers and passengers. The lack of knowledge in dealing with violence in the workplace limits the safety of taxi drivers. A lack of knowledge about how to avoid accidents and how to behave correctly in emergencies also affects not only the drivers themselves, but also the safety of passengers. At the same time, media reports worldwide documented cases in which drivers with revoked licenses continued to travel via platforms such as Uber – with potentially fatal consequences for both drivers and their passengers.

Modern regulation can also be done differently

The example of Taiwan shows that innovation and security do not have to be mutually exclusive. There, a hybrid system has been established that combines ride-hailing service, i.e. ordering a ride service via app, with government regulation. The positive result of this is higher revenues for taxi drivers and better insurance coverage for passengers. In Madrid, on the other hand, the entry of Uber and Cabify could even contribute to a decline in serious accidents under strict conditions. 

Less about it, but talk more with each other!

However, the industry that would be affected by it, i.e. the taxi operators and taxi drivers themselves, can best assess such possible deregulation.