No more stopping bus, jeepney fare increases on Nov. 3
LTFRB dismisses appeal, cites need to find a balance between interests of drivers, riders
A last-minute effort to thwart the impending bus and jeepney fare hikes failed after the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) denied a petition to suspend the increases set to take effect on Nov. 3.
The LTFRB issued the ruling on Tuesday, just days before the end of the 15-day period it gave to interested parties to file an appeal.
In a resolution dated Oct. 18, it raised from P9 to P10 the minimum fare rate for jeepneys plying routes in Metro Manila, Central Luzon and the Cavite, Laguna, Batangas, Rizal and Quezon (Calabarzon) region. The minimum fare for Metro buses also went up, from P10 to P11.
In denying the appeal, the LTFRB cited the need to “strike [a] delicate balance” between the interests of the riding public and drivers.
However, the 4-page resolution also took the petitioners to task for their failure to air their grievances during the year-long discussion of the fare hike petition.
Just like the earlier decision, only LTFRB Chair Martin Delgra and board member Ronaldo Corpus concurred to dismiss the petition filed by Arlis Acao, a private citizen, and United Filipino Consumers and Commuters representative Rodolfo Javellana Jr.
Additional burden
The duo had argued that “millions of Filipinos” would suffer if the fare increases pushed through amid runaway inflation rates.
They also reasoned out that jeepney and bus drivers were already earning more than the basic pay of P512. Transport leaders earlier estimated that drivers earned roughly just P300 after deducting the boundary and gasoline expenses.
The LTFRB, however, said that Acao and Javellana failed to present new issues to justify the reversal of the fare hikes.
It also pointed to their lack of due diligence as it cited Javellana’s nonattendance in hearings before the fare hike approval or, in the case of Acao, his failure to raise pertinent issues for consideration even if he was present in the proceedings.
“It is the view of the majority of the board that [the commuters’ sector] was given more than enough opportunity [to participate and express their views]. Twelve months is more than enough time given to all parties affected,” the LTFRB resolution read.
At the same time, it ob- served that Javellana became a petitioner by merely appending his signature to Acao’s appeal.
Lack of resolve
The LTFRB said it interpreted this as a lack of resolve on his part to assert his grievances on the fare hike decision.
According to Javellana, they assumed the LTFRB “would eventually see any such hikes as detrimental to riders, and as such, would side with us.”
“Instead, they have shown how heartless they are by approving these hikes so close to Christmas,” he said.
Lone dissenter
In her 13-page dissenting opinion, LTFRB board member Aileen Lizada lambasted the other board officials, accusing them of railroading the petition’s dismissal by refusing to hear out Javellana.
She pointed out that the board had already resolved the appeal as early as Oct. 26, the same day it ordered Javellana to attend the Oct. 30 hearing on the motion for reconsideration.
But the hearing was canceled as the board announced its dismissal of the appeal.
Lizada also argued that the absence of commuters during the hearings “must not be construed against them, that they are not interested.”
“This sector is working hard to survive and attending hearings would mean additional costs on their end; precisely why this board should be more understanding, circumspect and judicious,” she said.