[sustran] Private Monopoly and Vested Political Interests in SA

[Eric Bruun]

Wendell, thanks for the information. It would not surprise me
if companies found ways to hide their subsidies.  Are these
commuter oriented only services for highly specific markets
or are they in competition with combi-taxis in many places?

About your comment about 40 percent of work trips being
taken by combi-taxi: If this is MOTORIZED work trips, there
are several European and Asian cities that have similar
splits for transit. Not necesarily for only one mode, but
for a combination of modes. It is not rare for transit-oriented
cities. 

I agree that unions have often contributed their share to
problems in improving or expanding services. Believe it or
not, I am actually even fairly sympathetic to the management
of SEPTA (Philadelphia region) in the impending strike by
the Transit Workers Union.  I think a large minority give
poor service to the public and abuse the equipment they operate.
Certainly, there are some unreasonable work rules. 

We have had the debate before about "market wages." This is
about ideology. Yes, we could take advantage of the large
numbers of people earning very low wages by busting unions,
but there really is no such thing as a pure "market". Without
unions, managements hold more of the negotiating power instead,
as can be seen by declining real wages for the majority of
workers in the United States as unions have disapeared. Thus,
I have to support the right of people to collectively bargain.
A senior driver earns about $16 per hour at most agencies. This
is barely even a middle class income anymore. What I want to 
know is why a rich country can no longer supposedly afford to
pay decent wages for work that is important to society?

Eric



On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Wendell Cox wrote:

> To Eric and the group ---
> 
> Please forgive me if a version of this arrives --- I seem to have lost a
> previous draft, but hopefully this will say the same thing....
> 
> The private bus companies (commuter) are highly subsidized. They also hold
> monpolies. There has been some competitive tendering in the past (little
> compared to the total private service) and much more will happen now under
> the Mandella government's new initiatives. Around the world private bus
> operators that hold monopolies have told me they are unsubsidized --- more
> often than not they have concocted an interesting way of defining subsidies
> as operating revenues.
> 
> There are good reasons for "appeasing" the kombi-taxi industry ----
> 
> 1. It provides more than 40 percent of the black work trips --- a non-SOV
> market share not matched by any mode in western Europe or the US.
> 
> 2. The kombi taxi industry has political power --- which means they must be
> appeased. Just like the transit unions in the US --- whose political power
> has routinely violated the interests of transit customers and the cities
> they serve by providing (shall we say rationing) services through the
> imposition of higher than market costs. Or take the NYC Transport Workers
> Union, which is standing in the way of expansion and development of the van
> industry, which many people find superior in terms of mobility compared to
> the fixed route service. It is no wonder that people seek alternatives, and
> begin commuting by car. All of this is to say that political reality is
> political reality. The kombi taxi industry has political power. The US
> transit unions have political power. There seems to be little in recorded
> history to suggest that powerful political interests are inclined to put the
> good of society ahead of their own interests. Too bad that in all of this
> the people and our cities are the victims. 
> 
> None of this is to retreat from my position that the kombi taxi industry
> represents a very important resource in SA --- it seems to me that the
> appropriate direction of policy is to make the best use of what is there
> already, while supplemnting that with things that make sense and truly
> improve transport in the urban areas. All of that has to be pursued in the
> context of the financial limitations facing the central, provincial and
> local governments.
> 
> Best regards,
> Wendell Cox
> 
> 
> >Thanks for the informative answers, but I am still puzzled, and it is
> >one of the reasons that I asked the original question in the first
> >place. I have heard from several quarters that most public bus
> >>services are completely un-subsidized.  Last year I met the accountant
> >for Golden Arrow bus company who told me that neither his company nor
> >his competitors get a dime of subsidy, either capital or operating
> >subsidy.
> >
> >Another question is why the combi-taxi people so damned important
> >to appease?  Are they precluding all efforts to build up regular
> >fixed route transit systems that don't involve operating "turfs".
> >
> >I hope Walter gets some work in SA, it would be very interesting
> >indeed. Perhaps with a new Prime Minister coming in......
> >
> >Eric
> >
> >
> >......  previous stuff deleted .......
> >
> >
> >
> WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY
> International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic Planning
> The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal
> http://www.publicpurpose.com
> Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax  +1 618 632 8538
> P.O. Box 841- Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA
> 
> "To facilitate the ideal of government as the servant  of the people by
> identifying and implementing strategies to achieve public purposes at a cost
> that is no higher than necessary."
> 
>