by John Q. Duffy

Members of the City’s new Licensing and Standards Committee have concluded there is no need for protective shields in all Toronto taxicabs, at least for the foreseeable future.

But cab drivers who feel the need for this extra security still have the option to install a shield at their own discretion.

However, City staff were asked to look into the possibility of having customers pre pay their cab fares.

There is some opinion that as taxis are the only form of transportation that does not require pre payment, this could reduce the crime of transportation fraud, and reduce the potential for fare disputes between drivers and customers.

Fare disputes too often result in confrontations between drivers and passengers and have led to violence.

And staff will look into and report on a Global Positioning Satellite system now in use in some European cities.

“I’m very happy,” said cab driver Steve Hozek after the voting on the controversial mandatory shields proposal was over. “I thought it was decided last year.”

Aldo Marchese of the Independent Cab Owners’ Co-operative Inc, commented, “I think the City finally decided the way to go. Shields are buried and they put the nail in the coffin.”

He said, “If drivers want the shields, give them the choice. They nailed the last nail in the coffin. Shields are dead once and for all.”

He thinks if shields were mandatory in taxis, “We would have lost a lot of business to limousines.”

Cab driver Ervin Shaw pointed out that Ambassadors don’t have to run to the bosses. “They make their own choices.”

But not everyone was satisfied.

Ahmet Gulkan commented that while owner operators do have a choice, shift drivers, he said, do not.

The question of whether or not protective shields should be required equipment in all Toronto taxis was referred to L&S by City Council last year at the request of Councillor Janet Davis.

Previously, the old Planning and Transportation Committee, which was then responsible for taxi licensing, had voted to study shields again after standards were set by the Canadian Standards Association or a similar body.

Staff was also asked to conduct a feasibility study regarding such a program and report to L&S by March of this year. Furthermore, P&T had asked that $10,000 of City funds be set aside to do an “independent, statistically valid survey of taxicab users to determine their views on the implementation of a mandatory taxi cab shield program.”

The effect of this was to effectively delay a mandatory shield program for at last an extended period. L&S Committee chair Howard Moscoe told the committee on Friday, Feb. 16th that the previous P&T action on this file was basically, “a consignment to oblivion”

At the February meeting of L&S another motion was put forward to do a survey of all licensed taxicab drivers to determine their attitudes towards shields. Moscoe said if a survey was to be done, he suggested an appropriate question be placed on cab driver and owner license renewal forms. In a year, after all the forms had been received by Municipal Licensing and Standards, the City would have a full poll of the entire industry on the question.

`He said it is his opinion that the majority of cab drivers do not want shields to be mandatory and he is on record as having consistently opposed the idea of making these barriers required equipment in all taxicabs.

`Gerry Manley, an ex Toronto policeman and long time cab owner operator, has been for many years the taxi industry’s foremost advocate for driver safety. He told L&S the City’ By-laws, “have always allowed safety shields.”

In his deputation he said, “There are a few in Toronto that will have you believe that the majority of drivers want to have shields mandated but that is not the truth and can easily be shown. We have 5,000 taxis along with over 10,000 members in our industry in Toronto. Over 3,000 of our taxis are either ambassador taxis, which are City owned plates allowing only a singular driver; leased plates operated by a singular lessee that may or may not have a driver and the independent owner/operator who also may or may not have a driver.

“This is about sixty percent of our fleet that employs about forty percent of our membership,” he stated.

Manley then said, “Up to the tragic death 18 months ago of one of our members, there was only one shield installed in Toronto taxis and since that time I believe there are still only about two dozen. How does that transmit into the majority of our members wanting mandated shields?”

He said a vocal minority of activists want, “To remove customer choice as no customer envisions paying for taxi service that parallels sitting in the rear of a police car and most important of all have someone else pay for them. I am wondering when our membership is going to step up to the plate and take some responsibility for their own safety?”

He said the current taxi driver safety by-laws are working well and asked, “Why take the chance of reducing an already diminishing customer base?”

Manley said other cities in North America have experimented with mandatory shields and some are having second thoughts about them.

New York City, for example, he said, “has changed the by-law for their medallion taxis (yellow cabs) allowing an owner/operator to install a digital camera instead of a safety shield.”

And he pointed out in Chicago, “The number one customer complaint is about shields.”

He concluded by saying, “There is no one or combination of pieces of safety equipment that will 100 percent protect the taxi driver. His/her best protection has and always will be their industry experience and common sense.”

Ex City Councillor Martin Silva then told the committee he looked into a GPS locator system with a direct hookup to emergency 911 systems that is now in use in some European taxis and he was told it was working well.

Steve Okopny from Okan Industries, a shield manufacturer, said a number of American cities like Boston, Los Angeles and Chicago, as well as Winnipeg in Manitoba, and Melbourne, Australia, have mandated shields.

He said statistics show that in those cities crimes committed against taxicab drivers have dropped, ”significantly.”

Shields make cabs, “a safer workplace,” he said, and cab drivers “need to be protected as much as possible”.

In a society that requires workers to wear safety shoes and safety gloves, he thinks this City should, “do the same for cab drivers.”

Asked how many of his company shields have been sold in Toronto, Okopny would say only, “a few.”

Aldo Marchese, of the Independent Cab Owners Association, representing over 300 Independent drivers, told the committee in 36 years driving cab he had, “never been robbed or assaulted.”

He also pointed out that drivers have the choice to put in a shield or not. He said it would send tourists the message that Toronto is not a safe City and that cabs would lose business as customers don’t like shields and would take limousines instead.

“It is not in the best interests of the City to make shields mandatory,” Marchese stated.

Asked by Moscoe his opinion of having a shield question placed on license renewal forms, to get an idea of driver attitudes, Marchese said it would have to be made clear in the question that the City was not going to pay for them.

Dropping in briefly from another committee meeting, Councillor Janet Davis spoke strongly in favor of polling cab drivers on their views about making shields mandatory.

She said she has many cab drivers in her ward and they are telling her that they want shields as required equipment, ever since the murder of cab driver Mahmoud Bhatti about 18 months ago.

“They asked that I take leadership on this issue,” she said.

The action of the previous committee effectively put the issue, she said, “on the back burner.”

A previous poll of the industry showed the number one choice of safety equipment for the industry was shields, but this result, she said, “was ignored.”

Davis argued that creating a safer workplace for cab drivers was the least the City could do for them. It gave shields to bus drivers, she added.

Moscoe informed her that shields for bus drivers are, “optional.”

“Did you ask the bus drivers?” Davis asked.

“Yes, we did,” Moscoe replied.

“Ask taxi drivers!” Davis said.

Asked by Councillor Rob Ford if drivers should have an option, Davis said drivers wanting shields are looking for, “a level playing field.”

And she charged that drivers, “working for companies don’t have a choice.”

She said shields should be for, “everyone or no one.”

Mike Tranquada, President, Independent Toronto Taxi, and a cab driver for 35 years, also opposed mandatory shields.

He asked, “How many times do taxi drivers have to reject a mandatory shield program?”

In his 35 years he has found seven Exacto knives on the floor of the cab behind him.

He avoids assaults by knowing how to deal with his passengers, he said

He pointed out there are, “10-12,000 cab drivers in Toronto and 2-3,000 owners who would be paying the shot.”

Drivers, he suspects, would vote for shields, “thinking they would not be paying the additional costs. I say one way or another they will be paying for it.”

And he pointed out about 25 years ago, one owner put in 10 shields when his drivers asked for them, “and then within three months all took the shields out, threw them in the garbage.”

Asked if it was true some companies refuse to install shields, Tranquada said companies like Beck don’t own cabs. These decisions are made at the fleet garage level.

“If the driver is pushing them, fleet owners put them in.”

Further deputations were permitted, for two minutes rather than the usual five minutes, when the committee voted to allow them.

Under new rules, those wishing to make their opinions known to committees must place their names with the Committee Secretary in advance of the meeting. Last minute additions to the deputation list may or may not be allowed to speak, depending on the will of the committee.

Cab driver Steve Hozak told L&S that he was, “totally against shields.”

The public doesn’t like them and making them mandatory would, he stated, “affect my income.”

Ahmet Gulkan speaking in favor of shields, said he is one of the cab drivers in Toronto who does have a shield installed. He feels safer, but suggests some cab drivers think they are avoiding trouble by being selective in whom they pick up.

He charged that some cab drivers,” don’t pick up young black people. They turn off their roof light and go right back to Union Station.”

Ervin Shaw, another long time cab driver, pointed out that some cars now approved for use as taxicabs don’t have enough space to fit in a shield under the current by-law. He would have to change his car and buy a new one if shields were made mandatory.

So, he said, if shields were made mandatory, it would cost not just the price of the shield and installation, but “thousands and thousands of dollars” more to replace cars.

Jim Bell, General Manager of Diamond Taxi, told of one experience he had with one of his drivers were the driver asked for and got a shield, but two days later came back to have it removed as it caused glare at night making it difficult for him to see.

He also pointed out that shields become scratched and yellow with age, making them both unsightly and more difficult to see through.

“This is truly an issue,” Bell said.

Discussing the issue in committee after the deputations, Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong commented that this issue, “Seems to come back again and again and again. I do know, if they want to put in a shield, there is nothing, absolutely nothing, stopping them.”

He said he doesn’t think a poll is needed on the subject.

As well, he thinks shields would be, “bad for tourism…bad for business.”

He said he has seen shields in New York City and said, “I hate them.”

He also resisted laying another set of costs on drivers.

“Drivers are smart enough to know they are going to pay for it,” Minnan-Wong stated.

On the other hand he did support the idea of exploring the option of customers pre paying fares.

Paying the driver $20 on deposit up front and getting change after the ride, or pre swiping a credit or debit card, he thinks, might be workable as it would give the driver assurance of customer “credibility.”

Councillor Anthony Peruzza also stated he didn’t support mandatory shields.

He told drivers, “If you don’t feel safe behind the wheel, get it installed.”

He wasn’t terribly keen on the idea of pre payment, preferring that police go after those who don’t pay and punish them through the courts.

At the end, L&S unanimously decided to “Take note and File” the poll suggestion on shields, effectively quashing the idea for this term of council.

It also unanimously approved staff looking into prepaying fares and examining the GPS system in use in Europe.
http://www.taxinews.com/tac.html