New e-hailing regulations: drivers voice concerns over safety and affordability

SOUTH Africa's new e-hailing regulations set to take effect in October have sparked mixed reactions among drivers, who express concerns over safety, affordability, and the potential impact on their livelihoods.

These regulations include mandatory driver registration, operational licences, vehicle branding, and the installation of panic buttons, aimed at safeguarding both drivers and passengers amidst a backdrop of rising crime. 

The National Land Transport Amendment Act was signed into law by President Cyril Ramaphosa in June 2024 and is being gazetted and expected to come into effect by next month.

In a statement, transport minister Barbara Creecy said she believed the rules would cool rising tensions between e-hailing and taxi drivers, and they were committed to working and supporting e-hailing drivers, who were mainly young people determined to live a decent life.

But local e-hailing drivers are concerned about the safety and affordability of the rules.

Darryle Padayachee, 49, of Phoenix, said while he welcomed the new regulations, which he believed would ensure that drivers and passengers would be safe, he felt adhering to the requirements was unaffordable.

“We are not in a position to pay for added registration processes, or modify our vehicles to allow for enhanced safety measures. Panic buttons will keep us safe if we can get to it during a robbery or a hijacking, but it will come at a cost.

“I started driving for a private e-hailing service when I lost my job as a truck driver in 2019. I earn about R4 000 per month. This is not enough to take care of my family. I would also not be able to afford annual licences, as my earnings are too little."

Padayachee is against ehailing cars being branded due to safety concerns.

“E-hailing drivers have become easy targets for robberies and hijackings. Whenever I leave my house, I pray I am protected and do not become a victim of crime. With markings or branding on the vehicles, we will be easily targeted. Criminals who would normally not know we are e-hailing drivers would be able to identify us and plot crimes against us quickly. I hope the associations and councils object to these regulations as it would put our lives in danger."

Russel Govender, 61, of Chatsworth, began working as an e-hailing driver for a private company using his own vehicle when he retired as a driver for a newspaper company.

“I needed to earn an extra income as my government pension did not cover the cost of basic necessities and food. With this job, I am able to supplement my income, even though it is not a lot of money.

“If I had to renew the licence and pay to install a panic button in my vehicle, I would consider throwing in the towel due to the costs, regulations and safety concerns regarding the branding on our cars."

Dillon Naidoo, 35, from Bayview in Chatsworth, said: “There should have been a forum for e-hailing drivers to voice their concerns and make suggestions before the new regulations were finalised. While the safety concerns may be reduced by a mandatory panic button, we will never be safe in the cut-throat transport industry. We drive in fear of being attacked and robbed. If I am being attacked, I do not think a panic button will be effective as I may not be able to reach it.

“The Department of Transport should have instead addressed the salary of e-hailing drivers and created regulations for drivers to be adequately compensated. We earn less, and to expect us to fork out money for licences and branding is unfair."

The KZN E-hailing Council has taken a firm stance against the proposed regulations that would impose geographical restrictions on operating licences for drivers.

Sipho Mabika, the council's chairperson, said limiting these licences to specific towns or cities not only stifled the mobility of drivers but hampered their capacity to dynamically meet customer demand.

“The limitation of an operating licence issued for the specific area of operation imposes unnecessary constraints,” said Mabika. 

He said such regulations contradicted the essence of e-hailing services, which thrived on flexibility, convenience, and accessibility. 

“This framework reduces the quality and availability of services to passengers, especially in underserved or rural areas.”

The proposed solution from the KZN E-hailing Council is a nationwide operational scope, allowing e-hailing platform providers the flexibility to operate beyond geographical borders. 

“Drivers would have the opportunity to work in areas with higher demand, optimising their income potential,” Mabika said, emphasising that this change would enhance not just earnings but service quality as well.

While acknowledging some provisions of the proposed regulations, the council raised significant concerns regarding others that could unduly burden drivers. Notably, they oppose an agreement or terms and conditions between drivers and platform providers for obtaining an operating licence. 

“Government intervention in this private contractual relationship disrupts fair business operations,” Mabika explained.

He further pointed out the instability that ties licences to specific apps. With e-hailing platforms frequently changing, merging, or ceasing operations, drivers, he said, faced the real risk of losing their licences when an app becomes inactive. 

“Licences should be issued solely based on the applicant's compliance with regulatory requirements." 

Mabika also voiced concerns over vehicle branding regulations, highlighting the risks posed by vehicle-related crime in South Africa, including hijackings. 

“Branding vehicles with operator and contact details makes them easily identifiable, which could increase the risk of being targeted by hijackers and criminals,” he warned. 

Instead, he suggested that branding should be managed at the association level to verify compliance and maintain driver safety. The proposal includes using subtle identifiers, such as small logos or removable magnetic stickers, rather than large markings that could attract criminal attention.

In terms of safety, Mabika expressed his opposition to mandatory panic buttons in vehicles, arguing that the financial burden of implementing such a system would unfairly fall on drivers. 

“The presence of a visible panic button has escalated situations for some drivers, leading to harm,” he said, while emphasising that the costs associated with these systems were often prohibitive. 

“Contracts typically require a minimum commitment of 24 months, amounting to R12 000 over two years." 

He suggested that e-hailing app companies should be responsible for the costs of installing and maintaining panic button systems. 

“This ensures equitable sharing of safety-related expenses and prevents undue financial strain on drivers,” he said, proposing alternative safety measures like real-time GPS tracking and in-app emergency alerts.

Trevor Mathebula, the deputy secretary of the South African E-Hailing Association, raised further concerns about the regulatory amendments. 

He warned that restricting working areas could marginalise drivers and expose them to increased safety risks, adding that the current practices already limited their operational latitude. 

“E-hailing companies must implement rigorous vetting procedures for consumers to better protect drivers,” Mathebula said. 

He claimed that the average e-hailing driver was left to absorb the costs imposed by large corporations. 

“These amendments do not address the urgent needs of drivers regarding safety, fair working conditions, and decent earnings,” he said. 

THE POST