“Regulation changes the meaning of the law.Following in Uber’s footsteps, ride-hailing company Cabify last week filed a 42-page presentation with the Comptroller’s Office in which it sought to explain why the “EAT Act” or “Uber Act” regulations, according to it, restrict free competition among players in the mobility market.
“At Cabify, we have been emphasizing for several months the need for regulations to ensure free competition (…). We also emphasize that we are not against the law; in fact, we believe it is good and necessary, but we must not ignore the impact that regulation will have on the quality of service provided to people. La Tercera Corporate Affairs Manager at Cabify Chile, Sergio Saldias.
The appeal is in addition to one already filed with the Comptroller’s Office in January. Specifically, ride-hailing companies—as well as drivers and users—have emphasized the potential harm the regulation’s requirements could cause to the service. What’s more, the director of the University of California’s Center for Surveys and Longitudinal Studies, David BravoPrepare an analysis of the impact of the law and its regulations on the labor market, and assess it. 40,000 drivers will be removed from the platforms for not complying with the aforementioned requirements.
But Cabify goes one step further. The company notes in its presentation that the regulation states,Violations“Which they hope the Comptroller’s Office will take into account when conducting the review. In principle, through lawyers Claudia Sarmiento and William GarciaThe Company asserts that Law No. 21.553 created a registry and not an “authorization” as provided for in the regulations.
“The EAT Act provides in its section 2 for a single register at national level, which simultaneously registers both the “transport application companies” and the “qualified drivers” who receive the Act (…). Likewise, it is an enabling register, so that if it is not integrated into it, neither the companies nor the drivers will be able to provide the service.
Which is added to:It is a restriction of freedom of access to the relevant market.This means that registration, in the case of drivers, is not simply an entry into the payroll, as happens in the case of vehicles, but a restriction of a fundamental right.
Although Cabify points out that this restriction is based on law, for the same reason that (the law) determines its scope, without the regulation being able to create privileges that have no legal justification such as, for example, “In case of suspension or “freezing” system. From registration in the case of drivers.
“We know that the freeze on driver registration is provided for by law, but the regulations set quotas for their replacement, which will worsen the competitive situation in the market,” says Saldias.
Because? As explained in the appeal to the Comptroller’s Office, the regulation specifies reasons for excluding drivers not provided for by law, as well as additional procedures for their removal.
In addition, it is noted that the regulation creates a “licensing” system for movement between regions for licensed drivers and even for vehicles that “are not subject to any type of licensing in the law.”
Moreover, they assert that by taking such positions, The regulation imposes additional conditions that “lack justification for the purposes stipulated by the legislator or in the text of the law: “For example, by creating a ‘waiting’ period of six months from the ‘last license.'”
The presentation also addresses questions in the sense that in this procedure of successive licenses “the Regulation is clear in making market access subject, as an enabling condition, to an administrative act authorizing registration, in circumstances where such an administrative act is not foreseen by the law and does not emanate from its text.”
From the transportation application company they confirm that this adds to unjustified bureaucracy This would not only cause a loss of dynamism in the industry, but also among “thousands of app users – passengers and drivers – who would be directly affected by the impact this could have.”
