PH customs brokers propose ways to improve TABS efficiency, transparency

0
1160

Trucks_on_RoxasSome Philippine port stakeholders have put forward measures to address concerns identified during the initial days of strict implementation of the Terminal Appointment Booking System (TABS).

A group of customs brokers sent a letter to TABS implementers International Container Terminal Services, Inc. (ICTSI) and Asian Terminals Inc. (ATI) on March 31, outlining proposals for making the system more efficient and transparent, following a “feedback gathering discussion” on March 29.

TABS is a government-approved online platform—piloted in October 2015 and fully implemented on March 16 this year—that manages truck movements in and out of Manila International Container Terminal and Manila South Harbor.

READ: TABS compliance 96% on first week of full implementation

The letter was sent on March 31, a day before the TABS penalty for late-arrivals and no-shows was implemented, and days after another group of port stakeholders, complaining about the negative effects of TABS on the supply chain, filed an injunction against the system with the Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC).

The injunction was filed by Roberta Riga (former president of the Chamber of Customs Brokers, Inc), Mary Zapata (Aduana Business Club), Reynaldo Soliman, Levy Adrian Zapata, Imelda Guilas, Armando Chan, Michael Mertalla, Abraham Rebao, and Joselito Castillo against former Cabinet Secretary Jose Rene Almendras and ICTSI and ATI.

In a summons issued on March 22, Manila RTC Branch 14 required respondents to answer the complaint within 15 days.

Validation exercise

The feedback gathering discussion on March 29 was “motivated by our desire to validate and try to help alleviate the ‘perceived ill-effects’ of TABS,” according to letter writers Samson Gabisan, the group’s coordinator, and Victor Torres, group secretary.

READ: 3-day protest vs Terminal Appointment Booking System ends

The suggestions that came out of the meeting, they noted, are “based on real and actual experiences of some stakeholders who are willing to give TABS a chance and more than willing to help fine-tune TABS to suit the needs of both the terminal operators and stakeholders.”

In the letter, Samson and Torres noted that booking appointments through the system and contacting terminal operators’ “customer care lines” to seek assistance remained difficult.

They said discussion participants claimed slots for the next 12 hours for the free zones are usually not available for booking, leaving open mostly those slots in the high demand zone which have a P1,000 fee and which “generally TABS users avoid.”

Gabisan and Torres also noted participants said they experienced queuing of trucks going to terminals to take advantage of the free demand zones because stakeholders tend to book at those hours to avoid paying the P1,000 charge.

Because of this situation, they suggested that instead of having free, medium (costing P300), and high demand (P1,000) zones, a flat rate of P100 be charged per booking in all time zones.

And due to the non-availability of slots during free time zones, they said “majority of the participants asked for (a) little transparency (in) slot usage.”

“Users are in the dark whether a time zone is already booked with the number of booking as previously presented, that is, 100-150 bookings per time zone,” Gabisan and Torres added.

Participants suggested that in the advance booking screen, the name of the broker who booked a time zone be visible to other users. Another suggestion was to revise the booking reference number to reflect the booking date as the first two digits; succeeding two digits to indicate the time zone; and the fifth, sixth and seventh digits to show the booking sequence for a particular time zone. At the end should be the name of the broker.

The group said transparency in TABS booking “will deter users from abusing TABS as well as it will clear all doubts of alleged booking slot manipulation to give advantage to a selected few.”

Moreover, they observed the occurrence of truck ban apprehensions during the initial days of strict implementation of the system even for trucks with TABS bookings. These trucks should already be exempt from such bans, as embodied under Metropolitan Manila Development Authority Memorandum Circular No. 06-2016. The exemption took effect also on March 16.

However, they acknowledged this as birth pains, suggesting that stakeholders document cases of apprehensions and requested terminal operators to assist stakeholders in presenting them to government authorities.

At the same time, they commented on the traffic congestion to and from the terminals, which “remains a consistent event” that can result in the late arrival or no-show of trucks, both of which carry penalties.

“These traffic congestion events run directly counter to one of the objectives of TABS, that is to avoid port congestion as a result of faster movements of goods,” the group said.

The group suggested that the terminals “make representations with authorities concerned for more stringent efforts to clear roads of obstructions, illegally parked vehicles, etc.”

“Road clearing is quite successful at Road 10, Anda Circle, Bonifacio Drive, therefore it can also be done at MICT Access Road and Del Pan area,” the group noted.

They also requested ATI and MICT to draft a list of frequently asked questions “to lessen the burden of your respective customer care teams.” Both operators had already earlier issued implementing rules and regulations and user guide on TABS and its points payment system. – Roumina Pablo