Minister of Health and Welfare Chiu Tai-yuan (邱泰源) on Friday said the ministry supports keeping priority seats on public transportation, but is considering expanding the eligibility criteria and renaming the seats.
Chiu’s remarks came after local news media over the past few weeks reported incidents involving priority seats, once again sparking heated discussion about whether the seats should be abolished or regulations regarding them should be revised.
On June 11, an older woman asked a young woman on a Taipei MRT train to yield her priority seat. The young woman refused, saying that she needed the seat after working a 12-hour shift. After an elderly man intervened and an argument erupted, the young woman allegedly assaulted the man. Other passengers reported the incident to MRT security.
After they were taken off the train, the elderly man told the woman he would sue unless she apologized. The woman apologized, but then apparently suddenly started banging her head on a pillar repeatedly. She was rushed to a hospital for bleeding.
MRT security told the man that priority seats are for “people in need,” which does not only mean elderly people.
On Tuesday last week, a young man on an MRT train who said that he had diarrhea was yelled at and allegedly assaulted by an elderly man for refusing to yield his priority seat.
The Taipei MRT said that 22 of the 427 dispute cases it received from January to May concerned priority seats, accounting for 5 percent.
Every now and then, the priority seats issue comes under the spotlight following an incident going viral. The government has repeatedly cited the People with Disabilities Rights Protection Act (身心障礙者權益保障法) to say that it could not abolish priority seats. The act stipulates that priority seats for people with disabilities, elderly people, pregnant women and children should be designated in public transportation.
The ministry last year proposed amending the act to add “anyone with genuine need” to the eligibility criteria, but it could not pass the legislation before the end of the legislative term. With new lawmakers in office, the amendment should be proposed again.
The ministry is also considering changing the Chinese name to “priority seats” (優先席), from the current name, which literally means “courtesy seats” (博愛座).
While the proposal to change the name and eligibility criteria was inspired by methods in some other countries, it is not clear how effective they would be in reducing disputes.
In Japan, aside from the same four designated categories as in Taiwan, signs near priority seats also mention people with internal disabilities. A survey in Japan showed that passengers’ willingness to yield their seat to others might vary based on what the seats are called.
In the UK, Transport for London offers free “please offer me a seat” badges, holds a Priority Seating Week to raise public awareness, and places signs around the seats with messages such as “please offer this seat,” “not all disabilities are visible” and “someone may need this seat more.”
In France, Paris has an order of priority, listing nine categories of people starting with military veterans and ending with elderly people aged 75 or older.
These countries are not exempt from disputes over priority seats. Before rushing to adopt other countries’ methods, Taiwan should conduct analyses, surveys and interviews to better understand passengers’ needs and concerns.
The White House’s decision to take a 9.9 percent stake in Intel Corp is looking like very shrewd business indeed. Since the government bought in at US$20.47 a share last August, the US chipmaker’s surging stock price has delivered the US a US$43 billion return. One of the reasons the investment has so far proved so sound is that the White House has made sure of it. According to The Wall Street Journal, Howard personally pushed deals on Intel’s behalf with some of the most lucrative clients imaginable. They include Nvidia Corp, the company at the heart of the AI
A single photograph can cut through a lot of noise, but it can also be used to misrepresent the truth. At the very least, it can concentrate the mind on something that requires further investigation. On Monday last week, Ma Ying-jeou Foundation CEO Tai Hsia-ling (戴遐齡) and former National Security Council secretary-general King Pu-tsung (金溥聰) held a news conference in which they showed a photograph of former foundation CEO Hsiao Hsu-tsen (蕭旭岑), now Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) deputy chairman. In the image Hsiao is seated next to Xiamen Taiwan Businessmen Association chairman Han Ying-huan (韓螢煥). The two men were holding
I first met Professor Ray Jiing (井迎瑞) as a film and documentary student at Shih Hsin University’s (SHU) Department of Radio Television and Film in 1988. The following year, he went on to become the director of the Chinese Taipei Film Archive — forerunner of the Taiwan Film and Audiovisual Institute (TFAI). Over his eight-year tenure, Jiing rescued and restored over 200 classic Taiwanese films. In 1997, he established the Graduate Institute of Studies in Documentary and Film Archiving at Tainan National University of the Arts (TNNUA), and I joined the program in his third cohort of students. Beyond a
A recent report concerning a student who is suing his teacher posed the question in its headline: Does failing a student in two subjects constitute bullying? The college student in Chiayi County apparently sought NT$2 million (US$63,603) in state compensation, but a court dismissed the case. The first reaction of many might have been to ask: What has happened to students nowadays? Some say that teachers have lost their authority, while others say students are overindulged. Some even start reminiscing over the days when “whatever the teacher says goes.” However, the real issue might be overlooked if emotional reactions like that are the
RSS