Public transport is an important part of everyday life in that it facilitates access to social mobility. It has an inherent influence over people's access to employment, education, healthcare and is important for urban development.

With the above in mind, it's easy to see why a suspension of services by taxi operators in Mamelodi profoundly disrupted daily life.

The findings of the National Travel Household Survey (NTHS) published in 2013 clearly illuminate the central role played by minibus taxis in the economy.

According to the survey, the total number of public transport trips per weekday to work are estimated at 5.4 million. Of this number, 3.7 million trips are made by minibus taxi.

This makes minibus taxis the preferred mode of public transport, accounting for 68% of work trips, followed by buses and trains at 20% and 13% respectively.

Despite the above statistics, the public seem to be in a love-hate relationship with the minibus taxi industry. This is due to the general impression that taxi drivers disobey traffic laws, are disrespectful to passengers, a danger to other road users, rude and prone to violence or conflict - as demonstrated by the recent attacks on Autopax buses in Mamelodi.

Conflict usually stems from over-traded routes that different taxi associations operate. But it is important to note, as the Mamelodi case demonstrates, that conflict can flare up due to the desire to monopolise routes, including those operated by buses.

This could be attributed to the fact that the minibus taxi industry is a self-sustaining and self-regulating industry. So it's not surprising that though taxi wars are about profits, they are also about the need for recognition and legitimacy.

The latter can be linked to the contentious question of why minibus taxis are not being recognised as part of the integrated public transport network in order to be considered in tender processes and be subsidised by the government.

This has not happened because of the failings of the taxi recapitalisation programme intended to formalise the minibus taxi industry to make it more sustainable and profitable. It was hoped that the programme would replace the existing 16-seater vehicles with those seating 18-35 and regulate the industry.

While the recapitalisation programme achieved some success in certain areas, it has completely failed to regulate the working conditions of taxi drivers.

There are a number of reasons for this failure, but the most detrimental one is incompatibility between the legislative prescripts, nature of work and South Africa's industrial-style unionism.

SA's legislative framework and trade unions are biased towards traditional standard employment relations. This is demonstrated by the stipulated working hours of taxi drivers as contained in the Basic Conditions of Employment Act's sectoral determination for the taxi industry.

Clause 11 on ordinary hours of work makes the following determinations: an employer may not require or permit an employee to work more than 48 hours in any week, 10 hours on any day if the employee works for five days or less in a week, and eight hours in any day if the employee works for more than five days in any week.

Adhering to this legislative requirement would mean that taxi drivers will miss one of the two (morning and afternoon) peak periods.

The sectoral determination defines night work as work performed after 8pm and before 5am the next day.

This is effectively legislating against the industry that operates during these hours and, as such, both taxi owners and taxi drivers are likely to resist this kind of regulation.

This is a cut-and-paste regulation underlined by a one-size-fits-all mentality and is insensitive to the apartheid spatial arrangements that force many working-class people to start travelling from around 3am in the morning.

The survey shows that 24.5% of workers in Gauteng leave for work before 6am.

By its nature, the minibus taxi industry is more responsive to the needs and demands of commuters, which places it in conflict with the Basic Conditions of Employment Act's rigid regulations.

The nature of work in the minibus taxi industry is such that most drivers are paid on a percentage system.

This means that drivers are paid a certain percentage of the weekly taking. Therefore, salaries are linked to daily takings.

Socio-economic conditions, travel patterns and the history of this country have greatly shaped, and to some extent reinforced, the implicit influence of commuters' travel demands over the minibus taxi industry, as opposed to legislative requirements.

The failure of South Africa's industrial-style unionism to penetrate this industry can account for the chaotic state of the minibus taxi industry.

This failure to effectively organise taxi drivers is due to employment insecurity, lack of legislative protection and the meaningless notion of a workplace.

To this end, taxi drivers will seize any opportunity to acquire additional routes because of its implications for their daily takings, and ultimately their salaries.

lMmadi is student adviser in the faculty of natural agricultural sciences at the University of Cape Town