Taxi Driver Online

Why? Will your beliefs have changed then

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

Yes, Unite are definitely guilty of this. All those computers, but hey, you can't use them!

No mate, I'll take the government's money anytime, but I wouldn't take it off a fellow cabbie. It's either free for all or not at all.
Look I know I'm tainted forever, but ask anyone I've trained, they'll tell you.
I could write a book about the goings on at Unite 680, might well do actually, cos it certainly isn't trade unionism.

I never said you was tainted I was just curious that if you are happy to take the governments money for training then surely believing what you do it follows that if drivers have to pay for it, they should at least have the opportunity to be trained by somebody who knows the trade. I would suggest that you are prepared to walk away at the most crucial of times

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

No mate, I'll take the government's money anytime, but I wouldn't take it off a fellow cabbie. It's either free for all or not at all.
Look I know I'm tainted forever, but ask anyone I've trained, they'll tell you.
I could write a book about the goings on at Unite 680, might well do actually, cos it certainly isn't trade unionism. [/quote]

I never said you was tainted I was just curious that if you are happy to take the governments money for training then surely believing what you do it follows that if drivers have to pay for it, they should at least have the opportunity to be trained by somebody who knows the trade. I would suggest that you are prepared to walk away at the most crucial of times [/quote]

Ha ha, you got me. I don't know, damned if I do, damned if I don't. Personally I'd rather give free training to someone than charge for it.
I don't believe that drivers should pay for it when it's been free up to now. If there had been a definite timescale, as with say CPCs then maybe, but then a CPC is only £65 every 5 years or so. NVQ averages at £1200. Seems a bit discriminatory to me. But I see what you're saying. I'd just feel a little uncomfortable with it I suppose.

Which one is it you nuggit.... goverment money is our money unless it grows on trees !

Stop wasting taxpayers money and get a proper job.

All other trades pay for their own training so why not taxi/ph drivers? Perhaps if it was the drivers that paid only those that saw the trade as a serious prospect would actually join? Drivers would go to training providers based on merit and not on necessity. You could always write your own course and get it qualified and therefore charge what you considered appropriate. There are lots of options other than giving up, if that is what you really believe in

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

Like I said, I can't win with you boys, I could stop wasting taxpayers money and get a proper job, like, er, I know driving a cab! You don't pay much tax driving a cab do ya?
But then last time I did it I wasn't earning enough to pay any, in fact I needed tax credits to live. I still don't earn much doing the training although I suppose you know different, but still my conscience is clear.
I'd love to read your submission to the LC, it must be a cracker seeing as you have all the answers.

And it's fatnuggit not nuggit thank you.

You gonna pay over a grand for yours?

Did you not read what I said? Who says it'll be over a grand? Btw I'm as qualified as you

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

But it wasn't.

_________________
IDFIMH

SOLVING THE CROSS-BORDER HIRE PROBLEMS

Recommendation 11. We recommend that it should be permissible for taxi and PHV licences to include a condition that the vehicle must principally be operated in the licensing district. A similar provision should also be permitted in relation to driver licences. (Paragraph 30)

DfT response: The Government understands the concerns that some have about the present position but is not convinced that this recommendation (which it understands to relate solely to pre-booked hirings, rather than immediate hirings at ranks or by being hailed in the street) is a suitable way of dealing with the cross border issues considered by the Committee.

Such a restriction would work against those operators who were located at the edge of a local authority's area and it would work against those operators who were dedicated to long-distance trips eg airport runs where a large proportion of the distance travelled would be beyond the local authority's border. Operators would end up sending for an out-of-district hiring not the nearest driver, but a driver who had not yet reached his limit on out-of-district journeys—and this would increase dead mileage, with adverse environmental implications. In short, it does not sit neatly with a deregulatory approach to reforming taxi and PHV legislation.

Moreover, a restriction of this nature could confuse and unfairly penalise passengers who would be unable to use the operator of their choice.

On a practical level, it would involve local authorities establishing a whole new tier of enforcement activity—at some cost, which might be added to the licence fee—in order to determine which vehicle owners and which drivers had exceeded their quota of out-of-district hirings.

The Government recognises that the Committee's underlying concern is to avoid the situation where taxi drivers are licensed in the north of the country and then locating themselves in the south of the country in order to undertake pre-booked hirings. The Government would note that there are alternative approaches to that proposed by the Transport Committee, for example, obliging licensed operators to use only vehicles (whether taxi or private hire) licensed by the same local authority as granted their operator licence.

The Government, in proposing this possible alternative approach, is not intending to fetter the Law Commission's discretion in undertaking a comprehensive review of the legislation, it is simply demonstrating that there are various potential means of addressing this particular issue.

The Law Commission will, as part of its review, consider the wider picture including why this is actually happening and propose a way forward in that context.

Recommendation 12. In addition, new legislation should permit local authorities to issue fixed penalty notices to out-of-town drivers where there is evidence, for example, that they have worked, or sought to work, for a specified period of time in that district. Local authorities should also be enabled to prosecute operators in other districts which are routinely sending cars to work in their area. (Paragraph 30)

DfT response: The Government does not agree with this recommendation. For the reasons set out in response to recommendation 11, the Government does not consider that directly restricting the area in which a taxi or PHV driver can pick up passengers by means of a condition attached to his licence is a sensible way of proceeding against the background of a review which has a deregulatory objective at its heart.

The Government believes that fixed penalty notices are best deployed for offences which are objective and where the scope for dispute is minimal (for example a driver either was, or was not, wearing his badge). The question of how many out-of-district journeys a driver might have undertaken as a proportion of his overall total number of journeys would be far from straightforward to determine at any time, and particularly not "on-the-spot".

Recommendation 13. In our view it is essential that local authorities justify their approach to the use of these controls in local transport plans, alert drivers and operators in neighbouring districts to their intention to use such powers; and provide adequate warnings to drivers and operators before issuing fixed penalty notices or initiating prosecutions. (Paragraph 31)

DfT response: The Government does not agree with this specific recommendation as it is not convinced that directly restricting the area in which a driver can accept a pre-booked hiring is a desirable way forward.

All other trades pay for their own training so why not taxi/ph drivers? Perhaps if it was the drivers that paid only those that saw the trade as a serious prospect would actually join? Drivers would go to training providers based on merit and not on necessity. You could always write your own course and get it qualified and therefore charge what you considered appropriate. There are lots of options other than giving up, if that is what you really believe in [/quote]

You gonna pay over a grand for yours?[/quote]

Did you not read what I said? Who says it'll be over a grand? Btw I'm as qualified as you [/quote]

We must know each other then

Toots>

We must know each other. I have actually written a course and i'm trying to improve what i'm delivering now but like i said, how much would you pay for yours?