Taxi Driver Online

Now I would get the right hump if I had paid £120 to be asked such idiotic questions such as those.

And, as BC mentions, if they are going to ask idiotic questions, FFS get them exactly right, not just in most cases right.

_________________
IDFIMH

I think it was based on the suspension for not doing it.

_________________
IDFIMH

to charge extra for another layer of tests...

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most

The 'they' I was referring to was the drivers

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

I'm waiting for the advice on how to fill your car up with diesel.

Sorry got carried away with the smilies and the good news from Loughbrough.

Just being serious for a minute ......

I suppose the real bottom line on this Magistrates Court judgment is that it is unreasonable to suspend an existing licensed driver for not taking 'training on the job'. After all, the LA have already licensed him / her as 'fit & proper' to do the job of a licensed driver. AND where is the evidence that a Btec / NVQ Level 1, 2, or 102 would make him / her better at the job?

What a licensing authority require as a minimum standard for new driver applications though, would, I suspect, be a totally different thing. And if a particular LA were to require a Btec / NVQ Level 1, 2, 3 or 103, then I would imagine that would be an entry standard for all NEW applicants & as long as it was a policy decision by a particular LA, I doubt that it could be challenged as unreasonable.

Questions;

Could a LA require a driver that was suspended for a mis-demeanour, not related to Btecs & NVQ, require that driver to take a Btec / NVQ prior to re-licensing him / her?

Would the Court still regard that as unreasonable?

_________________
Kind regards,

Brummie Cabbie.

Type a message, post your news,
Disagree with other members' views;
But please, do have some decorum,
When debating on the TDO Forum.

IMO if a driver had received a large number of complaints re his attitude, a council could require him to attend a customer care course within a certain time-scale, and if he didn't then his license could be revoked, not suspended.

_________________
IDFIMH

That is a question asked on the "Newsletter/Questionnaire that has been sent to all drivers in Cardiff, words to the effect of " should we make a driver take a BTEC as opposed to suspension/revoking a license". My take on this for what it is worth is that they could use any old excuse/slight misdemeanour to put you/I through a BTEC that had nothing to do with an offence.

If anything is serious enough to revoke or suspend a driver then a BTEC is not going to rectify it.

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.

I would have thought that with answer 4 you could charge a soiling charge if the dog was so wet that you have to get the seats cleaned.

_________________
Grandad,

It's one battle in the war and as they say slowly slowly catch the monkey

For what it's worth I believe that taxi drivers deserve a professional qualification not just an educational one for the sake of having it. There should be a lot more involved in the qualification than there is. Having said that as much as drivers on here may know what they are doing we still have drivers whose education was cut short for whatever reason. I've dealt with a lot of drivers who having only got a level I numeracy or literacy and have then decided that they'd like to improve and gain a level II. There are drivers who didn't think they'd cut it back in the classroom and really enjoyed it so much so they've taken other courses in totally different subjects to taxi driving.

When they first start the course some do grumble and some will never admit that they picked up any tips even if they did. Some maybe never learnt a thing cos they did know it all, but, at the end of the course they've enjoyed the break in routine, they've had a banter with others in the trade that maybe they don't do normally.

Level II Btec is very basic but to be fair if it was a higher level some drivers would be overwhelmed and give it up and that's not right. It's also an opportunity to help drivers that need to improve their English language.

Lets look at the London taxi driver. People have respect for the London Cabbies cos they know it's taken a great deal effort and time to achieve their licence They have little respect for others around the country because it's takes nothing to become a taxi driver. It's considered a second rate occupation and that is not right.

Drivers should be fighting for the recognition that they deserve, maybe not through the Btec/NVQ route but there has to be viable alternatives to this before you bin it for nothing.

With regard to the fly by night training companies they are there because drivers decided they couldn't be bothered looking or insisting on proper providers. It is true if you put nowt in you get nowt out.

So whilst I congratulate these particular drivers for achieving what they set out to achieve if they'd put as much effort in getting higher standards into the trade then maybe we'd all have something to shout about.

Here end my long but humble opinion

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

Thats a very negative and somewhat derogatory remark, dont you think

It may be the case in some areas, but in other areas, it can take a great deal of effort to pass the knowledge. My licence is my qualification.

Any driver who gains a licence in my area has to complete a knowledge exam, which includes apartments and buildings, a route exam, and a DSA test.

Where taxi driving is perceived as second rate is in the eye of those of the general public who consider driving a taxi to be a part time job. And that will never change regardless of however many BTEC's or NVQ's are put in the path of the cab driver.

The major issue is that (I would guess) the huge majority of cab drivers are self-employed. If they were actually employed by the council I could understand as to why the extra "qualifications" would be imposed.

It wasn't intended to be derogatory but I agree it is a negative comment



We have knowledge exam here but to be fair it ain't rocket science and we don't have a DSA which I think all councils should have. The fact that I can get passengers from a to b by the shortest route isn't much use if I frighten the living daylights out of them with my driving



It shouldn't be considered an obstacle now you're being negative



You could or you do understand why the extra 'qualifications' would be imposed? If you do understand please explain why there should be a difference just because you are self employed

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

It shouldn't be considered an obstacle now you're being negative

Well, it is an obstacle that isnt worth the paper it is written on, unless a driver goes to an office for a car and the owner stipulates a BTEC or NVQ requirement. And I doubt whether that would happen because the owner of a cab firm just wants the drivers weekly subs.

You could or you do understand why the extra 'qualifications' would be imposed? If you do understand please explain why there should be a difference just because you are self employed

I am refering to part of an employment contract. My partner works for the local council and she has to attend "ridiculous" (her words) courses that are mainly common sense. However, she is compelled to attend the courses under her contract which are usually run by outside bodies who seem to be doing very well under the politcally correct council who seem to have vast amounts of money for such matters yet cannot afford to replace the swings in the childrens playgrounds. Sorry, was I ranting there

I passed the test.