Taxi Driver Online

Another new thread for a bit of a non-story, but the previous one went into some detail about the AA cost index, and think I'd lose the will to live to be reminded of that again

However, the stuff about the rubber-stamping and the consultation process etc is maybe a bit more interesting.


Taxi fares to be hiked 7% in Aberdeen

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... -aberdeen/


Image: DC Thomson/Press & Journal

An 11th hour bit to stop an Aberdeen taxi fare hike was defeated today.

Granite City charges will rise 7% from January 29 following the decision of councillors on the licensing committee.

The committee met to rubber stamp the rise following a month-long consultation exercise.

The meeting was told there was just a single response when the public and trade were asked for their views.

Once the rise has come into force, it will mean taxi fares in the city have risen 12% in just two years.

An appeal can still be lodged with the traffic commissioner against the new fare structure.

At the meeting, councillor Steve Delaney moved that the rise be kicked into the long grass – raising fears it could lead to fewer people taking cabs and deepening the decline of the trade.

He said: “I propose that we take no action.

“Such a significant increase in fares could lead to a reduction in taxis, so I can’t support this at this time.”

He was backed by councillor Philip Sellar who added that he saw “no justification” for the hike.

Committee convener John Reynolds, however, said that no members of the public had complained about the rise so it would have to go ahead.

The committee approved the fare rise by seven votes to two.

Not sure if this is the best use of the phrase 'rubber stamp' if two committee members actually voted against it


Which, of course, doesn't quite encapsulate what Unite said a couple of months ago in objection.


Yes, I'm sure that's a fair representation of public opinion on the matter

I mean, obviously the public shouldn't have the final say, but if any member of the public at all responds to such a consultation then that's an achievement in itself, and to that degree the whole thing seems a bit pointless, and the convener's point meaningless.

It's like our recent 100 yard drop in the flagfall distance, on average adding a mighty 13p to a T1 run, irrespective of distance.

Everyone I've spoken to about it thinks it's a bit of a nonsense, but for various reasons don't get involved in the consultation process etc. At best they just assume it's pointless, and whatever's decided is out of their hands and will go ahead anyway.

Echoes of that in Aberdeen, and in the convener's statement in particular

(But at least my meter change and the council meter test went a bit more smoothly than it could have done Would have preferred they'd just left it as it was, though )

So one objection has held up an increase in wages for 100s of drivers for several months.

_________________
IDFIMH

I suspect the Union has had a meeting of its members and those members have told them what they want, not what the reps want.

_________________
IDFIMH

An alternative take in the P&J's sister paper the Evening Express. Online just a couple of hours later

This describes the thing in a lot more detail, but in reality doesn't really clarify the various issues.


Taxi fares to rise by 7% in Aberdeen next year

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/new ... next-year/

Taxi fares will rise 7% in the new year, councillors have ruled.

Members of Aberdeen City Council’s licensing committee voted for the hike at a meeting yesterday – but not all of them were happy.

Two members expressed concern the cost increase would put people off using taxis and that it was only 18 months since the last rise.

But the majority felt the extra takings would help taxi drivers cover rising costs.

Passengers are currently charged £2.40 for the first 950 yards and then 20p for every additional 180.5yds.

That will rise on January 29 to £2.60 for the first 940yds, with 20p then charged for every 160yds travelled.

Before tabling the idea, council officers met taxi drivers and a report noted they were “generally happy” with the idea of an increase.

Rainbow City Taxis managing director Russell McLeod told the Evening Express: “It is a fair increase.

“The drivers have been subsidising costs for the last five years with no rise to compensate.”

Only one – anonymous – person contributed to a new council consultation, opposing it.

At yesterday’s meeting councillor Steve Delaney said: “We put this out to consultation and the taxi drivers themselves are mixed with their responses.

“The previous fare increase was fairly recently. Fares in Aberdeen are high compared to some other cities.

“Some other drivers are quite concerned people will use taxis less if they start costing more.”

Councillor Philip Bell said: “Taxi drivers have been chipping away, attempting to get fare increases for over a year now.

“It started off last year with a proposed credit/debit card surcharge, then there was a proposed rate increase, then there was a request to increase fares at the weekend because that would entice drivers out. Now there is a 7% request for increase due to the cost of living. Increases for cost of living are nowhere near 7% and people I speak to say taxis are way too expensive.

“What a waste of having this resource in our city.”

The council’s trainee solicitor Karen Gatherum said the council is legally obliged to review taxi fares every 18 months and they went up 6% 18 months ago.

She said there had been “a fault” in the council had been provided with outdated information about the cost of maintaining a taxi – and the 7% rise would put that right.

The council’s solicitor Sandy Munro said: “From a legal basis, we have to be careful because these are discussions that should have been had at the last meeting at which the committee discussed this issue.

“We agreed at that meeting to advertise a 7% increase and having done that we have only received one representation.

“Councillor Bell has said taxi drivers don’t want it – they haven’t told us.

“We have followed the process and if we change our mind now it would be highly vulnerable to appeal.”

Councillor Tauqeer Malik said: “It would be very difficult if we don’t agree the increase today because there was no opposition to it at the last meeting.”

The committee’s convener John Reynolds proposed the 7% increase, which won the vote by seven to two.

Councillor Yvonne Allan said: “Prior to this one letter we’ve had opposing the increase, we had full support from the taxi organisation for the city.

“They commended what we put forward that day and I certainly don’t think we can back down on it now because they are not saying ‘no, don’t do it’.

“At this stage in the game I don’t think we have the right to withdraw this when it what the taxi drivers are expecting.”

So there's just one taxi organisation in the city?

Suspect it's *un*representative rather than a properly representative body.


Suspect it's a bit like here - the council get together with the select few, then decide on an increase, and by the time they advertise it etc the rest of the trade think it's effectively done and dusted, so just accept it. A fait accompli, as some might say