Taxi Driver Online

I refer the right honourable lady to the answer I gave earlier, as they say... (well, two of the main points anyway!)


So, as you can see...whilst I largely agree with you toots, the question is not "what should have been done from the start?"....it's more a question of "how do we put it right as we currently stand....or is it even possible to do so?!!!"

I just happen to believe that delimitation, whilst dishing out well deserved retribution to the "barons", is not acceptable if it means doing so by the destruction of many, many more sole-operators, family operators etc., particularly if a survey has proven that there is no consumer need for further vehicles (and probably no rank space for them either). I further believe that much of the delimitation argument, despite many claims of good intent, is being driven by PH who have been brainwashed into holding an OFT type viewpoint. They believe that the "Hackney cake" must taste better than theirs. The truth however, is that firstly, the PH's have the same purchase options and secondly, it's the same cake, but that some hacks simply choose to pay a premium for a little more flexibility on when and where they can eat it...if you see what I mean?! Whatever is true, potentially destroying the cake so that no-one can eat it is crazy. We should also remember that many people choose to rent (either PH or Hackney), as they don't want the expense or hassle of running their own vehicle.

On the subject of quality (and how it may control/limit the number of vehicles), let's annoy people and widen the argument even more

If we are saying that some individuals are restricted from entering the trade by various costs, then why should some councils, as an alleged solution, simply allow a new licence, if you spend up to approximately £30,000 on a WAV? Let's move those darned "licence premiums" into the pockets of the taxi manufacturers instead eh? Also, if someone cannot afford to enter the trade now, whilst there is, arguably at least, a modicum of control allowing a "wage" of sorts to be earned, why will they be any better off if they have to pay a fortune to LTI etc....but there's much less work (from the ranks at least) due to the market being flooded?

If we accept the "no restriction on numbers" argument as the panacea for all the trade's ills (which it isn't) and expand on them, a strong argument could be placed that the answer to the question of quality control, rather than pressing for new vehicles, is to simply have better/stricter testing and enforcement of ALL the vehicles within a LA. That way, anyone wanting to join the party, even those who cannot afford a new vehicle, but know of an "immaculate" older vehicle for sale could also enter the fray!

Whilst I agree that public demand for taxis should play a part in the equation, if our council performed a SUD now, even though there are far too many taxis, we would still have a situation of unmet demand. Furthermore to only put quality on a vehicle is pointless. You could have the best fleet in the country driven by drivers who have little regard for customer service & safety and have little or no knowledge of the area they are working (thus relying on Satnavs). There are even drivers that can't or won't speak English when faced with customer questions.

The problem with rank spaces is HC will only use a space if it's in an area that has a lot of trade. There is only a certain amount of land available in these areas and I'm afraid that parking meters provide a higher revenue than taxi licences



Whilst I agree with what you say here I wouldn't say that the hacks pay a premium for flexibility I would say they pay extra for another piece of the cake

I am however unlikely to waiver on my opinion that driver standards should be increased via knowledge tests (in English) and training. So as not to annoy those that have been in the trade since 1847 and know all there is to know perhaps the training should begin with the new drivers and the option to train being given to current drivers if they wish

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

Then the argument we should all be promoting, is how to perfect the survey methods (if possible!)....before any delimitation takes place. To base any overall need on what amounts to be only 5% of the hours in the week, would clearly be ludicrous. Imagine if a supermarket had to have every checkout open all the time, because some idiot decided to base a survey on Christmas week! (Yes, I know, a little bit exaggerated, but the point is the same). To be fair however, if a survey is done correctly , then the methods should not base unmet demand on brief, exceptional, busy periods anyway, but I agree...past evidence makes it very difficult to have faith in them.



Actually, I totally agree....and these minority of w*****s are the ones that create the majority of bad press! It will benefit everyone to get rid of them.




Partially true....but I would change that to saying that the rank must have at least a "decent" amount of trade. How you define "decent" is the thing! I would counter the point however, with the statement that many of the unused ranks are so out of date that they should have been removed completely. You can't expect anyone to sit on a rank for hours, maybe a whole day, with little or no chance of a job.

Where I agree with you, is that providing there is evidence to show that there is a reasonable alternative (ie another "workable" rank), if a driver then ignores the acts/bylaws and refuses to "proceed to the next available rank" to use them (effectively a form of cherry picking), then let them be dealt with by licensing officials, using the powers available to them. It would serve the greedy beggars right!

However, to add to this point, only having enough rank space at certain times of the day, for around 20% of the licences that have been issued is a disgrace (some LA's even have a worse percentage!). If a council were to then site a rank a considerable distance from anywhere that would provide trade, in order to boost the rank numbers, then it would be pointless and arguably devious. I re-state my point that adequate/reasonable (and useable) rank space should be compulsory before licences are issued. Whilst local conditions may make the actual percentage vary in different LA's, I would argue that this should be, perhaps, a minimum of 50% rank spaces, per licences issued (but certainly not 20%!).



We'll agree to disagree. I feel that such ideas can be likened to "urban legend"...or "the grass being greener". The reality is often somewhat different.



If administered as you suggest, then I'd wholeheartedly agree, although the current training schemes, in my opinion, seem to be inaccurate, half-cocked attempts at doing so, that only seem to be money making exercises for the firms involved. However....having been around since 1847 (but still knowing f**k all! ), I will be patient and give them a chance to improve.

I would have agreed to disagree had you not added what you fel about such ideas. I don't believe it is urban legend it is in fact a reality that HC's work PH systems. That to me is having 2 pieces of cake



If you are waiting for the NVQ to improve I wouldn't hold my breath. They haven't in any other trade and are not likely to in this one. However there may come a time when an alternative and more appropriate training will become available. I have no problem with the basic Btec/VRQ but there doesn't appear to be a higher level, which is a shame

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

Interesting reading for a change. but I am surprised that nobody looks further than local councils... a free plate as long as it goes on a wheelchair accessible vehicle..= more wheelchair accessible vehicles, seeing as the saloon vehicle owners want to keep their vehicles it's the only way for the government to appease the baying of the disabled lobby.

I fully support tighter restrictions on drivers and vehicles, and the training programme for drivers, but not the Mickey Mouse one that is interpreted in many different ways that we have now.

Surveys need to be uniform across the country. with a small element of leeway. they should also include the needs of the disabled lobby, and when presented before council, the council should have to follow its recommendations.

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

Ah, OK...I missed what you were trying to say the first time toots. I take your point, but I guess the ratio of PH/Hackney, along with the percentage of hacks that are on a circuit varies from area to area.

I can only speak from personal experience (as myself singular and also having worked areas where the percentage of hacks on circuits was quite low by normal standards). I personally would not have a radio in, as my choice, as I indicated previously in the thread, is about a way of working...ie more flexibility.

Most hack licence holders are not barons and most find times as hard as anyone else, particularly at the moment. Many make very tough choices/decisions and borrow money etc to get into the job and many (but admittedly not all) of the people who moan the most, could make the same ones if they wished.

By the way, there's a danger here that the evidence is saying we need more regulation, instead of less! Hell, imagine the furore in places like Liverpool if they told them that only PH could be on a radio

The truth is, if an unmet demand survey is done properly (we can but live in hope), any hackneys working on a radio should be taken account of. The ranks would be left a little more empty, which may then reflect in a possible unmet demand and possibly more licences...or not of course, depending on the evidence gathered. Anyway, if hackneys are finding it vital to, or even just more profitable to be going on PH most of the time, maybe the grass is greener on the PH side.

Its the all about meeeee mentality my friend

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Personally I think both sides of the trade is suffering from a driver point of view. The only people not suffering are the large operators who get their settle regardless as to how much a driver earns. The problem we have here are the 5, 6 & 7 seater hacks taking the work of 2 ph vehicles and incidentally paying less settle for the privilege. Having said that it shows to me that a single tier of mixed fleet vehicles would work just fine

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

Me either, never had one PH or HC, false economy tbh, the car needs replacing twice as often, you pay extra tax and maintenance is higher, add in Joe Idontcareitaintmineanyway and you soon see what a waste of time and worry it is for effectively letting someone else earn that £50 you could by doing an extra hour a day, pom for me all the way.