When a survey is done as to how many licences should be in force, do they include a risk assessment as to the wellbeing of existing drivers?

By that,I am thinking of the hours that a driver might have to work 70/80 to now meet his/her commitments. This also becomes a danger to the driver and mr & mrs joe public, so whilst the L.Os may not consider our wellbeing, perhaps they should think of the public safety issue.

Also what constitutes unmet demand?

Cardiff appears to have issued in excess of 200 hackney licences in the last 15 months and no sign of it stopping.

All of your answers are somewhere on the DFT website.

I dont believe the well being of the driver is taken into account.....the survey is to help a local authority decide if there is a significant unmet demand of passengers....or any latent demand.

Its been more or less certain since the 1985 transport act that a local authority can only restrict numbers of hackney carriages if it is satisfied there is no SUD.....if it isnt satisfied then it shouldnt restrict.

The best practice document issued during October last year considers it best practice not to restrict numbers.

The unfortunate fact has been written by yourself in your post....I suspect the way your LA will consider it is that they have issued 200 licenses in 15 months....they will say there must be a demand.

The only thing that your LA may listen to is either a united taxi trade or a number of passenger deaths because drivers have fallen asleep doing 80 hour weeks.

Its pants isnt it.

CC

Thanks C.C

Re the wellbeing of drivers - do the L.As have to have a duty of care towards drivers?

It strikes me as odd that it is only one way (public safety) and as I am part of the general public off duty, and I also use taxis. Could the safety issue be raised regarding lack of safety from any of us - as we are members of the public!

Basically I am thinking of another angle to come in from.

I'd be careful, because I would envisage your local authority being really interested, you'll all be faced with safe driving courses (saFED), risk assessment courses, disability courses, DSA tests...need I go on?

After all, your local authority wouldnt want unsafe drivers on its hands

regards

CC

We (Cardiff) already have to resit the driving test and do the disabilty course -neither should worry you. But! the constant issuing of licenses is a big worry, as I have stated before in Newport Gwent 70/80 hrs plus per week is quite the norm. That L.A is still issuing, just where do they stop - or dont they!

If it hadn't been for Mr Cummings greed, you wouldn't have this situation, would you? You should push for higher quality controls, limiting numbers by quantity control is dying practice.

Regards

JD

When a survey is done as to how many licences should be in force, do they include a risk assessment as to the wellbeing of existing drivers?

Also what constitutes unmet demand?

ISUD = APD x PF x GID x SSP x SF


Where:

APD = Average Passenger Delay calculated across the entire week.

PF = Peaking Factor. If passenger demand is highly peaked at night the factor takes the value of 0.5. If it is not peaked the value is 1. Following case law this provides dispensation for the effects of peaked demand on the ability of the Trade to meet that demand. To identify high peaking we are generally looking for demand at night (at weekends) to be substantially higher than demand at other times.

GID = General Incidence of Delay. This is measured as the proportion of passengers who travel in hours where the delay exceeds one minute.

SSP = Steady State Performance. The corollary of providing dispensation during the peaks in demand is that it is necessary to focus on performance during “normal” hours. This is measured by the proportion of hours during weekday daytimes when the market exhibits excess demand conditions (i.e. passenger queues form at ranks).

SF = Seasonality factor. Due to the nature of these surveys it is not possible to collect information throughout an entire year to assess the effects of seasonality. Experience has suggested that hackney demand does exhibit a degree of seasonality and this is allowed for by the inclusion of a seasonality factor. The factor is set at a level to ensure that a marginal decision either way obtained in an “untypical” month will be reversed. This factor takes a value of 1 for surveys conducted in September to November and March to June, i.e. “typical” months. It takes a value of 1.2 for surveys conducted in January and February and the longer school holidays, where low demand the absence of contract work will bias the results in favour of the hackney trade, and a value of 0.8 for surveys conducted in December during the pre Christmas rush of activity. Generally, surveys in these atypical months, and in school holidays, should be avoided.

I once tried to actually fathom out the maths equation. Done my head in.

Came to the conclusion if a council wants to de-limit, a pro de-limit survey will be submitted, if not then a anti de-limit survey will be submitted.

If the council want to add a few cabs, a few cabs will be added. If they want a load but don't want to de-limit, then more times than not that will be the outcome.

Do you get the picture I'm painting?

If it hadn't been for Mr Cummings greed, you wouldn't have this situation, would you? You should push for higher quality controls, limiting numbers by quantity control is dying practice.

Regards

JD