Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sat May 02, 2026 8:20 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 179 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
GA wrote:
I said nothing about reducing private hire drivers earnings.


I was under the impression you were in favour of introducing mandatory working hours hence my assumption that the two go hand in hand. If you are not in favour, which your answer would suggest then I retract the inference that you were.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
JD wrote:
GA wrote:
I said nothing about reducing private hire drivers earnings.


I was under the impression you were in favour of introducing mandatory working hours hence my assumption that the two go hand in hand. If you are not in favour, which your answer would suggest then I retract the inference that you were.

Regards

JD


I'm in favour of reducing the working hours BOTH HC and PH drivers HAVE to do in order to earn a decent living.

But I accept that reducing hours will, at the moment, reduce earnings and that is an issue that needs to be addressed ......................... I have previously offered some suggestions that may open the door, but I don't offer them or anything else as a total solution.

B. Lucky :D

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 11:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
GA wrote:
JD wrote:
GA wrote:
I said nothing about reducing private hire drivers earnings.


I was under the impression you were in favour of introducing mandatory working hours hence my assumption that the two go hand in hand. If you are not in favour, which your answer would suggest then I retract the inference that you were.

Regards

JD


I'm in favour of reducing the working hours BOTH HC and PH drivers HAVE to do in order to earn a decent living.

But I accept that reducing hours will, at the moment, reduce earnings


Well now I'm confused. first I said you are in favour of reducimg working hours and you blew hot and cold and said you are not, and now you state you are in favour of reducing working hours. I'm afraid I'm going to have to retract my retraction because no matter which way you look at it less hours means a reduction in earnings.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 12:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
JD wrote:
GA wrote:
JD wrote:
GA wrote:
I said nothing about reducing private hire drivers earnings.


I was under the impression you were in favour of introducing mandatory working hours hence my assumption that the two go hand in hand. If you are not in favour, which your answer would suggest then I retract the inference that you were.

Regards

JD


I'm in favour of reducing the working hours BOTH HC and PH drivers HAVE to do in order to earn a decent living.

But I accept that reducing hours will, at the moment, reduce earnings


Well now I'm confused. first I said you are in favour of reducimg working hours and you blew hot and cold and said you are not, and now you state you are in favour of reducing working hours. I'm afraid I'm going to have to retract my retraction because no matter which way you look at it less hours means a reduction in earnings.

Regards

JD


WTF are you going on about.

What I am saying is very simple.

Drivers work the hours they NEED to work they do not work the hours they WANT to work.

The reduction of hours in the current climate will lead to less takings.

I doubt very much therefore that drivers would work 18 hour shifts if they were making a decent living by working 8 ................... well at least not every day.

What is it YOU want JD ........................ or do you just want to comment on other peoples opinions without (as usual) offering your own.

B. Lucky :D

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
GA wrote:


WTF are you going on about.

What I am saying is very simple.

Drivers work the hours they NEED to work they do not work the hours they WANT to work.

The reduction of hours in the current climate will lead to less takings.

I doubt very much therefore that drivers would work 18 hour shifts if they were making a decent living by working 8 ................... well at least not every day.

What is it YOU want JD ........................ or do you just want to comment on other peoples opinions without (as usual) offering your own.

B. Lucky :D


ok I take it you are not in favour of reducing working hours therefore I retract my retraction that retracted my first retraction and reimpose this new retraction, lol.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
some will NEVER make enough money, its called greed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
GA wrote:

I can start you off -

Gateshead - 3 times as many PH than HC. Deregulated area.
PH numbers increasing at a greater rate than HC.

B. Lucky :D


Just a few examples of Taxis outnumbering private hire in unrestricted areas.

Taxis, PHVs in England & Wales 2007

Taxis P/H/V

Northumberland Taxis 483 P/H/V 338

Castle Morpeth 86 46
Tynedale 158 64
Darlington UA 180 47
Chester-le-Street 92 50
Sedgefield 340 35
Wear Valley 172 36
Redcar & Cleveland UA 300 129
Stockton-on-Tees UA 292 218
Allerdale 135 54
Carlisle 205 56
Copeland 150 35
Eden 90 50
South Lakeland 192 38
Rossendale 155 30
Macclesfield 429 115
Craven 156 10
Hambleton 156 48
Ryedale 37 23
North Lincs UA 215 52
Amber Valley 145 41
Derbyshire Dales 93 57
Erewash 209 26
High Peak 130 96
Ashfield 125 65
Broxtowe 144 40
Gedling 210 59
Newark & Sherwood 81 20
Boston 89 19
South Holland 121 87
South Kesteven 255 24
West Lindsey 63 49
Rutland UA 39 19
Harborough 69 44
Hinckley & Bosworth 105 12
Melton 54 25
Oadby & Wigston 109 22
Daventry 53 16
Cannock Chase 235 8
Oswestry 103 7
Coventry 629 195
Worcestershire 736 174
Worcester 205 79
Wychavon 106 76
Wyre Forest 98 34
North Warwicks. 67 39
Nuneaton 180 72
Warwick 165 0
Breckland 133 43
Great Yarmouth 154 57
Cambridge 282 135
East Cambridge 83 60
Fenland 250 104
Forest Heath 129 30
Mid Suffolk 73 13
Waveney 142 30
Broxbourne 226 114
Dacorum 219 141
East Hertfordshire 169 32
North Herts. 225 107
St Albans 222 103
Watford 213 92
Brentwood 209 42
Maldon 79 12
Rochford 215 33
Tendring 313 33

The list goes on and on.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:22 pm
Posts: 14152
Location: Wirral
How many of those HC taxis are also on PH systems?

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
toots wrote:
How many of those HC taxis are also on PH systems?


Do you mean radio systems? I don't think hackney carriage drivers call their radio systems "private hire systems".

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
toots wrote:
How many of those HC taxis are also on PH systems?



you mean there are HC-only and PH-only circuits?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24391
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
JD wrote:
GA wrote:

I can start you off -

Gateshead - 3 times as many PH than HC. Deregulated area.
PH numbers increasing at a greater rate than HC.

B. Lucky :D


Just a few examples of Taxis outnumbering private hire in unrestricted areas.

Taxis, PHVs in England & Wales 2007

Taxis P/H/V

Northumberland Taxis 483 P/H/V 338

Castle Morpeth 86 46
Tynedale 158 64
Darlington UA 180 47
Chester-le-Street 92 50
Sedgefield 340 35
Wear Valley 172 36
Redcar & Cleveland UA 300 129
Stockton-on-Tees UA 292 218
Allerdale 135 54
Carlisle 205 56
Copeland 150 35
Eden 90 50
South Lakeland 192 38
Rossendale 155 30
Macclesfield 429 115
Craven 156 10
Hambleton 156 48
Ryedale 37 23
North Lincs UA 215 52
Amber Valley 145 41
Derbyshire Dales 93 57
Erewash 209 26
High Peak 130 96
Ashfield 125 65
Broxtowe 144 40
Gedling 210 59
Newark & Sherwood 81 20
Boston 89 19
South Holland 121 87
South Kesteven 255 24
West Lindsey 63 49
Rutland UA 39 19
Harborough 69 44
Hinckley & Bosworth 105 12
Melton 54 25
Oadby & Wigston 109 22
Daventry 53 16
Cannock Chase 235 8
Oswestry 103 7
Coventry 629 195
Worcestershire 736 174
Worcester 205 79
Wychavon 106 76
Wyre Forest 98 34
North Warwicks. 67 39
Nuneaton 180 72
Warwick 165 0
Breckland 133 43
Great Yarmouth 154 57
Cambridge 282 135
East Cambridge 83 60
Fenland 250 104
Forest Heath 129 30
Mid Suffolk 73 13
Waveney 142 30
Broxbourne 226 114
Dacorum 219 141
East Hertfordshire 169 32
North Herts. 225 107
St Albans 222 103
Watford 213 92
Brentwood 209 42
Maldon 79 12
Rochford 215 33
Tendring 313 33

The list goes on and on.

Regards

JD



that ignores the fact that in some areas the main point of a PH plated vehicle is to carry 8 passengers and be able to charge more as against fixed HC meter rates


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 4:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:31 pm
Posts: 1761
Location: Commonsense Country
JD wrote:
Just a few examples of Taxis outnumbering private hire in unrestricted areas.

Taxis, PHVs in England & Wales 2007

Taxis P/H/V

Northumberland Taxis 483 P/H/V 338

Castle Morpeth 86 46
Tynedale 158 64

The list goes on and on.

Regards

JD


Castle Morpeth and Tynedale are both in Northumberland.

I would also point out that -

Firstly there doesn't seem to be any City Councils in your list.

Secondly, the authorities you list probably haven't seen HC numbers overtake PH numbers since deregulation and I would suggest very few of these councils have ever regulated numbers.

I can though tell you that I said few because Chester le Street still restrict numbers and have always had significantly more HC than PH ................. but there again in Chester le Street the vast majority of drivers work through an office.

This shows numbers not growth, and your one tier crusade should show growth in HC and reduction in PH to hold water.

B. Lucky :D

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 4:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 8:15 pm
Posts: 9170
Driving hours is just the Tip of the Iceberg for us Small Operators...as well as having to Drive all hours to make a living theres Many more Hours spent on Car Care, Car Maintainance, Paper work and other sundry jobs...for ever 40 hours driving im guessing theres another 20 Non driving hours as part of the Business...not to mention all the hours spent waiting on people. 100 hour weeks are nowt...it aint even Minimum wages we Self employed Owner Drivers get...but do we grumble????


Of course we do !!!!!!!!! :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:07 am
Posts: 2596
Location: Hampshire (HC)
GA wrote:
JD wrote:
Just a few examples of Taxis outnumbering private hire in unrestricted areas.

Taxis, PHVs in England & Wales 2007

Taxis P/H/V

Northumberland Taxis 483 P/H/V 338

Castle Morpeth 86 46
Tynedale 158 64

The list goes on and on.

Regards

JD


Castle Morpeth and Tynedale are both in Northumberland.

I would also point out that -

Firstly there doesn't seem to be any City Councils in your list.

Secondly, the authorities you list probably haven't seen HC numbers overtake PH numbers since deregulation and I would suggest very few of these councils have ever regulated numbers.

I can though tell you that I said few because Chester le Street still restrict numbers and have always had significantly more HC than PH ................. but there again in Chester le Street the vast majority of drivers work through an office.

This shows numbers not growth, and your one tier crusade should show growth in HC and reduction in PH to hold water.

B. Lucky :D


A neighbouring borough, Gosport, deregulated recently. There appears to be a reduction in the number of PH and an increase in HC.

An FOI request for numbers on, say, 1st January each year since 2003 would show you the trends. Also make a diary note to get the figures each year for the next few years.

My feeling is that HC will increase while PH declines due to the added attraction of being able to respond to a hail, whilst still having the benefits of a radio circuit.

Our borough has a massive number of HC as against PH. We are a radio circuit of 70 owner/driver vehicles, all HC, all making a living. [at the moment!!]

As I have attempted to elucidate on numerous occasions over the years, numbers, working hours and earnings will all follow the rules of supply and demand. An imbalance in one factor will result in individuals entering or leaving the market until the equilibrium is restored. No one factor can be artificially controlled without affecting the remaining factors in a market where the consumer has a choice, ie buses, walking, own cars, etc.

In other words, you will either accept the market conditions dictating your hours and earnings or you will leave the business. Simple as that.

/waffle over!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57356
Location: 1066 Country
Out of the 13 district councils in Sussex only 4 now restrict. :D

Out of those four Hastings, Eastbourne and Mid Sussex have loads more PH than HC.

B&H has a few more HC than PH.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 179 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 228 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group