Taxi Driver Online

No surprise that the 'some taxis' in the headline actually means HCs


Why some Southampton taxis will now need card machines

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/244188 ... -machines/

Some taxis in Southampton will now be required to have working card machines for customers and drivers will be subject to random drug screening under new rules.

The card machine move applies to hackney carriages in the city after concerns were expressed by the industry.

Members of the city council’s licensing committee heard the requirement would prevent a “minority” of drivers who used the lack of a card machine to refuse short trips.

A new drug testing policy for all taxi drivers in the city will also come into force.

Councillors approved the changes to the local authority’s rules for taxis, along with adding the previously stand alone policy on taxi cameras into the main policy document.

Phil Bates, licensing service manager, told the committee at a meeting on Wednesday, June 26, that the card machine policy had been successfully trialled within the docks.

He said the request to bring in the change had come from the trade during forum meetings.

Another change means customers paying by card must be able to identify the vehicle, or driver, or registered limited company that took the payment on their bank statements.

A further consultation would be needed to introduce the card machine requirement for private hire vehicles.

On the subject of implementing a drug testing policy, Mr Bates said: “Very rarely, thankfully, we get some information that suggests a driver might be taking some drugs.

“Without any policy, it makes it very difficult for officers to be able to follow a process that satisfies keeping the officer safe and offers protections for the drivers as well.”

Senior licensing officer Russell Hawkins said they did not think there was a “big problem” but the team was not “sitting on our hands”.

“What we are looking to do is be able to screen and test as we see fit during operations or during periods of time that we see fit,” Mr Hawkins said.

“That won’t be every time a driver comes into us. It won’t be every time a driver renews.

“It may be at random roadside when we are conducting test purchases. It may be when we have got specific intelligence. Those situations will come to us as they arise.”

He told councillors they were not being presented with the specifics of how the licensing team would carry out screening and testing, instead the mechanism of being able to do it as part of the policy.

“It is a job for us to ensure public safety,” Mr Hawkins added. “It is a job for us to ensure the drivers are fit and proper and it’s a safeguard the public should expect us to be aware of and deal with.”

A consultation on the changes saw them all supported by at least 63 per cent of respondents.

The committee also approved a slightly amended style of door sticker for private hire vehicles.

A full switch to the new layout, which has a border line and rounded corners, will be left for the trade to communicate with the council when they believe the old stickers should be replaced.

For the time being, both sticker designs will be permitted.

Have added some words there to what's said in the article. The original makes it sound like the drivers genuinely don't have readers, whereas I suspect they do, but just claim they don't.

Because otherwise the reference wouldn't be to just short trips - they'd be refusing all trips, even the £200 ones

You should see some of the passengers, pal

Not sure what to think of this, and wondered whether maybe the privacy stuff in the response to the CCTV requirement had gotten mixed up with the drugs. But read this literally and certainly sounds like one or more drivers think drug-taking is none of the council's business


‘Dismay’ at Southampton taxi driver responses to drug test

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/244193 ... drug-test/

Concerns have been raised over responses made by a ‘minority’ in the taxi industry to introducing new rules for drivers.

Southampton City Council’s licensing committee approved several changes to the taxi policy.

This included requiring hackney carriages to have a working card machine, introduction of a formal drug testing policy for all drivers and moving the stand-alone taxi camera policy into the main rules document.

Conservative councillor Jeremy Moulton said some of the feedback to the proposals “slightly concerned me”.

In relation to the drug testing policy, Cllr Moulton said a driver had said “words to the effect of ‘what I do in my private life is nothing to do with you’.”

Speaking at the licensing committee meeting on Wednesday, June 26, Cllr Moulton said: “Drugs stay in your system for a while and if people are taking drugs, even if it was a day or so before they are then driving, that does potentially present a danger to customers.

“Just the general attitude from some of the comments, who are licensed taxi drivers, caused me some degree of concern. That’s just an observation.”

The council’s licensing service manager, Phil Bates, said some of the responses also caught his eye.

He highlighted an extract from one comment, which covered taxis needing to have a permanently operating camera, even when the vehicle is not being used as a taxi.

The response read: “I believe that the personal privacy of the driver always outweighs the safeguarding of passengers/drivers.”

Mr Bates said he was “just dismayed” by this consultation response.

The committee was told that a taxi remains a licensed vehicle at all times, even when it is being used by the driver for personal use.

“It is very disappointing,” Mr Bates said. “What I will say is I am of the opinion that those comments are in the minority and the extreme.

“I think the vast majority of our drivers do go out and do a really good job, diligently, without taking drugs etc, but as in all walks of life there is an element that will abuse it and, unfortunately, some of them have voiced it and they don’t do their trade any favours in voicing it.”

Mr Bates added: “If we knew who it was, we would be doing what we could to take action but the consultation is done anonymously so we get honest feedback.

“If we do ever find out who it is, as I say, we will be taking steps and they may well end up being the first person that ends up going through the drug testing process.”

I wonder if the comment was actually about the need for a camera at all times, even when not being used for business?

I mean, if it's such a big deal to the council in Southampton, how many other councils in the country require such recording?

Wolverhampton?

Not sure what direct relevance the Cardiff trade has to do with Southampton.

Or maybe this is the Reform headbanger in Clacton, offering his contribution on the Southampton trade via Cardiff

Very strange comments from drivers.

A taxi or PHV is never a private car, and the council will not require drivers to produce footage for times when they are not working unless the police request it for more serious matters.

Drivers do have privacy rights, but if a council receives a complaint from a punter then they are duty-bound to investigate it, and that will include requesting footage of the alleged incident at the time of that alleged incident. Councils won't request footage of when you are out and about with your family, in fact it would be unlawful, IMO, to request footage without good reason.

If the privacy issue relates to drug taking, and I would really hope that isn't the case, then those drivers can go f*** themselves.

Drugs stay in your system for days after they are taken, and the effects of drugs stay in your system for days after they are taken.

We should all be applauding councils that take drug taking seriously.

_________________
IDFIMH