Taxi Driver Online

Tried to read this earlier on the Southampton Daily Echo's website, but it looked like it had been pulled

But it's one of those replicated on the Yahoo News site, so it's still up there.

And maybe the reason the local source pulled it is because it's utter nonsense

It says HCs can't currently do private hire work

But I suspect it's really all about the difficulty of HCs working with Uber in terms of surge-pricing, or whatever it's called these days.

Anyway, interesting that the HCs in Soton want to work with Uber at all, which isn't how it's supposed to work. But the reason they want to work with Uber is because, er, Uber is taking all their work


Taxi drivers want ability to do private hire work after Uber ‘influx’ in city

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/taxi-drivers- ... 02355.html

Taxi drivers in Southampton are calling for changes to be made to allow them to carry out private hire bookings in the city.

Councillors were told an “influx” of private hire vehicles, including those operating for Uber, had a “detrimental impact” on the trade.

Currently the city’s licensed hackney carriages are not permitted to undertake private hire bookings within Southampton, while private hire vehicles from out of the area can freely operate in the area.

Speaking at a recent city council licensing committee, Ian Hall, chair of the Southampton Hackney and Private Hire Association, asked for changes to be made to help taxi drivers sustain a viable income.

Mr Hall said: “Southampton City Council licensing department has allowed a large number of Uber private hire vehicles and likely others from various companies to operate within the city.

“This influx has had a detrimental effect on the local hackney carriage trade.

“A key issue is that Southampton licenced hackney carriages are not permitted to undertake Uber or other private hire jobs within the city, while out of area private hire vehicles can freely operate here.

“This imbalance has caused significant financial strain on the local taxi drivers and vehicle owners.”

Making an amendment to the city’s table of fares would enable a hackney carriage to take local private hire bookings from private hire operators.

Russell Hawkins, council licensing manager, put forward the suggestion of such an amendment to a taxi forum meeting in June.

At the licensing committee meeting on Wednesday, November 12, Mr Hawkins said: “I installed the idea of it earlier this year and it’s building fruition.

“I think that’s now gaining support amongst the hackneys.”

Perry McMillan, a Unite the Union representative with a taxi licence in Southampton, said: “We have had communication from a large company regarding that matter.

“Anything that helps hackneys get work we are more than happy with.”

Mr Hawkins told councillors it was a case of “watch this space” as the matter related to the table of fares rather than the statement of taxi licensing policy, which was being considered and approved by the committee.

Which surely indicates what it's really all about - but it'll be about tariffs as opposed to taking private hire bookings per se.

But as per what was said in an another unrelated local thread, amending the tariff card to accomodate higher private hire pricing probably wouldn't be legal. Assuming, of course, anyone challenged it

At least I assume they want the ability to work with Uber, but that's about as directly as the article puts it.


Or maybe it's other large legacy circuits in the city they want to work for, who have fare structures higher than the HC tariffs...

Anyway, assuming the Daily Echo publishes a rehashed piece it all might become a bit clearer then.

Unless, of course, Southampton has a very odd policy whereby HCs can only work the streets...

Which would probably be illegal as well

But this seems to be the current tariff card, and there's nothing remotely like that on there...

So I suspect the amendment they want to make to the card relates to the ability to charge more than the HC tariffs on pre-booked runs

https://www.southampton.gov.uk/media/03 ... -fares.pdf

Well the Echo's article is back up, and it's just the same as the one above, so it's not clear why it disappeared in the first place. And, of course, the whole pre-booking thing is still unclear.

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/256313 ... uthampton/

But, I mean, what item in the tariff card linked to above needs amending so that HCs can do pre-booked work?

And PHTM have simply rehashed the whole thing, so no light shed there either.

I also looked on the council's website for the minutes referred to last night, but could only find the agenda for the meeting, and not the minutes. But, as the article above makes clear, the meeting was all about the general policy anyway, and the pre-booking thing wasn't even due to be discussed. And the remarks made about the tariff card thing might not even make the minutes anyway, I'd guess.

There are quite a few comments on the Echo's site, and just the usual stuff, but maybe this one illustrates what it's all about:

Given that hackneys have been able to do the above for nearly 180 years, I think it's a case of wanting to charge different fares than apply on the tariff sheet.

I suppose in theory they could charge any PH fares that don't exceed the tariff card. But I suspect they want to charge more than the approved rate for PH work.

Good luck with that.

_________________
IDFIMH

Someone has more recently posted this on the Daily Echo's comments section:


Which effectively confirms what me and Sussex have said above. What a waste of time...

(And the Unite HC rep in Southampton is called McMillan, so the pseudonym used above suggests it's maybe him. Which obviously wouldn't be a surprise anyway.)

I am so confused about this article

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

But not as confused as the Daily Echo and the councillors

Or I was when the Captain posted his York cross-border assessment.

_________________
IDFIMH