|
AGM
Propositions and "going home"
I hate to hark back to the AGM that by
now is but a distant memory for those
117 hardy souls who turned up, but there
has been an outcome from a successful
proposition. This was put by Stelios
Stylianides (C27) and seconded by Paul
Soteriou (P89). They are both nice guys
and put forward their proposition
amendment of returning to the previous
‘going home’ system because they
believed it was the best way forward for
the majority of drivers.
I spoke to Stelios on the phone prior to the AGM and he explained
what he and Paul were looking for – that
is for unlimited rejects for up to one
hour before going home. Stelios
explained that up until then, the going
home procedure would only offer you
trips in the back-up zones to where you
lived. He said that if, as an example,
you lived in Ilford, many drivers would
be happy to accept a trip to Palmers
Green and leave themselves with a
25-minute run along the North Circular
to get home. Under the old system, that
option would not have been offered. He
asked if he could explain his
proposition to drivers via Call
Sign and of course I agreed.
Their new system doesn’t suit me because at around the time I go
home, there could be anything up to 50
uncovered trips in EC5 with one of them
surely helping me out – even if it
doesn’t go that far but just helps with
the cost of the day’s diesel whilst not
taking me out of the way of my homeward
journey. Consequently, I voted against
it.
However, this is a democratic organisation and the amendment went
through and I accept it. The result is
that the mad rush of EC5 jobs is now
taking longer to cover because the trips
are no longer "unmasked" if a driver on
a Code 3 bids. The same applied
to E140 at Cabot Square. Again, that is
how the majority voted and we have to
abide by it.
What bothers me though, is that neither Stelios or Paul actually
turned up on the day to put forward
their proposition. There is nothing in
the rules that says they have to, but
surely it must be wrong that any member
can put forward a proposition that could
affect so many drivers and then not turn
up?
I sincerely hope there was not any serious reason why they didn’t
appear, but no one on the
Board had heard from them and so it was "debated" in their |
absence – debated not
really being the operative word because
both speakers that got up were against
the proposition alteration.
Perhaps I’m just miffed, but I really think that if you want to put
forward a proposition, then you should
be prepared to turn up on the day or
send along someone who knows and agrees
your point of view to speak for you.
Too many cabs?
I’m somewhat
confused by a quote from LTDA General
Secretary Bob Oddy in a recent issue of
Private Hire and Courier.
Bob does such a lot of good – and
probably unappreciated - work for this
trade, but like Brian Rice, most of that
is taken for granted while we look for
the one thing we can catch him out on.
Why? I haven’t a clue but the need is
there and I plead just as guilty as
anyone else. And speaking of that…!
We’ve read Bob in Taxi Newspaper many times about how
we have too many cabs and that we don’t
want the Knowledge speeded up (it is
currently an average of 3.5 years). My
feeling of confusion arose when reading
the PH&C version of how the "…public
condemn black cab fare increase."
London’s taxi fares are admittedly the
highest in the world, but passengers do
get a far better quality service for
their money.
So when PH&C asked Bob Oddy for a quote of whether we were ripping
off passengers, he replied:
"The cab fares are excellent value. If they were too dear, there would
not be a shortage of cabs."
Sounds about right to me except that
the LTDA constantly claim that there are
already too many cabs in London. Both
views can’t be right?
Black is black…
Towards the end of last year, I wrote of
the concerns I shared with Stuart Pessok,
Editor of Taxi Newspaper, about
the use of the term "black" in relation
to describing London Taxis. LTI were
(and still are) prime users of the
expression "black cabs" in |
their
press releases and amazingly, even the
PCO are not averse to using it! And of
course, we all know how we are described
by the national newspapers – black cab
sometimes being the polite version!
In a later Editorial I suggested that whilst I was still
against its use, I was becoming more and
more inundated with press releases etc
referring to us as black cabs, that I
wondered whether I should just give up
the ghost and leave Stuart to carry on
the battle.
Recently a driver spoke to me outside JPM whilst we were waiting
for our passengers and mentioned my view
on the subject. He told me a story about
a passenger he had picked up who
happened to be the Marketing Manager for
a large company. They had a pleasant
conversation during the journey over the
use of the term "black cabs."
"Why," the passenger asked, "does the most famous and respected
taxi business in the world throw away
its biggest advantage?" He went on to
explain to the DaC driver that the
expression "black cabs" can and only
does apply to London Taxis and that so
far as marketing was concerned, you
could not put a value on it. "Black
cabs," he went on, "are known all over
the world as referring to London Taxis
and you lot want to get rid of it! You
must be mad! Look how many tourists
coming to London are advised to use
black cabs only?"
He also went on to query why we were using different colour taxis
when black is the traditional colour?
So far as different colour cabs are concerned, the cork is out of
the bottle and can’t be put back, but is
he right about the expression "black
cabs" being an advantage that we appear
not to want? Perhaps you can give your
view…
Still
here?
Last month I mentioned that DaC driver
Grant Davis (L39) threatened to
leave DaC if AGM propositions he claimed
to be associated with were rejected. As
we now know, they were all defeated, but
you’ll be relieved to know that Grant is
still here having said in The
Badge that if drivers left, it
would play into the hands of PH. He adds
that the only way is to stay and fight.
So that’s all right then – he was only
joking!
Alan Fisher
callsignmag@aol.com |
