Editorial Comment...


ince it was first introduced some five or six years ago, NVQ or VRQ training for taxi and private hire has spread to all parts of the country (London excepted), and some councils have even made it compulsory. Obviously the training, or rather the rush by some councils to make it compulsory has split the trade, and to put it mildly, some taxi and private hire drivers (some may argue that the majority of ‘em) are positively hostile to the idea - In fact in our experience, opinions generally range from waste of money to “I’ve been a cab driver for 25 years, what can they teach me?” variety.


S


However, it must be realised that the taxi and private hire trade isn’t being singled out, there is a whole swathe of jobs that traditionally had little or no training because the previous government wanted all workers to have either academic or vocational qualifications, furthermore we believe that the present government are not about to abandon this policy.


Some of you out there might ask what is the government up to. Like everything governments do there is the official version and there is an alternative reality because (and this may come as something of a surprise to some of you) politicians don’t always tell the truth. About a decade ago, a report by Lord Leitch concluded that the UK had the least (or should that be the Leach) educated workforce in the developed world, and it was on the back of this report that the NVQ/VRQ on the job assessment was expanded. NVQs was also seen as a way to ‘flag up’ if a candidate had problems with numeracy and literacy, and then ‘signpost’ them to an appropriate college course, and was seen by the government as a cost effective way of monitoring, then closing the skills gap that exists between the UK and our competitors.


NVQs-What’ They Gonna Do When The Money Runs Out?


So far all very worthy - until we examine an alterative reality. We take the view that NVQ/VRQ is about accountability rather than teaching someone to be a better cab driver, milkman or club doorman, because by a curious coincidence the Corporate Manslaughter (and the lesser known provisions of corporate responsibility) came into being in 2007 and although it hasn’t had the impact that the law has in the U.S – just give it time. If a cab driver has an accident in America, the lawyers sue everything that moves - the driver, the company they work for, the authority that issued the ‘badge’, probably the car manufacturer if they can. The No-Win- No-Fee legal machine is in its infancy on this side of the pond, however we’re sure that everyone is aware that the Americans are way, way ahead of the game when it comes to litigation (Americanisms such as ‘Ambulance chaser’ are now firmly established in our vocabulary).


“


the lump of sugar that sweetens the


pill of training for taxi and private hire drivers is the fact that it is fully funded


”


Let’s give you an example: A person hires a cab or private hire, and proceeds to load an expensive plasma TV into the back,


now we are certain that 99% of taxi and private hire drivers do not have Transit of Goods insurance policy (which is different and a lot more expensive than public liability insurance). The TV is severely damaged in an accident, and if our legal system goes the way of the States, the driver can argue that he wasn’t aware of the insurance requirements, and the injured party can sue the Local Authority and/or the taxi firm for negligence for letting loose an untrained driver onto an unsuspecting public. And the DRIVER (obviously with the help of a decent brief) can sue the Authority for failing in a ‘duty of care’ towards him or her. However, if the driver has undertaken a NVQ or similar, it will be a case of “M’Lud the driver was well aware of the implications because he/she attended a course on the carriage of goods and parcels on the 17th


September, and


here is a copy of the lesson that he/she signed for” Now doesn’t that make sense?


The lump of sugar that sweetens the pill of training for taxi and private hire drivers is the fact that it is fully funded, however we would be extremely surprised, to say the least, if the funding isn’t affected by the ruthless cost cutting that the present government have embarked on. So if the funding is cut where does it leave drivers that work in a Licensing Authority and have a policy of a NVQ qualification being a requirement of licence? Now THAT is a good question: Since the Bournemouth case (four drivers appealed against the requirement to have a NVQ as a condition of licence and lost), it is obvious that any driver that wishes to go down the legal road is doomed to failure - they might as well donate the money to charity.


Nevertheless, we suggest that any driver that is in this predicament should examine the wording used when your licensing committee voted it in and if the committee


taxitalk 3


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36