GMB PERSPECTIVE COVID-19: NOT THE ONLY PANDEMIC TO OUR TRADE
It’s not very easy to avoid the subject of ‘Carry on COVID’, so I won’t bother trying
not to mention it and I make no excuses for ‘it’ being part of my article this month so.....
The really distressing factor on drivers’ minds is that there is no end date to this monumental disaster to the trade - and I am sure it is the same in any trade - but that is scant comfort . I’m sure that hairdressers are just as troubled.
I have had several proprietors/drivers phon- ing me who are at their wits’ end about their future because whilst driving a cab it is near impossible to have social distancing in place. Yes - the ideal cabs at the moment are the London style ones (have you seen how many are now parked up at the garages?) or those conversions which have a solid and purpose made division. But these cost the same as an ongoing mortgage and in most areas cannot be justified on an economic basis, and the majority of the trade in the UK, whether it is a hackney carriage or PHV, is the saloon type.
This brings me on to the vast array of tem- porary ‘screen dividers’, and let’s not call them ‘safety screens’, which are popping up everywhere. Now I will stay neutral on these ‘screen dividers’ as I believe it is the right of the proprietor/driver to protect themselves in any way they can. This is why CCTV is being pushed by many councils which is at the expense of the individual proprietor. But it does appear that councils, such as in Southend, are banning any such type of screen based on what I have been told, which is:
1: “That this would render a four seater licensed vehicle as a three seater.”
So what! I dont know of any byelaws that states a hackney carriage/PHV must take a minimum of passengers.... only that it is restricted to a maximum of passengers.
2: “Southend Borough Council’s reason was this would force a group of four to split up and have to take two cabs”
Now because I am a fit and proper person and such a saint that I am even teetotal, I have had to restrain myself from putting a
54
lot of expletives all in a nice little row, which would even be in upper case, and dare I say in bold as well with a few dropped in excla- mation marks!
Furthermore I was even told that when a Southend Borough Council licensing officer had a car in for licensing he/she wouldn’t go near it. This is quite ironic when there seems to be little sympathy when the drivers want to protect themselves.
If none of this is true, then I invite Southend Borough Council to refute any or all of what I have been told and I will make an apology in the July edition of PHTM.
However if any of this is true, then quite frankly, shame on the council.
But back to the screens themselves; I was alerted to a company which was advertising its ‘safety screen’ on a Facebook page along the lines of “save lives”, “honestly is elimi- nating lose (sic) of life” and “stop the spread”. This really annoyed me because at the moment the trade is desperate!
There was a promotional video showing the screen, which is still available to watch, and to be honest I would be totally embarrassed to have such a contraption in my cab. It was literally made up of a wooden two-by-two frame with what appeared to be wrapped in insulation tape with a piece of Perspex screwed to it. All for £310.
I made a point of sending this company a message telling them that the claims they are making on “saving lives” and all the other similar declarations must be taken down and these were eventually removed. I also questioned the suitability of having a construction of a wooden two-by-two frame that went across the back of the
headrests and suggested that no council in its right mind would ever approve such a contraption, let alone get approved cover from the respective insur- ance companies on such modification of the vehi- cle. If any council approved this type of modification then it seri- ously need to look at its own standards. I am sure
the company had every good intention but that design and construction needs to go back the drawing board.
However, I have to say that I have seen some really smart looking ‘screen dividers’ where no such claims of “saving lives” have been mentioned, and at a much lower price.
For many years our ‘Blue Book’ in Brighton & Hove has allowed us to have a ‘safety screen’ although this has always been regarded as a screen to protect the driver of a saloon cab. This was of such a design that it protected an attack from the back (I could have done with one last year). It covered the back of the seat to stop the seat being punctured with a knife and came up the headrest and slightly curved around to give a bit of pro- tection to the drivers head/face. However, I only ever saw one of these being used and I don’t think it was used for that long.
A few weeks ago a local cab company got together with a supplier and produced a one piece ‘screen divider’ for between £180- £200, with no outrageous claims and the council approved this for use providing there is a written undertaking that the mod- ification has been accepted by the respective insurance company for each cab. I believe there are around forty cabs with this now in place here.
All local councils must look at these simple screens as an option for drivers, but take heed at the horrible ‘two-by-two’ wooden frame contraptions. In fact whilst typing this out, PHTM has posted news that Leeds City Council is actually paying 50 per cent towards the fitting of screen dividers. I real- ly believe in putting councils to task but this must also be balanced by applauding councils who go the extra mile. So well done Leeds City Council!
JUNE 2020
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 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112
