GMB PERSPECTIVE UNHAPPY NEW YEAR?
As we start a new year the trade will be facing multiple questions and dilemmas. In October GMB Union was invited to engage with Defra,
DfT and The Welsh Government regarding a plan to create a national database that would carry details of all PHVs and taxis throughout England and Wales. In effect this is a proposal
zones but in future may be used for other purposes.
Several local authorities are looking at imple- menting these zones. However rather than just local users being charged, the govern- ment is looking at the lowest hanging fruit - namely taxis and PHVs, leaving commercial motorists to get off scot free.
The increase on a journey cost could be as much as £25.00 which would need to be met by customers. However the bottom line is that the vehicle owner, be they an operator or as in most cases the driver, will have to meet the costs.
Clearly GMB has reservations about such a charge and the issues surrounding it, such as school or hospital journey costs being impacted. This would not only affect drivers but the health and education authority bud- gets which will have to take into account these increased fees.
Overall charging of an industry that is already blighted by bad regulation, in our opinion will heap further damage upon it. We are all fully aware that the choice of vehicles on offer to the trade is limited, especially in relation to low emission options, and where they do exist the cost of such vehicles is much higher. In the case of larger vehicles, alternatives just don’t exist, leaving those who use them no other choice but diesel options.
I am in no doubt that many more local authorities will be looking to bring in clean air zones as a money making exercise along with increased parking charges for diesel vehicles, as we have seen in London boroughs. The one thing I am sure about though is the even- tual demonisation of hybrid vehicles. It only took a short time for diesel to become the vil- lain as will anything that is not zero emission.
Meanwhile, just a few days ago I was asked to attend a meeting with the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead regarding Uber and cross border issues. Whilst I could not make it I was able to phone in and have sub- sequent discussions. This subject is of concern to the licensing department and I am delighted that they are being pro-active.
Clearly this is not the case with all councils such as Welwyn Hatfield BC, which is not only encouraging non-licensed operators to offer a
20
service but is turning a blind eye to London registered vehicles covering local jobs for a Hatfield operator under the guise of the Lon- don licence they use. Our question shortly will be: Why fares for taxis have remained stag- nant for ten years and where are all the licence fees going? If you suspect your authority is not ring-fencing licence fees do drop me a line.
initially relating to clean air
To help matters and give you the reader an understanding of cross border hiring please do watch ‘Cross Border Hire’ on YouTube:
https://goo.gl/qjtF24
LONDON AND THE CONGESTION CHARGING FOR PRIVATE HIRE VEHICLES
Just before the end-of-year festivities start- ed, London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan, and TfL announced that they intended to remove the congestion charge exemption which Lon- don’s PHVs had received since Ken Livingstone had introduced the scheme dur- ing his mayoralty.
As previously mentioned the vehicle choices for those wanting an EV are either non-exis- tent, prohibitively expensive, lack range or passenger/luggage capacity. Until the charg- ing infrastructure is in place PH drivers will be in a quandary.
Currently there are just over 2,000 standard and 150 rapid charging points in London funded by TfL which will be in place by the end of the year. So even if the private hire trade switched to EVs, the biggest issue would be lack of infrastructure, and even where charge points exist London PHVs have to share them with the general public.
Instead of offering additional grants or phased introduction periods, PH drivers and fleets have basically weeks to prepare.
With the additional charge to Euro 5 PHV owners who bought vehicles expecting the full ten-year use, they will be penalised twice by having to pay the C-charge and a T-charge.
Small outlying borough operators whose drivers make occasional journeys into the zone will be affected most along with those who have contracts for schools and hospital runs. Both will now be subject to increased costs that somehow must be passed on to the customer.
In many cases where individuals cannot use public transport, these journeys will be lost and there will be a further impact to London which may well lose out economically.
Local councils, Healthcare Trusts and providers will have to make further cuts or increase budgets to bear the costs of the charges which will be passed onto them.
With discounts a £52.50 fee will be payable
by drivers or fleet owners weekly, based on daily access. Even with a £10.50 daily charge, a short journey from outside the congestion zone could see a near tripling of costs to the passenger. As there is no way of drivers knowing what the next journey will bring, should they be expected to pay out £52.50 a week without any assurance the costs of the journeys concerned will be covered?
There will also be the chancer companies who charge passengers or companies and pocket the difference. A good example of this scenario would be a driver who collects from Heathrow and transfers a passenger into London incur- ring a charge. The driver then has a further transfer to Heathrow and the passenger is charged and the driver has a further trip back from Heathrow where a passenger is again charged. There is nothing to stop this practice.
The further issue is how to legitimately charge customers where a driver may make multiple transfers in or out of London, as one cannot know in advance how many pre- booked journeys they may have to divide the cost between customers.
In reality drivers are facing an extra tax. Forc- ing small businesses out of the market and charging the low paid worker is not the way to deal with congestion. Most PHV drivers already live a hand-to-mouth existence and these new charges are likely to tip them over the edge and out of the trade to become a burden on the state.
UBER LONDON ZOMBIE
Just a week before Christmas the Court of Appeal rejected Uber’s argument and ruled that Uber drivers are indeed ‘workers’. Uber was granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. Unsurprisingly Uber’s lawyers did not attend knowing the outcome but have imme- diately advised of an intention to appeal.
Just like Zombies in a bad movie, Uber does not seem to know when to give up. The pri- mary reason for delaying the inevitable is to minimise what would be huge costs for Uber’s flawed model. Uber’s use of overseas compa- nies to bill customers and drivers to facilitate tax avoidance and smoke and mirrors con- tracts should be an unacceptable part of any licence just like Uber’s self-made jurisdictions.
FINALLY
In closing I just wanted to thank the ambu- lance crews, the NHS Staff at Harefield Hospital and the many many well-wishers following my heart attack last month.
Without an NHS I would not be here!
Steve Garelick Regional Organiser, GMB
steve.garelick@
gmb.org.uk
JANUARY 2019
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
