captain cab wrote:
Andrew Murphy, Royal Mile, Edinburgh
Wot a letter in that paper not penned by Mr Jasbar?
| Taxi Driver Online http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| Unhappy in Edinburgh writes... http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=14012 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | captain cab [ Mon May 03, 2010 3:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Unhappy in Edinburgh writes... |
Letters: Late-night taxi queues not fare if you want quiet night IT WOULD appear that Edinburgh's taxi drivers are not happy because of the private hire trade and pedicabs that are operating in our city. Are there too many taxis plying for the limited trade in our city just now? On the Royal Mile there is a taxi rank with a notice stating that no more than three taxis should be there at any given time. Yet if anyone passes this rank – especially at night – there can be as many as 25 taxis waiting for passengers. The engines run well into the wee small hours outside the houses that are there, and sometimes there are more taxis there than there are in the train station or at other taxi ranks. Who enforces the rules on taxi ranks in Edinburgh? Is it still our council or is it the taxi trade? At one time there were taxi ranks all over Edinburgh, including places such as Waterloo Place and other city centre locations. Previous councils knew exactly what was going on in the city that they were elected to run, and in the past they enforced the rules that they made. Does our council think it is right to let taxis queue up beside these residential properties without any restrictions? Or is this just because our council no longer enforces the rules? Andrew Murphy, Royal Mile, Edinburgh http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/Letters-Latenight-taxi-queues-not.6268369.jp |
|
| Author: | Stationtone [ Mon May 03, 2010 4:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
And they say there is not enough taxis on the road,when you get the public complaining about the numbers sitting on ranks the councils really should start listening. |
|
| Author: | chipper [ Mon May 03, 2010 4:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
stationtone wrote: And they say there is not enough taxis on the road,when you get the public complaining about the numbers sitting on ranks the councils really should start listen.
so should a few others as well or even open there eyes but that aint going to happen |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Mon May 03, 2010 6:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Unhappy in Edinburgh writes... |
captain cab wrote: Andrew Murphy, Royal Mile, Edinburgh
Wot a letter in that paper not penned by Mr Jasbar?
|
|
| Author: | Skull [ Mon May 03, 2010 6:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Unhappy in Edinburgh writes... |
Sussex wrote: captain cab wrote: Andrew Murphy, Royal Mile, Edinburgh Wot a letter in that paper not penned by Mr Jasbar? 
|
|
| Author: | Frank Lay [ Mon May 03, 2010 10:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Unhappy in Edinburgh writes... |
Even the public have noticed that we are not doing much, It must be bad! |
|
| Author: | Skull [ Mon May 03, 2010 10:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Unhappy in Edinburgh writes... |
Frank Lay wrote: Even the public have noticed that we are not doing much, It must be bad!
Give it six months, after the election and you'll know what bad is - the worst is yet to come. 
|
|
| Author: | Stationtone [ Mon May 03, 2010 10:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
We are Doomed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyFyAqLtHq8 |
|
| Author: | Skull [ Mon May 03, 2010 11:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
stationtone wrote: We are Doomed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyFyAqLtHq8
A lot of owners and drivers are struggling, and now is not a good time, the worst is yet to come.
Don't you worry Stationtone, there will always be those who want kissed on the a*s? 
|
|
| Author: | Jasbar [ Tue May 04, 2010 7:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Response to auld nick on the letters thread in the Evening News. Three things. First, you fall into the same mistake as the council in believing that rank occupancy somehow relates to demand levels for taxis. Yet, when there are no taxis on the rank, as there are frequently, you would not bring yourself to say that supply does need meet demand and that there should be more taxis in the fleet. You gotta make your minds up guys. What you're really saying here is that all we have to do is take a photie of a queue at an empty taxi rank and we have the evidence that demand is being unmet and our licences should be granted. Which is what we've been saying all along. You're now agreeing with us so can we have our licences now please?  Second, it should be the customers using the service who should determine the level of taxi provision, not the council. This is what happens in every other sector in the economy, why should the taxi market be any different? C'mon now, tell us all why taxis are a special case, why the same rules shouldn't apply to taxis as every other market sector. I can't wait for this answer. Third, refusing licences denies drivers the right to unfettered access to the tools of their trade, a clear breach of their human rights. Kinda like saying to a mechanic that they can learn their trade but if they want to work in it then they have to hire their spanners from the few individuals who are allowed to own them, and at the price they dictate. Crazy or what? So, if a mechanic, electrician, joiner et al can get unfettered access to the tools of their trade, why should taxi drivers be denied? C'mon, give us the answer Finally, as for Mr Murphy's complaint? Clearly a 3 taxi rank is ludicrous here. There's no reason why is couldn't be bigger, and there's no reason why it isn't enforced. Personally when the rank is overflowing I move on. Taxi ranks are little more than social clubs, the same drivers use the same ranks. Round the corner someone will likely be trying to hail a cab but can't. That's where I come in. It's called plying for hire. Only problem is the price of fuel is forcing drivers onto ranks to save costs. |
|
| Author: | captain cab [ Tue May 04, 2010 6:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Jimthefruitloop wrote: You gotta make your minds up guys. What you're really saying here is that all we have to do is take a photie of a queue at an empty taxi rank and we have the evidence that demand is being unmet and our licences should be granted. Which is what we've been saying all along. You're now agreeing with us so can we have our licences now please? No you dont have evidence, evidence is gathered over a certain period of time ya crank......as per Brighton vs. Bunch. Jimthefruitloop wrote: C'mon now, tell us all why taxis are a special case, why the same rules shouldn't apply to taxis as every other market sector. I can't wait for this answer. You should refer back to the notes you made a few years back when you were in favour of regulation......that aside, I could go on but feel I'm wasting my time and effort because your mind is closed to the issue. Jimthefruitloop wrote: So, if a mechanic, electrician, joiner et al can get unfettered access to the tools of their trade, why should taxi drivers be denied? C'mon, give us the answer
Your presuming the mechanic, electrician and joiner has a job, that aside the tools of their trade are tools, these are spanners, amp meters and probably saws. The tool of the drivers trade is owned by a taxi proprietor, just like the tool of a mechanics trade is employment in a garage. Again, I'm wasting my time even answering this because your mind is closed. CC |
|
| Author: | gusmac [ Tue May 04, 2010 6:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
captain cab wrote: The tool of the drivers trade is owned by a taxi proprietor, just like the tool of a mechanics trade is employment in a garage.
Employment in a garage is not a tool. It is an employment position or job. So is self employed mechanic, with or without premises. Many mechanics are expected to supply their own tools. No one is preventing a mechanic setting up on their own and no one says the only way to do so is to buy out an existing garage. Your analagy is flawed. |
|
| Author: | captain cab [ Tue May 04, 2010 8:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
gusmac wrote: captain cab wrote: The tool of the drivers trade is owned by a taxi proprietor, just like the tool of a mechanics trade is employment in a garage. Employment in a garage is not a tool. It is an employment position or job. So is self employed mechanic, with or without premises. Many mechanics are expected to supply their own tools. No one is preventing a mechanic setting up on their own and no one says the only way to do so is to buy out an existing garage. Your analagy is flawed. I think you would disagree with me whatever I stated. 13.— Taxi and private hire car driving licences. (1) A licence, to be known as a “taxi driver's licence” or, as the case may be, a “private hire car driver's licence”, shall, subject to subsection (2) below, be required for driving or otherwise having charge of a taxi or private hire car. 10.— Taxi and private hire car licences. (1) A licence, to be known as a “taxi licence” or, as the case may be, a “private hire car licence”, shall be required for the operation of a vehicle as— (a) a taxi; or (b) a private hire car. hmmm, two different licenses? CC |
|
| Author: | Skull [ Tue May 04, 2010 9:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
captain cab wrote: gusmac wrote: captain cab wrote: The tool of the drivers trade is owned by a taxi proprietor, just like the tool of a mechanics trade is employment in a garage. Employment in a garage is not a tool. It is an employment position or job. So is self employed mechanic, with or without premises. Many mechanics are expected to supply their own tools. No one is preventing a mechanic setting up on their own and no one says the only way to do so is to buy out an existing garage. Your analagy is flawed. I think you would disagree with me whatever I stated. 13.— Taxi and private hire car driving licences. (1) A licence, to be known as a “taxi driver's licence” or, as the case may be, a “private hire car driver's licence”, shall, subject to subsection (2) below, be required for driving or otherwise having charge of a taxi or private hire car. 10.— Taxi and private hire car licences. (1) A licence, to be known as a “taxi licence” or, as the case may be, a “private hire car licence”, shall be required for the operation of a vehicle as— (a) a taxi; or (b) a private hire car. hmmm, two different licenses? CC What the feck has that got to do with having unfettered access to the tools of your trade? |
|
| Author: | Jasbar [ Tue May 04, 2010 10:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
captain cab wrote: gusmac wrote: captain cab wrote: The tool of the drivers trade is owned by a taxi proprietor, just like the tool of a mechanics trade is employment in a garage. Employment in a garage is not a tool. It is an employment position or job. So is self employed mechanic, with or without premises. Many mechanics are expected to supply their own tools. No one is preventing a mechanic setting up on their own and no one says the only way to do so is to buy out an existing garage. Your analagy is flawed. I think you would disagree with me whatever I stated. 13.— Taxi and private hire car driving licences. (1) A licence, to be known as a “taxi driver's licence” or, as the case may be, a “private hire car driver's licence”, shall, subject to subsection (2) below, be required for driving or otherwise having charge of a taxi or private hire car. 10.— Taxi and private hire car licences. (1) A licence, to be known as a “taxi licence” or, as the case may be, a “private hire car licence”, shall be required for the operation of a vehicle as— (a) a taxi; or (b) a private hire car. hmmm, two different licenses? CC You have a talent for not having a talent CC. No one understands your wittering. Thank god you're not an employer of people. 
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|