|
The Casey Column
By
Wayne Casey
The views expressed in this column may not be those of the National Taxi Association
At the time of writing, I have no idea what the Law Commission (LC) is going to come up with in respect of taxi law. Whilst I seem to have spent many months castigating them for their (somewhat biased) approach – and by that I mean the political objective the Department for Transport (DfT) gave them. There can be little doubt they face a difficult task in making change to taxi and private hire law.
I wrote about Northern Ireland last year, the genuine cab trade there appear to have been shafted in a rather grandiose way – all vehicles are effectively taxis in a not to dissimilar way to the neighbouring Republic. It’s quite ironic – current tensions in Ulster about some daft flag taking precedence over the changing taxi law, thus making the north’s licensing institution practically indistinguishable from the south, appear to have gone practically unnoticed – never let the basic greed of some (the creation of minicab empires) get in the way of institutional change.
It seems more or less certain whatever the LC decide we are still going to be left with local authorities effectively running the taxi and private hire licensing regimes – thus making England and Wales very different to our colleagues across the Irish Sea. These same local authorities are currently switching off CCTV systems in town centres, closing public conveniences, cutting rank marshal funding and cutting staff from licensing departments, all this whilst broadly increasing licensing fees (except Plymouth Council). Of course, the fact licensing departments should be self-funding and therefore recession proof is to all intents and purposes, conveniently ignored. In terms of the LC, the funding of licensing departments has similarly been a matter deemed unworthy of much comment.
The hotchpotch of differing licensing regimes around the country further add to the confusion – locals being best placed to decide is all well and good – but what happens if the locals are obviously mental? Any business needs stability to succeed – for a business to operate in an environment where it is effectively a political football, there to be kicked if a councillor is having a bad day, simply isn’t healthy. The cab trade having to go cap in hand to people, who with no due respect, haven’t the first idea about the business they govern has always appeared rather bizarre position. Yet this position is supported, and perhaps justifiably so, in those areas where there are decent working relationships between the cab trade and local authority.
As an immediate and easy example from my home county of Cumbria where there are 6 different local authorities responsible for taxi licensing. Carlisle has a maximum age limit of 5 years for saloon hackneys, neighbouring Eden district has a 10-year-old maximum, Allerdale has 15 years, Copeland 8 years, South Lakeland 10 years and Barrow with none at all. Six different local authorities, six different sets of rules. The testing arrangements are also different in each area with some local authorities ‘outsourcing’ vehicle testing whereas others keep them strictly in house. The frequency of tests equally differs from area to area. There are also differing colour policies in each area as well as obviously different fares. It is therefore easy to suggest the public do not stand a chance of understanding the taxi vagaries in each area they happen to visit.
Of course, Cumbrian councils are no different to any other council; they saw a specific issue and went their own way about dealing with it – hence the differing licensing rules. These rules on their own may look perfectly good locally, but looking at them from a national perspective, they may look quite the opposite.
It is more or less certain that each time a local authority decides to deregulate taxi numbers some councillor with a penchant for grabbing the headline of the local rag comes up with the expressions about the ‘free market’ and councils ‘must allow market forces to prevail’. Invariably, the same councillors weep crocodile tears as stores such as HMV, Jessop’s and Comet close, thus decimating their high streets, these people have little or no regard for those practically forced into bonded labour.
Councillors are so confident in market forces in almost all cases they instigate policies that effectively shackle new entrants to finance companies (age, vehicle and colour policies). They instigate policy very often with little or no evidence that whoever enters the taxi trade will earn enough of a living to pay back their debt – let alone if such policy will make any difference to the service performed. The onus is put upon the applicant – it’s their decision and they’ll either fold or prosper. The fact that drivers often keep going until the bitter end to try to make their businesses a success – thus often working excessive hours and skimping on maintenance isn’t seriously considered. Indeed, in many cases new entrants (and existing licensees) are forced for financial reasons to join minicab radio circuits – paying many thousands of pounds per year for the privilege.
Further to the above, the issues surrounding foreign drivers are very often a highly emotive local concern. Existing drivers often question how the new recruits manage to achieve their licenses – how does someone obtain a badge when they can’t speak the language? (weird line to take when very often the drivers saying this haven’t actually spoken to them). They similarly cite foreigners who cannot write in the language, again, a quite strange conclusion unless correspondence has been exchanged. More importantly, the all round get out saying they don’t know where they’re going without the aid of satellite navigation, as if existing drivers never use sat nav. The taxi trade, in being the great rumour mill that it is, will often accuse a council of being overly politically correct and sometimes with good reason. The environment we work in, when people struggle to earn a living leads to this – the “they took our jobs” mentality. It’s easier to blame the foreigner.
I once went to the office of my local MP to raise the question of east European drivers who were becoming increasingly prevalent not only in my home City but in the country in general. I questioned the usefulness of CRB checks, which are only of any use when a person has been resident in this country for a good number of years – and of no use whatsoever, if a person has just arrived on our shores. I mentioned my view that some East Europeans were being exploited, in many cases the promise of employment wasn’t actually employment, but self employment. In many cases wages had deductions, these included repayments for training costs, rent, insurance etc. I was practically accused by the MP of being racist – it’s interesting to note that this particular ex MP’s party line has suddenly changed – of course this only did so because they’re out of power.
The reality of the situation is that East Europeans are taken on in a manner that is often openly advertised, I saw one email inviting a minicab company to “buy four get one free”, this distasteful advert wasn’t about some offer for supermarket produce, it was about human beings. These human beings sign contracts, these contracts tie them to their new UK employer for a period long enough to ensure both the minicab company and the European ‘employment agency’ recoup their costs. This would appear to some critics as nothing more than a new form of bonded labour.
The stories of unscrupulous operators purchasing houses on ‘buy to let’ mortgages, filling them with workers who effectively pay rent and therefore pay the mortgage, and are thus totally dependent upon the ‘benevolence’ of the operator for even the roof above their head are not whimsical exaggerations.
The exploitation of East European workers is essentially something that has been happening from the moment the Berlin wall came down, although it has been happening for centuries. Do a simple google search and type in “The exploitation of East European workers” and you’ll discover page upon page of cited examples of West European business exploiting East European workers. Coming from a family that arrived on the mainland in the mid 1800’s it would be negligent of me not to point out that Britain are the world experts in this. The exploitation does work in reverse – a large pool of workers wanting jobs – with people knowing they can be easily replaced – makes for a more compliant workforce, a workforce less likely to raise concern and less likely to take action.
In respect of minicabs, the self-employed status makes for an easy ‘get out jail free’ card for the operators. In one story last week (incorrectly cited as a taxi story), a minicab driver risked life and limb by racing under a level crossing barrier. The instant reaction of the minicab firm was to point to the drivers ‘self employed’ status, as if this in itself cleared the company of any responsibility.
Very little of what I have written above is likely to be addressed by the law commission, indeed, the intelligent money is on minicab firms being given more free reign.
_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin
|
Login
Register
FAQ
, ANOTHER GUINNESS 