JD wrote:
GA wrote:
The point gusamc is that all the representative groups stated they would need to consult with their membership
Who told you that?
The mere fact that they are representative groups clearly signifies that the membership would need to be consulted, this has been accepted as a fact within the reports
JD wrote:
Quote:
I have no idea whether the consultations have been held
Tell me, who is the Liverpool T&G going to consult with? Who is Taxi Talk going to consult with? Who is the NNTTG going to consult with? Who is the NPHA going to consult with and who is the NTA going to consult with?
When you find out the answers let us know.
Liverpool T&G .................. is that the same as Brighton GMB.
Taxi-talk are not a representative organisation so I have no idea why you would suggest that they had a membership to consult with .................. but an appraisal of what was said will be appearing in the next edition, I'm sure of that.
The NPHA, and NTA will I'm sure consult with their membership and the NTTG will consult with members of their group.
What makes you think they won't ................... other than your asumptions and second guess work we are all supposed to take as fact by your word.
JD wrote:
Quote:
but I bet they will have been done before the next meeting.
Sounds as though you already know who these guys are going to consult with therefore we shouldn't have to wait long for your response.
The answer to your insane question is their members
JD wrote:
Quote:
but as I'm no longer a member of any representative organisations
Welcome to the silent majority, I was informed that Gateshead T&G members and Gateshead NTA members were excluded from the consultation process. Therefore it is no wonder that not one taxi driver in Gateshead has heard of these proposals or what they mean for them but maybe you can inform the local cab trade at some stage of the game just why they are being excluded?
Excluded from what ................ from discussions ..................... NOTHING has been proposed to anyone .................. its just your moronic failure to seek facts, relying on your asumptions of what "might" happen.
JD wrote:
Quote:
I'm glad that they are all discussing issues regarding the whole trade and that can only be good for the trade generally.
What issues are they discussing that are beneficial to the Taxi Trade? I'm keen to know what you mean by, "can only be good for the trade", especially after you reading the minutes of these meetings and then showing your ignorance as to the content.
Maybe you can out-do Mr T and explain to the taxi trade just what he, taxitalk and every other entity involved in these closed shop proceedings have so far failed to do and that is explain to the taxi trade the "positives" and "negatives" of these proposals?
Or perhaps you, like all the rest, don't have a clue?
Regards
JD
What do you suggest then JD ............... 250,000+ people in a room disussing the issues relating to this industry .................. thats going to achieve a lot isn't it.
The fact remains that the MOM group is made up of all representative groups as well as other individuals and organisations who can "bring something to the party".
As far as them "explaining" their discussions with the taxi trade ............... why ................ the vast majority of the taxi trade is quite happy to allow representative groups to decide without them even being involved ................... but you don't want an explaination for them, you want an explaination for yourself
B. Lucky
Login
Register
FAQ
](./images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif "Brick wall")
