Protesting taxi drivers: do you support them?

tbh

amtaxi wrote: »

There is a thought among drivers that if the playing field was level there would be a much better taxi industry for both the consumer and service provider.

in fairness, that I can appreciate. That just needs stricter regulations however, and while I can understand that capping plates while that whole process was reviewed would make things easier, it doesn't mean that they would have to cap to make it work. Guys working off sham taxis will still do it until new laws come into force, it's unfair to penalise the genuine guys looking to come into the trade for the regulators sins. In fact, it could be argued that it would be worse to cap, as only legals plates would be capped, illegal plates would still be produced at the same speed.

tbh

amtaxi wrote: »

I thought I had answered clearly enough - so in simplier terms

They are obliged legally to use the taximeter - it is an offence not to except in the case of a pre-booked (i.e. by phone) when the service provider (taxi) and consumer have agreed a fare and the consumer (passenger) in this case the consumer must sign a wavier to have his fare charged offmeter. This is not allowed at a rank or when hailing a taxi!

A taxidriver is entitled to give a discount but is not obliged to

Hope this helps

ok, then just answer me this. I get in a cab, no mention of any discounts or anything, and the guys brings me somewhere, and the fare is e10. The taxi driver then says "listen pal, I'm against that fare increase, so I'm not implementing it. That fare will actually be e8".

Is that legal or not?

Calina

amtaxi wrote: »

I thought I had answered clearly enough - so in simplier terms

They are obliged legally to use the taximeter - it is an offence not to except in the case of a pre-booked (i.e. by phone) when the service provider (taxi) and consumer have agreed a fare and the consumer (passenger) in this case the consumer must sign a wavier to have his fare charged offmeter. This is not allowed at a rank or when hailing a taxi!

A taxidriver is entitled to give a discount but is not obliged to

Hope this helps

If I understand this correctly, this means the taxi driver must have the meter running but may apply a fare less than shown on the meter at the end of the journey.

I don't believe that tbh is asking whether a taxi must give a discount but whether the discretion exists, ie, must they charge the exact fare as shown on the meter or can they charge less. I think it's a given that they cannot charge more.

In summary, I think the holy all of this is that the fare as shown on the meter is maximum allowable for practical terms. A taxi driver may charge less if he or so wishes.

Would I be correct?

amtaxi

tbh wrote: »

in fairness, that I can appreciate. That just needs stricter regulations however, and while I can understand that capping plates while that whole process was reviewed would make things easier, it doesn't mean that they would have to cap to make it work. Guys working off sham taxis will still do it until new laws come into force, it's unfair to penalise the genuine guys looking to come into the trade for the regulators sins. In fact, it could be argued that it would be worse to cap, as only legals plates would be capped, illegal plates would still be produced at the same speed.

Yes I agree with some of your points. Except : The fact is that overall there is no need for any more laws!(my opinion) They are there already but not enforced! I genuinely believe that proper enforcement of the laws already in place would dramatically change things.

I understand that the criteria for issuing driver licences is to change this year and welcome this.

tbh

Calina wrote: »

I

Would I be correct?

that would be my understanding of it. The reason I was making the point in the first place is that taxi drivers used the fact that they had not agreed with the fare increase because they were acting out of the interests of the consumer. They are using consumer interests as one of the two basic cornerstones for their whole protest. My opinion is that they didn't refuse to implement the fare increase (which I argue they could easily do) because it wasn't in their interest, which is what, I would argue, their whole campaign is about - protecting their own interests. While I respect them for doing that - and who wouldn't do it - I resent them using the consumer interests argument, when it's clear it's just something they've used to try to increase non-existent public support.

amtaxi

Calina wrote: »

If I understand this correctly, this means the taxi driver must have the meter running but may apply a fare less than shown on the meter at the end of the journey.

I don't believe that tbh is asking whether a taxi must give a discount but whether the discretion exists, ie, must they charge the exact fare as shown on the meter or can they charge less. I think it's a given that they cannot charge more.

In summary, I think the holy all of this is that the fare as shown on the meter is maximum allowable for practical terms. A taxi driver may charge less if he or so wishes.

Would I be correct?

Spot on! Sorry if I misunderstood tbh but I found some of the previous posts hard to read and all over the place!

Calina

amtaxi wrote: »

Spot on! Sorry if I misunderstood tbh but I found some of the previous posts hard to read and all over the place!

You and me both.

Thank you for clarifying however. It helps.

noodler

If there is no money to be made as a Taxi driver then the market will correct itself.

Simple economics. Many argue this is just a case of pulling the ladder up behind you.

Why do people keep becoming drivers if they can't make a living out of it?

Why should the taxi industry get special treatment?

amtaxi

tbh wrote: »

that would be my understanding of it. The reason I was making the point in the first place is that taxi drivers used the fact that they had not agreed with the fare increase because they were acting out of the interests of the consumer. They are using consumer interests as one of the two basic cornerstones for their whole protest. My opinion is that they didn't refuse to implement the fare increase (which I argue they could easily do) because it wasn't in their interest, which is what, I would argue, their whole campaign is about - protecting their own interests. While I respect them for doing that - and who wouldn't do it - I resent them using the consumer interests argument, when it's clear it's just something they've used to try to increase non-existent public support.

Just a simple point in relation to fare increase, as I've already said taxis who didn't calibrate meter (€40-€50 + €90 sealing) with new fare got fines €250, I personally know 3 in my area who got these. So legally drivers had to changeover to the new fare structure or face a fine. When drivers nationally were asked to give their input for a fare increase a very small number made submissions (100s), this may support the claim that drivers did not want increase. This is just point of facts - not argument!
The other points in relation to how much driver charges I believe I've already covered

oisindoyle

Calina wrote: »

@oisindoyle,

please learn to use the quotes properly as described by tbh in this post. Since you subsequently quoted the post I know you have read it.

Your posts are incredibly difficult to read. This is very unfair on the rest of the community. Please have some consideration for people who are reading this thread.

regards,

Calina - C&T Moderator.

I just thought highlighting them in bold was as good .I didnt think it was causing a problem

amtaxi

noodler wrote: »

If there is no money to be made as a Taxi driver then the market will correct itself.

Simple economics. Many argue this is just a case of pulling the ladder up behind you.

Why do people keep becoming drivers if they can't make a living out of it?

Why should the taxi industry get special treatment?

Personally not getting into this argument - joined this post simply to try clarify the confusion in relation to fares...;)

Terrontress

noodler wrote: »

If there is no money to be made as a Taxi driver then the market will correct itself.

Simple economics. Many argue this is just a case of pulling the ladder up behind you.

Why do people keep becoming drivers if they can't make a living out of it?

Why should the taxi industry get special treatment?

What the drivers are saying is that by the time you realise there is no money in it, you have already had substantial outlaw for a car, meter etc. and you have forfeited your rights to social welfare.

Also, new drivers being unaware of how hard it is and signing up are making it more difficult for the existing drivers.

The only motivation I can see for the call for capping licenses is reduction of competition. It seems to be the primary call of the drivers. Yes, there are illegal practises going on. Cloned licenses and cars, criminals driving, unsafe cars and only 8 enforcement staff. I don't see what a cap on licenses will do in that regard. As mentioned previously it will most likely have the effect of encouraging more people who can't go down the legitimate route of going down the illegal.

The taxi drivers should have made better enforcement and standards their key rally call when striking. The more cynical posters amongst us might say that better enforcement is not going to earn them more money but fewer taxis will. Plus how many of those striking were 100% legal in their operations?

Calina

I'm inclined to think that this thread is now travelling around in circles.

As such I will close it in one hour's time if no one has anything new to say.

Spook_ie

Calina wrote: »

I'm inclined to think that this thread is now travelling around in circles.

As such I will close it in one hour's time if no one has anything new to say.

I do have something to add but it's going to take a long to time to write and proof read,at the moment it reads like a "Tale of two Cities" so might need to abbreviate some of it feel free to close this thread and I'll post it under a title of " Musings of a taxi driver" or something....

noodler

Terrontress wrote: »

What the drivers are saying is that by the time you realise there is no money in it, you have already had substantial outlaw for a car, meter etc. and you have forfeited your rights to social welfare.

I take your points. Is it safe to say every driver invests in a brand new car though?

Surely the market is in the process of correcting itself now? How long has it been since the first rumblings were made re:the dereg?

I find it hard to get a job at the moment but I wouldn't call for a reintroduction of college fees to ensure there are less graduates competing with me.
College, for example, was a significant investment for me despite free fees.

oisindoyle

Calina wrote: »

I'm inclined to think that this thread is now travelling around in circles.

As such I will close it in one hour's time if no one has anything new to say.

I agree .Like all taxi threads on this forum ,it decends into taxi bashing ,and arm chair critics with same old same old "arguments".

Calina

Spook_ie, if you don't mind, separate thread please.

I'm sure most people have noticed I've wound up closing a lot of these threads lately, unfortunately.

oisindoyle, sad to say, some of them descend into customer bashing as well.

noodler: your points have been raised in several threads in the last few weeks.

Okay, I'm closing this one.