Taxi drivers fail in bid for compensation over licence deregulation

L1011

Mr.Frame wrote: »

Not true

Disprove it.

The taxi unions used to gripe every time there was a tiny number of new licences issued and entirely supported the limits.

Or are you trying to deny they had Callelly, Ahern, GV, etc wrapped around their little finger?

Mr.Frame

L1011 wrote: »

Disprove it.

The taxi unions used to gripe every time there was a tiny number of new licences issued and entirely supported the limits.

Or are you trying to deny they had Callelly, Ahern, GV, etc wrapped around their little finger?

When exactly were these "tiny number of new licences issued"??

L1011

Mr.Frame wrote: »

When exactly were these "tiny number of new licences issued"??

There were extremely rare issues of new, usually wheelchair accessible, plates by DCC annually before dereg. Every time lead to wailing to Chris Barry, the Herald, and threats of revolt by the captive FFers.

We were constantly told there wasn't the work for the number of plates issued at the time, despite many of them being used 24/7

Mr.Frame

L1011 wrote: »

There were extremely rare issues of new, usually wheelchair accessible, plates by DCC annually before dereg. Every time lead to wailing to Chris Barry, the Herald, and threats of revolt by the captive FFers.

We were constantly told there wasn't the work for the number of plates issued at the time, despite many of them being used 24/7

In 1997 1998 100s of wheelchair taxi plates were issued WITH the agreement of taxi reps. So your comments are null and void.
Try again.

Losty Dublin

Mr.Frame wrote: »

In 1997 1998 100s of wheelchair taxi plates were issued WITH the agreement of taxi reps. So your comments are null and void.
Try again.

This is correct. These plates were issued to drivers who were operating as Cosy's. I believe they cost IR £25,000 each, excluding the cost of the vehicle and fitting it out.

L1011

Mr.Frame wrote: »

In 1997 1998 100s of wheelchair taxi plates were issued WITH the agreement of taxi reps. So your comments are null and void.
Try again.

There was extreme whining at the time, and the 'unions' opposed the issuing entirely.

Massive revisionism cannot fix what happened. There was no opposition to the regulation and when the deciding court case was won there was further, extreme, politicised whining.

Drivers convincing themselves of a new reality when there was the vain hope of compo cannot 'fix' what actually happened. This isn't long enough ago that it's out of memory, and most media articles from the time are still online.

Licence buyers who gripe about losses were nothing but speculators who got caught. We're lectured about bank speculators deserving their losses recently - perspective required here.

Find me one - just one - contemporary media item of a valid taxi representative encouraging the issuing of more licences. There can be zero validlity to claiming you can't find one as its too long ago as this is entirely within the period of modern media and recording of absolutely everything.

end of the road

L1011 wrote: »

There was extreme whining at the time, and the 'unions' opposed the issuing entirely.

Massive revisionism cannot fix what happened. There was no opposition to the regulation and when the deciding court case was won there was further, extreme, politicised whining.

Drivers convincing themselves of a new reality when there was the vain hope of compo cannot 'fix' what actually happened. This isn't long enough ago that it's out of memory, and most media articles from the time are still online.

Licence buyers who gripe about losses were nothing but speculators who got caught. We're lectured about bank speculators deserving their losses recently - perspective required here.

Find me one - just one - contemporary media item of a valid taxi representative encouraging the issuing of more licences. There can be zero validlity to claiming you can't find one as its too long ago as this is entirely within the period of modern media and recording of absolutely everything.

they were not speculators, gamblers, or anything of the sort. the posts above yours give the description of what actually happened

L1011

end of the road wrote: »

the posts above yours give the description of what actually happened

No, they don't.

Mass speculation occurred, including renting plates out 24/7, and opposition to any expansion occurred with vast political support.

You have bought in to a revisionist history and nothing more. If this was the 1980s we were talking about, you might get away with it. Its not.

Everyone else here remembers the pathetic 'strikes' after deregulation, "we're not going back", etc, and the eventual realisation that the house of cards had collapsed and a proper market was inevitable.

The utterly pathetic claims on here recently claiming a constant increase in drivers when the figures show year on year drops since 2008 is just a symptom of a fake reality many people have put themselves in.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

end of the road

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

no it isn't. the way the industry was set up meant those who wanted to be part of it were forced to hand over large amounts of money to do so.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

end of the road

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

the government regulation meant a situation where those wanting to provide a service to the public had to hand over huge amounts of money to do so. so if at that time one wanted to be part of the industry they had no option but to hand over money, hence being forced to hand over money. the drivers should have never been in that position. the fact nobody forced them to be part of the industry in the first place is irrelevant

the_syco

end of the road wrote: »

a good amount of taxi drivers disagree. i will take their word personally. they know the industry. they know what is going on. i will believe them

Oh, I believe them, but it's tough sh|t. I used to get charged €90-€120 to get home in a taxi, now it costs €30.

But because they're down money, I should feel sad for them? Nay.

end of the road

the_syco wrote: »

Oh, I believe them, but it's tough sh|t. I used to get charged €90-€120 to get home in a taxi, now it costs €30.

But because they're down money, I should feel sad for them? Nay.

its not togh anything at all

Mr.Frame

L1011 wrote: »

There was extreme whining at the time, and the 'unions' opposed the issuing entirely.

Massive revisionism cannot fix what happened. There was no opposition to the regulation and when the deciding court case was won there was further, extreme, politicised whining.

Drivers convincing themselves of a new reality when there was the vain hope of compo cannot 'fix' what actually happened. This isn't long enough ago that it's out of memory, and most media articles from the time are still online.

Licence buyers who gripe about losses were nothing but speculators who got caught. We're lectured about bank speculators deserving their losses recently - perspective required here.

Find me one - just one - contemporary media item of a valid taxi representative encouraging the issuing of more licences. There can be zero validlity to claiming you can't find one as its too long ago as this is entirely within the period of modern media and recording of absolutely everything.

My comments stand. because they are correct. Your comments on the other hand are utter nonsense. You can continue with "your" version of events and continue to taxi bash all you like.
Most of us know what happened .
Bye bye now

BowWow

end of the road wrote: »

the government regulation meant a situation where those wanting to provide a service to the public

Taxi drivers wanting to provide a service to the public! You have to be joking? That is the last thing on any taxi driver's mind.

Snickers Man

Mr.Frame wrote: »

Well the answer wasn't deregulation,it was the governments cheap way out. they should have invested in a better transportation system and not leave it down to taxi drivers.
Your reasoning that the only answer was dereg., to rid the city of the cartel that meant "high fares", is totally incorrect.

The utter hypocrisy of those who suggest that what taxi drivers wanted was a more and varied public transport system is truly nauseating. When taxi drivers say this, what they mean is that one or two extra Darts or night buses per hour could be put on so that they could be used as a fig leaf for them to say "You don't have to take a taxi: there's always the bus" Even though such a minimal additional service would hardly have made a dent in the problem of people getting home at night.

Now if you had a really efficient and high capacity bus/Dart/Luas system, the taxi drivers would have been up in arms.

Didn't they try to obstruct the AirCoach people when they started running bus services from the airport to the hotels on the south side? I seem to remember that they intimidated Air Coach from handing out flyers advertising their service inside the Airport arrivals terminal.

Didn't like the competition, you see.

Deregulation was the only answer. And it's worked very well.

No going back!!!

Snickers Man

end of the road wrote: »

there was no greed on behalf of the plate owners.

Coffee through the nose moment!!

end of the road wrote: »

it was the extreme regulation in the first place that caused the lot. the plate owners had put a ridiculous amount of money in to be part of an industry and had every right to protection in return. the situation where such protection was required should never have been. new licences were issued when there was room for them, nothing to do with the drivers. the drivers didn't and couldn't stop the issuing of licences, they could give their opinion on the issue like they currently can on any issue.

Are you trying to drum up sympathy for licence plate holders? You are failing. Miserably.

Snickers Man

Mr.Frame wrote: »

Not true

Very true, actually. It was a northside taxi mafia. Good thing that it was smashed.

end of the road

Snickers Man wrote: »

The utter hypocrisy of those who suggest that what taxi drivers wanted was a more and varied public transport system is truly nauseating. When taxi drivers say this, what they mean is that one or two extra Darts or night buses per hour could be put on so that they could be used as a fig leaf for them to say "You don't have to take a taxi: there's always the bus" Even though such a minimal additional service would hardly have made a dent in the problem of people getting home at night.

Now if you had a really efficient and high capacity bus/Dart/Luas system, the taxi drivers would have been up in arms.

Didn't they try to obstruct the AirCoach people when they started running bus services from the airport to the hotels on the south side? I seem to remember that they intimidated Air Coach from handing out flyers advertising their service inside the Airport arrivals terminal.

Didn't like the competition, you see.

Deregulation was the only answer. And it's worked very well.

No going back!!!

de-regulation wasn't the answer, and it hasn't worked well. we need more regulation in relation to the types of taxi and more, which is being delivered.

Snickers Man wrote: »

Very true, actually. It was a northside taxi mafia. Good thing that it was smashed.

not true, actually

Valetta

Snickers Man wrote: »

The utter hypocrisy of those who suggest that what taxi drivers wanted was a more and varied public transport system is truly nauseating. When taxi drivers say this, what they mean is that one or two extra Darts or night buses per hour could be put on so that they could be used as a fig leaf for them to say "You don't have to take a taxi: there's always the bus" Even though such a minimal additional service would hardly have made a dent in the problem of people getting home at night.

Now if you had a really efficient and high capacity bus/Dart/Luas system, the taxi drivers would have been up in arms.

Didn't they try to obstruct the AirCoach people when they started running bus services from the airport to the hotels on the south side? I seem to remember that they intimidated Air Coach from handing out flyers advertising their service inside the Airport arrivals terminal.

Didn't like the competition, you see.

Deregulation was the only answer. And it's worked very well.

No going back!!!

Very well put.

I fail to understand why the old school taxi drivers still try to cling on to the "good old days"; miserably attempting to justify their gouging practices in the name of "public service".

Bobby Molloy got it spot on.

Valetta

Mr.Frame wrote: »

If your sweet shop failed, you could sell something different, apart from sweets. Or you could let out your shop.
You would still have the value of the leasehold. Your argument is ridiculous.

Only seeing this comment now.

Why should one industry be regulated over another to restrict entrants?

Losty Dublin

the_syco wrote: »

Oh, I believe them, but it's tough sh|t. I used to get charged €90-€120 to get home in a taxi, now it costs €30.

More fool to you to pay it

end of the road

Valetta wrote: »

Only seeing this comment now.

Why should one industry be regulated over another to restrict entrants?

because sometimes industries have to be regulated for the greater good. specially where those industries are vital. keeps time wasters out as well

ohnonotgmail

end of the road wrote: »

because sometimes industries have to be regulated for the greater good. specially where those industries are vital. keeps time wasters out as well

I think you need to learn the difference between regulation and restriction on entry.

L1011

Mr.Frame wrote: »

My comments stand. because they are correct. Your comments on the other hand are utter nonsense. You can continue with "your" version of events and continue to taxi bash all you like.
Most of us know what happened .
Bye bye now

So you can't find a single example, then?

Thought so

Trying to revise recent history does not work.

Drivers trying to pretend they didn't support the system they were fighting to get compensation for the dismantling of is either utterly hilarious, or utterly deluded. Not sure which.

end of the road

L1011 wrote: »

Trying to revise recent history does not work.

so why are you doing it then?

Mr.Frame

Snickers Man wrote: »

The utter hypocrisy of those who suggest that what taxi drivers wanted was a more and varied public transport system is truly nauseating. When taxi drivers say this, what they mean is that one or two extra Darts or night buses per hour could be put on so that they could be used as a fig leaf for them to say "You don't have to take a taxi: there's always the bus" Even though such a minimal additional service would hardly have made a dent in the problem of people getting home at night.

Pointing out that the public transportation system (paid for by everyones taxes) should have had more investment (more late night trains, darts, buses ect) is NOT hypocrisy, it is a perfectly reasonable assumption and calling.
After midnight the only means by which people could get home was by taxi.
Expecting only ONE means of transport to bring people home simply wasnt right.

Snickers Man wrote: »

Now if you had a really efficient and high capacity bus/Dart/Luas system, the taxi drivers would have been up in arms.

If we had all of the above, there would not have been any need to deregulate the taxi business.

Snickers Man wrote: »

Didn't they try to obstruct the AirCoach people when they started running bus services from the airport to the hotels on the south side? I seem to remember that they intimidated Air Coach from handing out flyers advertising their service inside the Airport arrivals terminal.

Perhaps if you are going to quote something,it might be a good idea if you had your facts correct.
What happened was, people from Air Coach were handing out leaflets INSIDE the airport terminal, which is forbidden by the airport authorities and against bye laws. No group is allowed to ply for hire inside the terminal be it bus or taxi operators.
So to sum up, Aircoach were in breach of the bye laws and were told by the DAA that there actions were wrong.

Snickers Man wrote: »

Didn't like the competition, you see.

There has always been "competition" be it from trains, buses, or dart.You're also forgetting that every taxi driver is in competition with each other.Throwing out a comment as you did , is cheap and laughable.

Snickers Man wrote: »

Deregulation was the only answer. And it's worked very well.

No going back!!!

Well no it wasnt the only answer, it was the cheap and quickest way out for the Gov., when they should have being investing in public transport.
It hasnt worked out that well,the powers that be have lost the run of the taxi business.
Ireland is now seen by other countries as to how NOT to deregulate the taxi business.
As for your nonsensical comment "no going back". No one in the industry has ever suggested such a thing.

ohnonotgmail

Mr.Frame wrote: »

Pointing out that the public transportation system (paid for by everyones taxes) should have had more investment (more late night trains, darts, buses ect) is NOT hypocrisy, it is a perfectly reasonable assumption and calling.
After midnight the only means by which people could get home was by taxi.
Expecting only ONE means of transport to bring people home simply wasnt right.



If we had all of the above, there would not have been any need to deregulate the taxi business.



Perhaps if you are going to quote something,it might be a good idea if you had your facts correct.
What happened was, people from Air Coach were handing out leaflets INSIDE the airport terminal, which is forbidden by the airport authorities and against bye laws. No group is allowed to ply for hire inside the terminal be it bus or taxi operators.
So to sum up, Aircoach were in breach of the bye laws and were told by the DAA that there actions were wrong.




There has always been "competition" be it from trains, buses, or dart.You're also forgetting that every taxi driver is in competition with each other.Throwing out a comment as you did , is cheap and laughable.



Well no it wasnt the only answer, it was the cheap and quickest way out for the Gov., when they should have being investing in public transport.
It hasnt worked out that well,the powers that be have lost the run of the taxi business.
Ireland is now seen by other countries as to how NOT to deregulate the taxi business.
As for your nonsensical comment "no going back". No one in the industry has ever suggested such a thing.

so how long have you been a taxi driver?

endacl

It's great these days. You can audition taxis. 'No thanks. Drive on. There'll be a nice clean merc along in a minute'.

I don't know how many times I walked home from town in the 90s, facing an oncoming river of unoccupied taxis. Buyers market now!