|
which
is why Call Sign is always happy to promote it…Ed
STRESS
I read with
alarm the article in April’s Call Sign concerning the two Dial-a-Cab
drivers involved in Road Rage incidents. These incidents are exactly the
scenarios I described in my first article. As professional drivers, we all
see and experience intolerant non-taxi drivers performing dangerous and
illegal manoeuvres on a daily basis. How we react at that precise moment
can affect our lives from that moment on, as was clearly shown in both
accounts. We all know that the standard of driving in London has reached
an all time low. There are not enough police to ‘correct’ those
motorists who think it's OK to overtake at speed on the inside. Those Road
Hogs who blatantly push in when lanes narrow due to road works, rather
than feed into the constriction like the rest. In my opinion, it will only
get worse as more vehicles try to use roads that are already overcrowded
and badly managed. So what is the solution? Is there one? Well, there
probably isn't one that is feasible, therefore WE must rise above it all
and not respond to the aggression of lesser motorists who do not possess
our skills. Any fool can race along an open road at 70mph. It's how to
stop that counts!
David Kupler (Y74)
THE
PURPOSE OF DIAL-A-CAB
Although I was originally in favour of changing the structure
of DaC into something akin to a John Lewis type partnership, I am now
grateful to Brian Rice’s statement that any change will not happen at
least while he is Chairman - long may his good health continue. Perhaps we
could now define what the purpose of DaC is. All other business
enterprises have a clear idea that their remit is to provide profits for
their shareholders whilst maintaining a happy workforce, by providing
their customers with an efficient service or well-made product. When one
or more of these aims clash and harsh decisions have to be made, profit
and the well being of their shareholders have priority. Since we are
apparently to remain a non-profit making organisation, shareholders are
paramount.
This
leads me to the report from Mr Alastair Hill in the March Call Sign.
His comment that other industries are focussed on serving the
paying customers is only partially true, and in all other businesses
comes, as a priority, well behind shareholders interests. Any company’s
actions to the contrary would possibly be illegal and would certainly be
questionable business ethics. In my opinion, customers’ wishes also
should not supersede, or act contrary, to the best interests of the
workforce. Events in the City, particularly apropos the actions of banks
recently, show that his theory is somewhat dated.
In
our particular set-up, his priorities and the Boards are made simple,
since we are both shareholders and workforce. Therefore it should not be
necessary to take “tough decisions”, a phrase that sounds ominous to
me, without the full approval of the drivers. I also object to, and ask
him to justify his assumption, that the views of the vociferous few, i.e.
those who are prepared to stand up and be counted, are not shared by the
silent majority. Logic says that since they are silent, he cannot enlist
them to his viewpoint. It also follows logically that the “needs of the
organisation” are the needs of the shareholder/workforce. The
“responsibilities of office” are the responsibilities to us, the
shareholder/workforce, and to suggest making any major decisions that
might change the way we currently operate without our consent and input is
undemocratic and patronising. Without us there is no Dial-a-Cab. We drive
a taxi to live; we do not live to drive a taxi.
Jon Tremlett (Y32)
Alastair Hill replies:
I should like to start by correcting one point made in the early part
of Mr Tremlett’s letter. Mr Rice has always maintained that he would not
engage in making any changes to DaC unless instructed otherwise. To omit
this small but significant point may suggest to those not familiar with
how DaC operates that he personally could impose his will on the
membership in this (or any other matter) and could mislead those who are
not familiar with his stance on this issue. Before tackling the main
question, I shall address the points raised:
* The first point concerns conflict between customers and shareholders.
In almost every business, the interests of shareholders depend, amongst
other things, on the support from customers for the products or services
supplied. Without generating sales revenue from these customers, profits
cannot follow and shareholders would be rightly upset. As a result I see
that the interests of shareholders depend on serving customers and not
through being in conflict as suggested, DaC is no different.
However, our customers
occasionally perceive our services to be more for the workforces' benefit
than their own and find this hard to reconcile with other suppliers'
attitudes.
*
Whether customers' wishes should supersede the workforces' is a
question to which the answer will depend on the political, not commercial,
views of the
|
individual
concerned and I therefore cannot answer. However, there are numerous
examples of industries that have declined or even disappeared over the
years because they failed to adapt their products and working practices to
the circumstances and needs of the customer rather than their workforce.
Regrettably, many of these industries occupied leading positions within
their field but are now but distant memories.
* I am not sure what the significance
is of references to the City and what the recent 'action' by banks has
been, so I cannot comment.
* No significant decisions can be made within DaC without the approval
of the members. It should not be overlooked that all decisions made by the
Board, whether tough or easy, major or minor, are capable of being
reversed by the members if they so wish, so the membership is at all times
able to exert its control over the Society.
*
I make no assumptions about the vociferous few and their views and
whether they are in accordance with the views of the remainder of the
Society. However, my experience is that in some cases, some of the most
vociferous have expressed views which have not been supported by the
Society as a whole. I would also disagree with the conclusion that the
vociferous few are necessarily the only ones to stand up and be counted. I
do not believe that just because some are vociferous, that their view is
more meritorious than the views of others less vocal and in order to be
counted members can vote by show of hands as well as by postal ballot,
something they voted for overwhelmingly.
* I hope that I have also made it clear that the members' consent is
essential for any decision. Neither I nor the Board can act
undemocratically or in a patronising manner and unless any actions taken
receive the support of the majority, are liable to see the actions
rejected. As a final reassurance, if any is needed and in case it is not
clear to members in general, I have neither a vote as a member of the
Society nor as a member of the Board, your destiny is safely protected
from anything I may do, good, bad or indifferent without approval.
I now move on to the underlying question posed, namely 'What is
the purpose of DaC?' This became somewhat lost in the range of other points raised
and which I have addressed already, but is fairly straightforward to
answer and I would refer Mr Tremlett to the objects of the Society as
contained in the Rules. The principal and overriding objective is to
provide a radio booking service between members and the public, Rule 1a.
There is no requirement to be competitive, to expand, to be the best or
worst, to be profitable, to be friendly or even to provide a minimum level
of business to members. Despite the market place having probably changed
since this was first established as an object, I assume this is what the
membership still wants and it is what the Board endeavours to deliver and
that will remain the case until it is varied.
CASH
CUSTOMERS AND A GUARANTEED SERVICE
Congratulations on a very fine April Call Sign and of course your
reappointment as Editor, long may you reign! I would like to comment on a
few items that appeared in the issue.
Firstly, Alan Togwell should cease to be surprised that no
circuit has been taken to court for failing to produce a cab that had been
pre-booked: In one of the early years when we were known as Owner-Drivers
and based in Pentonville Road, an RAF officer took us to court for failing
to supply a cab after he had pre-booked it. This particular chap had
booked one of our taxis through the office to go from somewhere in Hornsey
to Waterloo Station. A nice ride, especially in those days. It was on a
summer Sunday at about 9 a.m. In those far off days before the advent of
the scabs, all the hotels especially in the Bloomsbury area were requiring
our services with porters and doormen being halfway up the street looking
for cabs. We gave them a good service but there were not that many of us
and nearly all the jobs went to Waterloo or Victoria. This was before
package holidays really came into their own. These rides were quick and
lucrative, invariably four-handers with luggage taking about 10 minutes or
so. Our ‘run ins’ were minimal and it was felt - rightly or wrongly -
that it was not worth ‘shlepping’ all the way to Hornsey to come back
to where you were starting from. I should add that the 3 Northern stations
were disgorging thousands, again nearly all going to the Southern
terminals with no through trains in those days.
Our Secretary of the time, John Robinson, appeared for the defence and in
his evidence stated that whenever we took advanced bookings, it was always
pointed out to the would-be client that we could not guarantee a cab. The
man who was suing us admitted that he might have been told.
There were no taped calls in those days. The result was that the case was
thrown out. Whenever I used to go into the control room to help out on the
phones, I always made a point of telling the caller that there was no
guarantee, but in order to sweeten the pill somewhat, I added that usually
we would be able to cover especially if the driver could have a little extra on his meter on arrival
and this always worked. Perhaps
something on these lines could be tried out?
- |
It was nice to see a letter from my old colleague Sid Gold (E20) appearing
in the magazine and refreshing my memory as to who were the missing couple
appearing in that 1967 published photo. Sorry to hear of the death of
Benny Landau, but I think that Sid may have got Benny's call sign wrong.
If my memory serves me correctly, A99 was the call sign of a very affable
guy called Ernie who came out of Gants Hill. He died within a couple of
years of retiring and was a cousin of the late Bernie Conway, one of the
funniest dispatchers ever to don a headset. With all these people passing
on, I ask “…is there anyone still out there?”
Finally, I congratulate your columnist Chas Kissin who has the guts to say
what he thinks regarding so called ‘asylum seekers’. He is only
stating quite openly what many people think but just can’t be bothered
to say.
Sam Harris (S95J)
APOLOGY
NOT ACCEPTED?
In his haste to accept my apology for saying that he advocated minicabs on
the circuit, Mr Whitbread neglected to read the terms and conditions. In
the small print, he was asked to clarify:
A/
Non-taxi drivers and B/ Limousines. Failure to do so renders all apologies
‘null and void’ and reverts back to the original statement: That he is
indeed advocating minicabs as part of the Societies business.
Mark White (B86)
DIAL-A-CAB
GYM?
May I thank Steve Shaller (R75) for making me smile and think about what
is a serious subject for Dial-a-Cab – the non-attendance of members at
AGM’s (April Call Sign).
Perhaps he could be given a regular column!
Regarding
Allen Togwell’s health article in the same issue, perhaps we could look
into a corporate gym membership for ourselves or even build one of our own
at Brunswick House?
Jon Trevor (W94)
Allen
Togwell replies:
In answer to the second part of Mr Trevor’s letter, I have made
enquiries for a corporate gym membership for our drivers and staff, one
club in particular was a 24 hour gym (apparently the only one of its kind
in London) in the old County Hall Building in York Rd. They offer several
types of membership, one being a twilight membership from 23:00 to
06:00hrs that would be ideal for night drivers. It is a top quality club
offering top class facilities including four hour free parking. The cost
is approx £1,500 a year for full individual membership. The twilight
membership is about half that amount. They offered a small discount for
corporate membership but only up to a maximum of 20 people. The problem
with the majority of cab drivers, as I mentioned in my last article, is
the apathy, which makes it near nigh impossible to organise or introduce
anything new. There is never any shortage of critics but when it comes to
making an effort or asking for a response its zero. Apart from your letter
Mr Trevor, nobody has contacted me re the health scheme or on the subject
of fitness. Several articles back I wrote about organising stress classes,
one driver out of 1700 responded. Before that I wrote suggesting using our
training centre for evening classes for a multitude of subjects from PC
Software to Languages, nobody responded. Your mentioning of Mr Steve
Shaller’s letter re the AGM reminds me of the amount of times we have
asked drivers if they would be interested in us starting regular forums,
again to my knowledge not one driver has responded. Returning back to the
subject of gym facilities. I would be willing to propose we organise a
corporate gym membership strictly
for named drivers who are prepared to use it. However I have little
confidence of it being accepted because within minutes of it becoming
known I can visualise the
usual bunch of screamers jumping
up and down demanding the facility be made available for every member or
not at all. As for building a gym at Brunswick House, unfortunately we
have no available space. The only other option would be to rent a small
unit locally and convert it into a gym, which I stress is a suggestion
strictly from me, not necessarily the rest of the board.
INSURANCE
AD
I am enclosing an ad for Keith Williams Financial, a company that has
helped me to invest some capital wisely and to sort out my financial
affairs. They have also helped several cab driving friends to meet their
needs. I wonder if you would consider using the ad in a future Call Sign
for our subscribers’ benefit.
E.J.Greenbury (D85)
You will find the ad in this
issue …Ed |
