A letter appears in this issue from Barry Spear (Y16) on cash bookings and it
merits more text that the usual Mailshot reply can give...
There would never be any issue accepting cash bookings if - and a
big IF - all trips were despatched non-rejectable. All the time drivers have a
choice of rejecting or undertaking alternative work off the street, we run the
risk of a trip not being covered. Although the Board's duty is to provide work
for drivers, it also has an equal responsibility to ensure financial risk to
the Society is avoided or certainly kept to a minimum. Because there is
no control of the work force and we cannot offer a guaranteed service, there
will always be a risk of us not supplying a taxi.
It is becoming more common in this country for people to use the
legal system in an effort to gain compensation for their losses caused by no
fault of their own. A passenger misses a flight and doesn't attend a business
meeting because the taxi fails to arrive on time or not at all and a
compensation claim can arrive for additional expenses of alternative flight,
overnight accommodation while waiting for flight and loss of revenue for
missing the meeting. This is not as far-fetched as some may believe
and I wonder if any of us could put a figure on the total amount? The flights
and accommodation possibly, but the
amount for loss of business - who knows?
|
And all this because one or more drivers decided that they didn't fancy doing
the trip...
Lead Times
Lead times are also set with the same thoughts in mind. The
controller's judgement is equally as crucial to the service we provide as the
driver accepting a trip. We all know the areas that prove difficult to cover
work in.
Once a controller looks at the advance bookings, the dilemma he/she faces is
how will the situation change closer to the pre-booked time? More often, it is
the case that there will be a driver in or around a particular zone when they
view the booking. The risks the controller takes by reducing the lead time so
as not to let the driver sit there for at least 11 minutes is; will the driver
reject the trip; will he/she take a street job; will they take a trip from a
back up zone; or is there a possibility that an asap trip may just happen to
come in and they accept it. Whatever decision a controller makes will be either
the wrong decision for
|
the driver or wrong decision for the passenger. Therefore they will
always ere on the side of caution.
As I said earlier, take the risk element out of dispatching trips and it
would assist driver, customer and controller. I have spoken with the
controllers and they have assured me that they will monitor the lead times
more closely and reduce them whenever they can during this quiet spell.
Quiet as it may seem, there are still occasions when certain account trips
are proving very difficult to cover. I'm still seeing drivers being offered
between 20 and 30 trips a shift only to find they accepted 4 or 5.
From the early reports of the survey that has been carried out on our radio
channels, it has been reported to us if we could reduce the number of
rejects, there is a possibility that we could improve the error messaging by
30%. Something to consider...
Head Hunted?
It has recently come to my attention that a number of drivers are
asking if it is true that I have been head hunted by a reputable car
company? All I'm prepared to say is that I am extremely flattered in a
strange way and that when the approach was made I must have missed it! Can
the drivers asking the question please retrace their conversations and
advise me how this rumour started, because I would be fascinated to know...
Keith Cain
|
