On a personal note, September was not a
particularly good month for me. Within days of returning from two relaxing
weeks holiday, I developed a cough that progressively got worse up to the point
where I was laid up for almost four weeks. I suppose at times I could have made
the effort and gone to the office, but as I am forever criticising staff for
spreading germs when they are ill, I could hardly then go and do the same
myself!
I mention the above for two reasons; firstly donations would be
kindly appreciated (joke) and secondly, to emphasise what a hard man your
Editor is (no joke) by totally ignoring my pleas to be excused this month from
submitting an article due to ill health.
Fortunately, being out of the office doesn't necessarily
mean I am completely out of touch because our technology is such, that
providing I can get access to the Internet, I can retrieve all the internal
e-mails being distributed around Brunswick House by the Chairman and others
etc. In addition, the Chairman and I keep in regular contact and it was during
this regular contact that I was made aware of a distressing incident that,
apart from the serious consequences, was once again proof that some drivers
just never learn.
To give a clearer understanding of what I mean by serious
consequences, I would like you to picture the following scene. All of you, plus
millions of others on hearing rumours that war might be declared, fuel prices
were to rocket, the stock market is about to collapse and a terrorist attack
similar to 9/11 is about to hit London, would all rally round the nearest TV to
hear any news when suddenly, there is a total black out...
With panic about to grip the nation that the attacks may have
already started, these fears are exacerbated by a newsflash that the TV station
you were watching has been evacuated due to a bomb scare. An hour later, when
TV is resumed, the announcer apologises for the blackout and explains the cause
was due to an unidentified person with a holdall forcing himself past security
and disappearing into the building. The unidentified person, it was eventually
discovered, was a licensed cab driver insisting on using the loo.
You can, I suppose, be excused for smiling at the above story, but
hopefully only until the realisation sets in of the immense damage such an
incident could cause to an already diminishing image that the licensed cab
trade in London has been suffering these past few years.
The rumour about the news was fiction, the details about the TV
station evacuating the building was minutes away from being fact, the driver
forcing himself past security to use the loo was very much fact.
Exactly what possesses people to act in such an idiotic and irresponsible
manner I'll never understand, particularly when the actions of one person can
have such a devastating effect on not
|
just their own livelihood, but also on the cab trade as a whole. I wrote
an article not so long ago about toilet facilities and driving a cab. I
will reiterate a part of what I said then. Just because a client uses a
licensed taxi to go to and from their premises, it does not automatically
give the driver of that vehicle the divine right to enter those premises
to use their facilities without permission, particularly when those
manning security specifically state that you cannot. That is no more so
than a postman should expect the right to use your toilet just because he
delivers the mail to your home. Security services at the premises of the
large corporate buildings are employed to follow orders, orders that can
quite easily change daily. Those not employed on those premises have
absolutely no right to question those orders.
If you have a bladder problem, then it is for you to make a
provision for that problem that does not rely on facilities that cannot be
guaranteed. And if such provisions include the form of surgical aids, then
these are readily available at a chemist or a visit to your GP. It may be
a sensitive subject and to some a little embarrassing, but why put
yourself into a situation that could jeopardize your badge or make you
suffer unnecessarily because of ignorance or pride?
I'll finish the subject by saying this; if it is of any assistance to
those of you that are encountering problems in this area and have little
knowledge of what help is available, you are welcome to contact me in
confidence via the e-mail address at the end of this article.
Mickey Garner
Picking up the last issue of Call Sign from the mat and looking forward to
yet another
enjoyable read, a casual flick through the pages suddenly fell open at the
photo of someone whose immediate effect on me induced both a smile, a
shudder and then a little later, extreme
sadness. The photo in question was none other than Mickey Garner (D1).
On seeing his face and his accompanying article, the smile
came at the thought of him making a recovery after his triple-by-pass. The
shudder was from the never to be forgotten memory of the baptism of fire
that he put me through after just six months of my joining the Board and
the sadness was the news I received as I was about to finish this article,
that Mickey had since passed away.
I never knew Mickey Garner socially, our paths only ever
crossed over political issues and this was usually only at AGM's, but
whatever the issue and no matter how passionate the argument, there was
never any hint of malice. In fact, knowing how readily I rose to the bait
in those days, I swear that on occasions, he had a dig just to wind me up
because at the end of the meetings he would always shake my hand and with
a mischievous smile, wish me well!
|
As to the baptism of fire; having been elected to the
Board by postal ballot mid-term, I had only 6 months experience of the
heavy politics at DaC before attending my first AGM. I had no idea about
our AGM procedures, I assumed all questions from the floor would go via
the Chair, which was the case until Mr Garner got up on the rostrum. He
totally ignored the-then Chairman, but instead looked straight at me and
as he said in his article, laid into me with such venom that you would
have thought I was responsible for mass murder!
I was sitting at the far end of the stage feeling totally
isolated with not a clue what to do! I had no microphone within reach, I
looked along the row of Board members for some sort of support only to see
every bugger looking at their knees! Then eventually the Chairman handed
me his microphone together with an expression of "OK, mate, you're
your on your own!" That, incidentally, transpired to be the future
case at AGM's for a number of years, so far as I was concerned, with
questions going through the Chair except when it involved a moan about
lack of work, fixed prices, run-ins or gratuity etc and then it was me
that got blasted as if it was me and not the Board who made the unpopular
decisions. For the record, I hasten to add that those past AGM procedures
ceased to apply long before the current Chairman and Board came into
office.
The irony in the case of Mickey Garner was that I was being
lambasted for something I had never actually said. I have never advocated
that cab drivers should wear a tie. Admittedly I was forever hitting a raw
nerve by expressing my displeasure at the disgusting state that many of
our members dressed, but I never said that they should wear ties! And the
answer I gave at that AGM when I eventually recovered enough to speak, was
one I have been repeating ever since. That is that dress equates to
attitude. If you look good, you feel good. If you feel good, you act good.
And by acting "good", it is both beneficial to yourself, your
work and the cab trade in general. Conversely, I believe that sloppy dress
has the reverse effect, which is one of the reasons I have never supported
those dress-down days that became a fad in offices several years ago and
which last year, a number of major firms abandoned following a report that
on the days when sloppy dress was worn, the general output was also
sloppy...
Allen Togwell
DaC Marketing
allent@dialacab.co.uk
|
