|
Sabotage? In the last edition of Taxi magazine, Steve McNamara wrote about TaxiBoard, Tariff 3 - which was implemented in 2001 - and how he claims the radio circuits attempted to sabotage the increase. But probably just as important, he was also endeavouring to discredit TaxiBoard and the work they have done over the years. Regarding his statement that the radio circuits endeavoured to sabotage Tariff 3, that is untrue and I will explain exactly what happened just to clear up any misunderstandings. How do I know? Because I was present in the room (and Steve wasn’t) when the-then Mayor, Ken Livingstone, agreed an increase in the night tariff. Whilst I do not believe that Steve is intentionally endeavouring to discredit me, he does have his facts wrong (as he still wasn’t there) and I will attempt to relay exactly what happened so that he will be aware of the situation should the subject arise again in the future. This is part of what Steve wrote regarding Tariff 3: "Whilst this much-needed change was universally supported by every working driver, two of the radio circuits attempted to sabotage the new tariff by declaring that ‘A dayman is a dayman and nothing will persuade him to come out at night.’" Below is an extract from Call Sign, dated April 2001, from my Chairman’s report (before the increase was granted): "I must say that I'm a little disappointed that nothing at all has been done to entice more drivers out at night by increasing the night charge. The Mayor was asked by the trade to increase the running rate at night so that when the meter was engaged, it would automatically start at the enhanced rate that we currently receive when the journey is in excess of six miles. That tariff would then remain unchanged for the entire length of the journey. The trade were subsequently informed that this option was not available at the moment because not all meters were equipped with a calendar facility. The meter would need to know the time of day in order to charge the enhanced rate. We were informed that 25% of the trade were not equipped with a calendar meter; consequently, the enhanced running rate was not an option at this time. However, TfL went on to say that the technical limitation of the current taximeters will be addressed as soon as possible and there will be a full review |
 of the fare structure over the coming few months that could lead to changes prior to April 2002. They went on to add that TfL would consult fully with the trade before finalising a new structure. I believe that this has now become a matter of some urgency because as we are all aware, there is a shortage of cabs in certain areas particularly at night, and unless the tariff is reformed in order to encourage more drivers to work at those unsocial hours, then there will be even greater demands from our opposition to remove radios from licensed taxis in order to make more of them available during the evening and night and to give the public a better service than they are currently receiving." The above are hardly the words of a man that was opposed to night drivers enjoying an enhanced tariff. After I had written the above, the driver organisations including myself, had a meeting with the Mayor and his advisers so that we might endeavour to obtain an enhanced rate for drivers working at night and also entice more day drivers to work more unsociable hours, as there was definitely a shortage of cabs at that time of night. We all believed the Mayor would press for the new rate to come into force from midnight, but we really wanted it to come into play from 10pm, so we thought we’d bluff it. We asked for an 8pm start, believing the Mayor would then try to compromise and we’d all settle for the new rate as from 10pm – which was what we wanted anyway! Instead, the Mayor left the room with his advisers for around ten minutes and when he returned, told us we had the increase from 8pm as we had wanted. Irrespective of what Steve says, most people in the room that day thought 8pm too early (I know because I was there and Steve wasn’t) and we were proven to be correct when at a later date (April 2003), the starting time was put back to 10pm, which as I’ve said was what we had wanted in the first place. Then in December 2001, I wrote: "At the time of writing, it has been almost three weeks since the increase in the night tariff and the feelings from members |
are very mixed (see Mailshot ...Ed). There is no doubt in my mind that a man working at night should earn a higher rate than the day man due to the unsociable hours he or she works." Again, hardly the words of a man that was opposed to night drivers enjoying an enhanced tariff. Then in February 2003 (some fourteen months later with the trade having had time to see if Tariff 3 was working), it appeared that most of the trade were in agreement about a change to the tariff, so I wrote: "TfL have put forward a proposal for this year's tariff increase that is due to be implemented in April. The increase was a little smaller than anticipated due to the fact that the last one was implemented in June last year, consequently a full year has not elapsed since that increase. It will average 3% although the weekend tariff will remain unchanged. It is also proposed to put the night tariff 3 back from 8pm to 10pm." I think you will agree that the above are hardly the sentiments of a man who thinks ‘A dayman is a dayman and nothing will persuade him to come out at night’. As I wrote earlier, I don’t believe that Steve deliberately set out to mislead anyone, but he definitely has got his facts wrong. The only problem with that is that everything written by him in the future will always have the reader wondering if it is correct! As you know Steve, I am very approachable so in the future all you have to do is pick the phone up and events that happened eight years prior can be clarified. Building Works Brian Rice |
