|Mailshot is your chance to tell the subscribers of
Dial-a-Cab exactly what you think. Complaints, compliments or just to write about Call
This is YOUR paper within your magazine....
You can also email your letters to: email@example.com
The vote on livery cabs at the AGM was very close and if you
ask most drivers, then it was in favour of keeping them. The amount of £750 pa, which
most liveries pay, is a big help to drivers with a wife and family to support.
In the last Call sign, it was said that we must compete with Volvos and
Limos etc which is something we will never be able to do.
On DAC, we have Westminster Taxicards, Special Needs, Great Ormond Street and lay-outs.
None of these people care what cab they get into. If you are a day man, you will find that
there is not much other work on the radio. If you do a ZQ, you find 0/50 in EC2. 0/15 in
EC1 etc. Surely we should be looking for more accounts rather than worrying about what we
drive. Some of us with liveries do a lot of account work and if we are not careful, we
could lose a lot of them to Data Cab or Mountview who happily accept liveries and have a
lot of quality work. We dont want to get left behind.
Russell Simmons (M50)
To change back would now require a further rule change
I was absolutely delighted to receive the communication of the 7th inst.
regarding the accurate position of David Clegg.
For this unprecedented action to have taken place was brave,
proves excellent managership and conveys to all Society members the truthful and honest
feelings of the Board, which in turn unquestionably reflects the high calibre of Manager
we have in our midst. In today's climate, numerous employees are somewhat uncertain as to
the capabilities of their managers. However, in this instance, for an action of this type
to have been produced and distributed
sheer guts and utter devotion to the job and men in hand.
For years the Society has had numerous battles, most of which have interfered
with the deserved progress the Society earned. In most of these cases, it was individuals
who were gunning for the Society that were the cause.
These somewhat confused mortals should have realised that their interference
very much jeopardised the earning capacity and the growth of each of US, the latter being
a special breed of NORMAL folk who were completely satisfied with our lot! No one man
should be allowed or permitted to control the Society - this would lead to the whole thing
becoming a 'Hitlerite operation'. Thank God, our true and gutsy guys at the top have come
down heavily on another example of misguided individualism.
With my hand on my heart, with my thoughts on the past and with a great deal
of knowledge of the human race, I feel that the half a day per week and Monthly Board
Meeting, is surplus for the Society to it's requirement relative to the individual
I take my hat off to each member of the Board BAR ONE!
Ronald S. Colman (B13)
Re your communication dated 7th January 1998: I, as well as many of
my friends and other members feel that the whole (David Clegg) incident is being handled
very badly and perhaps even unconstitutionally. I feel that if you decide not to employ Mr
Clegg on the BOM, it either means that you cant cope with Mr Clegg because of
personal problems - which would be very unprofessional of you - or you dont require
the amount of Board members you had elected at the AGM and you are cutting costs.
However, if as to your letter you no longer have trust in Mr Clegg, then
there is no need to hold elections at the AGM. We just need to vote for a Chairman who can
then form a BOM from his friends. If you feel that Mr Clegg has done wrong, then the only
avenue open is the Societys complaints procedure. If you cannot form a complaint,
|have to respect Mr Cleggs position as an
elected member of the Board and give him a job as the members elected him for.
As far as the issue of the EGM, I personally and my colleagues believe that
the whole thing was a fiasco. There was bad consultation, bad presentation and bad
Mr Clegg was voted onto the Board to do a job and represent the members with
his points of view and abilities. If he saw a flaw in the conversion, as most of us did, I
would expect him to speak up with his points of view and not to just tow the party line.
Alternatives are not required at this point.
Glen Pamphilon R78
Brian Rice replies:
Dear Mr Pamphilon
When a member is elected as a Board member he does not automatically receive a 'job' on
the BOM. He is elected and will attend all Board meetings. This right has not been denied
to David Clegg, it is not in the rest of the Boards power to act in that manner. You state
in your letter that I don't need all the Board members that I had elected, but I did not
have them elected, the Rule Book states how many there should be. David Clegg was elected
as a Board member to represent the members interest and this he does, as do the remainder
of the Board by attending Board meetings. If you believe David Clegg was acting in the
members interest by acting in a manner which was outlined in the letter of the 7th Jan
then obviously Mr Pamphilon you are entitled to your opinion but the remainder of the
Board do not share your view.
It was also stated in the Boards letter that after David Clegg went to the Police, he
subsequently informed a member(Dennis Mahoney ) plus three unnamed members. I have
subsequently learnt from David that you, Mr Pamphilon, were one of the three unnamed
MRS CHAIRMANS REPORT!
I was shopping in Oxford St just before Christmas and was due to