@edi_dot_bike@DrScottArthurMP Considering the traffic lights are on green, is it not safe to assume that “the two funny looking bikes” have just driven forward?
@adam_copp@TomEwing14@DrScottArthurMP There are many things that’s pushing up the price of fares. Lack of drivers isn’t one of them. We should be focusing on them.
@adam_copp@TomEwing14@DrScottArthurMP Providing services cheaper should never come at the expense of workers. Drivers are self employed. This is the only protection we have in legislation to protect income.
It’s a shame you’d prefer to put a driver on the breadline in order to have a cheaper service.
@iamonabeach@WallaceUofE @donturvLDR @doddsy70@DrScottArthurMP That was a disgraceful comment from Cllr Arthur TBF. Shows how much respect he has for the trade, many whom are his constituents, who he relies on votes from.
@DrScottArthurMP@adam_copp@TomEwing14 I think it is worth pointing out though, that PH companies in Glasgow are actually in favour of the OP policy in Glasgow
@DrScottArthurMP@adam_copp@TomEwing14 Hi, MP Scott Arthur,
PH Companies are concerned about their bottom line.
However, the council doesn’t have a commercial interest. You have legislation at your disposal to protect driver income when over provision has been identified via an unmet demand survey.
@CaroRoshan@DrScottArthurMP Yes, it can. It can pick up out of area, going anywhere, if it received the job whilst in its own area, received the job as a follow on job or actively travelling back to area after dropping off, as per section 21 civic gov Scot act. You can’t sit and wait out of area for a job.
@CaroRoshan@DrScottArthurMP It doesn’t work like that in Scotland. Should Scotland follow England’s lead with the deregulation act? Some would say yes, some would say no.
@adam_copp@TomEwing14@DrScottArthurMP The legislation exists purely for the reason of protecting driver income when the trade becomes over-saturated. Drivers have families to feed and bills to pay. The council has a duty to protect them.
I don’t think we’re going to agree on this subject, which is absolutely fine.
@adam_copp@TomEwing14@DrScottArthurMP 1/2 Limiting vehicle numbers isn’t new in the taxi and private hire trade. That’s why the legislation exists to give the council powers to do it.
As I said, it’s about protecting driver’s incomes and them being able to make a living wage within a reasonable amount of time.
@adam_copp@TomEwing14@DrScottArthurMP concluded there was too many vehicles operating, driving down earnings and forcing drivers to work dangerously long hours to make ends meet.
You can’t compare a bakery vs private hire. The staff get paid their hourly wage regardless of how much the shop makes. Drivers don’t.
@adam_copp@TomEwing14@DrScottArthurMP 1/2 Because the council licence these vehicles. It has a duty to the people it licenses to not oversaturate the market.
Glasgow has an over provision in place for this reason. There was far too many vehicles being licensed, so they commissioned an unmet demand review which
@AndrewW12290183@StevenMcp@DrScottArthurMP The answer to your questions is “the exact same checks a black hackney driver has to go through”. There’s absolutely no difference when it comes to checks between a taxi or private hire driver.
@adam_copp@TomEwing14@DrScottArthurMP The point of an over provision policy is to ensure the driver can earn a fair wage within a reasonable amount of time. Too many taxis / private hire’s mean drivers have to work longer hours to earn the same or less money.