Wednesday, October 31, 2018
Tuesday, October 30, 2018
Mohiussunnath Chowdhury attacked three police officers with a samurai sword while shouting 'Allahu akbar'.
And in December 2015 a Uber driver, Muhiddin Mire, tried to behead a stranger in a London Tube station, yelling: 'This is for my Syrian brother.
Last Week Uber Were Going To Buy All It’s Drivers Electric Cars...This Week, They Are Just 3rd Parties.
A long-running case over the status of Uber drivers will be heard in the Court of Appeal on Tuesday and Wednesday.
The taxi-hailing app is contesting an employment tribunal finding that drivers should be treated as workers rather than self-employed.
If classified as workers, Uber drivers are entitled to paid holiday and the minimum wage. Unions calculate this could be worth £18,000 per driver. (70,000 drivers nationwide)
Uber said the tribunal "fundamentally misunderstood" how it operated. This is also what they told judge Emma Arbuthnot!
It is the latest stage in a legal battle led by two Uber drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, who won an employment tribunal in October 2016.
After the tribunal ruling in October 2016, Uber appealed to the employment tribunal, but lost in November 2017. The tribunal upheld its original decision that any Uber driver who had the Uber app switched on was working for the company under a "worker" contract.
Uber is now taking the case to the Court of Appeal, the next stage of the appeal process before the Supreme Court.
James Farrar is one of the two drivers at the centre of the case
Uber said that 60,000 licensed private hire drivers now use its app across UK.
But the case could have implications beyond Uber, according to law firm Leigh Day.
"This appeal is of great significance not only to Uber drivers but also to millions of other workers in the gig economy and we hope that this can now bring this matter to a conclusion for the benefit of all workers," said Nigel Mackay, partner at Leigh Day.
Law firm Leigh Day started the legal action against Uber on behalf of 25 members of the GMB union, which initially included Mr Farrar and Mr Aslam but they pursed their case with a different union, the IWGB,
What is the 'gig' economy?
Uber drivers win key employment case
Mr Farrar, who is branch chair of the IWGB United Private Hire Drivers branch, said mini-cab drivers were still waiting for justice, two years after the tribunal ruling.
"As the government ignores this mounting crisis, it's been left to workers to fix this broken system and bring rogue bosses to account. If anything gives me hope, it is the rising tide of precarious workers that are organising and demanding a fair deal," he said.
'Significant' financial implications
Uber said it had made changes to give drivers more control over how they use its app. It also cited a study by Oxford University that found drivers make more than the London Living Wage and want to keep the freedom to choose if, when and where they drive.
"Almost all taxi and private hire drivers have been self-employed for decades, long before our app existed. We believe the Employment Appeal Tribunal last year fundamentally misunderstood how we operate," an Uber spokesperson said
"For example, they relied on the assertion that drivers are required to take 80% of trips sent to them when logged into the app, which has never been the case in the UK."
The GMB said Uber should admit defeat.
Sue Harris, legal director at GMB, said: "While the company are wasting money losing appeal after appeal, their drivers are up to £18,000 out of pocket for the last two years alone.
"That's thousands of drivers struggling to pay their rent, or feed their families."
The £18,000 figure is based on an Uber driver in London working a 40-hour week.
Paul Jennings, partner at Bates Wells, the law firm representing Mr Farrer and Mr Aslam, said a key issue in this case was whether Uber had mischaracterised the employment status of its fleet and in so doing failed to observe fundamental employment rights.
"The financial implications of this judgment could be very significant," Mr Jennings said.
The IWGB said Deliveroo riders, outsourced cleaners, restaurant workers and others in the gig economy would take place in a march on Tuesday to raise the issues facing "precarious workers"
Source : BBC
TAXI LEAKS EXTRA BIT :
TAXI LEAKS has been informed that tomorrow morning, the Trade Associations & Unions will be meeting with both Mytaxi & GETT.... to discuss trade concerns and questions
Monday, October 29, 2018
In response to the Secretary of State for Transport, Chris Grayling MP’s comments that Transport for London (TfL) is suffering “deep financial difficulties”, Gareth Bacon AM, Chairman of the London Assembly Budget and Performance Committee said:
“The London Assembly holds the Mayor and the organisations he runs to account. The biggest of those organisation is TfL and we take our role very seriously.
“The comments from the Transport Secretary are not dissimilar to what we have been saying for the past year.
“TFL is certainly in some severe financial trouble. A number of factors have contributed to this situation and we continue to investigate those factors and the implications for Londoners.
TfL is facing a £700 million annual cut in Government funding
The Mayor’s fares freeze will cost TfL £640 million over four years 
Crossrail has been delayed and a later opening date is expected to cost TfL hundreds of millions in lost revenue.
“It’s clear that the primary cause of TfL's woes is the removal of the government grant. But the Mayor knew this was the situation before he took office and still imposed a fares freeze.
“We are one of the world’s greatest cities. It is absolutely essential that we have a world class public transport system. However, TfL is currently experiencing a perfect storm of fiscal uncertainty. We need to find a way through these issues and ensure TFL gets back into the black as soon as possible
Sunday, October 28, 2018
Uber drivers are estimated to be more than £18,000 out of pocket because the ride hailing company refuses to recognise a two-year-old ruling entitling them to holiday pay, a minimum wage and rest breaks.
The law firm Leigh Day – acting for the GMB union, which brought the action against the tech giant – calculates that its 40,000 drivers are all owed almost £11,000 in wages and more than £8,000 in holiday pay. But Uber is continuing to appeal the ruling, made two years ago at the central London employment tribunal.
“These figures lay bare the human cost of Uber continuing to refuse to accept the ruling,” said GMB legal director Sue Harris. “While the company is wasting money losing appeal after appeal, drivers are up to £18,000 out of pocket. That’s thousands of drivers struggling to pay their rent, or feed their families. It’s time Uber admits defeat and pays up. The company needs to stop wasting money dragging its lost cause through the courts. Instead, Uber should do the decent thing and give drivers the rights to which those courts have said they are legally entitled.”
However, a spokeswoman for Uber said “almost all” taxi and private hire drivers had “been self-employed for decades”, long before Uber existed. She quoted an Oxford University study based on a poll commissioned by Uber, which found that its drivers make more than the London Living Wage. She added: “If drivers were classed as workers, they would inevitably lose some of the freedom and flexibility that come with being their own boss.”
Since the ruling, Uber says it has given drivers more control over how they use its app, plus sickness, maternity and paternity protection.
“We think the Employment Appeal Tribunal fundamentally misunderstood how we operate,” the spokeswoman said. “For example, they relied on the assertion that drivers are required to take 80% of trips sent to them when logged into the app, which has never been the case here.”
In its recent accounts, Uber London acknowledges that the self-employed status of its drivers is disputed. It says: “The Uber Group [is exposed] to numerous legal and regulatory risks, including the application, interpretation and enforcement of existing regulations … as well as risks related to … the company’s classification of drivers as independent contractors.”
Since you’re here…
… we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading The Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism than ever but advertising revenues across the media are falling fast. And unlike many news organisations, we haven’t put up a paywall – we want to keep our reporting as open as we can. So you can see why we need to ask for your help.
The Guardian is editorially independent, meaning we set our own agenda. Our journalism is free from commercial bias and not influenced by billionaire owners, politicians or shareholders. No one edits our editor. No one steers our opinion. This is important because it enables us to give a voice to the voiceless, challenge the powerful and hold them to account. It’s what makes us different to so many others in the media, at a time when factual, honest reporting is critical.
Our journalism is increasingly funded by our readers – thank you for your support. Less than three years ago we had 200,000 supporters; today we have been supported by over 900,000 individuals from around the world. Hundreds of millions read The Guardian’s independent journalism every year but less than 1% of them help fund it. Our long term future will only be secure if we’re able to keep growing this relationship.
Saturday, October 27, 2018
Exclusive : TfLTPH COs Overstepping Their Authority Again. Demanding Passengers Only Use Rear CC Machines
It’s been bought to our attention that TfLTPH COs are overstepping their authority again this morning.
The TfLTPH staff are loitering at the drop off point at Kings Cross Station.
They approach drivers seen making credit card transactions using a hand held unit. The COs then inform the driver that they can’t use the hand held unit (a false statement) and must use the one fitted in the rear (again false).
They then expand on this by telling the driver if they continue with the transaction, they will be reported.
This is in fact not true.
There are no regulations or laws saying you can’t offer the passenger a choice of payment options.
Conflict of financial interest?
It appears as if the COs are acting as agents on behalf of certain Transport for London board member who has a financial interest in certain Credit Card facilities and transaction companies, such as WorldPay. Surely not !!!Screen shot from TfL website
If a customer wants to pay by Green Shield stamps, or with a live chicken and 10 pound of potatoes, as long as the driver agrees, it’s no one’s business but the driver and passenger.
We comply with the mandate laid down that we must take credit or debit cards in payment for Taxi fares, and we all comply under the conditions of fitness of the vehicle with working machines in the rear.
But that’s as far as our responsibility goes.
Arrangements can be made to take payment by whatever means are agreeable between the driver and customer, it has nothing to do with TfLTPH.
TAXI LEAKS EXTRA BIT :
We've seen PCOs overstepping their authority before, with their attitude and the way they speak to drivers. They have in the past given instructions they have no authority to give, they've taken property from Taxis they have no right to take.
It's now been bought to our attention that Mr Nandha's PCOs appear again to be acting beyond their authority
We expect an apology from Anand Nandha head of compliance at TfLTPH as soon as possible.Image from on route magazine
This search of Taxi Leaks archives makes very interesting reading:
Friday, October 26, 2018
If you walk through the City of London at 08:30 in the morning, you can't fail to notice just how packed the pavements are.
Going against the tide of people is extremely difficult in an environment that is just not designed for walking.
That could be about to change.
Next week, the local authority will take another step towards a bold, radical plan to change the streets in the Square Mile over the next 25 years.
Some streets could be closed to motor vehicles during rush hour and there could be zero emission zones.
There will also be a 15mph speed limit across the district.
The local authority wants to cut the number of vehicles by a quarter by 2025.
The issue of pedestrianisation raises the question again of who cities are for and who should benefit from them.
And any change in road space is contentious and highly charged.
The City's local authority carried out a public consultation and discovered some stark facts.
Cycling CEOs drive out chauffeurs
It found 98% of people travel to the area by walking, cycling or public transport, while 84% think pavements are too crowded.
Four in five people think traffic levels in the City are too high, with 67% saying it contributes to poor air quality, while 59% said it creates an unpleasant street environment.
The authority said it listened to workers and businesses and has to deliver what they want to remain competitive - especially in a post-Brexit world.
It also said it must improve the area to appeal to business and wants to change the priority completely, giving more space to pedestrians and cyclists.
One of the City's councillors, Chris Hayward, told me the age of chauffeur-driven cars is coming to an end.
"We have found that more and more cars don't work," he said.
He said CEOs are often seen now on bikes or walking, but as more offices will be opening, the City must reduce and divert traffic.
Black cab drivers have their concerns.
Steve McNamara of the Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association (LTDA) says pedestrianisation is being dreamt up by middle-class blokes who don't realise how the milk for their caramel lattes is delivered.
"They are strangling the best city in the planet and they don't realise people need to have goods and services delivered," he said.
He thinks the march to pedestrianisation will kill The City.
* Oxford Street 'traffic-free' plans ditched
Living Streets, a charity, disagrees. It said what this shows is how transport has changed and how The City is now listening.
The charity argues a reallocation of road space is long overdue.
An interesting comparison to the City is in Westminster, where the mayor's flagship policy was to pedestrianise a large part of Oxford Street.
Oxford Street has terrible air quality and extremely high collision rates.
Pedestrianisation was due to be London Mayor Sadiq Khan's transport legacy of the first term - £8m was spent by TfL drawing up the plans.
There the original plan has died as the road is owned by Westminster Council.
The council reversed its support of the scheme after opposition from residents who feared traffic displacement. They had threatened to stand as independents in the local elections.
Full pedestrianisation has gone.
Richard Beddoe from Westminster Council said it had to listen to the reaction in the consultation. He believes the council had to ditch the mayor's plan as it only focused on one street and not the wider area.
Privately, City Hall was fuming at that decision.
Whatever route authorities take, they can't please everyone.
The question is, who do they listen to? Residents, workers or drivers? Or is it really about compromise?
Where the balance lies often comes down to political interpretation.
Source : BBC
TAXI LEAKS EXTRA BIT :
Comfirmed, Taxi age limit back on the agenda as TfL determined to hold trade to a certain org leader's alleged promise of 9000 ZEC vehicles by 2020
ReTaxi only bus lanes, eTaxi only ranks, eTaxi only streets and areas are coming to London....and they are coming sooner than later.
So, what do our orgs intend to do about this obvious attempt to divide the the trade....again.
Another question that hasn't been answered, is why the LTDA tried to lie in their inhouse publication (Taxi) not only to the trade but also their own 10,000 members about TFL's intention to introduce these new measures, which will dramatically effect drivers working conditions in the capital.
With the alleged words "Fake News" being banded about, the London Cab Drivers Club, (for the sake of clarity), asked TfL compliance if the signage featured in a post on Taxi Leaks (which was referred to as Fake news in the LTDA Taxi paper) was actually proposed to the DfT by TfL.
At the recent TOPS meeting, TfL confirmed they submitted the e-Taxi bus lane templates to the DfT for approval.
They added that although the signage had been approved, there are no plans (as yet) to introduce the signage on current bus lanes Londonwide.
But the question now begs to be asked....as the LTDA’s Chairman Richard Massett had access to the original templates:-
Why did they crop the TfL logo and address out of the images shown in Taxi?
Why did they infer that the signage being at the bequest of TfL was rumour and "Fake News"?
Why were they trying to cover up the fact that TfL had submitted the signage and why did they say the e-Taxi bus lane signage was intended for Manchester. A statement that has now been shown to be "FAKE NEWS".
But it’s all cleared up now, the Fake News was not the post on Taxi Leaks, it was in fact the article that appeared in Taxi Paper. This has been confirmed by TfL.