Monday, June 24, 2019

REALITY CHECK ! in Response To Comments On Social Sean Paul Day

Firstly, it's absurd to suggest TfL don’t know the protests are happening. 

I deal with TfL police/Met/ MPSRTPC most weeks and depending on what other events require additional deployment their attitude can range from mildly accommodating to assertively aggressive. Believe me, TfL know the demos are happening as 36 bus routes have to be diverted. What the Met  really hate is for us to move about; the threat of which, allows the protest in the square to be constant. 

Relevant bodies at TfL have proposed talks but The ITA have categorically refused on the basis that the proposed dialogue is not genuine nor is it intended to sort the problems out. 

Being invited around the table is NOT the end game and six years of a phoney engagement policy is testimony to that. As far as the ITA is concerned, DIALOGUE IS DONE. Either TfL address the situation with credible and acceptable solutions or WE PROTEST.....or shall I say the core 500 WILL PROTEST. 

One thing is unequivocal, the ITA will not be complicit in enabling punitive policies being implemented against the cab trade. FULL STOP! 

Most of you would have read Paul Goghlan’s acutely observant post on FaceBook with optimism. 
Few however, will have grasped the nucleus of the point he was making. 
To emphasise it somewhat, the decommissioning of thousands of taxis will leave the cab trade unable to fulfil its remit as an official, city-wide taxi service. And yet the reduced fleet - and subsequent upturn in work- has everyone jumping for joy as though the waves from an oceanic drought have come lapping back to the shore.

Dear god, I can only smash my  bloodied face against a brick wall for so long. 

By all means don’t demo, sit on your hands and cheer-lead what this page offers. I’m all for that, but whining on because someone’s tried to wake up the status quo is something I’m not gonna lose sleep over. 

Deleting posts that stir up mild conflict has more to do with dissipating dissonance than it does supporting the trade. For goodness sake, allow the space for healthy debate - and the facts - to prevail. 

Defending doing nothing IS NOT THE ANSWER. There’s no need to fall apart at the seams in defiance against a non-compliant message. Criticism doesn’t warrant a call to action where the ensuing result is to cling to the prevailing slumber. Cognitive bias is not a sign of collective strength, and believe me, parallels drawn with the LTDA is not a good look. Surely there are times you should lead your men into battle for f*ck sake! 

That said, some frayed knots need sealing...

Bank Junction was lost by the LTDA. The ITA was asked to cease demoing so the City and the LTDA could collate data pertaining to the adverse effect that restricting access would have on our earning potential. This could not proceed if the protests continued. 

All those with memories a little more robust than a gnat reaching the end of its life span, will recall me arguing against adversity in favour of halting the demos as I believed the stats would determine the trades quickest return through the Junction.  

Even though The ITA had paved the way for the ‘all trade’ negotiations they were never invited to attend the meetings and despite a sterling effort made by the ITA and Ray from the RMT (who submitted collision and congestion data respectively) those negotiations subsequently failed from the outset (they were told that a traffic order had already been instructed and that Bank Junction was it not up for negotiation) 

Why? Well for one, there were no demands made and no timeline for when those demands should be met. Which in my book is nothing short of LUDICROUS! 

The impact assessment that was carried out by the LTDA was so far-fetched that the remake of Journey to the Centre of the Earth carried more credibility, and it was dismissed out of hand. Surely, it is inarguable that trade representatives need to understand what the fight is to be able to contest it? 

Not dissimilarly, and for the record, the negotiation policy is - and has always been- a total utter catastrophe for our industry, simply because it has taken away the threat drivers hold over policies implemented against the trade. 


The political route is redundant because the trade has absolved itself of bargaining power. TfL’s  negotiating policy has succeeded In the trade believing it has achieved its end result by merely being invited around the table. 


We have gained nothing, yet TfL has garnered a firsthand gauge on what the cab trade can - and more significantly - what the trade CANNOT do. It is the biggest disservice that the trade has ever inflicted upon itself.

Why does the trade think the traditional way of refusing to accept adverse policy isn’t permissible through the engagement policy? 

Why do we accept everything TfL lumbers us with? 

Why can we no longer say that we do not accept policies that work against our best interests? 

Why can’t we tell TfL that they need to find another solution? 

We have absurdly allowed them to take away the threat of collective rebellion, that’s why! 

I repeat for the millionth time;


If McNamara believes the political route alone will win the day - as he has done for the last 11 years - then why doesn’t the cab trade have ONE SINGLE MP asking questions on our behalf on the floor in the House of Commons? 

Why don’t we have representatives that can offer deputations and give evidence in our favour at local traffic management meetings? 

It’s an unmitigated farce and we’ve fallen for it hook, line, and sinker; all to protect a bunch of 70-80 year-olds that wouldn’t know their arse from their elbow when it comes to the future of ‘eco-transport/smart-city‘ solutions. 

Do not delude yourselves for one moment that cosying up to Wes Streeting will save us. And if McNamara is so keen on him why didn’t he have the diplomatic courtesy to greet him at the branch meeting organised by his own members? 

Streeting’s failed ten minute bill was a PH Bill to benefit minicabs. No doubt his 60k per year fee to host the APPG will keep him paying lip service to the trade for as long as he needs to (Wes and Sadiq will not politick polemically) And aren’t we glad we have MyTaxi and Gett speaking for us on our behalf? Just in case you WEREN’T wondering, TAXIAPP, which offers the only alternative working model to the corporate based apps and as a Cooperative is best suited to represent drivers, is excluded. I wonder why that is? WAKE UP!

The protests are uneventful because the majority of drivers won’t demo, much the same way as they won’t fill out consultations, lobby their MP, contribute to UTAG, support LTPR, or attend the Mayor’s QT once a month. In fact, drivers will spend more time arguing against the demos - and support each other arguing against them - than they would if they turned up for just three hours per week. And most who claim to be adherents did the one offs - not the daily ones; day in day out.

Excuses, Excuses, Excuses. 

The time and frequency of the protests are determined by those who attend- and rightly so.  If we still did 4pm - 7pm, five days a week there'd be half a dozen die hards, two mop heads and a broom stick willing to attend. Still, as far as I’m aware, taxis are officially included in the remodelling of Tooley St. If I remember rightly, the ITA inadvertently let that victory slip three weeks before Christmas, which just so happened to be five months before the Adams Family at Woodfield Rd -or is it Great Suffolk St-  decided to tweet it out.

Furthermore, for the ralliers that never attend the demos, but holler to do bridges, even though most bridges are exclusion zones and an arrest order would be automatic, we still should do bridges... or Hogarth Roundabout... or the Spur Road on the M4. Who do you think would take the hit if we did carry out those suggestions? I sure as hell know the non-attendees of the current protests wouldn’t, especially whilst there’s hay to be made due to 1000’s of cabs being decommissioned! Whoohoo! 

The old adage that even predates the The LTDA COM, that you can lead people to water, but you certainly cannot make them drink never rang truer. But what I find inexcusable is the apologists who try to brand drivers who are fighting for the future of all of our livelihoods as the bad guys.

Could anyone of those, please tell me, what is more serious than protesting being taken out of crucial elements of the Mayors transport strategy? 

What is more serious than protesting the local implementation plans that adhere to the Mayors transport Strategy that allows the borough councils the autonomy to restrict access to taxis? 

What is more serious than protesting being downgraded to a mode of transport that is considered no different to a car driven for private purposes?

What is more serious than protesting not being deemed as an integral part the public transport solution which will displace us into all other traffic; forcing us around costly, time-inefficient routes?

What is more serious than protesting being systematically replaced by ‘dynamically routed, on-demand’ hopper bus services? Whether you agree that this service will succeed or not is not the point.

What is more important than protesting the engineering of a reduced fleet which will influence mainline stations to offer ‘holding spaces’ for private hire (demonstrable already at Heathrow, City Airport, ExCel, Westfield) and eventually opening them up for tender? Why does anyone think we are any different to LUTON!!!! 


As far as the trade goes, we desperately need to find a better system for governance. Many of the irreversible risks that now threaten our trade originate from a rapid pace of industrial development coupled with the monopolisation of emerging technology and an adamance by TfL not to enforce existing legislation

Conveniently for TfL, the system currently in place to represent the trade - and effectively manage many of issues we are facing is done by using yesterday’s tools and by the same people. As a consequence, the necessary action is either not taken or is taken too late, while the problems and risks the industry faces continue to grow and mutate. 

The LTDA, UNITE & TFL are NOT apathetic or indifferent to what is happening, they have a totally different agenda to the rest of us. If denial is the issue then there is little more I can do, or say, to convince you that if we don’t defend our working practices now,  we won’t have the collective strength to do so in the future.

For reasons of clarity. I would be willing -for this trade- to stand in the middle of Piccadilly Circus, naked, with my thumb up my arse, and pirouette for 25 hours a day if I thought that drivers would support me in defending our working practices. It is however, self evident, that 20k plus drivers will not. But one thing I do know is, there are 400 who would walk through the desert with me if I asked them to and that makes it worthwhile. And the same goes for me, for them. And I hope one day the whole trade will benefit, not just those fighting for us week in, week out.

To conclude (if you’re still reading this then I advise not to  pause as it is likely to be deleted) it’s not the 400 who are protesting who will lose the trade access to infrastructure. It won’t be down to the core of the ITA men and women. It’ll be the sterility of those handing our profession over to TfL enabling them to force a one tier system. And disgracefully there’s drivers on here who don’t attend the demos that say, “TfL don’t even know the protests are happening” At least see the blatant hypocrisy- or idiocy through ever increasing blinkered eyes. 

Hate on me as much as you like, but it’s the ‘work-on's’ and the ‘stay-at-home's’ who weaken our fight EVERYTIME. And it's the media snipers who strengthen TfL's resolve. Quislings all, shameless and dishonest!  

It is only the self-entitled who believe that intransigence - when all else is rapidly changing around us - will prevail. 

Fill ya boots, make hay while the stations are going unserved.

Be Lucky

Sean Paul Day.


Anonymous said...

SPD could have had all of the debate he wanted on Facebook,(UNSTIFLED) but he didn't want it- because the heat in the kitchen got too hot for him. So he ran away to Taxi Leaks to post his verbose sermon, WHY? I'll tell you WHY:

Because Taxi Leaks robustly censors 99.9% of comments that get left.

Some drivers are sick to the back teeth of being told what they should be doing by people that sat on their hands years ago when the trade was warned what was coming!

Hugh Bar said...

Well said Mr Sean Day. If only every driver had a tenth of you passion and half the love for the cab trade as Mr Jim Thomas has, then I'm confident the cab trade would be in a far healthier position. We as a cab trade should should look at today's circumstances and forget about holding onto the past. We need urgently to reform the "knowledge" to allow new blood to replenish our ageing ranks. We need to reform our pricing on medium distance journeys (two to six mile distance). The most important people to us is our passengers who are our bread and butter. We must also focus on being more attractive to the public to use us. A lot of cab drivers I have come across believe their worth is a lot higher than it really is to what the public think. Keep up the good work the two of you by keeping fuel in the tank all day.

Hugh Bar said...

Is it true that you censor 99.9% of comments that get Left? How many comments do you decline?

Sean Paul Day said...

Thank you Mr. Annoying... I mean anonymous

It may of escaped your attention but the article was initially posted on Save Tax’s FB Page and has subsequently been posted to fifteen other ‘uncensored’ FB sites.

It’s ironic that someone who persistently hides their identity would complain about comments that are being censored...especially against someone like me who relishes the debate. You are very welcome - if it doesn’t compromise your delicate disposition too much - to visit the Save Taxi page and ignite the debate for me. Can’t wait!

Ps. When you have the guts to nail your colours to the mast, Taxileaks might consider your posts worth publishing.

Editorial said...

Hugh Bar, 1.15

About 15% of comments are deemed not suitable for publication
We do not allow profanity, which is the main reason most comments are refused publication.
We do not allow unsubstantiated claims against persons, organisations or businesses.
Also we do not allow personal attacks or insults.
We do not allow comments that contain embedded advertisements.

Anonymous said...

Now censor this Jim, because thats your game isn't it? You might not post it, but you'll read it and tell SPD. So job done.SPD has been ironed out with a reality check - that's what I set out to do and that's what I have achieved.
Like I said - the article like everything else SPD writes is verbose. Why won't SPD tell everyone how many demo's he blew off to work between 2010/15.
Him and the slags with bags had their opportunity on facebook and they ALL bottled it. The above question explains WHY!

Sean Paul Day said...

Hi Hugh

Thanks for your comments.

I’m not speaking for Jim, and I’m sure he will correct me if I’m wrong, but I have been privilege to some of the comments that are made and they only get censored or go unpublished if they are personally abusive or contain offensive language for the sake of it.

I will also never understand why those who are so aggressively opposed to anything that is said are unable to screw their convictions to sticking place and reveal their identity. You can’t complain about unpublished comments without first showing the colour of your worth.

They are trolls on any other platform. The more trials you have the more validated you become. I don’t quite think I have as many as Jim yet but I’m working on it.

Be lucky mate- and thank you for taking the time to comment.

Here’s a couple of posts to PR our trade.

Anonymous said...

Yawn All Day... How many demo's did he blow off and work while he was subscribing to the Ltda. Didn't he recently malign a popular figure on social media recently, then bottled it when he was invited to repeat the slur to the drivers face at GSS. Day is nothing but a cyber bully, inebriated by his own verbosity.

Anonymous said...

It has never ceased to amaze me, that the passion & desire of those who are prepared to stand up for their rights - in any industry - is criticised by those who do not. However, the apathetic & laid back attitude of said characters, is in complete contrast to the enthusiasm shown when they eagerly reap the benefits of those who have put themselves out.

In all industries/trades, throughout the years, there have been benefits gained & wage rises obtained, by those souls who have
‘put themselves on offer’ but have been criticised & abused whilst doing so. Then a remarkable situation evolves; the same critics & lackadaisical individuals become a collective, as they celebrate the benefits & wage increases obtained. And unsurprisingly, these same critics do not refuse these benefits/increases, that were gained by those they criticised/abused or I presume do they donate any financial increase to charities!

Basically, sir you are banging your head against a brick wall with such characters. They are the same ‘hang up hotel & phone mob’, the same ‘nick a job in front of a rank mob’ & the same ‘let out a side road & nick a job mob’ - can you spot the pattern! The problem with these people is that they cannot ‘see the wood for the trees’ but this selfish & hypocritical attitude will culminate in disaster for the majority, If attitudes don’t change.

It’s nothing to do with politics or the persuasion that you follow - whether it be, left, right, centre or up in the air. It is a simple matter of being allowed to carry out the trade you trained for. And this relates to providing a safe, convenient, practical service, without unnecessary hindrance for all, at a price not made artificially uncompetitive by external forces. By all means, it is admirable to encourage people to use public transport & cycle but .... the baby is being thrown out with the bath water here. This is because it is not only stopping unnecessary journeys but also, taxis & necessary trades from carrying out their business. Therefore, just ban all private cars & individuals from entering & let essential trades, taxis, cycles and public transport, enter central London. If not; reopen the roads & let traffic flow as otherwise it will result in permanent gridlock and associated unemployment eventually.

The taxi trade has an understandable grievance as it is being hamstrung & needs the support of all associated to it. It is a situation that needs the input from all concerned & like it or lump it, what other way is there. And always remember, there is no need to be rude or aggressive & a polite explanation of the trades problems - to anyone enquiring - is a lot more positive than ranting & raving!

Sean Paul Day said...

Mr. Annon

Firstly I’ve never taken time off a demonstration to work between 2010 - 2015 as I also subscribe to the UCG at the same time I was a member of the Redundant LTDA. I wasn’t upfront in the early days as I mistakenly thought the LTDA had an inkling of an idea about what they were doing. How wrong was I?

Secondly, as far as the ‘popular figure’ on Social Media is concerned, I’ve been in GSS every day since that conversation took place on Facebook and will in-fact be there again today so will be more than happy and willing to address the situation to whoever you’re referring to.

Sadly for you, not a single person that knows me would believe that I’m a cyber bully; but if so, how is it I’m always keen to ignite debate on any platform, including in person? I’m perfectly capable of backing up everything I say.

Whilst I’ve broached the subject of credibility, I overly keen to challenge Steve McNamara, not only to a live debate, but to his position as general secretary.. The reason being, the trades representation within TfL has been nothing short of catastrophic for the whole of the trade not just his own membership. And before you think this is about an ‘asset grab’ I’m prepared to do it, not for financial reward, but for McNamara to bow out gracefully taking all his accumulated pensions with him.

As for the remaining misfits; Thomas is done, Oddy has lost the plot, and Massett, Street, Brennan, Howard, Pesok, Smith, and Hawes, couldn’t hold an argument on behalf of the cabdriver if twenty decommissioned cabs fell from the sky and hit them square on the head. They ALL need to go.

So how about it? A live debate between myself and anyone of the slag-dog scrounges for that matter that reside there in the vaults at Woodfield Road.

Feel free to bring your tried and tested sycophants along with you. No more cyber verbose; let’s do it !

You’ve been called out !

Sean Paul Day

Anonymous said...

SPD. Your problem is you speak to the few NOT the majority as seen on the Demos the new blood accept our future accept technology has change the public perception has changed SPD is nothing but a dinosaur,move on and stop lambasting those who just want to serve the public and NOT disrupt. I doubt this will be posted because sometimes the truth hurts.

Sean Paul Day said...

I don’t even think you know how embarrassing your comments are?

The few that you refer to are the ones who had the time and energy to insure that the travelling public not only get served today but also get served future. But let’s not end it there, the very same people are the ones that contribute to everything; be it, The Taxi Trade for Military Veterans, The Disney Trips, The East London Cabbies Outing, London Taxi PR, TAXIAPP, UTAG. They are the ones lobbying their MPs and filling out consultations, They are the ones that support groups such as the ITA and DadsDefendingDaughters.…

… and do you know why these groups came about? They came about due to the relentless, ongoing, systematic failings of of our main association and their lapdogs Mary Mungo and Midge over there at UNITE. In fact, isn’t it the case that Rosie has split from Jim to join the Munster House at Woodfield Road?

You talk about me being a dinosaur; the person that hosts, produces and edits the content on LTR - be it audio or video - and played an integral part in setting up TAXIAPP from its inception. I’m one person that understood the significance of how the future of this industry was changing and how we needed our own technological platform. I was the one that talked about taxis needing to integrate into the wider ‘smart city’ landscape before it was too late (no doubt Kirby’s got his head round that one) . The insular nature of your little sectarian get up meant that you were blinkered to any deals the the trade could’ve made, to the point that it’s almost been mandated out of the picture altogether. You should be eternally ashamed!

The redundant bunch of slag dogs that turn up every month to cast phoney votes for £300 a pop couldn’t see what was around the corner because you were too busy fighting your own ‘enlightened’ membership who were trying to get you to pull your head out your arse and see what was actually happening.

Because the rest of the COM will never be able to string two thought lines together, let’s talk shop for a moment.

Take advice from a “dinosaur”

Uber is about to give the driver the end destination at the point of the ping. This is significant. Back in 2013 Hailo (in the US) were giving drivers the end destination at the point of notification - this caused an unsustainable reliability issue because drivers cherry picked the work.

Uber are changing their driver T&C's, possibly resigning to losing the employment case and will be liable for employment liability and back VAT (Something LTDA could have a look next to 5 years ago) However, new T&C will deem drivers are self employed contractors....and the absurd circular arguments re: worker rights will start again… cont…

Sean Paul Day said...

We'll have to see just how HMRC react to this if they do claim historic VAT from Uber. As for any new employment argument on the new T&C's - who knows what the government will do... but this is Uber’s life saver when they lose the supreme court employment case..... and TfL are paving the way.

Uber have always stated that they are the "agent" for the driver who is the "principal " The employment tribunal disagreed and said that Uber IS the principal. Not that I will ever expect you to challenge this as it falls way beyond your comprehension. But if you do, Advise your crusty old lawyers that they will never win an argument against Kolvin et-al about plying on the Uber App or any other app if you argue the same dusty old arguments that were argued in Reading Borough Council vs Uber plying case or some wrenched up case-Law from the 1960s

Recent cases over the last few years have pointed to the fact that not until the "contract" is formed does a driver get prosecuted for plying for hire without a licence. Therefore, is it safe to say that unlawful plying is not an offence until the contract is formed between the passenger and the "principal"....(formerly touting) When a taxi driver is indicating that he is "plying” with his light on does that mean the taxi driver is the "principal"?...I think it does because he is the principle.

So, if it's the "principal" who does the plying and Uber are saying the driver is the "principal" to avoid employment liability and VAT liability, then Uber is caught up in an unwinnable plying argument.

A little more advice from the Jurassic era, if you bury your head in the sand with regards to the corporate hailing apps then you are complicit in the trade been drilled down to a one tier system, and I will haunt you till your dying day. We force the hand of the taxi hailing apps to commit to Hackney Carriage Law by forcing them into the position of “Principle” which they’ll unceremoniously need to reject.

If your 11 cast members of Carry on Screaming cannot get your aged crusts around any of this, then you all need to go… merely advertising these apps is aiding and abetting our downfall. Stop leading the trade into oblivion, or resign yourself to being haunted FOREVER!

I mean it !

Anonymous said...

It’s plain to see the public by mass have seeked a alternative the work from the street hail is a distant past, the knowledge is now a complete joke, expecting average joe to spend 4 years of misery at a financial burden to end up working 80 hours a week for the minimum wage we are now being charged 10-12 percent for work we once got for free! consequently these apps that we all rely on for the scraps of our living are involved in one way or another with large car manufacturers who will in time replace us drivers with technology we are basically lambs to the slaughter, agreed TFL is inadequate , but trust me the devil is the enemy within on a touch of a button,the driver will eventually be surplus to requirements

Sean Paul Day said...

That’s a rather sensible response, but what I detest about it is, the defeatist attitude. And that comes about through intransigence at the top.

The endgame of all the corporate ‘hailing’ apps is automation, so why does the trade press continue to advertise and fund the rapidity of that demise?

We are absolutely not there yet, and while the policymakers favour usership - as opposed to ownership - they haven’t considered that driving is a relational vocation (not just the interaction with others but with the environment) and people enjoy it immensely. Stripping drivers of autonomy will be a monumental task.

The biggest grievance I have, is that you wilfully wilfully allowed the attack on private car ownership to include taxis. You’ve never challenged the taxi trades enmeshment with Private Hire and now we are considered no different to a car driven for personal use.

The sheer passivity towards the detrimental policies that have been inflicted on our industry is the greatest injustice ever, and those that eased those policies to be acceptable should not be in the positions they are today.