Was there ever any doubt that the ULEZ was only about extracting money from vehicle drivers?
More importantly it's about grabbing money off of people who can't afford a newer car and will be forced to pay up or take public transport. Yes public transport in London Is good but not in all areas. For me to hey to work by bus would take 1.5 hours and 2 or possibly 3 buses by car its 20 minutes.
|
|
I am not a fan of the ULEZ but, when reading articles like this, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-6984513/Family-s-delight-new-inquest-girl-s-death-linked-air-pollution.html
in the same paper perhaps there is something in it and there should be better encouragement to fund less polluting vehicles like the scrappage scheme from a few years ago.
|
|
I (personally) am not affected, but when The "powers" that be pick all these things,
Dart charge,
Congestion zone,
ULEZ
and all the other little revenue raisers set by HMG and local authorities as well as the private parking operators.
it seems that the revenue is important, but the fines for non payment are more important.
Edited by oldroverboy. on 22/09/2019 at 19:23
|
|
There has to be a balance between the payment and the fine for non-payment otherwise people wouldn't bother paying, though ANPR makes avoiding fees more difficult.
I wouldn't mind so much if the running of these things were not outsourced and the fines for non-compliance were put back in to the road / transport infrastructure. Is this the case for TFL?
|
|
Some of the money goes to this...
Most Tube drivers, more than 3,000, were paid between £60,000 and £70,000, and 900 drivers - mainly part-timers or those who left during the year - received less than £60,000
|
Some of the money goes to this...
Most Tube drivers, more than 3,000, were paid between £60,000 and £70,000, and 900 drivers - mainly part-timers or those who left during the year - received less than £60,000
I hear a lot of different figures on there earnings, so not sure who to believe but £70k to £100k was mentioned, but what the truth is I haven't a clue, its enough anyway imo
|
|
That's not a lot different to what train drivers earn.
Only a few earn >£100k, being specialist drivers and instructors. The base salary is c£55k I understand.
|
|
In Vancouver we took the underground, there was a seat right at the front. After a little while It dawned on me that I was sat where the driver should be. After a little panic it also dawned that this train had a computer driving it...how long before this comes to London transport?
|
Singapore is the same, but they both have drivers, as does the Docklands, you just can't see them!
It will never happen across the whole of London as most of the infrastructure is far too old and vast parts of the Underground isn't underground.
Edited by daveyjp on 22/09/2019 at 21:30
|
|
Where in the article does it say TFL are upset by it?
|
|
Indeed - they aren't. Typical of the press to make everything into bad news.
They talk about 'big problems' for Sadiq Khan, but then quote him as being (rightly) encouraged by the drop in polluting vehicles. One would hope that his office has budgeted for the loss in revenue.
|
Singapore is the same, but they both have drivers, as does the Docklands, you just can't see them! It will never happen across the whole of London as most of the infrastructure is far too old and vast parts of the Underground isn't underground.
Don't be too sure it wont happen, TFL are looking at all driverless and have been for a while especially as some strikes about pay have caused severe problems, and the electrification of buses is going well so far with one route that has induction charging to help prevent the diesel engine kicking in when fully loaded
if they put the cost of ULEZ up it might pay for the new electric buses they are after assuming anyone will pay it
|
It’s already here.
The Victoria line is automated but has a driver to oversee. . The Docklands Light Railway is totally computer controlled with no driver. It’s quite fun really.
|
|
That's not a lot different to what train drivers earn.
Only a few earn >£100k, being specialist drivers and instructors. The base salary is c£55k I understand.
Higher annual salaries easily result from them doing lots of (very lucrative) paid overtime, given their working week is normally only 35hrs. This has been going on for decades, despite the unions complaining about 'having' to work long hours. All they wanted was to be paid a fortune for any overtime and gladly took it.
Note also they and their spouses also get free travel, worth several £0000s pa, as well as VERY lucrative holiday and pension 'entitlements', far more than anyone in other industries.
|
|
|
|
|
There’s a hint in your reply of resentment that Tube drivers are so well paid. It’s similar money for most train drivers. And before people get cocky and say driving a train is easy, it’s anything but.
Some bullet points:
Drivers have to undergo psychometric testing, full medical and colour blindness checks before selection.
Takes up to 9 months for a driver to learn the route in exact detail.
He must know every station, which side is platform, where every bridge, signal, junction and level crossing is, and in the dark.
Has to learn ‘rules and regs’, and is tested regularly on them
Has to lean to drive the train, what the warning lights are, what the braking distances are in all weathers and also emergency procedures to ensure passenger safety
Where to stop safely in event of an emergency evacuation. Oh, and basic fault finding. And more.
The industry has a zero tolerance to alcohol caught and its sackable.
Minimum rest periods
It’s is tough to make it and be responsible for the safety of hundreds.
Two years ago LNER embarked on a recruitment drive. 15,000 applied, just 64 were good enough to drive 125mph trains.
And think about how a driver can be affected when someone one decides to jump in front of your train and there is nothing you can do about it. There’s around one fatality every day on the rail network, some never drive again because they are so traumatised. No one jumps in front of cars at 70 mph, do they?
Hope that’s an insight for those who may not be aware.
|
There’s a hint in your reply of resentment that Tube drivers are so well paid. It’s similar money for most train drivers. And before people get cocky and say driving a train is easy, it’s anything but. Some bullet points: Drivers have to undergo psychometric testing, full medical and colour blindness checks before selection. Takes up to 9 months for a driver to learn the route in exact detail. He must know every station, which side is platform, where every bridge, signal, junction and level crossing is, and in the dark. Has to learn ‘rules and regs’, and is tested regularly on them Has to lean to drive the train, what the warning lights are, what the braking distances are in all weathers and also emergency procedures to ensure passenger safety Where to stop safely in event of an emergency evacuation. Oh, and basic fault finding. And more. The industry has a zero tolerance to alcohol caught and its sackable. Minimum rest periods It’s is tough to make it and be responsible for the safety of hundreds. Two years ago LNER embarked on a recruitment drive. 15,000 applied, just 64 were good enough to drive 125mph trains. And think about how a driver can be affected when someone one decides to jump in front of your train and there is nothing you can do about it. There’s around one fatality every day on the rail network, some never drive again because they are so traumatised. No one jumps in front of cars at 70 mph, do they? Hope that’s an insight for those who may not be aware.
+1
I know I couldn't do it, I haven't got the attention span or visual acuity. As for the suicides, I was shaken up when I had to put a mouse down after our cat broke its back.
Edited by Zippy123 on 23/09/2019 at 03:10
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am not a fan of the ULEZ but, when reading articles like this, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-6984513/Family-s-delight-new-inquest-girl-s-death-linked-air-pollution.html
in the same paper perhaps there is something in it and there should be better encouragement to fund less polluting vehicles like the scrappage scheme from a few years ago.
The problem is that the 'scrappage scheme' was instituted before the ULEZs and that many cars bought under the aupices of that scheme will not comply with the latest ULEZ requirements. This means taxpayers are just subsidising people's nice new cars for no reason, benefitting the manufacturers and those who can afford to take advantage of it.
Most people cannot (or puts them further in debt if they buy on credit), especially the poor, who will be hit the hardest by the ULEZ or be forced to go everywhere by public transport, including when that isn't appropriate.
ULEZs benefit the rich elite and no-one else, as it keeps the plebs in their place at the bottom.
|
|
|
|
|
