Why not just ban the lories from the road and save all that fuel?
Oh, just realised, its the only way the stuff gets to the shops from the docks!
|
Oh just realised its the only way the stuff gets to the shops from the docks!
Perhaps it's my imagination, but there seems to be *many* more trucks on UK roads than you get elsewhere in Europe.
And driving in the US; OK, I know it's a big country and maybe they use trains, but within each State they must use trucks, yet you see few on the roads.
|
Don't waste your time and expensive fuel driving arround in pointless and ill advised rolling blocades and protests. If we drive we know how much fuel costs and annoying and delaying us with your antics is not going to get you my support, for one!
Edited by Armitage Shanks {p} on 02/07/2008 at 20:32
|
The problem with these debates is they don't develop the full argument. So we all agree fuel duty is too high? Right OK, fair enough. But maybe people could then tell us:
1. What tax would they be prepared to see increased to compensate
and/or
2. What area of public expenditure are they prepared to see cut.
Maybe the truckers could enlighten us.
|
|
But if they don`t fight their own corner who will? I suppose the alternative is to keep quiet and shut up shop one by one. Who would benefit from that as money went out of the country to foreign trucks coming in to pick up the business using extra large tanks?
|
|
|
|
Government can cut expenditure by getting soldiers out of Iraq. you can imaging billions of pounds that would be saved and then tax on fuel can then be cut conveniently.
|
>>Government can cut expenditure by getting soldiers out of Iraq.
But realistically that's not going to happen is it?
|
|
|
|
Just watched BBC News where the Friends of The Earth spokesman said that truck drivers knew very little about getting the best fuel economy from their vehicles and that education and adopting defensive driving styles would help the truckers save money.
Talk about not having a clue. I know there will be the odd exception, but I don't think this chap is correct.
Equally helpful advice - All truckers should fill enclosed trailers with helium when they are running unladen. That will help.
|
They're trying to reduce their costs by losing a days work and driving into central London. Did they all pay the congestion charge?
Reminds me of the old Vietnam war graffiti:
Fighting for peace is like copulating for virginity.
|
|
|
Helium's pretty dear. Hydrogen is cheaper and lighter. And it could be piped to the engine to provide boost for those motorway inclines.
:o}
|
|
|
|
2. What area of public expenditure are they prepared to see cut.
>>
I don't suppose the truckers are great accountants, and probably accountants don't make good truckers.
As i understand it, the truckers are asking for a level playing field to enable them to compete with the army of foreign trucks that are running here for free, and when i say free, i mean operating here with no contribution whatsoever to our economy.
A very quick fag packet illustration of why we shouldn't let our trucking industry go bust, which it is doing very quickly..
My truck uses approx 1000 to 1400 litres of fuel a week, say £500 to £800 in tax revenue from the forecourt alone.
If we say the drivers wages will end up back in the economy as tax revenue of say 50% thats say £300+
Thats not including all the other contributions that the operation of the vehicle, and employment of the driver contributes to the economy, maintenance, admin, tec.
I'm being quite conservative with these estimates i believe, but every UK truck and driver will be contributing £1000 to £1500 in tax alone, without the benefits to the economy in general.
If the British operator goes out of business, then the operation will be performed by one of the many foreign operators, and the gov of the day will get nothing, zilch, nada, not one penny in tax revenue from that trucks operation..
Ditto with the foreign driver, the gov will get nowt.
But the costs of that vehicle running here will be met by the British tax payer, road maintenance, policing, etc.
So, if the govt thought further than their own expense accounts they'd realise that harmonising the fuel duties would probably net them more revenues in the long run.
Just as an aside, we the taxpayer even provide fresnel lenses free to foreign trucks entering the UK in the hope they won't kill us whilst here, yes they are a good idea, but when do we stop being a world charity and make others take responsibility as we do?
|
|
|
"1. What tax would they be prepared to see increased to compensate
and/or
2. What area of public expenditure are they prepared to see cut."
Neither, just cut out all the waste - MP's could set an example for instance in not expecting us to pay for their mortgages/new kitchens/ food/ and first ckas travel/linousines when they only live a few miles from their place of work.
Then maybe, you could start on pointless and unworkable computer schemes which are years behind schedule and not working - that NHS thing which could cost £12 billion (and still not work). Then how about the Olympic costs? What was the original "cost"? about 10% of what it will cost. How about the billions that have been spent on education and health service initiatives which have resulted in no noticeable improvement in services (Early Start, Literacy, etc) How about the billions of pounds spent subsidising "green" fuels - windfarms, etc ) and which add hundreds of pounds to your energy bills but will still need all the conventional power stations for when the wind don't blow and the tide is in (or out).
Tell you what mate - buy a copy of Private Eye one week and discover the billions wasted daily - then you might be able to "develop the full argument" rather than trotting out the words you have heard from successive governments - oh, and been prepared to weep in anguish at the way your tax money is wasted without any sign of an equivalent improvement of your standard of living while the fatcats and politicians take us for idiots.
As an aside , and to add a further motoring point to my mention of limousines above - tell me how/ why our fuel duty/fuel cost is one of the highest in the world? (Norway beats us but where else?)
Can you also explain why Chinese/Indian demand for oil is increasing by less than 10% a year and we blame them for a doubling of oil prices while production remains about the same?
Speculators, money grabbing gamblers on futures - hope the bottom drops out of their market like it has the property speculators - do I feel sorry for Wimpey and Barratt -?
Best wishes
Mr Grumpy
|
|
Speculators indeed! Why can't all western countrys make it illegal to speculate on oil and food stuffs? Recently I was in Egypt they were paying 9p a litre for 98 octane. I'm fairly sure a barrel of crude is not $142 over there!
|
|
|
PhilW
There is very little you or anyone can tell me about public waste. Only today I have had to attend a meeting to hear of the sickening news that a £6m IT project has pretty much been scrapped. The problem is that the electorate don't get clearly defined costing options when elections come. Rhetoric is fine as far as it goes but we need accurate figures.
"- tell me how/ why our fuel duty/fuel cost is one of the highest in the world? (Norway beats us but where else?)"
Quite simply because for many years the electorate have made it clear that they do not want direct taxation. Oldest con in the game - cut income tax and jack up other things. Maybe you could inform us what level of income tax Norwegians pay?
"Can you also explain why Chinese/Indian demand for oil is increasing by less than 10% a year and we blame them for a doubling of oil prices while production remains about the same? "
I suspect that that 10% increase equates to a huge amount of oil.
I don't read/buy Private Eye after they displayed a distasteful article (IMO) on the Royal Family about 20 years ago. Now there's a point, maybe we could get rid of them?
Edited by The Melting Snowman on 02/07/2008 at 21:43
|
Whisky.
The reason that your fuel is so cheap in Egypt is because high rolling tourists like yourself prop up the economy in a way the UK can't imagine.
|
Tim Yeo (Tory) was on R4 this morning stating that he supported the Governments stance on not reducing fuel duties on HGVs etc. He went on to say that the fight on pollution has to be relentless and they must not back down on this issue.
I didn?t quite follow his reasoning although he must be a clever man to be an MP. ?
The question which I would have asked was how allowing foreign vehicles to replace our own industry makes the slightest difference in pollution from the UK.
And as stated previously the Treasury will receive less by this policy
Its beyond my comprehension that we have a Government who seem intent on destroying all that we have worked for over my lifetime. Is it simply a case of the lunatics taking over the asylum, or is it big business leaning on our Politicians to enable them to make use of cheaper foreign haulage and other imported labour.
wemyss
|
|
|
|
Snowman,
Don't really want to get into this - haven't a clue what income tax is in Norway, but point I was trying to make is that politicians always make the hackneyed old point of "if you pay less fuel tax you will have fewer nurses" which is patently untrue because there are hundreds more taxes and thousands of other things our taxes go on, and there are thousands of other areas where savings could be made to "pay for nurses".
As for "a 10% increase equates to a huge amount of oil" , yes it does, but a 10% increase in worldwide demand for oil should not result in a 100% increase in price in UK in 6 months - no doubt someone will be along shortly to explain "elasticity of demand and supply for oil" shortly and put us both right.
Royal family? Well for someone who has not read Private Eye for 20 years because of a distasteful article (what the heck do you read??) then perhaps you should be aware that the civil list costs us £40 million a year but taxes/fees/income etc paid by royals on various estates etc amount to £200mill. Net cost to the taxpayer is minus £160mill - and that doesn't count all the tourists drawn here by the things they "put on", trooping of colour, and all the other stuff. Most articles in Private Eye are distasteful - especially to the con-artists who are supposedly our masters.
The point is that we blame the oil companies/world markets etc for price of fuel yet 70% of the cost is down to tax. Oil cos make less than half what the gov does out of fuel price and the Gov has made something like £500 mill this year from increased VAT on fuel price alone.
We also must remember that most of the goods we get are delivered by truck - what good is it going to do us if our transport companies go out of business (with the unemployment that implies) and is "taken over" by foreign trucks, filling up on the continent, using foreign drivers, paying no UK raod tax/fuel duty/insurance etc?
I think truckers are right to protest - whether it will have any effect is another matter.
I feel we are going to have to agree to differ on this lot!
Best wishes
Phil
|
|
|
|
|
1. What tax would they be prepared to see increased to compensate and/or 2. What area of public expenditure are they prepared to see cut.
1, Income Tax. If the Govt needs more of my money then tell me up front why and as unpalatable and unpopular as that might be, take it off my income tax. Don't insult my intelligence by trying the sneaky route or the so called green route. Doesn't wash.
2, -The vast army of bureaucrats and managers that have sprung up in public services. To use the NHS as an example, if there's a saving to be had it's always a ward or a casualty unit. When did you last hear of a tier of managemnt gone, which lets face it never used to be there and has caused minimal beneficial gains. The money some of thes people earn is incredible, particularly in local authorities.
- spin doctors for govt
- special advisers
- non essential support groups
- Legal Aid needs trimming badly
- Luxuries in prisons (I consider a t.v. a luxury)
- State Benefits need trimming badly. Why would anyone on more than £25K pa need child
allowance? is there a robust system for avoiding fraud on invalidity benefit? Is a
Jobseekers Allowance properly and robustly administered i.e. those that are too lazy to
work given sod all... (not the truly deserving who can have it with my blessing)
- Aid to foreign countries that are corrupt and waste their own resources
-failed asylum seekers i.e. not the genuine ones
- etc, etc
|
|
|
2. What area of public expenditure are they prepared to see cut.
I was dying to answer this question, but others have got there first. To the list that others have created, I'd like to add the following:
Tighten up on the benefits culture, which is abused on a horrendous scale and encourages the lazy not to work.
Some might not agree with this one, but I say cut the millions dished out to foreign countries in aid. Charity begins at home and whilst there are English children and families suffering in poverty, the Government has no business sending money abroad. Most of the aid ends up in the hands of administrators and corrupt officials anyway.
There's a huge amount of waste in Government, but the Govt is hardly going to admit it, so they will make out that any cut in fuel duty must mean a cut in spending on important services like the NHS and so on, but it is not true.
Edited by pendulum on 04/07/2008 at 00:29
|
|
|
|
Don't waste your time and expensive fuel driving around in pointless and ill advised rolling blockades and protests.
For what it's worth, the company I work for sent a 40-footer to join the central London protest today (Lots of free advertising - a photo of the truck passing Big Ben is the headline picture on at least two news websites and we can't wait for the 'papers in the morning!) The driver concerned had a full load delivery at 6.00am near Heathrow and has a collection from Dover at 8.00am tomorrow, so the net cost to our company has been his day's wages, an overnight payment and yes, the £8.00 congestion charge. We sometimes don't have enough work for every driver every day as it is, so chances are the company would have been paying a driver a day's wages to wash trucks and sweep the yard anyway.
|
When I bought my diesel vehicle 6 years ago, it was becasue it was going to be more economical,mpg on the high mileage I do,and it was also 2-3p a litre cheaper -now it is 15p a litre more expensive (£13.50 extra on every fill up) -there can be no justification for that.
I would imagine that at least 80% of business miles done daily are in commercial vehicles and lorries,ie diesel and those vehicles are the life blood of the economy -if diesel was 15p a litre less, there would be no protests or road blocks.
The current Govt stance is strangulating our industry, and subsidising foreign transportations, because they enter Britain fully laden, and leave having paid JACK
|
|
I wasn't being entirely flippant when I started this post, if the cost of diesel is sending lorry drivers to the wall, why don't they drive a little slower and save themselves money on their fuel bills?
|
Whilst on the subject - what about van drivers?
Owners of companies with fleets of delivery vans are weeping at the increased cost of fuel whilst their Transit drivers are hurtling up and down the Mways at 85+ mph. Scope for savings here I think.....
|
Just to be clear - how much work are mainland Europe based truck drivers/haulage compnies
supposed to be 'taking' from Uk based ones?
Is it in-transit jouneys from one part of Europe to Uk then back or that somehow foreign trucks are picking-up work here on extended stays?
If the former, than surely apart from journeys to-from ferry ports, Uk based haulage can buy fuel at similar prices in Europe. If the latter, than why can't Uk based hauliers 'compete' with non-Uk based truckers on their own soil (with 'cheap' fuel) - like they're appaently doing here?
My point is, if non-Uk based truckers can compete here, why can't Uk-based trucks go to Europe & do the same (when fuel prices will be similar for all)?
Might there not be just a bit missing-a-trick going on here or a bit of the we-can't-compete-with-Polish-builders syndrome we hear(d) from the building trades?
Maybe trucking is not quite 'globalised' exactly, but maybe UK-truckers have to adapt to a new reality & learn to compete out of their (local) comfort zone.
|
A good friend runs 3 x 3.5 tonne GVW "white vans", and has just replaced the fleet. The new ones are speed-limited to 56 mph.
Accountant was in the other day, and queried the fuel card account. It was 30% less than a normal month, despite miles being the same.
Result, I think.
|
When I was strapped, I did some courier work.
The firm was small, but they had some kind of tracker fitted that enabled the owner to check on the speeds his vehicles were being driven at.
Keep to 60 ish and he was happy. Regularly stray above that and you got into trouble and were put at the bottom of the list for work and "good" jobs. I was perfect so this never happened to me!
The point is, I think most well run businesses would tell their staff to drive in a fuel efficient way.
|
Whitney - this is what Asda do - they expect to save 40% in fuel costs in two years by monitoring driver behaviour.
McFarlane Transport in Leeds have just gone bust - a major player in logistics in the area - potentially 300 jobs lost. I suspect they won't be the last.
Edited by daveyjp on 03/07/2008 at 12:57
|
|
Woodbine has a very valid point. Maybe our drivers can't get the foreign businesss because they can't speak the local language.
|
|
Some are either trialling or have already fitted diesel tuning devices programmed specifically for maximum economy. Economy improvements of 5% - 10% have been easily achieved and means the device pays for itself in no time, and for 1+ million mile per year companies that's a huge cost saving.
|
>>If the British operator goes out of business, then the operation will be performed by one of the many foreign operators, and the gov of the day will get nothing, zilch, nada, not one penny in tax revenue from that trucks operation..
Ditto with the foreign driver, the gov will get nowt.
But the costs of that vehicle running here will be met by the British tax payer, road maintenance, policing, etc.<<
GordonBennett - sorry, but that is tripe.
What is this foreign trucker going to run his truck on once his tank has run dry after coming off the ferry?
If you face competition, compete - take out the first tankful and you're on a level playing field, probably one in your favour when you look at French labour laws.
Or you can roll over.
|
Nsar
Tripe is it, when have you ever seen an eastern european truck filling up with fuel at a service station in Britain.
They arrive with huge tank capacities, and thats not including the belly tanks slung under the trailer.
I suggest you keep your eyes peeled and try to spot the queues of them at our filling stations, more chance of spotting the ooslem bird.
And what on earth are you talking about with the French labour laws.
It isn't the French companies that are the problem, they do have to run legally.
|
|
A lot can be done to improve MPG by driver training, I have cruise control fitted on my truck and use it on motorways etc, but many of our deliveries are timed so if you get held up for any reason you have to try and make it up some how and that means doing 50 in a 40 limit for example, Other wise the delivery will be refused, Have to be rebooked taken back to the yard so that means wasted journey which means wasted fuel
|
Can anything be done with the `Tall barn door` aerodynamics of the average HGV? I`m thinking of some sort of streamlining. If the engines were back out in front, couldn`t the whole front end be lower and more streamlined with hydraulically raised (trailer height optimised) deflectors?
|
Oilrag, goodmorning.
I'm not so sure now that the aerodynamics make such a difference as they once did.
As the average truck only travels at 54mph, there isn't such a tremendous drag factor as when the trucks would be cruising at 60 to 70 allegedly ;)
The differences would have been tremendous with those higher speeds.
Look at the tremendous difference when travelling at 60mph in a car compared with say 80mph, the drag really makes a huge difference at the higher speeds.
Truck design has changed a lot in the last 20 or so years, and the coupling gap between truck and trailer has closed to minimum proportions, that has made a tremendous difference, as large gaps there caused tremendous drag especially in cross winds.
Plus the side deflectors fitted to many vehicles behind the cab and under the load platform along the whole length make a good improvement.
Many tractors now are as high as the trailers they're towing.
I believe the biggest drag now comes from the flat back end of most trucks where a huge vacuum is developed, (very useful and taken advantage of by drivers of small vans....) quite what can be done about that i don't know as the vehicles are already maximum length to maximise loadspace, so difficult to imagine a way of rounding off the rear sufficiently.
You can see the effects of this drag as the back doors of most trucks are filthy where the road dirt is vacuumed up.
Could this mean the return of the old flat bed trailers i wonder, always more economical as the trailer was only as voluminous as the load carried, fuel consumptions with those trailers were remakable.
Make the newer drivers learn some skills of old school haulage as well, roping and sheeting for one..;)
|
Morning GB,
I can`t even remember how long trucks have been limited..
But just as an aside, what were they really capable of before limiting regarding speed and what did limiting do to fuel consumption with the same trucks? Day after sort of thing..
Regards
|
vehicles registered after 1988 or so needed to have them retro-fitted, and I think it was 1993/1994 when limiters became a legal requirement on new trucks.
It made a big and noticeable difference to fuel consumption.
|
But just as an aside what were they really capable of before limiting regarding speed and what did limiting do to fuel consumption with the same trucks?
NC's right it made a great difference to fuel consumption, but could be balanced against lower productivity, not as i'm advocating going back in time on this instance as the roads are far too crowded now, and some new generation drivers may not have the correct responsibility of attitude in all cases, and some of us old uns were bad enough.;)
I'm going to be candid here, the better trucks i've had over the years from the early 70's would cruise comfortably at 70mph all day long, with a maximum speed available of between 80 and 90 mph in some cases, not as anyone i'd know would do such a thing you understand, but 70 was a good smooth cruise, and it has been my experience with British trucks that they were geared for those speeds, whereas the foreign trucks with some exceptions weren't quite so high geared, so IMO were not as economical when worked hard.
My normal consumtion back then was 7 to 7.5 mpg running at 38 tons with very unaerodynamic vehicle.
Once or twice i tried an economy run with a flat bed trailer and have achieved over 11 mpg with the same vehicle, running between 55 and 60 at about 900 to 1000 rpm, peak torque on that vehicle.
Don't forget the roads were much freer running then and when up to a high cruising speed it could be kept up, thats where the economy comes in.
I now have a vehicle thats limited to 54mph, has 20 computers so i'm told and does 7.5 mpg.
Other operators can get better consumption with the right choice of vehicles and depending on the work involved, hear of 10mpg quite regularly, but i'd like to see the work patterns involved, and the type of weights and destinations too.
My vehicle weighs over 22 tons empty, so is effectively laden all the time, and the type of multi drop and town work associated with car deliveries doesn't make for the ideal economy runs, plus the engine is running to operate the hydraulics during loading/unloading.
One may be forgiven for thinking that there has been no progress fuel consumtion wise on hgv's, but as with the newer diesel cars, all the emission devises sap a lot of power and on it goes.
And we'll never see those clear roads where one could get up to 70 and just let the vehicle, car or truck or bus cruise comfortably.
|
Fuel saving as practised by the (mostly) eatern european drivers. Incredible amount of fuel tanks (under slung etc.). If in doubt look at a uk lorry against a easter europe one! Well over double (possibly triple) capacity of fuel.
As for "how are they taking the jobs?" Not only are they bringing in the loads direct to the warehouses; (thats because we dont make anything) they are now being used more and more to actually distribute a load from the very warehouse they delivered to to a customer before returning to the ports! Not only cheap to get here, but running around cheap too! Most uk lorries actually travel miles to get to their next load ! Just imagine how the cost savings are of dropping 1 load and picking a new one up at the same place!
Also many lorries arrive over laden (dont know of any that have been stopped and impounded even at roadside checks! They are normally just given a "warning" where the Uk lorries are actually forced to stop and transfer their loads to another lorry!).
Cant name the firms involved (name and shame policy?) but I know of one that does this around 50 lorries daily! But dont worry its the uk taxpayer that picks up the bill for the damage to the road and structures/services etc!
Why do the majority of people nad especially the politicians stick their heads in the sand, quote supply and demand and free trade and watch our economy go with it?
If we lose our service industries (we have no manufacturing industry), what have we got left? Replies on the back of a postage stamp?
|
Good post Yorkie, got a feeling its going in one and out the other though.
Maybe its that self destructive mentality that seems peculiar to these shores, we do seem to want to destroy the country as quickly as possible.
Good old Tommy, can always be relied on to play by the rules, at the same time making all sorts of allowances and granting advantages to others.
|
VOSA have a weighbridge on the A20 half way up the hill out of Dover. I've never yet seen it in use, and I go past it often.
There's another by the A24 N bound at Abingdon - I go past that and see the tumbleweed blowing around.
No chance of getting caught, so why bother obeying the law?
|
|
Has anyone done the reverse and taken a load across Europe? If so, how did it compare with truck driving (and facilities) here in the UK?
|
|
Finger trouble - that's the A34 N-bound, not the A24, of course....
|
Has anyone done the reverse and taken a load across Europe? If so how did it compare with truck driving (and facilities) here in the UK?
My sis has been doing that for the last 30 years OR, i maybe could get her to write a piece.
No promises, but if she does, lots of long words so i'm lost already.;)
|
Look forward to that GB if she wants to post that is.
Years ago I remember British trucks forming up into little groups of two or three a long way from home on Continental Motorways. Noticed more then as i was In a 2CV at lowish speeds.
Regarding the post topic, it looks like no tips are needed, the governer`s seem to have already done most of what is possible.
Could take another 5mph off I suppose..
;)
|
|
|
>> Oh just realised its the only way the stuff gets to the shops from the >> docks! >> Perhaps it's my imagination but there seems to be *many* more trucks on UK roads than you get elsewhere in Europe.
Just more spread out in Europe, BP
|
|
|
|
|
Even better you could have `Road Trains`
Stan Robinson Ltd of Stafford & Denby Haulage of Lincoln are pestering the govt. for permission to trial roadtrains, i.e towing two trailers but the dept. of Transport is umming and arring
|
Speaking as someone who (a) saw the protests in London this week and (b) listened to Prime Ministers Questions in Parliament on the very day of the protests, my observations were that :
1. They caused significant inconvenience to the public. Roads around Parliament were gridlocked for quite a considerable time.
2. Members of the public were utterly unimpressed
3. *some* of the truck drivers behaved appallingly (e.g. blasting extremely loud air horns while driving close to pedestrians, terrifying small children)
4. The cost to you and me (the taxpayer) of policing their little outburst must have been huge (it tied 3 riot vans full of foot patrols, plus around a dozen traffic cars/motorbikes plus a helicopter up for several hours)
5. It carried that little weight and influence that the subject wasn't even mentioned during Prime Ministers Questions !!!
I therefore conclude that (a) it had little or no effect on those it was intended to persuade, (b) it annoyed a significant number of the public who will now be a little less sympathetic towards truckers than they would otherwise have been and (c) wasted an awful lot of public taxpayers money.
Well done to all involved. not.
|
All probably true whoop whoop except......
There are now hints at government level that the fuel duty may be shelved, levelled, held or other. In other words its being looked at and some outcome is probably likely.
It may therefore have been achieved by peoples protests!
If you are quite happy to keep paying extra fuel duty tax continually and watching the price of EVERYTHING rise as a consequence, and wtach our transport industry (1 of our biggest service industries?) get decimated then feel free.
For me I support the need to balance the increased fuel duty to keep the country stable !
Protests are ok as long as they dont upset anybody? Is that the idea?
|
If it's possible to undercut a UK trucker by slinging some extra fuel tanks on your vehicle and being prepared to drive across a continent before the domestic trucker has even got into his cab then I'd suggest that it's a market that was simply waiting to be cracked open.
Truckers are increasingly sounding like farmers - the world owes them a living and they think have a given right to protection from competition and respond by go-slows on motorways and fuel depot blockades to make life a misery for everyone else. That everyone else includes the people who buy the products that truckers so often tell us are delivered by them (as if they were doing it for the love of it).
It's a free market and that means everyone is free to find ways to cut you out of the picture.
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 05/07/2008 at 22:14
|
|
Nsar......unbelievable....and not worthy of argument.
|
Personally I cant wait for the day when the majority of software (not just hardware) comes from china etc!
Lets see who is concerned about the greater economy then?
Why cant/wont people se that the argument over fuel/transport is more than just the fuel itself!
A few other facts of transport for you!
O licences, already covered by others. Huge expense just for the uk transporters, not the europeans even thought its supposed to be!
Drivers hours; strictly controlled in uk. Not so in Europe. A lot of lorries are run 24 hours a day from europe to here and back by 2 drivers. Strictly illegal to our firms.
Fuel costs, already discussed in details!
Over weight lorries; strictly controlled against uk lorries; not so against others. Quite possible to lose an O licence for breach of this! Quite easy to make extra money by breach of this if not controlled!
Driving standards, discussed elsewhere recently. Easy for uk driver to lose his licence and his firm get fined. Just a "warning" given to others!
Need I go on? There are lot more examples!
Competition is not a problem! Flouting rules made for "all" is !
|
|
|
Nsar......unbelievable....and not worthy of argument.
Nsar.....believable....and maybe hard to argue against.
gordonbennett,
From your posts over the last few months, I know you to be a competent and caring driver who knows the job inside out.
But there is no doubt the road haulage industry in general is putting itself across as Nsar says.
If you put your problems before the wider public, as the haulage industry has done, then it is quite reasonable for that public to respond in anyway they chose.
Patting us all on the head and telling us we don't understand may improve your lot, but I doubt it.
Edited by ifithelps on 05/07/2008 at 20:38
|
ifithelps.
Sorry if i came over with a patronising attitiude, thats hopefully not me, but i concede i may not be good at getting how i feel across, i drive a truck, i'm not a PR consultant.
The haulage industry could have done with some good PR over this issue.
Unfortunately as others are finding, getting a fair hearing in our country now is getting increasingly difficult.
The media will with few exceptions read off the hymnsheet that suits the people that own them, this applies to many issues.
With selective editing the most reasonable argument or person can come across as something completely different.
Difficult to know what other ways they could have brought attention to their issues anyway, the govt arn't interested. Quite why our government is so anti its own people is quite beyond me.
The haulage industry doesn't with a few exceptions have the resources to support good publicity against a hostile media. Maybe those that are doing very nicely, and there are one or two, would rather not bite the hand that feeds them.
Ours isn't the first industry to be unfairly treated and it surely won't be the last.
All our industry asks for is a level playing to compete against other EU companies that whilst able to operate considerable distances within our borders (1000 to 1500 litres of cheaper fuel goes along way, a weeks running), are allowed to operate in unsafe and illegal ways with impunity.
Its also very difficult to have reasoned argument against the type of posting you referred to.
Our industry has always taken bad press and bad publicity, sometimes deserved, often caused by chaps such as me who are i suppose the people who the average person sees representing the industry.
The standards only get further eroded as the remuneration levels drop, most old school drivers, the sort i would trust implicitly have got out, and its a great pity to lose good experienced and skilful people.
Everyone thinks a truck driver only has to pass a test and then thats it.
Thats so wrong, it takes years to become totally competent, there are so many scenarios, so much depends on feel and knowledge. And to bore you again, any fool can drive a modern truck down a motorway, if only thats all there was to it.
The way things are going it won't be long before there will be much of the old industry left, it should be very interesting to see how our replacements are viewed by the average person.
If we're still kicking about this could be a good discussion to pick up in ten years time.
|
there has to be a happy medium, between free and fair competition, to keep things competitive..and a degree of protectionism to ensure our country's companies compete on a level playing field
have a look at what happened to this country's merchant navy fleet.....it's now virtually non exitsent...and yet we're an island nation, with the 4th/5th largest economy in the world
shipbuilding...no, gone
car building...no, gone
we stick to the rules and pay decent (ish) wages, which means those that don't stick to the rules and/or pay cheap wages have an advantage
my cousin is a farmer, believe me there's hardly any profit in that game nowadays. He might live in a big house and own a load of fields...but that lot has been in the family for over 120 years..there's no other way he'd afford to be in them..and apart from selling off large chunks of it he's not got much income coming in either
|
"Truckers are increasingly sounding like farmers - the world owes them a living and they think have a given right to protection from competition"
SPOT ON!
It's a free market and that means everyone is free to find ways to cut you out of the picture.
My sentiments exactly.... well said!
|
"Truckers are increasingly sounding like farmers - the world owes them a living and they think have a given right to protection from competition.
I`m an Employed trucker , not an owner driver and i don`t sound like a farmer because i don`t go round saying ooh arr and gerroff moi laaand
oh to be a trucker..........!
|
>>>It's a free market and that means everyone is free to find ways to cut you out of the picture.
I would like to hear your proposals as to how you plan to do this.
I notice in another thread it may cost you a little more in fuel since when you 'slipstream' a lorry to save fuel it is ok, but when we do the same thing to maintain a safe distance from the lorry in front and stop cars filling that gap, it is called 'Tailgating' and frowned upon.
The double standards in some of these posts amaze me.
Gordon Bennet delivers the cars you drive, I deliver the food you eat, the tyres you drive on and the astroturf your children play footie on, yet you still look upon us with disdain.
It's been announced this week that HGV Test fees and Operators Licence fees will go up by 5% as from 1st August so it isn't just the price of oil that is hitting us.
This, along with other recently announced funding increases for VOSA, means the UK Haulier continues to pay through the nose, whilst foreign operators pay scant regard for any of our regulations.
I think you all agreed on the recent Tanker Drivers thread that you didn't want a dodgy EU driver behind a full petrol tanker, does this mean it is OK to have them behind anything less flammable?
Pat
|
I notice in another thread it may cost you a little more in fuel since when you 'slipstream' a lorry to save fuel it is ok but when we do the same thing to maintain a safe distance from the lorry in front and stop cars filling that gap it is called 'Tailgating' and frowned upon.
I have a problem with car drivers who overtake me just to sit in front of my bumper causing me to drop back to re-establish a safe braking distance .
Why is it that the `Keep Your Distance`advice on motorways i.e the painted chevrons
on the M1 M6 etc gets ignored?
|
>>Gordon Bennet delivers the cars you drive, I deliver the food you eat, the tyres you drive on and the astroturf your children play footie on, yet you still look upon us with disdain.<<
pda - I don't look upon anyone with disdain, but with comments like this you're trying to make out that you are doing some kind of social service as if you're policeman or a nurse. You're not. You're in the private sector, being paid to do a job. You're no more putting food on the nation's plates in some heroic, knights of the road way than I am earning the money doing what I do to spend at the supermarket that pays your wages.
If someone finds a cheaper, more efficient way to do what you or I do, then we face the pressure to match it or beat it. I don't think that's going to change any time soon, but the truckers do seem to be adopting this King Canute mindset.
Edited by Nsar on 13/07/2008 at 10:53
|
>>>If someone finds a cheaper, more efficient way to do what you or I do, then we face the pressure to match it or beat it. I don't think that's going to change any time soon, but the truckers do seem to be adopting this King Canute mindset<<<
I presume then you approve of Foreign Haulage firms coming into this country and doing the work we do, but making no contribution to our economy?
I also presume that you approve of our elected government not only allowing this situation to happen, but actively encouraging it?
Have you wondered what will happen in 5 years time when something else is taxed to cover the loss of income from the British haulage firms, and that tax affects your motoring?
Competition is fine providing the playing field is level and this one most certainly isn't.
The only level playing field we have in this debate, is that the increased fuel prices affects us all as car drivers and lorry drivers,employer or employee, and will ultimately affect the cost of everything we buy.
In view of that I would have thought we would, at the very least, have been able to have taken a rather longer sighted view and have agreed it isn't acceptable.
|
Pat (pda), im sorry i've given up trying to argue this any more.
Its flogging a dead horse, the one with the blinkers..;)
About 5 or 6 posts above, Westpig gave one of the most common sense answers i've seen on this and many more subjects.
Keep safe out there. GB
|
|
|
|
|
