I agree with the Guy it’s all about getting more money out of us drivers wait and see if the French/Germans etc will carry it on I bet it gets put back or cancelled in them countries but us Brits will show them how it’s done even though all we get at the end is a nice card to go with all the other cards I have. By the way I have my cpc as I done a full ADR course paid by myself to further myself then I done the last 7 hours with the company I got a ADR job with who paid for it. But I still think it’s a RIP OFF…
Roymondo:
cheekymonkey:
At the last one I was taught that for every 1000ltrs(say 1tonne-ish)of diesel burnt produces 2.6 tonnes of Co2! I’m no particle physicist but I know that’s hardly possible!Shows just how wrong a truck driver can be, doesn’t it ?
A litre of diesel fuel is mostly carbon (roughly 87%) which works out at around 720g of carbon per litre. Each carbon atom (atomic weight 12) combines with two oxygen atoms from the air (each with an atomic weight of 16) to produce CO2 (atomic weight 44 - i.e. almost 3.7 times the weight of the carbon). So yes, you really do get 2.6 tonnes of CO2 when you burn 1000 litres of diesel.
Thanks for that. That explains it nicely. I take Winseers point about Carbon combining with Oxygen in the atmosphere, but of course the Oxygen isn’t doing us harm until it’s burnt and mixed with Oxygen, to make Co2.
Still slightly irrelevant to a driver though, is it not? It’s sufficient to know that the truck we are driving is a polluter, and the extent of the pollution is dependent upon how it’s driven.
Cheers.
6 litres may be average lung capacity, but that’s total capacity. In normal breathing a healthy adult only inhales/exhales about 0.5 litres with each breath. So the total volume exhaled each day is about 7200 litres. Exhaled air is roughly 5% CO2, so our imaginary person is breathing out about 360 litres of CO2 each day - or about 0.66 kg. Now compare that with the roughly 500 kg of CO2 emitted by a truck using a modest 200 litres of diesel each day.
the maoster:
^^^^^^^ Spineless HGV drivers? Withdraw your labour when they brought medicals in at 45 did you? Withdraw your labour when they brought digi cards out did you? No, I thought not.You don’t agree with the DCPC, well I’ve got news for you, many more don’t either, but they aren’t cutting their noses off to spite their faces, no they need to work to put food on the table and whilst they may not like it they live in the real world. By all means be my guest and make your stand if it makes you feel better, but don’t dare call anyone who has done their DCPC a spineless coward just because your teddies are out of the pram.
just one question to you
what do you think would happen if every driver said enough is enough and didnt get a cpc card ■■? thats why i used the term spineless as in my eyes they would never be able to enforce it as the haulage industry would come to a complete stop. which in turn effects every other industry out there. so the whole country would come to a stop. but drivers just dont see it.
its not just this new card that has got my back up its the industry as a whole.
all the new trackers, cameras, digi card that monitors almost everything, the smoking ban the transport office knob heads etc the list is a mile long these days and of course the buck starts and ends with a driver if anything at all goes wrong
i could go on and on but most of you guys have your card already so whats the point ?
just mark my words in a few more years time you will have even more to do as they will come out with something else if they keep on getting away with this sort of thing
so its really all down to each and every one of the drivers to either come together or carry on with the i am alright jack and look after number 1 thing
Mine been paid for so no problem!
But would I pay to do it my self?
Yes if I had a job that paid well!
And if there is a shortage of driver, wages will go up, you will work for the highest bidder, will there be a shortage NO! You will all bottle it at the last minute !
VOSA mite make a bit of money too, so expect a big smile “hello driver do you have your DCPC card?” .
Desypete I know exactly where you’re coming from mate and I agree if we all stuck together etc, but you may as well sieve sand tbh as it’s never gonna happen. In fact it never has happened. The unfortunate and maybe unpalatable truth is that although it’s nice to band together to help each other out the only truth is that you can only look after you and your own first and foremost. So whilst the idea of making a stand and saying “enough is enough” sounds great the reality is that most drivers struggle to pay bills and care for their families and are not going to risk that for anything.
As an aside we aren’t the only band of workers forced to pay to keep our jobs you know; gas fitters, plumbers, electricians and I’d guess a whole load of others do too. They probably pay a ■■■■ sight more than we do too.
Why should LGV/PCV driver’s be exempt from Refresher training■■? What about an ADR driver?? He has to carry out refresher training or he doesn’t do anymore Hazardous loads? What about a FLT driver? - he drives his Fork-truck every day but may need to be re-tested every three years to keep legal - depending who he works for.
The problem is as I see it is: 1) Who pays for DCPC?
2) When it takes place? - normal working day, paid=great. Day off, Saturday, unpaid leave=not good!!!
3) Quality of training - I’m sure some drivers will testify they learnt something whilst on DCPC. Of
course, on the other hand some courses can be a waste of time & money - company’s or driver’s
money (see FLT driver above).
So driver’s are hard done to because of DCPC - well they ain’t the only ones - they have got away without any refresher training - until now & for some it’s well overdue. It can be rewarding, it can enhance career prospects (as can ADR), it can even be enjoyable & worthwhile. What we need to do is aim to get more courses achieving more of these goals.
I’ve been in the office now for the grand total of a week and one thing I’ve already learned is that most drivers would sooner whinge than eat their dinners. One bloke this morning came in, had a look at his run, and proclaimed “they’re taking the ■■■■ ing ■■■■ here. That’s a day’s work, that is”. He wasn’t joking either, and didn’t take kindly to it when I pointed out that he had a day to do it in. 
If it wasn’t the DCPC - and I agree it’s inadequate and not really fit for purpose, but I don’t see that as my problem - it’d be something else.
Natural born moaners us truckers. Personally I’ve found some of tge CPC useful as I been at this a long time and, some stuff has changed. Most of it could probably be covered in a day, the rest is tedious.
I haven’t driven a truck for around eight years now, but will still reluctantly be losing a week of my holidays and about £300 plus of my own money this summer, just to keep the option open if I ever wanted to drive commercially again in the future.
Trouble is none of us knows how the job situation is going to evolve or change over the next few years. 
I used to do commercial stuff, steel, tippers, machinery etc and avoided the shop delivery crud (and home deliveries) like the plague. Trouble is that is all the agencies seem to offer now. 
Daz1970:
Batmann:
Don’t forget to factor in those who will still drive after the deadline without a DCPC.It’s only a game of odds before they are found, and how big is the punishment also? Big enough to force everyone to play the same game despite the divide?
How will this be policed come the deadline?
It’s okay bringing in new rules on paper, but in practice, policing them is a different ball game altogether.
I reckon we won’t see a shortage of drivers come October and I reckon some with the grandfather right will keep driving until they are caught…
As has been said many times it ain’t just going to be about getting caught…Operators and companies also have a responsibility to not employ any driver (current employees and future employees) without a current DCPC qualification - it will usually form part of licence check procedure. Already agencies/firms are starting to ask for Driver Qualification Card…no card = no interview…regardless of experience & suitability for job role. Come September those without DCPC will become as good as unemployable!!!
Yes, as has been said, like it was said fitters needed it to take vehicles to test…
This has been the modus operandi all along. Rather than introduce appropriate training in a thoughtful and practical manner the goal has just been to get as many people as possible to sit for(waste) a day listening to a lot of drivel spouted by anyone with the brass neck to set themselves up as a trainer.
Whenever, the usefulness or relevance of this has been queried the reponse has just been scare tactics of action against driving or operator’s licences.
The legislation is quite clear that DCPC is the driver’s responsibility but, when they started to panic take-up was too low they waved the big stick at employers so they would organise and finance the training so the deadline was met.
However, because as with all aspects of DCPC those responsible for its implementation didn’t think it through their actions have defrauded the Inland Revenue of an enormous sum that will need resolving.
Because drivers are responsible for DCPC those whose employers will not pay for it are paying for it out of their own (after tax) pocket. Where employers have paid for it someone is therefore liable for the tax as they have effectively paid for something an employee is liable for out of free of tax funds and it is therefore a benefit in kind.
Employers cannot pay for something an employee would otherwise have to pay for out of after tax wages in the same way they can’t pay your electric, gas or sky subscription out of your before tax wages as a perk.
This will have to be resolved and I suspect a lot of drivers who were thinking DCPC is no problem for them as their employer laid it on will find themselves with a tax bill. I would suspect if the employee was compelled to attend the employer is liable for the tax bill and if it was optional (which it often has been as VOSA encouraged this by classifying it as rest) the employee will be liable.
The VAT is another issue in itself which companies will be claiming back (so effectively not paying) and which drivers funding it themselves have no way to do so.
Wihtdrawn - talking tosh myself (again)
Own Account Driver:
However, because as with all aspects of DCPC those responsible for its implementation didn’t think it through their actions have defrauded the Inland Revenue of an enormous sum that will need resolving.Because drivers are responsible for DCPC those whose employers will not pay for it are paying for it out of their own (after tax) pocket. Where employers have paid for it someone is therefore liable for the tax as they have effectively paid for something an employee is liable for out of free of tax funds and it is therefore a benefit in kind.
Employers cannot pay for something an employee would otherwise have to pay for out of after tax wages in the same way they can’t pay your electric, gas or sky subscription out of your before tax wages as a perk.
This will have to be resolved and I suspect a lot of drivers who were thinking DCPC is no problem for them as their employer laid it on will find themselves with a tax bill. I would suspect if the employee was compelled to attend the employer is liable for the tax bill and if it was optional (which it often has been as VOSA encouraged this by classifying it
Try again:
I think that’s tosh, because the training should be allowable against tax regardless of whether it’s the driver who is paying for it or the employer. Indeed I note that some Trucknet members have done just that. HOWEVER, I also note this little gem: urtu.com/news_archive/hmrc_c … _taxation2 which says that employers can claim the cost of the training as a legitimate business expense against their tax, but that employees who have to pay for the training themselves cannot. But it does also say that there is no tax liability for employees where the employer picks up the tab. The position of self-employed drivers is slightly different - they can get tax relief on the cost of maintaining/renewing their skills, but not for obtaining new ones.
Roymondo:
Own Account Driver:
However, because as with all aspects of DCPC those responsible for its implementation didn’t think it through their actions have defrauded the Inland Revenue of an enormous sum that will need resolving.Because drivers are responsible for DCPC those whose employers will not pay for it are paying for it out of their own (after tax) pocket. Where employers have paid for it someone is therefore liable for the tax as they have effectively paid for something an employee is liable for out of free of tax funds and it is therefore a benefit in kind.
Employers cannot pay for something an employee would otherwise have to pay for out of after tax wages in the same way they can’t pay your electric, gas or sky subscription out of your before tax wages as a perk.
This will have to be resolved and I suspect a lot of drivers who were thinking DCPC is no problem for them as their employer laid it on will find themselves with a tax bill. I would suspect if the employee was compelled to attend the employer is liable for the tax bill and if it was optional (which it often has been as VOSA encouraged this by classifying it
Try again:
I think that’s tosh, because the training should be allowable against tax regardless of whether it’s the driver who is paying for it or the employer. Indeed I note that some Trucknet members have done just that. HOWEVER, I also note this little gem: urtu.com/news_archive/hmrc_c … _taxation2 which says that employers can claim the cost of the training as a legitimate business expense against their tax, but that employees who have to pay for the training themselves cannot. But it does also say that there is no tax liability for employees where the employer picks up the tab. The position of self-employed drivers is slightly different - they can get tax relief on the cost of maintaining/renewing their skills, but not for obtaining new ones.
The guidance in the link is effectively the existing HMRC tax position on training for companies and individuals and is well understood and reasonably fair as if a company wants to train up workers that’s a legitimate business cost and if a private individual makes a choice to upskill they have to withstand the cost from private earnings.
This is all well and good for say forklift, hiab or class 1 training but, DCPC is not at all interchangeable it is training mandated in law that all must have it and the law is clearly framed that responsibility for obtaining it rests with the driver.
It is clear the intention was to create a private market in training between drivers and independent businesses providing it. If it had been kept like this the issue would have been avoided but I think they panicked when they worried implementation by the deadline may fail. Consequently they’ve undermined the viability of the training companies as sustainable businesses and caused (justifiable) resentment amongst any employed drivers forced to finance the training themselves whilst simultaneously depriving the exchequer of a substantial amount of revenue.
There are (very) roughly 300,000 professional LGV drivers in the UK. If every single one of them had their DCPC courses paid by their employers, that would represent roughly £3m a year (assuming £100 for a one-day course) on which the employers would be getting tax relief against their Corporation Tax (at %20). So that’s a loss to the Treasury of £600,000 each year. A phrase beginning with “drop” and ending with “ocean” comes to mind. VAT doesn’t enter into it, as it is eventually borne by the consumer anyway, whether he is the recipient of the training or the end user of the goods that are transported by the haulage company.
Roymondo:
There are (very) roughly 300,000 professional LGV drivers in the UK. If every single one of them had their DCPC courses paid by their employers, that would represent roughly £3m a year (assuming £100 for a one-day course) on which the employers would be getting tax relief against their Corporation Tax (at %20). So that’s a loss to the Treasury of £600,000 each year. A phrase beginning with “drop” and ending with “ocean” comes to mind. VAT doesn’t enter into it, as it is eventually borne by the consumer anyway, whether he is the recipient of the training or the end user of the goods that are transported by the haulage company.
Not sure the figures being a drop in the ocean are an argument and certainly not one you could use on a tax inspection. Benefit in kind is taken seriously enough even where gifts like shopping vouchers as a christmas bonus are concerned.
In any case it’s £30m not £3m. The comparison is between any employed driver going and securing training themselves using after tax wages. At companies where it is laid on the drivers are effectively getting a £100 per year tax free pay increase.
The VAT the driver doing training privately is not later recouped in the company claiming back scenario if you think about it a bit harder. The DCPC is not a tangible item like a washing machine passing through the supply chain. It may put some increase on operating costs and what the company are forced to invoice/charge but not much.
Frazer smith:
I agree with the Guy it’s all about getting more money out of us drivers wait and see if the French/Germans etc will carry it on I bet it gets put back or cancelled in them countries but us Brits will show them how it’s done.
Sorry FS, but all drivers in France have had the card since Sept 2012.
See page 16
Interesting that from that EU document linked it makes no mention of employers providing the training and seems to almost go out of its way to imply independent third party provision.
2.3.3. Organisation of the training
The training is generally provided by driving schools, but it can also be provided by non-
profit bodies, vocational schools, vocational colleges, high schools14, or secondary schools15.
In some Member States16 the training is partially funded by the public sector.
Frazer smith:
‘… it’s all about getting more money out of us drivers …’
Wrong: Think “Big Picture” 
The Big Picture is all about the UK zone of the EU being Federalised a tiny piece at a time in the hope that - in our case in today’s age of dumbed-down diversity, no-one here cares about much other than crap telly with it’s incumbent Graham Norton/big-norks/throw-away type values.
They, ie, the faceless & unelected European administrators, are legislating DCPC-type manoeuvres without you or anyone else here really understanding or caring why it’s happening.
Meanwhile, the Labour, Libdem & Conservative parties reckon such a system, whereby we’re content to be nannied in order to save ourselves from ourselves, is - cowardly without properly saying-so, overall good for us Muppets of the (Former) UK 
The ‘…money out of us drivers…’ aspect is a secondary spin-off from how EU supports fabricated, unwanted & anti-democratic & expensive, one-size-fits-all pseudo-jobs 
Anyway, it’ll all soon pale into insignificance when the EU finds itself at war with Putin for which increased DCPC training costs and lots more funding taxes for the EU beside will doubtless pay for a cocktail of weak-willed ‘conferences’ at which failed leaders (Hague, Kinnock, etc) will subordinate to the EU Foreign Minister (Baroness Ashton- who?) to cack it up further in the face of that former Russian heavy who is playing a blinder against the God Father perpetrators of the DCPC.
Happy Keith’s on the money again.
Trouble is mate no buggers listening as history repeats itself, sheep led by donkeys now.