Get rid of driver CPC as it stands?

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
1

We have a chance right now to get rid of this poorly thought out bit of labour legislation.

Our new touchy feely government has offered the UK population the chance to tell them what New Labour laws should be repealed (they have already started to get rid of home information packs).

If we have someone out there who has the contacts, knowledge and time to set up a petition amongst bus and lorry drivers to make a serious protest about the ill thought out ongoing driver CPC would there be enough of us to support it?

My thoughts are that there are three options:

  1. Get rid of the driver CPC altogether.

After all, it is already enshrined in law that it is up to both the employer and employee to ensure that they are properly trained to do their job safely and legally.

  1. Make it a requirement for all new drivers.

This will give the government a get out clause so that those people who saw the chance to make a shedload of money out of a poorly thought out law would still have a business, but maybe not an apartment to retire to in Monaco as they are hoping for now.

  1. Keep it for all drivers but get rid of the ongoing part.

Lets look at the case of Charlie who passes his test at 21, what will the CPC offer him when he is 63 and is looking to take his 43rd course?

As evidence to how poor this law is, it could be pointed out that since only attending the course is enough to gain a CPC then the attendee would not need to even understand the language to gain this “qualification”.

As far as I am concerned, this was just another job creation scheme brought in by a government that had no idea or care of the effects of the laws they passed, and as such needs to be thrown out in the bin with Gordon Brown.

If there is a person with more knowledge and contacts out there, with the time and inclination to set this petition up, then they would have my support, any volunteers?

Any thoughts from anyone else?

2

schrodingers cat:
As far as I am concerned, this was just another job creation scheme brought in by a government that had no idea or care of the effects of the laws they passed,

It’s EU law, not the Labour Government or Gordon Brown’s. Like it or not we are part of the EU and the recent change of Government doesn’t change that or EU laws applicable here.

3

Coffeeholic:

schrodingers cat:
As far as I am concerned, this was just another job creation scheme brought in by a government that had no idea or care of the effects of the laws they passed,

It’s EU law, not the Labour Government or Gordon Brown’s. Like it or not we are part of the EU and the recent change of Government doesn’t change that or EU laws applicable here.

In that case vote UKIP :blush:

4

It still doesnt make the law right! So why havent the French blockaded the ports to the UK?

5

schrodingers cat:
It still doesnt make the law right! So why havent the French blockaded the ports to the UK?

It’s mainly because of the French we have it. They have had something similar for many years and were one of the main driving forces behind the Driver’s CPC legislation.

Also French drivers don’t protest any more. They haven’t done a meaningful protest, blockade, or go slow for at least ten years and anything they attempt these days is clamped down on very quickly by the authorities with penalties such as loss of licence facing them. The cry of - “We should be more like the French” is redundant these days as we are indeed exactly like them now, neither they nor us protest at all.

6

Coffeeholic:
It’s EU law, not the Labour Government or Gordon Brown’s. Like it or not we are part of the EU and the recent change of Government doesn’t change that or EU laws applicable here.

It is a EU Directive :exclamation: :exclamation:

but

It is down to each member Country how it is introduced, it only states 35 hours training must be done every five years.
Not that drivers have to pay for it :blush: :blush:

It could have been better implemented without all the cost and a shambles, no pass, fall asleep and learn nothing and still get the CPC etc

It has already been posted how much of a waste of time and money it is.

7

schrodingers cat:

Coffeeholic:

schrodingers cat:
As far as I am concerned, this was just another job creation scheme brought in by a government that had no idea or care of the effects of the laws they passed,

It’s EU law, not the Labour Government or Gordon Brown’s. Like it or not we are part of the EU and the recent change of Government doesn’t change that or EU laws applicable here.

In that case vote UKIP :blush:

So it was you who voted!

UKIP stood in 556 constituencies and lost their deposit in 459 (83%). Their vote share varied between 0.65 and Nigel Farage’s 17.3 in Buckingham where none of the three main parties contested the Speaker’s seat. No other UKIP candidate hit double digits. Nigel Farage went for the sympathy vote by doing freefall acrobatics :stuck_out_tongue:

We are in Europe and we will stay in Europe, but I agree the DCPC as it stands is flawed, it is made up of too many of Tony, Mandy and Gordons pals.

GOVERNMENT RELICENCES SKILLS FOR LOGISTICS
The Government has announced the renewal of the licence to operate for Skills for Logistics, the sector
skills council for the freight logistics industry. The announcement follows a comprehensive review
carried out by the National Audit Office on behalf of the UK Commission for Employment and Skills
which manages the relicensing process and considers the organisation’s ability to deliver specific solutions to employer demand, to deliver core products and services, and to progress results and impacts. The process also looks at how well the organisation is run. Business, Innovation and Skills Secretary Lord Mandelson said: “Employers can be confident that Skills for Logistics has come through a rigorous assessment and will offer employers the highest quality service in meeting their skills needs.”
SfL Chief Executive Dr Mick Jackson says ‘We are obviously delighted by this major vote of confidence in our work by the Government. We operate in an industry which is absolutely vital for the health of the
economy and of the needs of the whole UK population so it is crucial that we have a well trained and
efficient workforce fit for the purpose of delivering the goods in the widest possible sense. We intend to
continue the good work which has resulted in the renewal of our licence.’ Skills for Logistics has recently appointed Paul Brooks, Sales Director of Unipart plc, as its new chairman in succession to Andrew Callaghan. Brooks said ’We are indebted to Andrew for seeing us through the first six years and now need to continue to promote our industry as an exciting and rewarding career option for school leavers, graduates and job changers. Skills for Logistics is well underway with that work and relicencing allows us to continue with these endeavours.’ The licence renewal is for an indeterminate period but is likely to be reviewed again in three to five years. In addition to the appointment of Paul Brooks as its new Chairman SfL has appointed David Morton of Menzies Distribution Ltd as Vice Chairman. The organisation also has a new Board together with a National Advisory Council.

Note for Editors.
Skills for Logistics is the Sector Skills Council for the freight logistics industries. It is a registered charity and an independent, UK-wide organisation run for employers, by employers, to tackle the skills and productivity needs of the logistics sector. It is owned and led by the industry and has the active backing of over 100 of the UK’s top freight transport businesses as well as the leading trade bodies and Trade Unions. For further information call Mick Jackson at Skills for Logistics on 01908 313360.

Former Tesco training manager Stephen Thorp heads up JAUPT who licence and administer the DCPC

8

johnno:

Coffeeholic:
It’s EU law, not the Labour Government or Gordon Brown’s. Like it or not we are part of the EU and the recent change of Government doesn’t change that or EU laws applicable here.

It is a EU Directive :exclamation: :exclamation:

but

It is down to each member Country how it is introduced, it only states 35 hours training must be done every five years.
Not that drivers have to pay for it :blush: :blush:

None of the drivers I know are paying for it.

johnno:
It could have been better implemented without all the cost and a shambles, no pass, fall asleep and learn nothing and still get the CPC etc

It has already been posted how much of a waste of time and money it is.

I agree, but it should still be pretty entertaining. :wink:

9

Coffeeholic:
None of the drivers I know are paying for it.

So who is paying for all the Owner Drivers, the Self Employed, small businesses and most Agencies■■?

It has also been posted on here that some being payed for by their Companies are having to do it on a Saturday with no wage, or the company will claw back the cost if they leave early.

Yes, Drivers are paying for it (not all)

10

Its not only the cost of training thats the problem, but if you take the number of drivers working in the UK at the moment and multiply it by 7, thats the number of man hours lost in an industry thats already pinned to the wall by unnecessary legeslation, high fuel taxes and large companies looking to undercut fair rates so they can get a monopoly.

11

Wheel Nut:
Nigel Farage went for the sympathy vote by doing freefall acrobatics :stuck_out_tongue:

You mean his campaign never got off the ground. :laughing:

12

All guess work
but
400,000 drivers need the training.

that is 5.6 million hours lost through training in a classroom.

At £500 per driver each 35 hours including the training,time of and vehicle stood.
cost to the Industry
over £20m

The leaders of the Industry should have fought tooth and nail against it, but instead saw a quick profit to their margins by offering training instead.
RHA, FTA, all the Manufacturers, and anyone who could have said something

13

I agree with just about everything being said.

The UK Govt were made to have this EU law (or whatever) but as it was the choice of the UK Govt to be in the EU then the UK Govt should have made sure that no cost was passed onto any driver.

LGV drivers put up with much legislation but do not mind for the most part as they do not have to pay for it - this driver CPC is a different matter for many

I wonder how many would be so against it if it was free and the driver did not lose any monies over it?

14

johnno:
The leaders of the Industry should have fought tooth and nail against it, but instead saw a quick profit to their margins by offering training instead.
RHA, FTA, all the Manufacturers, and anyone who could have said something

Ah! but they did, they are all for it as you can see in this press release from Skills for Logistics.

Skills for Logistics has been involved in all the working groups that have been meeting, normally on a monthly basis, over the last year. These working groups also have representatives from a number of different stakeholders who have an interest in the Driver CPC, including the RHA, FTA and the trade unions.

15

Wheel Nut:

johnno:
The leaders of the Industry should have fought tooth and nail against it, but instead saw a quick profit to their margins by offering training instead.
RHA, FTA, all the Manufacturers, and anyone who could have said something

Ah! but they did, they are all for it as you can see in this press release from Skills for Logistics.

Skills for Logistics has been involved in all the working groups that have been meeting, normally on a monthly basis, over the last year. These working groups also have representatives from a number of different stakeholders who have an interest in the Driver CPC, including the RHA, FTA and the trade unions.

too true :wink:

They are all rubbing their hands together with the extra profits from providing training, no wonder they are not going to say anything against it.

Drivers don’t matter, the Industry don’t matter as long as we can make more money must be their new motto

16

johnno:
They are all rubbing their hands together with the extra profits from providing training,

The ones that I am in contact with are making a LOSS as the take-up is too low. Whether that changes in the future we shall have to wait and see…

The Govt is making money through the DSA testing fees and the JAUPT training provider fees…

17

ROG:
I wonder how many would be so against it if it was free and the driver did not lose any monies over it?

Me for one, I work for a small company and even if they paid for my training which is easily written off against tax, they lose me for one day per year unnecessarily ,which when you take into account the small margns made in our industry is significant.

18

schrodingers cat:

ROG:
I wonder how many would be so against it if it was free and the driver did not lose any monies over it?

Me for one, I work for a small company and even if they paid for my training which is easily written off against tax, they lose me for one day per year unnecessarily ,which when you take into account the small margns made in our industry is significant.

Easy overtime on a Saturday :bulb: :question:

19

ROG:

johnno:
They are all rubbing their hands together with the extra profits from providing training,

The ones that I am in contact with are making a LOSS as the take-up is too low.

Which is one reason why it is very easy to get the ‘training’ for the cost of a ‘drink’ and no time in the classroom or attending on a Saturday. :wink:

20

Coffeeholic:

ROG:

johnno:
They are all rubbing their hands together with the extra profits from providing training,

The ones that I am in contact with are making a LOSS as the take-up is too low.

Which is one reason why it is very easy to get the ‘training’ for the cost of a ‘drink’ and no time in the classroom or attending on a Saturday. :wink:

That proves just how worthless it is then :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp:

Yet some will have no choice but to pay and for waht■■?