Roymondo:
truckyboy:
Received a letter from DVLA this morning, reminding me my Digi driving card expires in July…so theres another £19 to be added to the Medical £120…the DCPC @ £35 per day ( x 7 ) and all borne by us…no other industry do they have to pay to work ( i dont think ).
There is nothing in the legislation that requires “us” (i.e. the drivers) to pay for the medicals, DCPC training/card or the digital tachograph card. FYI I’ve not paid for any of them in the 12 years I’ve been employed (important word, that) to drive lorries.
Well tell us how YOU haven’t had to pay, unless your employer has meet all the costs.
I received a response from the transport ministry via my MP
I’d like to post the response but due to it inc personal details I’m reluctant to do so, but The minister basically reiterated the current legal policy
ROG:
I sent a similar letter to my MP about 2 years ago
I included the fact that the pre 1997 LGV C1 medical is not needed until age 70
I don’t suppose that means if you held licence pre 1997 you get till age 70 ?
Just dreaming Rog !
Jim
Whats being done differently in the UK re a standard medical and an HGV medical?? All GP’s meet the same qualifying standard surely? Im maybe stating the obvious but sounds a money making racket going on here. 100£+ for something that takes all of 10 mins or less…
AndrewG:
Whats being done differently in the UK re a standard medical and an HGV medical?? All GP’s meet the same qualifying standard surely? Im maybe stating the obvious but sounds a money making racket going on here. 100£+ for something that takes all of 10 mins or less…
I had mine done in November 2017 at a cost of £65. Avoid your own GP at all costs.
biggriffin:
Roymondo:
truckyboy:
Received a letter from DVLA this morning, reminding me my Digi driving card expires in July…so theres another £19 to be added to the Medical £120…the DCPC @ £35 per day ( x 7 ) and all borne by us…no other industry do they have to pay to work ( i dont think ).
There is nothing in the legislation that requires “us” (i.e. the drivers) to pay for the medicals, DCPC training/card or the digital tachograph card. FYI I’ve not paid for any of them in the 12 years I’ve been employed (important word, that) to drive lorries.
Well tell us how YOU haven’t had to pay, unless your employer has meet all the costs.
Yes, my employer “has meet” the costs. As I said, “employed” is an important word.
wing-nut:
Well I have to say I disagree. When I get to 65, which won’t be long now, I’ll be quite happy to have a yearly medical if only to put my own mind at rest.
I quite agree with you on this one, safety must come first, we don’t want heart attacks etc whilst driving and I hate to say it guys that is the way it will be no matter how many letters are written.
jakethesnake:
wing-nut:
Well I have to say I disagree. When I get to 65, which won’t be long now, I’ll be quite happy to have a yearly medical if only to put my own mind at rest.
I quite agree with you on this one, safety must come first, we don’t want heart attacks etc whilst driving and I hate to say it guys that is the way it will be no matter how many letters are written.
You can just as easily have a heart attack at 44, before you’ve even got to medical age. Depends on your lifestyle, and genetic pre-disposition. As has been said above the “well man” clinics provide an easy and cost-effective way to monitor your own health on a yearly basis, without the need for taking an extra day off every year and multiplying your cost to either yourself or your employer five-fold.
The only reason the unions haven’t backed this BTW is that they still believe that Jeremy’s magic money tree will rain blessings on us all and we can all go back to retiring at 65, a 40 hour week and a nice convenient little strike every other Friday. Those of us who live in the real world (I set my stall out to retire at 70 a decade ago having seen what was coming) know different.
jakethesnake:
wing-nut:
Well I have to say I disagree. When I get to 65, which won’t be long now, I’ll be quite happy to have a yearly medical if only to put my own mind at rest.
I quite agree with you on this one, safety must come first, we don’t want heart attacks etc whilst driving and I hate to say it guys that is the way it will be no matter how many letters are written.
Totally agree. also the general population wouldn’t be too happy if they did this I’m guessing.
Sidevalve:
The only reason the unions haven’t backed this BTW is that they still believe that Jeremy’s magic money tree will rain blessings on us all and we can all go back to retiring at 65, a 40 hour week and a nice convenient little strike every other Friday. Those of us who live in the real world (I set my stall out to retire at 70 a decade ago having seen what was coming) know different.
There is no logical reason why retirement ages have needed to rise. There has been no great war, no natural disaster, no reason at all why this should need to happen following a 150-year period when workers’ conditions have slowly but steadily improved. The sole reason is that by working ever longer, you can earn more money for The Man.
As I always say, if sheep could vote, they’d vote for the bloke who brings round the bucket of food.
jakethesnake:
wing-nut:
Well I have to say I disagree. When I get to 65, which won’t be long now, I’ll be quite happy to have a yearly medical if only to put my own mind at rest.
I quite agree with you on this one, safety must come first, we don’t want heart attacks etc whilst driving and I hate to say it guys that is the way it will be no matter how many letters are written.
The assumption that once a guy gets to 60-65 you need a yearly medical is a wrong one.
Heart attacks and strokes et al can happen to anyone at any age. A far better way to judge someones fitness other than a stethescope is by using weight and measurement plus the treadmill,many couldnt do 20 mins on the treadmill without collapsing in a heap and thats at any age. A 65 year old can be just as fit as someone half that age, passing a run of the mill medical means very little…
Sidevalve:
jakethesnake:
wing-nut:
Well I have to say I disagree. When I get to 65, which won’t be long now, I’ll be quite happy to have a yearly medical if only to put my own mind at rest.
I quite agree with you on this one, safety must come first, we don’t want heart attacks etc whilst driving and I hate to say it guys that is the way it will be no matter how many letters are written.
You can just as easily have a heart attack at 44, before you’ve even got to medical age. Depends on your lifestyle, and genetic pre-disposition. As has been said above the “well man” clinics provide an easy and cost-effective way to monitor your own health on a yearly basis, without the need for taking an extra day off every year and multiplying your cost to either yourself or your employer five-fold.
The only reason the unions haven’t backed this BTW is that they still believe that Jeremy’s magic money tree will rain blessings on us all and we can all go back to retiring at 65, a 40 hour week and a nice convenient little strike every other Friday. Those of us who live in the real world (I set my stall out to retire at 70 a decade ago having seen what was coming) know different.
Yes of course you can but I did say etc and probably should have been more specific. There are plenty other issues as you get older including eyesight, reaction time and many more.
Of course everyone is different and some 65 year olds are fitter than guys 20 years younger than them but as with this and other issues the majority of the general public are not capabablr of making the correct decision on their own. They do what suits them in most cases so when it come down to whether they are fit to drive or not they need to be checked by a professional regularily after reaching 65 in my book.
Although lorry driving may not be as physical as it used to be (not to me anyway) it is still a job that needs certain elements of health to carry on safely.
As my consultant said…`You are ok because you have regular check ups, plus a dvla requirement test…i worry about those who dont report health problems, because of losing their licence, or those who have known heart problems but never seek medical advice…now theres a thought.
Reducing medicals is not a great idea. Providing them on the NHS is a much smarter move.
I got my medical done via a private doctor as it was cheaper. I was able to lie on any of the questions if I wanted as he couldn’t check my medical notes. (Not that anyone would do this). So you would increase public safety if GP’s were expected to do this. They offer lots of other services as it is - I’m not sure why them filling out a relatively short form for drivers is a great hardship.
Given the state of most drivers (me included I’m overweight right now) I’d like medicals to be done every 2 years no matter what age you are. It should also include a fitness test. I have to have a medical for professional diving - and it includes a step test. I think this would be a fantastic idea for hgv drivers.
Perhaps have a pass/fail if someone is obese as well. I’m not talking about a few pounds overweight - but someone who struggles to get into a cab. The cost of the medicals beng absorbed by the nhs would easily be recouped in having less people with heart conditions and diabetes. Win win all around.
Harry Monk:
There is no logical reason why retirement ages have needed to rise. There has been no great war, no natural disaster, no reason at all why this should need to happen following a 150-year period when workers’ conditions have slowly but steadily improved. The sole reason is that by working ever longer, you can earn more money for The Man.
Well that’s your logical reason for retirement ages to rise - people are living longer than ever (due in no small part to those improvements in working conditions) so the length of time they draw their State pension has gone up. As recently as 1960, the average age at death in the UK was 71 years. Now it is 81 years - so we’ve gone from drawing State pension for 6 years to drawing it for nearly three times as long. Back in 1960, state pensions accounted for 3% of UK GDP, now it is 8%. It is simply unsustainable without us paying more to The Man - either by increasing retirement age, increasing taxes or cutting the pension amount (or, more likely, some combination of all three).
Roymondo:
Harry Monk:
There is no logical reason why retirement ages have needed to rise. There has been no great war, no natural disaster, no reason at all why this should need to happen following a 150-year period when workers’ conditions have slowly but steadily improved. The sole reason is that by working ever longer, you can earn more money for The Man.
Well that’s your logical reason for retirement ages to rise - people are living longer than ever (due in no small part to those improvements in working conditions) so the length of time they draw their State pension has gone up. As recently as 1960, the average age at death in the UK was 71 years. Now it is 81 years - so we’ve gone from drawing State pension for 6 years to drawing it for nearly three times as long. Back in 1960, state pensions accounted for 3% of UK GDP, now it is 8%. It is simply unsustainable without us paying more to The Man - either by increasing retirement age, increasing taxes or cutting the pension amount (or, more likely, some combination of all three).
Absolutely correct.
Being educated by the state from 5 years to 20 years? Working for the next 50 years (or less for those taking time off for parenting) and then drawing pensions for 20 or thirty years just doesnt add up, without setting aside vast proportions of ones income.
sammym:
Reducing medicals is not a great idea. Providing them on the NHS is a much smarter move.
I got my medical done via a private doctor as it was cheaper. I was able to lie on any of the questions if I wanted as he couldn’t check my medical notes. (Not that anyone would do this). So you would increase public safety if GP’s were expected to do this. They offer lots of other services as it is - I’m not sure why them filling out a relatively short form for drivers is a great hardship.
Given the state of most drivers (me included I’m overweight right now) I’d like medicals to be done every 2 years no matter what age you are. It should also include a fitness test. I have to have a medical for professional diving - and it includes a step test. I think this would be a fantastic idea for hgv drivers.
Perhaps have a pass/fail if someone is obese as well. I’m not talking about a few pounds overweight - but someone who struggles to get into a cab. The cost of the medicals beng absorbed by the nhs would easily be recouped in having less people with heart conditions and diabetes. Win win all around.
Dream on. For all its pleas of poverty, the road haulage industry is wealthy enough to support its employees undergoing regular medical checks on the NHS. They’ve been privately funded since they were introduced so I don’t see anyone succeeding in transferring the financial burden onto an already cash-strapped public ■■■■■.
Everybody gets their HGV medical done privately, even if they use their own GP as I did. And don’t kid yourself that going to another doctor can help you side-step declaring an existing medical condition.
Franglais:
Absolutely correct.
Being educated by the state from 5 years to 20 years? Working for the next 50 years (or less for those taking time off for parenting) and then drawing pensions for 20 or thirty years just doesnt add up, without setting aside vast proportions of ones income.
Quite - although “vast proportions” is perhaps over-stating the required contribution level. A good rule-of-thumb is to
take the age you start paying into your pension fund and halve it. Put this % of your pre-tax salary aside each year until you retire.
Roymondo:
Franglais:
Absolutely correct.
Being educated by the state from 5 years to 20 years? Working for the next 50 years (or less for those taking time off for parenting) and then drawing pensions for 20 or thirty years just doesnt add up, without setting aside vast proportions of ones income.
Quite - although “vast proportions” is perhaps over-stating the required contribution level. A good rule-of-thumb is to
take the age you start paying into your pension fund and halve it. Put this % of your pre-tax salary aside each year until you retire.
Yep, Ive seen that idea mentioned before. I do wonder though how good that will hold in the future as life expectancy increases and companies offer less on guaranteed incomes? And many people with growing families would find 15% or more of their pre-tax income "vast" wouldnt they? I reckon many would find 5% “vast”! 
From what I hear from some of our drivers, even the 1% or 2% they would be required to contribute under the old auto-enrolment schemes was unaffordable. If they can’t cope with that, ■■■■ knows how they hope to be able to do anything more than barely exist on State Pension once they reach retirement age.