so is it only me that after skimming and ploughing over carryfasts etc monologue that once i reach the end of all the guff written,i usually have to sit for a min and concentrate really hard to see if i can remember the original topic of discussion? and sometimes i have to go back and look it up to see what it was as im by then bored into a near catatonic state…you see the new topic…you think,il have a peek and see what this is about…2 posts in,its sermon after sermon blablabla…6 pages later,youve forgotten what you were meant to be looking at…surely its not just me?
dieseldog999:
so is it only me that after skimming and ploughing over carryfasts etc monologue that once i reach the end of all the guff written,i usually have to sit for a min and concentrate really hard to see if i can remember the original topic of discussion? and sometimes i have to go back and look it up to see what it was as im by then bored into a near catatonic state…you see the new topic…you think,il have a peek and see what this is about…2 posts in,its sermon after sermon blablabla…6 pages later,youve forgotten what you were meant to be looking at…surely its not just me?
It’s just you mate, we all love it! 
must be an acquired taste…pity I cant acquire it…on the other hand…I absolutely love posts by conor…1st class all the way.
dieseldog999:
must be an acquired taste…pity I cant acquire it…on the other hand…I absolutely love posts by conor…1st class all the way.
We’ve no hope. Turns out he’s hoping one of Teresa May’s knitting club will read an article in commercial motor written about one of the threads he types about and mention it to Teresa over a slice of sponge and tea.
Yes, Conor Norris is classic. Such a div 
dieseldog999:
must be an acquired taste…pity I cant acquire it…on the other hand…I absolutely love posts by conor…1st class all the way.
Yep so much to learn from Conor, well as long as you don’t want to go further than the M62 or A1.
muckles:
dieseldog999:
must be an acquired taste…pity I cant acquire it…on the other hand…I absolutely love posts by conor…1st class all the way.Yep so much to learn from Conor, well as long as you don’t want to go further than the M62 or A1.
Ya but he earns 41 thousand a year between the two roads.
Anyway we mustn’t diss Conor Norris. It’s dangerous. According to the Internet site “Conor Norris facts”:-
1/ Conor Norris can win a game of connect four in only three moves.
2/ Conor Norris tells a GPS which way to go
3/ The last person to make eye contact with Conor Norris was Stevie Wonder
4/ Conor Norris can light a fire by rubbing two ice cubes together
5/ Conor Norris has a grizzly bear rug in his front room. It isn’t dead, it’s just afraid to move
6/ Conor Norris was to take sabbatical from driving and star in the film Mission:impossible. But they recast as they would’ve had to change the name of the movie to Mission:accomplished
muckles:
Kerragy:
Thank heavens for Ryan & Carryfast. Their posts make you consider a topic more deeply. My only criticism, which they both suffer from is their brevity. Please go into more detail guys. Some of your replies go over my head, mostly through lack of explanation.
Those two suffer from a type of verbal diarrhoea. Same ■■■■ over and over again. I have got to the stage of when I see their names I just think have they not got a life.
Rjan:
Carryfast:
We already know that even STGO type lengths,let alone the current generation of LHV’s,can work just fine within the existing road design network.
It will work fine for parts of the road network. But they are really just a faster horse - they can obviously never become as long as a train.
Road fuel duty has nothing whatsoever to do with road costs.Road transport having been proven to be more than paying its way through VED alone in that regard.
I don’t believe for one moment that road hauliers pay for the entirety of the road network, and then some, together with all the rest of the costs associated with road haulage, purely through VED. Road hauliers don’t even pay for training, whereas train drivers get paid to learn more than some truckers earn doing the job.
Perhaps road haulage operators pay more than the marginal cost of the wear they impose on the tarmac, but that is not the entire cost of the maintenance and incremental extension of the road network.
The fact is road transport is just more cost efficient regards its running needs than rail.Deal with it.
Is it? My impression has always been that road transport is less efficient for base loads, but it’s paid for by the cheapness of truckers’ wages versus railwaymen.
As I said we can’t have a highly unionised,high wage rail type road transport industry without bringing productivety levels and fuel costs more into line with rail type levels.Which in this case means LHV’s and use of red diesel.
We can’t have rail levels of productivity without travelling on rails! That’s the nub of it. Road haulage can never compete with rail on those terms, once the difference in wages and conditions is redressed (which would more than counter any benefit of using red diesel) - it competes on the basis of flexibility of scheduling and it’s almost 100% access to premises.
Yes truck drivers are by definition different to train drivers because they drive a truck not a train.
Feel free to go on trying to justify treating truck drivers as second class workers v train drivers on that basis.While at the same time hypocritically doing as the Guardian is trying to do in kicking the industry for being put in that position by that same pro rail lobby.
I’m not justifying treating truckers as second class workers - they are, as a matter of fact, treated as second class compared to railwaymen, and that is because they do not stand together to demand first class treatment.
I’m also saying that we can’t have truckers thinking they are entitled to cannibalise the work to which other modes are better suited. It’s like gas engineers arguing that all our electricity should be generated with gas instead of nuclear - in fact each has its proper place.
As I said the current generation of LHV’s at least in the form of the Scandinavian rigid and 45 foot trailer type outfit will go just about anywhere that a standard artic will go without a problem.
Road transport operators don’t need to pay for the entire costs of the road network only their share of it.Of which VED more than covers bearing in mind that VED more than covers road expenditure as it stands having been diverted from road budgets to other requirements.
Yes we know that trains can win out in terms of productivety regarding bulk products going to the same destination served by rail terminals at each end of the journey.But they aren’t much good when it comes to shifting numerous different ( truck sized ) loads to numerous different widespread destinations away from rail terminals.The definition of ( truck sized ) being open to variables and question.With the bigger that definition then the more advantageous road transport and the less rail transport’s advantages become.On that note we’ve seen numerous attempts by the rail lobby to artificially limit ( sabotage ) road transport’s efficiency in that regard historically in a blatant attempt to protect rail interests.On that note truck driver’s wages can obviously be improved massively than they are now given the extra productivety ( and extra skills demanded ) provided by the use of LHV’s and the cost savings provided by the use of red diesel.In which case what is the rail sector so afraid of in that regard.
As for treating truck drivers as second class workers.That’s exactly what such unjustified sabotaging of the road transport industry,to create a rigged playing field which favours rail freight workers,is doing.While it’s equally obvious that standing together against the employers ain’t going to work.Until ‘that’ problem has been sorted out first and which the employers ‘and’ drivers 'should be expected to be on the same side.
Carryfast:
Rjan:
Carryfast:
We already know that even STGO type lengths,let alone the current generation of LHV’s,can work just fine within the existing road design network.
It will work fine for parts of the road network. But they are really just a faster horse - they can obviously never become as long as a train.
Road fuel duty has nothing whatsoever to do with road costs.Road transport having been proven to be more than paying its way through VED alone in that regard.
I don’t believe for one moment that road hauliers pay for the entirety of the road network, and then some, together with all the rest of the costs associated with road haulage, purely through VED. Road hauliers don’t even pay for training, whereas train drivers get paid to learn more than some truckers earn doing the job.
Perhaps road haulage operators pay more than the marginal cost of the wear they impose on the tarmac, but that is not the entire cost of the maintenance and incremental extension of the road network.
The fact is road transport is just more cost efficient regards its running needs than rail.Deal with it.
Is it? My impression has always been that road transport is less efficient for base loads, but it’s paid for by the cheapness of truckers’ wages versus railwaymen.
As I said we can’t have a highly unionised,high wage rail type road transport industry without bringing productivety levels and fuel costs more into line with rail type levels.Which in this case means LHV’s and use of red diesel.
We can’t have rail levels of productivity without travelling on rails! That’s the nub of it. Road haulage can never compete with rail on those terms, once the difference in wages and conditions is redressed (which would more than counter any benefit of using red diesel) - it competes on the basis of flexibility of scheduling and it’s almost 100% access to premises.
Yes truck drivers are by definition different to train drivers because they drive a truck not a train.
I’m not justifying treating truckers as second class workers - they are, as a matter of fact, treated as second class compared to railwaymen, and that is because they do not stand together to demand first class treatment.
I’m also saying that we can’t have truckers thinking they are entitled to cannibalise the work to which other modes are better suited. It’s like gas engineers arguing that all our electricity should be generated with gas instead of nuclear - in fact each has its proper place.
As I said the current generation of LHV’s at least in the form of the Scandinavian rigid and 45 foot trailer type outfit will go just about anywhere that a standard artic will go without a problem.
Road transport operators don’t need to pay for the entire costs of the road network only their share of it.Of which VED more than covers bearing in mind that VED more than covers road expenditure as it stands having been diverted from road budgets to other requirements.
Yes we know that trains can win out in terms of productivety regarding bulk products going to the same destination served by rail terminals at each end of the journey.But they aren’t much good when it comes to shifting numerous different ( truck sized ) loads to numerous different widespread destinations away from rail terminals.The definition of ( truck sized ) being open to variables and question.With the bigger that definition then the more advantageous road transport and the less rail transport’s advantages become.On that note we’ve seen numerous attempts by the rail lobby to artificially limit ( sabotage ) road transport’s efficiency in that regard historically in a blatant attempt to protect rail interests.On that note truck driver’s wages can obviously be improved massively than they are now given the extra productivety ( and extra skills demanded ) provided by the use of LHV’s and the cost savings provided by the use of red diesel.In which case what is the rail sector so afraid of in that regard.
As for treating truck drivers as second class workers.That’s exactly what such unjustified sabotaging of the road transport industry,to create a rigged playing field which favours rail freight workers,is doing.While it’s equally obvious that standing together against the employers in that regard ain’t going to work until that problem has been sorted out first.
You two back off your 45 then? That’s it lads, banter over. Sir bore-a-lot and King yawnathon the 3rd are back in the saddle.
James the cat:
Sir bore-a-lot and King yawnathon the 3rd are back in the saddle.
Seems strange why you’d want to keep moaning about my posts.
Rather than having a go at the hypocritical bs contained in the Guardian article,which is what the topic is ‘supposed’ to be a about.
I won’t knock anyone doing the same job as me. But there are thousands of Euro trucks over here, and with the exception of the odd ones that jam up certain parking spots, they contribute nothing whatsoever to the UK economy. They fuel up elsewhere, bring their nasty ■■■■ stocked up. Don’t eat our food from our eateries. Drink in our pubs. They’re just a self serving take all and give nothing community. We have a few foreigners on our books at work, and in the main they’re top blokes. Have homes here, run UK cars (legally) and don’t park under motorway bridges, using ignorance as an excuse.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Carryfast:
Seems strange why you’d want to keep moaning about my posts.
Er, I’m not the only one. You two knacker up a thread. You know that though. You take it over. You remove any desire to post about a topic. Noticed how quiet the topic is now you and Einstein have started? There’s no point posting given any response will result in 3 pages of hard to read dialogue from just 2 posters.
James the cat:
Carryfast:
Seems strange why you’d want to keep moaning about my posts.Er, I’m not the only one. You two knacker up a thread. You know that though. You take it over. You remove any desire to post about a topic. Noticed how quiet the topic is now you and Einstein have started? There’s no point posting given any response will result in 3 pages of hard to read dialogue from just 2 posters.
Is it really so difficult to scroll through anything you don’t want to read.
So back to the topic and bearing in mind the Guardian’s typical juggernauts/monsters etc etc bs do you agree that the article is hypocritical bs or not. If not why not.
Carryfast:
So back to the topic and bearing in mind the Guardian’s typical juggernauts/monsters etc etc bs do you agree that the article is hypocritical bs or not.
Beyond the practicalities of our existing road infrastructure, I didn’t give it much thought.
I.E. It’s never going to happen!!!
A year or so ago you and I were involved in a heated, extensive debate over Fordism and trade sanctions. It did not end very well for you. Since then I have kept you and I separate from debate. Let’s let sleeping dogs lye shall we Carryfast?
muckles:
dieseldog999:
must be an acquired taste…pity I cant acquire it…on the other hand…I absolutely love posts by conor…1st class all the way.Yep so much to learn from Conor, well as long as you don’t want to go further than the M62 or A1.
and back again…£42kpa…cant be bad for a limper.
The way to attract top-notch drivers who’ll attempt to be all things to all customers at all times - is to pay top dollar with fantastic T&Cs with benefits that even a civil servant would be jealous of.
…But in the real world, that doesn’t even exist as a harry potter sub plot.
Harry Potter and the Wasted Time
"A haulier headhunted drivers yesterday. Now there’s only one haulier left, as the firm’s rivals have all gone out of business do to lack of drivers.
We spoke to a spider yesterday, and even he complained that “What can I do when my victim’s car can fly already?”
It’s always been a dream that “Price Discovery” that process which gives a true “supply and demand” curve to “going rates” - might one day apply to blue collar workers.
Meanwhile, rather than pay rising wages - we’ll just get a bunch in from overseas to do it for as near minimum wage as possible.
This, in turn - would not work if it were not for Labour-invented Tax Credits.
“Making work Pay” works best when ANY work pays a minimum wage sufficient to live on.
With couples both on £25k national average wage (we’re told) NOT being able to get a mega-cheap mortgage, despite the banks being awash with money to lend for just that purpose - WHO exactly are the Blue Collar workers of the future going to be? - Not indigenous Brits it seems.
It’s about time the bloody Guardian newspaper went ■■■■-up I reckon. It should have been the very first casualty of Brexit in my mind! 
How many more “Human Rights Advisors” or EU compliance officers can be required to be taken on NOW then?
We were promised by the remainers that 3-4m jobs would be lost if we did Brexit… Well start losing then! Chop Chop! 
Laurie-Driver:
There’s a shortage of HGV drivers in an economy that relies on moving mountains of heavy goods. Road haulage companies complain bitterly that they can’t recruit; operators are turning business away for lack of drivers.
Where Toynbee’s piece fails is that she accepts the figures given by the FTA as true. We all know there isn’t a shortfall except in certain areas where decent drivers won’t do the dross work for a pittance.
She also doesn’t query why there is a supposed shortfall of drivers whilst only 1% of lorries stood idle are due to no driver and 15% is down to there being no work for the lorry.
Hauliers are in denial and so are their trade associations.
Training isn’t the issue, retention is.
Also, let’s make it more appealing to minority groups & women?
What do minority groups and women require that middle aged white men don’t? I’m sorry, but other than carpet on the bog floor I can’t think of a single thing that can be justified for women that can’t be for men (Actually I can think of more but took a little literary license OK?). How about making the industry appealing to people, you know, human beings?
New drivers enter, think the job is like having a big camper van that somebody pays you to drive around in full time. Plus you get to have breakfast in the services and eat those expensive doughnuts, like when you go on holiday.
Suddenly realise that if you don’t know what it is all about, it can actually seem akin to rowing in a Roman Galley, but with less “me time”.
Many become very disillusioned, very quickly and beat a hasty retreat to work in Trev’s call centre.
Bosses and the RHA can’t imagine any reason why people don’t want to stay in the job. Previously they have thought “We’ll show those smelly inconveniences that they are ten a penny” and have imported staff from Eastern Europe. After having their kit smashed up and diesel and cargo stolen by an element of their new labour force, they are no longer so keen to fool themselves that is the answer.
Employers & RHA complain to government that it’s just not fair. Nobody helps us, our flipping workers have the temerity to leave the industry, and to top it all the next chance we are going to get to give them a kicking and show them who’s who and how much we can do without them is at least three years away.
Employers focus on recruitement. They hold Open Days, offer apprenticeships, target ex-military and generally paint a very Enid Blyton picture of the Industry to candidates.
People continue to leave the job.
Loop back to the start.
Companies obviously realise that there is a value in experience, hence the difficulty in getting a job having just passed your test. Yet they focus almost exclusively on the problem of attracting new blood, seemingly happy to let people who are aware of the rigours of a demanding job, to leave the industry. Perhaps they think that new entrants will put up with all of the well documented issues for entry level wages and basic terms & conditions. Looking at the demographic of the workforce, it would appear that this has largely not been the case since the mid-nineties. An industry can’t flourish with this constant churn.
Carryfast:
kr79:
Carryfast:
The Guardian.That bastion of the pro road transport cause.More like hypocritical bunch of socalist zb wits.Who are big on statements like LHV’s are damaging but obviously not so good on facts to explain how/why.Then,just as expected,they say it would make road transport more competitive with rail which is their real bs problem.
theguardian.com/environment/ … oad-trains
On that note if truck driving is to be given the same status as train driving and made more productive we need a level trading field in the form of the most efficient vehicles possible and fuel cost regime.If not then don’t be surprised when prospective new drivers walk away from the industry because they don’t want to be lumbered with the typical zb distribution sector type work that’s left at any wage,let alone minimum wage.While on that note spare us from such hypocritical utter zb.
Did you bother to read the article?
Yes.
Especially bits like ‘Monsters’ and reference to them not being ‘suitable’ to our roads when they’ve not even been trialled here.While in places where they have been the facts suggest that they’ll generally go wherever a standard artic will go.Just as the Scandinavians have known for decades.
Together with the same old bollox about protecting the rail freight sector.
I meant did you read the original posters article link