If companies decided to charge drivers £1.oo per day to carry on working for them wuold you pay it? bare in mind it is a tiny% of your earnings?
bit of a strange question that, but if i did agree to pay it, i would get it back by puttin an extra half hour down per day 
FFS Mavrick keep that thought to yourself, some firms looking on here will already be trying that
selby newcomer:
bit of a strange question that, but if i did agree to pay it, i would get it back by puttin an extra half hour down per day
that doesnt mean i am paid £2 p/h
is this a wind up ?
yea , it is 
Why would anyone pay for the right to earn money, the mind boggles.
Rollo Tomasi:
Why would anyone pay for the right to earn money, the mind boggles.
It is the same as taking a cut in pay, you still have a job but get paid a bit less for doing it.
selby newcomer:
bit of a strange question that
Not really, when you look at what else he has posted. It’s a ‘travesty’ and ‘tax on our jobs’ type question designed to get people answering no to this so then the DCPC issue can be raised again. A people are saying no to this but accepting the DCPC sort of thing. 
mavrick:
If companies decided to charge drivers £1.oo per day to carry on working for them wuold you pay it? bare in mind it is a tiny% of your earnings?
Pay a quid a day to work for one employer? No, I wouldn’t pay one employer to work just for them.
Pay a couple of pence a day to get a card, maybe like the DCPC for instance, that enables me to keep doing this easy job, earn good money and choose where I work then I don’t have a problem with that because it is a small investment for a big reward.
mavrick:
If companies decided to charge drivers £1.oo per day to carry on working for them wuold you pay it? bare in mind it is a tiny% of your earnings?
Are you related to LGVTrainer by any chance 
no way
companies charge for our labour
why should they get paid twice
coffeeholic has got it. it is little different than the dcpc. i can not believe drivers will not stand together on this issue, i further cant understand why any employer who is paying for this has not questioned its value. As there seems to be no actual training involved which would add value to a company, as it stands it is only a cost. I have noticed even the unions have not opposed this nonsense. good training is priceless this insult makes us all look like a bunch of brainless knuckledraggers. surely we are better than that. There needs to be a fightback but where it will start is beyond me. are we all out there looking out for No 1.
It is a sad day when british people accept they have to pay for the right to work.
mavrick:
coffeeholic has got it. it is little different than the dcpc.
It is very different. One is an employer charging you to work for THEM and only them. The other is paying a small amount to have a ‘qualification’ that enables you to work in your chosen industry, something that workers in many industries have to do
Pay a pound a day, that’s an outrage. 
We should all get together and form some sort of committee, a union of sorts, and march forth upon the capital … oh wait a minute 
I’m sure Rob “big scary boats” K won’t object to another airing of this…
Although personally I’m thinking this is becoming more appropriate …
mindmagma.com/mpunk3/keyboard_fu.gif 
(link contains a naughty word)
Coffeeholic:
mavrick:
coffeeholic has got it. it is little different than the dcpc.It is very different. One is an employer charging you to work for THEM and only them. The other is paying a small amount to have a ‘qualification’ that enables you to work in your chosen industry, something that workers in many industries have to do
If you pay the employer then you get a receipt and submit it against your tax, it would be a lawful expense and therefore the government will be picking up the tab.
Who started this bloody post anyway - tut, Maverick, don’t turn into a knob mate…ooops
Coffeeholic:
mavrick:
coffeeholic has got it. it is little different than the dcpc.It is very different. One is an employer charging you to work for THEM and only them. The other is paying a small amount to have a ‘qualification’ that enables you to work in your chosen industry, something that workers in many industries have to do
sorry coffee, you are talking crap.
if a company wants you to train, they should pay not the [zb] driver. full stop.
greggy:
Coffeeholic:
mavrick:
coffeeholic has got it. it is little different than the dcpc.It is very different. One is an employer charging you to work for THEM and only them. The other is paying a small amount to have a ‘qualification’ that enables you to work in your chosen industry, something that workers in many industries have to do
sorry coffee, you are talking crap.
if a company wants you to train, they should pay not the[zb] driver. full stop.
Lots of companies are paying for it. Its pretty much the self employed blokes that are going to have to pay for their own. The simple fact is, do it or stop driving. Coffee is correct in saying that many other industries require people to pay for some of their periodic qualifications, some of which come to a lot more money than the dcpc.
I was reading a thread on here the other day and someone was saying why not make the dcpc harder? When you think about it might not be such a bad idea, it would weed out some of the mongs and might even create a driver shortage
mavrick:
coffeeholic has got it. it is little different than the dcpc. i can not believe drivers will not stand together on this issue, i further cant understand why any employer who is paying for this has not questioned its value. As there seems to be no actual training involved which would add value to a company, as it stands it is only a cost. I have noticed even the unions have not opposed this nonsense. good training is priceless this insult makes us all look like a bunch of brainless knuckledraggers. surely we are better than that. There needs to be a fightback but where it will start is beyond me. are we all out there looking out for No 1.
It is a sad day when british people accept they have to pay for the right to work.
Go back to your union buddies, we dont need your type here.
greggy:
Coffeeholic:
mavrick:
coffeeholic has got it. it is little different than the dcpc.It is very different. One is an employer charging you to work for THEM and only them. The other is paying a small amount to have a ‘qualification’ that enables you to work in your chosen industry, something that workers in many industries have to do
sorry coffee, you are talking crap.
if a company wants you to train, they should pay not the £ukeeen driver. full stop.
I agree, of course they should and my company are paying for my DCPC training, If they weren’t I would likely leave and take a job with a company who would pay.
If I wasn’t working or my only option to continue to do this line of work would be a cost to me a a couple of pence a day then I wouldn’t have a problem with that, small investment for a big reward. It’s a no brainer.
mavrick:
If companies decided to charge drivers £1.oo per day to carry on working for them wuold you pay it? bare in mind it is a tiny% of your earnings?
a great post!
Saaamon:
mavrick:
coffeeholic has got it. it is little different than the dcpc. i can not believe drivers will not stand together on this issue, i further cant understand why any employer who is paying for this has not questioned its value. As there seems to be no actual training involved which would add value to a company, as it stands it is only a cost. I have noticed even the unions have not opposed this nonsense. good training is priceless this insult makes us all look like a bunch of brainless knuckledraggers. surely we are better than that. There needs to be a fightback but where it will start is beyond me. are we all out there looking out for No 1.
It is a sad day when british people accept they have to pay for the right to work.Go back to your union buddies, we dont need your type here.