dessy:
djw:
[content snipped]
Have I missed something, or did you post a quote of my entire post with no other content?
LGVTrainer:
Thanks for being frank Mike-C. I consider the “expert” comment a compliment.
Definition of “expert”: An ex is a hasbeen and a spurt is a drip under pressure.
As a trainer I answerd no to question 1 and yes to question 2 in view of just how little some drivers know about drivers hours regs alone.It certainly opened my eyes.
hidrive:
As a trainer I answerd no to question 1 and yes to question 2 in view of just how little some drivers know about drivers hours regs alone.It certainly opened my eyes.
Thats an interesting view given the fact that employers are responsible for implementing, overseeing and checking adherence to RTWTD and in the case of the EU regs , then employers are required to ensure that runs can be completed legally. So out of all the activities that LGV drivers undertake, your view is drivers should know more on the one specific subject that their employer is responsible for !!! And the other unmonitored activities might not matter so much !!
Rikki-UK:
‘… the Government’s Driver CPC training initiative …’
Eh? ‘…The Government’s … initiative?..’?
My understanding is that the DCPC has been foisted upon Britain from the EU and that chin & spineless Lib/Lab/Cons simply harrumphed it through because, for the few that possibly glanced into it, the brief probably looked either alright on their walnut writing desks or was too much bother to question the pompous complexity deigned compulsory with all things ‘EU’ that their civil servants puke out.
I disagree totally with another Keith post, but he uses any post to bash the EC. In reality the EU Ministers agreed on a perfectly good compromise which would have helped everyone. DIRECTIVE 2003/59/EC
This Directive should not affect the rights acquired by a
driver who has held the driving licence necessary to
carry out the activity of driving since before *the date laid
down for obtaining a CPC certifying the corresponding
initial qualification or the periodic training.
(my underline, my colours)
- Member States may exempt drivers who have obtained
the certificate of professional competence provided for in
Directive 96/26/EC (1) from the tests referred to in paragraph
1(a)(i) and (ii) and in paragraph 2 in the subjects covered by
the test provided for in that Directive and, where appropriate,
from attending the part of the course corresponding thereto.
(my underline, my colours)
96/26EC is the legislation that states that anyone who wishes to operate transport services has to have a CPC in Road Transport Operations or Passenger Carrying Services.
However these three gentlemen named below decided differently and we now have a quango called JAUPT calling the shots and using this new Statutory Instrument 2007 No 605 to do it with.
*Laid before Parliament 2nd March 2007
S.J. Ladyman
Minister of State
Department for Transport
26th February 2007
We consent to the making of these Regulations
Frank Roy
Claire Ward
Two of the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury on 28th February 2007
After spending three days on this, whilst watching our Queen celebrating 60 years in the job. I have been harassing her Government and will share any correspondence that I receive
Wheel Nut:
In reality the EU Ministers agreed on a perfectly good compromise which would have helped everyone. DIRECTIVE 2003/59/ECThis Directive should not affect the rights acquired by a
driver who has held the driving licence necessary to
carry out the activity of driving since before *the date laid
down for obtaining a CPC certifying the corresponding
initial qualification or the periodic training.(my underline, my colours)
That’s paragraph 11 of the recital. Being part of the recital, it’s not part of the substantive text of the Directive - it merely sets out what the EU were trying to achieve through the Directive. The recital is really just explanatory and would gain at most modest legal effect if, pursuant to the teleological interpretative approach used for EU legislation, if it was necessary to refer to the recital to resolve a query about the interpretation and intention of the main part of the text.
Further, once a Directive is transposed into domestic law, the Directive itself cannot have direct legal effect in that Member State - the most it can do is act as a guide to interpreting the relevant domestic law (so-called indirect effect). These are not matters that can be quickly explained, though if you’re interested, read any EU law textbook on the difference between vertical direct effect (as defined in the cases of Van Duyn / Ratti / Marshall) and indirect effect (as defined in the cases of Von Colson and Marleasing) of directives. This is a fundamental part of EU law that our own switchlogic will soon be encountering in his law degree (enjoy W200 Units 18 and 19!).
In other words, for a paragraph from the recital of an implemented Directive to have any effect in the UKÂ courts, that paragraph would have to be needed as an aid to interpret relevant UK legislation when the substantive provisions of the Directive could not help. This is most unlikely!
In any event, paragraph 11 of the recital is merely an expression of a saving (the legal term for preservation of existing rights). All it says (very clumsily) is that those who held a vocational driving licence before the DCPC scheme starts do not have to have their CPC placed into certificated form to drive commercially. This is why those driving on acquired rights do not need a DQC. It’s just an administrative convenience.
Paragraph 11 of the recital most certainly does not exempt existing drivers from periodic training. Paragraph 9 of the recital makes that explicit:
In order to maintain their qualification of driver, existing drivers should be obliged to undergo periodic retraining in the skills essential for their profession.
Onto your second extract…
Wheel Nut:
- Member States may exempt drivers who have obtained
the certificate of professional competence provided for in
Directive 96/26/EC (1) from the tests referred to in paragraph
1(a)(i) and (ii) and in paragraph 2 in the subjects covered by
the test provided for in that Directive and, where appropriate,
from attending the part of the course corresponding thereto.(my underline, my colours)
96/26EC is the legislation that states that anyone who wishes to operate transport services has to have a CPC in Road Transport Operations or Passenger Carrying Services.
That’s part of Article 3 of the Directive.
If you look at the full text of Article 3, you will see that the allowable exemption is very narrow. It only covers initial DCPC via course and test or test only (paragraphs 1(a)(i) and (ii) respectively) and accelerated initial qualification (paragraph 2). It does not apply to periodic DCPC (which is paragraph 1(b)).
I presume that the UK, who operate the ‘test only’ route to initial DCPC, decided that creating an exemption from some elements of the Module 2 and Module 4 tests for the small number of candidates who have an operator’s CPC wasn’t worth the hassle. Those with operator’s CPC would still have to take the tests, merely missing out certain subjects.
This option really exists for those Member States that have a course and test requirement for initial DCPC - it allows operator CPC holders to be permitted to skip the DCPC course on those subjects they covered in their operator CPC.
Wheel Nut:
However these three gentlemen named below decided differently and we now have a quango called JAUPT calling the shots and using this new Statutory Instrument 2007 No 605 to do it with.*Laid before Parliament 2nd March 2007
S.J. Ladyman
Minister of State
Department for Transport
26th February 2007We consent to the making of these Regulations
Frank Roy
Claire Ward
Two of the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury on 28th February 2007
I don’t think Claire is a gentleman.
In this case, the authority to legislate was exercised purely by Stephen Ladyman (then an MP). The Lords Commissioners of HM Treasury had to assent because of the financial aspects of the DCPC scheme.
Ultimately, it is Parliament (collectively) that was responsible for the Regulations. They delegated the power to ministers to make regulations implementing EU legislation via section 2 of the European Communities Act 1972, and had the power to address the Queen to pray for her to annul the regulations in a (relatively short) time window after they were laid before Parliament if they weren’t happy with what the minister had done.
Wheel Nut:
After spending three days on this, whilst watching our Queen celebrating 60 years in the job. I have been harassing her Government and will share any correspondence that I receive
You can always write, but I can’t see that you’ll get a reply in any way favourable to those with acquired rights or operator CPC.
Now - a serious point, as I’m genuinely not taking the [zb]. Have you ever thought of studying some law? You have the right sort of approach and you may find it genuinely interesting.
I may be throwing out some first year OU law books that are not that out of date. I have one complete paper set, another partial paper set plus a complete electronic set. As the electronic books take very little space, it’s getting towards time to throw out the paper.
Unlike later OU law courses, the W100 materials stand alone - they don’t require access to the commercial law databases to be useful. I’m not sure I want to part with the DVD (I only have one copy of that), but that won’t make much difference.
If you want an OU qualification, you have no alternative but to register and pay through the nose (£2500 if you live in England) as there’s no other way of taking the assessments. Otherwise, all you will lack is a tutor to pose questions to (though a legal dictionary and cautious use of Google should suffice) and a few optional tutorials.
There’s very little EUÂ law in this course - that comes later on in a module where you really need access to the legal databases and a tutor.
If you’re interested, PMÂ me.
I would like to thank djw for explaining the above in layman’s terms. I realise now there is a little more work to do and the last post has pointed me in another direction.
Expect a pm when I have had some sleep. I am very interested in understanding how the law works.
Malc
Wheel Nut:
‘…I disagree totally with another Keith post, but he uses any post to bash the EC…’
Too right I bash an undemocratic ‘market’ (as those that were asked about in 1974) when it has been distorted into the gargantuan and expensive disaster that it has since proven to be.
Wheel Nut:
‘… I am very interested in understanding how the law works…’
And I’m simply interested in fairness to the common bloke who doesn’t wish to see his nation trashed by political dreamers.
OssieD:
Can honestly say I won’t be doing this DCPC thing, maybe I’m one of the lucky ones, because come 2014 I certainly don’t want to be on the road anymore, (I’ll be 70) still got my licence (50 years and not even a tea stain on it) and aim to keep it going till then, but then that’s it, reading some of the threads on here and all the problems and obstacles being put in the drivers way by people who like to call themselves transport managers all because they went on a course and have a piece of paper that say they are, and more so their minions who we used to call traffic clerks but like to be called transport supervisors or some such, with all this c…p going on how is the driver supposed to do what his one aim should be and that is concentrating on his driving and the safety of others on the road and getting the job done as professionally as possible.
Do I sound bitter? I suppose I am because I’m watching an Industry that I’m very proud of going to the dogs through useless and unnecessary legislation being allowed to be imposed on it, all supposedly in the name of progress, when legislators give companies the means of making drivers do more and more hours behind the wheel with nobody standing up and saying enough’s enough, that’s not progress. I think I’m giving myself a headache I’ll have to open that other bottle of Calvados and test it’s ok, all the best.Ossie
Have to agree and hats off to you sir a driver for 50 plus years and transport managers I have plenty of experience with them idiots who shout and ball at drivers to get to delivery points at set times do this do that and they have in most cases not even got a car licence. last company I was with only one person out of 6 had any sort of driving licence.
i have a third question ,when i have taken this dcpc,will i still be disrespected by the rest of the british motorist or treated any better than a rabide dog ■■
curnock:
i have a third question ,when i have taken this dcpc,will i still be disrespected by the rest of the british motorist or treated any better than a rabide dog ■■
Nope we’ll still be second class citizens forced to use pot holed parking area’s 1/2 mile walk from The services, we’ll still be hounded by VOSA and have pay and conditions cut because of agencies and migrant labour
Waitrose trucker:
curnock:
i have a third question ,when i have taken this dcpc,will i still be disrespected by the rest of the british motorist or treated any better than a rabide dog ■■Nope we’ll still be second class citizens forced to use pot holed parking area’s 1/2 mile walk from The services, we’ll still be hounded by VOSA and have pay and conditions cut because of agencies and migrant labour
Do you get the profit share/salary ratio? Best ive known them get is 30% of salary!!
I’m 3PL (k&n) so we don’t get annual bonus, but always keep fingers crossed that waitrose will cut out the middleman and employ us direct.
Complete joke. Money making con. Another attempt at non-job creation along with those moronic health and safety masturbators who strive to ruin any half decent job left in this country.
HEAR HEAR
Q1 - No.
I doubt the govt will allow a minute’s additional time.
Q2 - No.
I passed my C+E and Operator National CPC in 2006…everything I learnt leading up to then and since with respect to hours rules, highway code, regulations etc is still fresh and in use daily. Unless I wanted an ADR licence I don’t see much in the DCPC syllabus unfortunately which would reasonably improve my knowledge. I am not a big head, I just know my job as I’m passionate about it so I’ve ‘learnt the ropes’ so to speak.
I don’t want half-baked ‘training’ forced upon me and I certainly don’t want the joy of paying for it AND losing a week’s wages to take the time off - or pay another driver - to cover my work.
I do hope the they dont extend the deadline, it would be a massive slap in the face for all those that have bothered to do it in time.
It makes me laugh all these drivers that say its a waste of time, preaching how long they’ve been driving and how the dcpc wont teach them anything, yet time and time again these same drivers prove they cant even get to grips with the very basics of the job.
I think they will extend it once they realise how many drivers have said errrr actually I’ll retire and the alleged shortage gets worse and how the uptake of new drivers seems very slow.
I’ve done day 3 of 5 now and it really is doing my head in. I honestly haven’t learned anything at all, apart from what the minor categories on a driving licence mean, such as “lawn mower controlled by a pedestrian” and I’ve forgotten what that was already because I just don’t need to know it, and if I did then I would learn it.
What really ■■■■■■ me off is that I have a real CPC and I still have to sit through this nonsense. Still, if, as predicted, the majority of drivers retire rather than bothering with it, it should at least push my wages upwards, that’s the only positive thing I can say about it.
I keep looking at my watch and thinking it must have stopped. I think it would be marginally less painful to spend seven hours being repeatedly kicked in the testicles.
Harry Monk:
I’ve done day 3 of 5 now and it really is doing my head in. I honestly haven’t learned anything at all, apart from what the minor categories on a driving licence mean, such as “lawn mower controlled by a pedestrian” and I’ve forgotten what that was already because I just don’t need to know it, and if I did then I would learn it.What really ■■■■■■ me off is that I have a real CPC and I still have to sit through this nonsense. Still, if, as predicted, the majority of drivers retire rather than bothering with it, it should at least push my wages upwards, that’s the only positive thing I can say about it.
I keep looking at my watch and thinking it must have stopped. I think it would be marginally less painful to spend seven hours being repeatedly kicked in the testicles.
As far as wages go Harry I wouldn’t hold my breath, remember when they first introduced the HGV licence we were told over night we would all become Professional drivers in the Transport Profession, and would be able to demand high wages appropriate to a Professional person, employers would have to treat us as Professional people, and we would be treated as a Professionals wherever we go, WOW I thought I’ve cracked it. What fools we were, it still continued the same old way, with the same old wages, and same old conditions, don’t get me wrong I’ve enjoyed every moment of it, but then I think I was driving when transport was at its zenith, every job was a challenge for the driver not a computer telling you what to do, and how much time you have to do it in, and lorries that now days seem to take the driver for a ride not the other way round, and now more bureaucracy the DCPC, I wish I could see the sense in it but for life of me I cant, I do honestly feel sorry for the new and younger drivers coming into transport as I can only see it getting worse, well the nurse has turned up with my medicine so I’ll have to be off………all right nurse I’m coming.
Ossie