Uber: Please don't give our London drivers English tests. You can work out the reason why Uber's lawyers in the UK have argued against rules requiring minicab drivers to pass an English literacy test – because many of its cheap cyber chauffeurs would fail. Last August, Transport for London (TfL) told all private-hire vehicle drivers not from a majority English-speaking country to take the reading and writing exam …
If a cabbie (of any sort) can't communicate with the passengers then what hope of you of getting to the correct destination.
At the moment, Uber is not making money. They have to as they say in the USA, step up to the plate and operate properly. If they don't then they should be run out of town. That means treating their employees (aka the drivers) properly and paying them a decent salary.
Some here may not agree with this post but ask yourselved this.
Would you want to work for a company that results in you getting less than the legal minumum wage?
More than likely, you wouldn't.
In addition, having the drivers pass an English test might increase the chance they're able to read and understand their one-sided contract of non-employment. No wonder Uber are against it.
Edit: they might also be able to argue back..
So London license, London licensing rules.
Oh wait "We're not in London, we're on the internet. That does not count."
B**locks.
Uber lost this the day they accepted they needed a license in the first place.
Nor do I see any other private hire company doing this jointly with them. Not surprising. Uber want a monopoly and I think their competitors can smell it on them.
'Oh wait "We're not in London, we're on the internet. That does not count."'
That's fine if they want to drive people round "the internet". However if they want to drive people round London, then they need to abide by London rules.
"I have never heard ANYONE addressed as 'treacle'."
I have. Older men (seventy plus, at a guess).
Also as an occassional black cab driver (LTDA cab), I would support this English test for all public service drivers (LTDA, Uber, minicab, bus) - as long as it covers all drivers, and covers the polite and apolitical use of language.
"Treacle (Tart) = Sweetheart (apparently!)"
I imagine many black cab drivers would be bang alongside an English test which had a "translate from Cockney" section. That would certainly weed out the less linguistically able.
(My grandfather was born in N8, but he had to learn Cockney to communicate* with his workforce who were largely East Enders.)
*Work out what they were saying about him behind his back.
If a cabbie (of any sort) can't communicate with the passengers then what hope of you of getting to the correct destination.
Well, since you put in your exact destination when you book the ride then you've a pretty good chance. Even without that, I've always managed well enough in other countries where I didn't speak the language, as do non-English speaking passengers here. The tiny subset of English needed by a taxi driver doesn't really justify GCSE standard - fortunately for quite a few English-born taxi drivers as well.
Well, and many of them speak what they THINK is english, but clearly is not... just go to Glasgow...
I reckon in Glasgow they'll need to test for both English and Glaswegian - you are right, they are indeed VERY different languages :). I think knowing a decent amount of English is essential for a cab driver, I don't think that is demanding too much.
Can someone explain to me HOW if the driver and passenger cant communicate, how do you expect the passenger to be taken where they need to be. Im aware that sometimes there are language blocks...BUT english is a so called 'international language' and in my experience most foreigners can with help from us make themselves understood....unless of course the driver dont speak english to start with. When i started in the cab trade we had to know the area we worked in,similar to Londons Knowledge and no we didnt have satnavs....in fact i still dont have one....just an A to Z. If Uber want to operate then they should work by same rules as the rest of us. Also, in respnse to the guy who wanted to go from where was it Croydon to Brixham, and ended up in Bristol....if that did happen then I would personally have rung the bank to stop the payment and if instructed by police to pay or arrested....i would elect arrest and go to court...the driver is taking the piss doing that. It has happened locally and i picked the people up after the driver threw them out of the car. All i got told by our council was its EU rules....which is bullshit. I know for a fact that EU counties,some have very strict licence rules like we used to have...and its individual member states that decide their own rules. Also locally in my area, most UBER drivers may come through the European route but do not originate from Europe....more African,Pakistan areas....no problem with that as long as they meet the required standard of english and local knowledge. Getmany dont employ Spanish bricklayers to sork as surgeons, so why do we give licences to drivers who dont know the difference between Big Ben and the Eiffel Tower.
I'd have a lot more time for these comments if the author could actually demonstrate a basic ability to communicate using written English rather than some truncated version of it.
I could just be a bit grumpy today though because I have to deal with poor grammar on a regular basis.
'Also, it would be unfair to only allow people with drivers-licensees to drive.'
Well, back when I worked in London (20 yrs+ ago), there was a minicab company where ISTR only three of the 20 drivers had 'kosher' licences (Insurance, that was another matter...), the rest were dodgy to various degrees (just like their passports).
In case anyone was wondering how I know this, I was asked to look at their radio system (specifically, I was asked to make Illegal modifications to their system, which I declined to do, seriously, seriously dodgy people..). I notice from a quick check on Google they're no longer there, TF!.
Small point about business who rely on a reputation (like taxi firms and security firms)
Beware any that change their names.
It usually means something has gone seriously wrong with their staff. In the case of taxi firms the classic is some kind of sex offense with passengers.
In the case of security companies it's usually an on site death of a guard.
'How would you know?'
Well, the owner had been there since the early 70's, and was pretty close to retirement back when I knew him, he kept muttering about packing it all in, selling the building to the Indian chappie who owned the rest of the properties on the street, and returning to Ireland.
The main reason he was thinking of getting out was that he couldn't handle the increasingly 'heavy' Yardie sponsored competition, there was a spate of his original drivers getting robbed at gun&knife point causing most of them to quit (hence why he had a stable of 'cheap' dodgy drivers when I had dealings with him), that, coupled with the serious amount of fare poaching that was going (this in particular was why he wanted me to 'fiddle' with their radio systems to 'hide' their comms on frequencies other local firms couldn't listen in on, oh, and he wanted to deploy 'jammers' to interfere with the rival companies comms into the bargain as well) probably forced his hand.
Sure, if they've not been deported (hah!) there's a good chance the drivers are still around and as dodgy as ever..though they've probably made enough money by now to buy kosher passports and licences, I do know that one of the drivers who did have a kosher license back then, and who used to run the place as an assistant manager went more into the car hire business, with a spot of 'import-export' on the side to help with the occasional cash flow problems..
'..Andf I doubt if they were the sole dodgy operator anyway...'
Oh, they weren't...see some of the above comments about his competitors. South London, fun, fun place..only time in my life where I've felt the need to arm myself for the usual 11:30pmish 15 minute walk from the station to the flat (and did so for around four months)..
Looking at it on streetview, despite the surface attempts at gentrifying the place it probably hasn't changed that much, (as well as the minicab firm, the dodgy locksmith, I see, is now gone, alas, so too is one of the better wee chip shops that I ever found in London..real chips - ok, so sometimes had to wait for them to peel and slice the potatoes, but combined with the locally made Jamaican vegetable patties and hot pepper sauce, never tasted anything like them before or since - it's now another bloody estate agents).
@MatsSvensson
"Also, it would be unfair to only allow people with drivers-licensees to drive. Think of the tremendous amount of jobs lost!"
While (presumably) tongue-in-cheek, this is spot-on.
It's a similar argument used by drone manufacturers when it was ruled in some country (forget which) that drones were surveillance devices. The plea from the drone manufacturers was that this was a booming industry.
So f%$king what?
The argument is, essentially: the regulations shouldn't apply to us because we are making money breaking them.
The original reason for the introduction of "the knowledge" to be a taxi driver in London was the piss-poor performance during some Victorian trade fare around 1865 when visitors got buggered around and generally the drivers failed to get them where they needed to be.
Now you could argue that the in-depth knowledge of London's roads is a bit obsolete in these satnav days, but still many people won't know the postcode or street name of where they want to be, maybe hotel name, or major shop, etc. So it still has some value. But ultimately if the driver can't understand what you are saying it is simply not a safe or satisfactory situation. And that is not specifically about Uber, but they seem to always be scraping the barrel in terms of screwing over thier drivers, etc.
I'd say the knowledge is completely obsolete these days , along with all the other taxi regulations.
If you only know a hotel name you can google it , or ring someone who can , or look at your brochurre etc etc ad infinitum - The cab driver needs to be tourist info less now than ever.
Now the amount of black cabs was limited , i think to ensure a cabbie could make a living - very anti comprtition / capitalism / market etc . Just let the market take care of it I say
The badges and licences were there to show that your driver wasnt a murderer . I think you could do that with an eBay like feedback system these days. In fact everybody should be able to be a taxi driver and fill empty seats in their car if they want - this would go a long way to alleviating pollution , congestion and save the worlds oil supplies , as well as making the journey cheaper for all
car sharing basically - should be rewarded not penalised.
The whole system should be scrapped and re done - uber seem to be taking a stab at his , but not getting it quite right
Um, sorry but putting car sharing in the same basket as taxi driver is not, in my opinion, justified. Car sharing is something you organize with people who have a common destination and, upon arrival, everyone disembarks until it is time to go back. It is generally a round-trip affair. A taxi is there is take a few people to a specific place and then take another fare to somewhere else (in ideal conditions). It is a series of single-trip drives by a driver who has no specific interest in going to any of those places outside of the money he makes.
Personally I think it is blindingly obvious that a taxi driver, being in a professional capacity, should bloody well be able to speak the language of the country he's working in, if only for safety reasons. How is he going to call for an ambulance in case of accident where he's the only one conscious ? Not to mention the more common understanding-your-customer day-to-day stuff that does make things go better, generally speaking.
That Uber is against it is not a surprise ; Uber is against anything that costs it money, including paying their taxi drivers - but they have trouble wiggling out of that one (not that don't try). Taxi companies everywhere need a bit of competition, but backstabbing Uber is not that.
I disagree. Driving is a great example of the kind of work that doesn't need advanced linguistic skills. It's the sort of job an immigrant might do while learning the language. These language tests are clearly a measure introduced to prop up someone's monopoly. Uber's an evil company, but they're coincidently right in this case.
Put it another way: if having a driver with an advanced English qualification were an optional extra, how much extra would most customers be willing to pay? Not a lot, I think. So let's not make it compulsory. The government shouldn't intervene any further than establishing language qualifications so that people who want to prove their knowledge of English can do so.
Put it another way: if having a driver with an advanced English qualification were an optional extra, how much extra would most customers be willing to pay? Not a lot, I think.
It's not about having English up to GCSE standards, it's about having enough knowledge to interact with customers (who, by the way, may also not speak English that well so you'd have TWO language barriers to cross), to understand warning notices, to call emergency services if something goes wrong - there is a basic amount of English you need to know just to function. THAT's what is required, and I think it's justified, also because your assertion that they should be allowed to work while still learning the language carries an unwarranted assumption that they ARE indeed learning, and not just blunder along until it goes drastically wrong.
Couldnt most of these issues be solved by giving the passenger control of the satnav?
If passenger not prepared to do that cos of intoxication or not knowing postcode , or the are in general or whatever THEN you pay extra for a "delux" driver with additional satnav and/or english skills
It's not about having English [...], it's about having enough knowledge to interact with customers (who, by the way, may also not speak English that well so you'd have TWO language barriers to cross)
I was in a fast food outlet one Friday evening in a major UK city. The person behind the counter and the customer both clearly were not native English speakers and could only just get by in English. It took about ten minutes for the (simple!) order to be placed.
(Many years later, I still feel a pang of guilt that I never stepped in to help clear up the confusion)
@AC - agreed. I've had a few issues with drivers neither able to understand 'normal' English nor communicate back to me in it. I care more about being able to communicate with a taxi driver than where they were born. If the driver can speak and understand English tolerably well, then I don't care if they were born here or just emigrated here last week. If they can't communicate tolerably well, then I don't want to be in their car.
"an advanced English"
Basic English is what is being asked for. Those with no obvious existing qualification will be required to pass a basic test. No one is saying that GCSE English is required. That was given as an example of an existing qualification that would be accepted as proof the holder had an understanding of the Language.
English for a taxi driver can be quite useful for reading signs, especially ones informing about current or upcoming roadworks, their duration and diversions with which a non-english speaker may well have some difficulty.
GCSE isn't "advanced English", it is what everyone does at school.
In this case it probably means English as a foreign language. Assuming this is the case then a GCSE would equate to "A2" in the CEFR. Copying/pasting from the wikipedia article this means that you can:
* Can understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of most immediate relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local geography, employment).
* Can communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange of information on familiar and routine matters.
* Can describe in simple terms aspects of their background, immediate environment and matters in areas of immediate need.
This would be enough for a cab driver I imagine.
* Can understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of most immediate relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local geography, employment).
* Can communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange of information on familiar and routine matters.
* Can describe in simple terms aspects of their background, immediate environment and matters in areas of immediate need.
Just a little comment about the asterisked points. They are poor and over-complex english. They are written above the standard they describe. They are ungrammatical and incorrect - I have never met anyone who communicated in any sort of task. Tasks are not normally a form of communication.
Whoever wrote that does not speak or understand english well enough to be a cab driver.
"Put it another way: if having a driver with an advanced English qualification were an optional extra, how much extra would most customers be willing to pay?"
Straw man argument. We're talking about basic English. A driver living in this country who can't be bothered to learn basic English - heck, there are free Internet apps for it - doesn't strike me as being sufficiently responsible to drive other people around.
(I am a little prejudiced perhaps because I know a Muslim couple, husband from Tunisia - he's working as a taxi driver while his wife trains as a midwife, and his English is pretty good, because he made the effort.)
Similarly, my daughter got in to a mini cab (pre booked) and the driver refused to move as she didnt know the postcode of the destination, cue calls to his office and complaints, they said it's standard practice now in mini cabs that they have a postcode for the driver to put in his satnav.
Not in my days as a mini cab it wasnt. we use a bloody A-Z to help the passenger identify where they wanted to go if they were unsure
"I got in a minicab recently and asked for Harrow on the Hill station. I got dropped off at North Harrow tube station"
And if you ask to be taken to the Ritz the hotel thinks you might get accidentally taken about a couple of hundred miles out of your way to Brighouse instead.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/londons-ritz-hotel-orders-namesake-yorkshire-ballroom-to-choose-new-name-after-80-years-a3472671.html
Used to get sent a car to pick me up when working unsociable hours in the early morning, I won't name the London car firm concerned but I had some shockers:
One bloke left the address of my flat in the satnav instead of work and was very surprised when we kept going back to my road. I had to point out the mistake after the second attempt or we could have done that for a while.
Another headed off and went the wrong way down a one way street and had to slam on the brakes (and quickly reverse) when an HGV appeared (going in the right direction) coming towards us. He said that the sat nav had failed to inform him that it was one way.
I was once taken a very peculiar route which when I queried he said "it's quicker". I said there wasn't a hope in hell this way was quicker and he then confessed that his sat nav had broken and he only knew this route to get across town.
One of them had Steve Allen on the radio at full blast and refused to turn it down. I eventually threatened not to sign for the journey at the end and he backed down.
etc.
I used to yearn for a black cab to pick me up instead!
My one and only experience of UBER was getting a lift with someone else and I was amazed at the service. Bloke showed up fairly quickly but was totally reliant on Sat Nav which worried me a bit especially when we lost the signal in the City of London and attempted to go up a one way street. When I found out that the app requires your location data and that they wanted it continuously I gave up on that idea.
car sharing basically - should be rewarded not penalised.
Uber is NOT car sharing, it's a freaking taxi company.
Car sharing = hey, I'm going this way, I can give you a ride if you agree to pay part of the cost.
Uber = hey, I'm not going this way but if you pay the cost of the ride plus some extra I'll come, pick you up and get you there.
Did you manage to spot the difference?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
