Free Speech and Pedophiles Uncle

Free Speech and Pedophiles Uncle



Further to Peer’s Peers and NSW Bailees Do Not Receive Entitlements many people including “taxifixer” refuses to contribute in the NSW TDA forum due to the infamous practice of selective free speech.

Peer,

Are you attacking me personally because I stood up for taxi drivers’ right at the NSW IRC? Once you describe CC Connor as Mad Connor in your scabbie magazine and in the post below you called him “Justice Connor”! Do you understand the difference between CC Connor, "Mad Connor" and “Justice Connor”?

Anyway, to increase your knowledge please read Mike Hatrick below.

“The following day, a number of taxi drivers were frog marched behind the "messiah" Robert Mayell at the Industrial Commission in front of CC Connor (NSW IRC Matter No 2383 of 1993).
No one is suggesting any conspiracy here! Poor Faruque and a few taxi drivers busted in anger and confronted the "messiah" Robert Mayell and the Transport Workers Union lawyer Adam Hatcher. During that time those new taxi drivers of Granville asked Faruque to be quiet and follow Meyall. Faruque told them, "I do not know who you are and I have not seen you in any of TWU meetings earlier – who are you people and what is the game going on here"?

Later many of these people confessed to Faruque and others that they were not even members of the TWU, many of them were not financial members of the union and the taxi bosses encouraged them to join in the TWU!

During the proceedings, the TWU lawyer said to CC Connor, "we reserve the right to oppose at a later date".

The good CC Connor found the opportunity and then he keenly passed the responsibility of gas and wash to the bailees without any compensation whatsoever. He did so despite strenuous objections made to him by Faruque and other drivers.

The decision by CC Connor did not change the bailor/bailee remuneration principle or law, but he made a decision which was not opposed by the parties.”


“Today, who is increasing the LPG price and on what basis no one knows or cares. The net impact is the weaker party in the chain is carrying the burden while "taxi mafia" is laughing all the way to the bank. The TWU lawyer Adam Hatcher found a chamber at the higher end of the town and become a BARRISTER! The good union boss Steve Hutchins became the president of the NSW Labor Party and eventually a number one ticket SENATOR from NSW.

Taxi drivers made an appeal to the Full Bench.

After a long and costly exercise, we found out that only the TWU have the right to represent taxi drivers at the Industrial Commission! During that hearing the rights and wrongs of the actual case were not discussed.

That means, in reality the court said the TWU can do whatever they like and they can ignore their own taxi driver members all together or their welfare! They are virtually not answerable to anyone. The union bosses do not have to follow justice, fairness, courtesy or common sense!

Since then the union removed a few bi-laws of their own constitution i.e. they don't have to advance the well being of their own members". The law is same today.”

Source: LPG to Iraq and Discrimination



--- In Sydney_TaxiCorruption@yahoogroups.com, "taxifixer" wrote:

Peer

When driver fronts up to a bailor and asks for work and the bailor offers a job with the sniffof work a tantalizing probability if the worker will listen to the mention of foregoing AnnualLeave for lower than ceiling pay ins I call that thinly veiled coercion and the grub making theoffer no better than a pedophiles uncle

Mike Hatrick

Source: http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/Sydney_TaxiCorruption/message/1047



--- In NSWTDAFORUM@yahoogroups.com, Peer Lindholdt wrote:
Re: Digest Number 990

Re: Digest Number 990Posted by: "union_faruque" http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/NSWTDAFORUM/post?postID=XPC553ejZLrmIVSQ1UDIfslJgq9UsvBm-osl4501HtUxkxlcPf8BUhs2BMcz-pZznFIQ6f2cyUQye9vOowLds6foeQ union_faruqueFri Apr 18, 2008 11:02 am (PDT)

> Peer,

Are you familiar with Case and Statute Law? In law, there is nothing called trade off! If you want to know more then ask CIM Miller. By the way, have you ever been to the IRC in your life?>

Faruque,

if you had bothered to read my posting properly you would have noticed I wrote "a gentleman's agreement" which is obviously not legally binding but is generally considered morally so, at least amongst decent folk.

Yes I have been at IRC taxi hearings twice. Once I even watched you stand up and make a fool of yourself. Even Justice Connor found it amusing and let you rave on longer than usual.

PEER




--- In NSWTDAFORUM@yahoogroups.com, "union_faruque" wrote:
Re: Digest Number 990

Peer,

Are you familiar with Case and Statute Law? In law, there is nothing called trade off! If you want to know more then ask CIM Miller. By the way, have you ever been to the IRC in your life?

--- In NSWTDAFORUM@yahoogroups.com, Peer Lindholdt wrote:

Ted,

firstly NSW drivers were not awarded entitlements, only Sydney drivers (see your points 1 and 2).

Secondly, in a previous posting here I explained the 3 reasons why most drivers don¹t get entitlements:

They don¹t drive enough shifts either by choice or because their operator won¹t let them; they don¹t ask for them or they have a gentleman¹s agreement to offset them against lower pay-ins. That the latter doesn¹t legally stand up in the IRC should the driver be a prick and still demand holiday pay later is irrelevant to this debate.

My information is that all full-time bailee drivers at the base at Cabcharge HQ and all at Lime get their entitlements. I have also spoken to many other drivers who do. We always did at TCS in Paddington provided we asked for them.

The Taxi Council has a strong argument in the IRC, backed by the claims below (1 & 2), for operators to be allowed to trade off entitlements by a set figure against lower pay-ins.

There is a strong rumour that the TC intends to apply to the IRC that method 2 be scrapped in favour of method 1 (50/50 split). That would presently cost many drivers dearly as the earn more than the pay-ins but in a recession would be to the drivers¹ advantage. Also, their income would not be affected by fuel prices as the operator pays for fuel under method 1. Maybe the NSW TDA should start telling its members to choose method 1.

The figure used by IPART of $4,000 towards entitlements is obviously inadequate if an operator has 2 full-time drivers, which makes him liable for $8,000, as shown in the PwC model.

You frankly don¹t know what you are talking about when you say ³... that has been the case for so long that operators with impunity do NOT allow for the payment and cost of Entitlements in the Payins.². The notional cost of entitlements is INCLUDED in the pay-ins ($4,000). The operator can¹t not allow for them, they are there, in the cost model. If they discount that's their choice, their gamble.

The idiocy of the IPART and PwC models is that if an operator avoids paying entitlements by whichever method, he pockets the money himself and there is no simple way of fixing that problem. And that is an incentive to operators not to give their drivers 5 shifts a week especially if there is a glut of drivers which will happen soon enough.

As I have said before, the only fair way to fix the problem is for IPART and the IRC to agree that ALL drivers who regularly drive 3 shifts or more p.w. be classified as permanent full-time drivers and that operators MUST charge the maximum pay-in and pay entitlements to such drivers. A lower maximum pay-in could be set for casual drivers.

That is what the NSW TDA and ATDA should have pushed for in their submissions. Why should cabbies have to work 60 hours a week to get holiday pay when other workers only have to work 40 or less?

The only other alternative is to scrap entitlements altogether and have lower maximum pay-ins. The Taxi Council would love that.

Cheers
PEER

LPG to Iraq

LPG to Iraq


Further to the “untouchable” NSW ALP President Steve Hutchins and Adam Hatcher saga below (Ghost and Gas – No Conspiracies), we have requested the ACCC to include LPG, Petrol, Kerosene, Dassel and Lube Oil (Ghost and Gas – No Conspiracies in Australia) in their watch list instead of only unleaded as mentioned by Chairman Mr. Graeme Samuel.

In the Science and Commerce article we made an attempt to say, “Scientifically speaking, i.e. chemical structure, energy ratio or content, mileage etc. etc., if the Diesel price is $A1.50/L then the Petrol should be below $A0.75/L and the LPG must be less than $A0.35/L.”

It is also important to remind everyone that the LPG is a cleaner and greener product than many other petroleum products and therefore a good government should encourage and facilitate more usage of the LPG.

Last year I was surprised to find out, “the LPG was around $A0.30/L in Victoria while in NSW the same product was $A0.50/L. It appears the state government may have some role in affecting the price of these products. In any case the public must know these factors and the ACCC can ensure accountability, transparency and openness in the whole episode. The other important fact is that the LPG does not attract state and federal tax and duties like petrol and therefore recent LPG price hikes got the smell of price fixing, collusion and other unethical activities behind the scene.

The ACCC, media and other authorities must examine all of these issues for the good of the public and country immediately.

Remember, Iraq was not invaded to “liberate” Iraqis, spread “democracy” or remove “weapons of mass destruction”! The tragedy was organized and executed for oil, profit and power.




Science and Commerce

Beside the principled argument of taxi fixer let me say the followings.

Scientifically speaking, i.e. chemical structure, energy ratio or content, mileage etc. etc., if the Diesel price is $A1.50/L then the Petrol should be below $A0.75/L and the LPG must be less than $A0.35/L.

However, due to the irrational economic rationalism, these days;
Diesel is $A1.50/L,
Petrol is $A1.40/L and
LPG is $A0.70/L.

It would be a wise idea to talk to the Australian Petroleum Institute or other scientific bodes about this blatant anomalies. The ACC may initiate this dialogue along with the scientific facts mentioned above inline with Ghost and Gas – No Conspiracies in Australia.

Source: Sydney Taxi Corruption


--- In Sydney_TaxiCorruption@yahoogroups.com, "taxifixer" wrote:
Re: Ghost and Gas – No Conspiracies

As a Method 1 bailee driver in Sydney I am not required to pay for the cost of fuel by way of the Taxi Industry (Contract Drivers) Contract Determination 1984,On Method 2 so called ' bailee drivers' are required to fork out the extra $40.00 / shift ...or so to pay for fuel.Little wonder that when the president of the TDA when wearing his other hat as champion of the bailor that he works for, will go so far as to appear for the bailor side of the industry in the NSW Industrial Relations Commission against bailee drivers who choose to Method 1 as he did several years ago- only to be demolished by the TWU lawyer.Also having opted to go with Method 2 pay in for the fuel is the wages of sin.Suckers- if you opt for a Method that facilitates massive tax evasion and avoidance- amethod that flies in the face of the massive legal precedent set down by the Justice Beattie report into the industry and opt for a method arrived at by legal chicanery then suffer you must.The bailor and the fuel companies are laughing ....

taxifixer
Source: Sydney Taxi Corruption


--- In Sydney_TaxiCorruption@yahoogroups.com, "union_faruque" wrote:
Ghost and Gas – No Conspiracies in Australia


It appears, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission do not know the fact that one can make millions of products out of a black substance called Crude Oil. The refiners make these products under certain conditions, pressure and temperature at the oil refineries based on the market requirement. Right now the main products in the Australian market are the L.P.G., petrol, kerosene, diesel and lubricating oil.

An intelligent organization with integrity must be watching all of these products, profit margins, price fluctuations and possible links behind any changes. According to Mr. Graeme Samuel of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, his organization is only watching the unleaded petrol prices to change the world.

However, the giant ACCC and Australian Government got millions of well paid and connected advisers and experts. One can hope they will ensure public good and fairness while they discharge their responsibilities.

Remember, taxi drivers are waiting for Removal of Cabcharge Decals from Taxis.




--- In NSWTDAFORUM@yahoogroups.com, "Cabbie Rights" wrote:

Well done Faruque,For once I read a post worthy of a media manager there is hope for you yet!The sad part being, that neither the TWU who don't give a shit, or the NSWTDA who are totally impotent as is the ATDA in this matter or any TDA in any state. It is obvious for anyone that pauses to think, that the oil companies in the present price hike are playing 'pay back' to Labor Australia and unless Kevin Rudd and his team takes a strong stand we are going to be screwed by the capitalist monopolies.What that stand should be, I have no idea as there has never been one single government to my knowledge be it Labor or Liberal that has the balls to tackle the oil companies and win. I may be wrong in this, and if the great historians of the Taxi industry have any corrections to this statment then I would be most happy to be corrected.So my dear collegues, tighten your belts and TRY and have a happy festive season.Remember Christmas is a time for caring and sharing, and we who have so little and try to share with others what little we have may be twice blessed.Peace and blessings to ALL

Jimmy
NSW TDA Forum



Ghost and Gas – No Conspiracies

According to the law of the land, the bailor is responsible for fuel and wash.

However, at the Industrial Relations Commission the "taxi mafia" made an application to pass the responsibility of fuel and wash to the bailees without any compensation whatsoever.

Further to ICAC Submission, long long ago; a "phantom strike" was called at Granville Taxi Base, Sydney, NSW of the `lucky country'! The TWU trouble shooter named Robert Mayell who used to work around the adjacent area quickly went over there and negotiated a settlement! The `Pay-in' went down by five dollars!!

The following day, a number of taxi drivers were frog marched behind the "messiah" Robert Mayell at the Industrial Commission in front of CC Connor (NSW IRC Matter No 2383 of 1993).

No one is suggesting any conspiracy here! Poor Faruque and a few taxi drivers busted in anger and confronted the "messiah" Robert Mayell and the Transport Workers Union lawyer Adam Hatcher. During that time those new taxi drivers of Granville asked Faruque to be quiet and follow Meyall. Faruque told them, "I do not know who you are and I have not seen you in any of TWU meetings earlier – who are you people and what is the game going on here"?

Later many of these people confessed to Faruque and others that they were not even members of the TWU, many of them were not financial members of the union and the taxi bosses encouraged them to join in the TWU!

During the proceedings, the TWU lawyer said to CC Connor, "we reserve the right to oppose at a later date".

The good CC Connor found the opportunity and then he keenly passed the responsibility of gas and wash to the bailees without any compensation whatsoever. He did so despite strenuous objections made to him by Faruque and other drivers.

The decision by CC Connor did not change the bailor/bailee remuneration principle or law, but he made a decision which was not opposed by the parties.

A few weeks later the LPG price jumped from $A0.20-$A0.30/L to $A0.50-$A0.60/L.

An application was made to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission on a different ground. After a futile exercise, the price went down for a while.

Today, who is increasing the LPG price and on what basis no one knows or cares. The net impact is the weaker party in the chain is carrying the burden while "taxi mafia" is laughing all the way to the bank. The TWU lawyer Adam Hatcher found a chamber at the higher end of the town and become a BARRISTER! The good union boss Steve Hutchins became the president of the NSW Labor Party and eventually a number one ticket SENATOR from NSW.

Taxi drivers made an appeal to the Full Bench.

After a long and costly exercise, we found out that only the TWU have the right to represent taxi drivers at the Industrial Commission! During that hearing the rights and wrongs of the actual case were not discussed.

That means, in reality the court said the TWU can do whatever they like and they can ignore their own taxi driver members all together or their welfare! They are virtually not answerable to anyone. The union bosses do not have to follow justice, fairness, courtesy or common sense! Since then the union removed a few bi-laws of their own constitution i.e. they don't have to advance the well being of their own members". The law is same today.

Whether we drivers like it or not, even if the TWU got any taxi driver members or not they will decide the bailee taxi drivers working conditions. No matter, how sad, immoral and unlawful they are.

Faruque and others used to expose them in the media. However, the union bosses used to make attempts to trap taxi drivers and block them from the media, parliament, etc. etc. Some of the documents are very revealing.

I say, the most tragic thing of my life is that knowing and dealing with the NSW Transport Workers Union.

Thursday, December 20, 2007


Ted Hirsch wrote:

From memory, about 4-5 weeks ago gas rose to a minimum 55/ litre and up to 70/litre.After cabbies got used to the shock, then a week or two ago it rose to minimum 65/litre and up to 75/litre.Did you say price gouging, Brian? Tut, tut. But Yes, getting our Media Manager onto it sounds worthwhile !On Wed 19Dec07 in the SMH, Gordon Samuels announced that the ACCC inquiry had NOT found any evidence of petrol price collusion. And Coles and Woolies dockets were cleared from accusations of higher shelf prices. Independent servos disappearing was is part of a long term trend, although they are hotly contesting this finding (self interest obviously). It is proposed to introduce a daily petrol price information scheme, popular in WA and which has reduced volatile price changes to once per day. By 4pm the next day's price is shown on the computer. No mention of gas prices or gouging by the ACCC, of course.

Our in house historian Mr. Ahmed, tells of an IRC "temporary decision" some years ago which, thanks to the TWU made drivers pay for fuel, whereas previously Bailors paid (or bailors/ bailees split the costs?). Faruque reckons taking this to the IRC for review is too difficult and costly. He reckons Parliament, somehow. Any specific advice, Faruque?Ernie suggest IPART gives us a handout for fuel price increases. That's the easiest approach, no doubt, albeit in June/July from memory and a massive amount of work if we do the full Monty! (Should IPART be added to our Calendar?) (BTW, why are radio jobs so poorly returned, Ernie? Cheers to all.

Ted


Ernie Mollenhauer wrote:

As bus fares have just been increased, their explanation being increased costs, I reckon there are more than reasonable grounds to pester Ipart for an increase in taxi fares. The other string in the bow would be the currently poor responses to radio booking which are now even less attractive than before. Is there support for a claim, (seeking to leave the meters alone) for an increase in the radio booking fee to say $3 so they can knock us back to $2?

Ernie



On 19/12/2007, Brian Ridge <http://post?postID=TLaweS6l8GxMBu8-oHHFsW55SWup1o6YOq_rP-UnQOKN2F3cnLGuqeurQHKXPeEPVTnivcWaNmkHwLU> wrote:

To the committee, Last night while filling my cab with gas at the Legion base at 65.9 cents per litre another driver told me he had narrowly avoided paying 74.9 at Crows Nest, and he estimated that it was costing him about $100 a week extra. My recollection is that when the fare rates were increased back about July the cost of gas rose from about 48 to 52 cents per litre. If my memory is correct that equates to about a 40% rise in less than 6 months. The term "price gouging" springs to mind. I am wondering whether the NSWTDA could do a bit of probing and perhaps create a bit of noise so that these prices are justified.

Brian
Source: NSW TDA Executive

Ghost and Gas – No Conspiracies

Ghost and Gas – No Conspiracies


According to the law of the land, the bailor is responsible for fuel and wash.

However, at the Industrial Relations Commission the “taxi mafia” made an application to pass the responsibility of fuel and wash to the bailees without any compensation whatsoever.

Further to ICAC Submission, long long ago; a “phantom strike” was called at Granville Taxi Base, Sydney, NSW of the ‘lucky country’! The TWU trouble shooter named Robert Mayell who used to work around the adjacent area quickly went over there and negotiated a settlement! The ‘Pay-in’ went down by five dollars!!

The following day, a number of taxi drivers were frog marched behind the “messiah” Robert Mayell at the Industrial Commission in front of CC Connor (NSW IRC Matter No 2383 of 1993).

No one is suggesting any conspiracy here! Poor Faruque and a few taxi drivers busted in anger and confronted the “messiah” Robert Mayell and the Transport Workers Union lawyer Adam Hatcher. During that time those new taxi drivers of Granville asked Faruque to be quiet and follow Meyall. Faruque told them, “I do not know who you are and I have not seen you in any of TWU meetings earlier – who are you people and what is the game going on here”?

Later many of these people confessed to Faruque and others that they were not even members of the TWU, many of them were not financial members of the union and the taxi bosses encouraged them to join in the TWU!

During the proceedings, the TWU lawyer said to CC Connor, “we reserve the right to oppose at a later date”.

The good CC Connor found the opportunity and then he keenly passed the responsibility of gas and wash to the bailees without any compensation whatsoever. He did so despite strenuous objections made to him by Faruque and other drivers.

The decision by CC Connor did not change the bailor/bailee remuneration principle or law, but he made a decision which was not opposed by the parties.
A few weeks later the LPG price jumped from $A0.20-$A0.30/L to $A0.50-$A0.60/L.

An application was made to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission on a different ground. After a futile exercise, the price went down for a while.

Today, who is increasing the LPG price and on what basis no one knows or cares. The net impact is the weaker party in the chain is carrying the burden while “taxi mafia” is laughing all the way to the bank. The TWU lawyer Adam Hatcher found a chamber at the higher end of the town and become a BARRISTER! The good union boss Steve Hutchins became the president of the NSW Labor Party and eventually a number one ticket SENATOR from NSW.

Taxi drivers made an appeal to the Full Bench.

After a long and costly exercise, we found out that only the TWU have the right to represent taxi drivers at the Industrial Commission! During that hearing the rights and wrongs of the actual case were not discussed.

That means, in reality the court said the TWU can do whatever they like and they can ignore their own taxi driver members all together or their welfare! They are virtually not answerable to anyone. The union bosses do not have to follow justice, fairness, courtesy or common sense! Since then the union removed a few bi-laws of their own constitution i.e. they don’t have to advance the well being of their own members”. The law is same today.

Whether we drivers like it or not, even if the TWU got any taxi driver members or not they will decide the bailee taxi drivers working conditions. No matter, how sad, immoral and unlawful they are.

Faruque and others used to expose them in the media. However, the union bosses used to make attempts to trap taxi drivers and block them from the media, parliament, etc. etc. Some of the documents are very revealing.

I say, the most tragic thing of my life is that knowing and dealing with the NSW Transport Workers Union.


Thursday, December 20, 2007




Ted Hirsch wrote:

From memory, about 4-5 weeks ago gas rose to a minimum 55/ litre and up to 70/litre.After cabbies got used to the shock, then a week or two ago it rose to minimum 65/litre and up to 75/litre.Did you say price gouging, Brian? Tut, tut. But Yes, getting our Media Manager onto it sounds worthwhile !

On Wed 19Dec07 in the SMH, Gordon Samuels announced that the ACCC inquiry had NOT found any evidence of petrol price collusion. And Coles and Woolies dockets were cleared from accusations of higher shelf prices. Independent servos disappearing was is part of a long term trend, although they are hotly contesting this finding (self interest obviously). It is proposed to introduce a daily petrol price information scheme, popular in WA and which has reduced volatile price changes to once per day. By 4pm the next day's price is shown on the computer. No mention of gas prices or gouging by the ACCC, of course.Our in house historian

Mr. Ahmed, tells of an IRC "temporary decision" some years ago which, thanks to the TWU made drivers pay for fuel, whereas previously Bailors paid (or bailors/ bailees split the costs?).

Faruque reckons taking this to the IRC for review is too difficult and costly. He reckons Parliament, somehow. Any specific advice, Faruque?Ernie suggest IPART gives us a handout for fuel price increases. That's the easiest approach, no doubt, albeit in June/July from memory and a massive amount of work if we do the full Monty! (Should IPART be added to our Calendar?) (BTW, why are radio jobs so poorly returned, Ernie?

Cheers to all.Ted



Ernie Mollenhauer wrote:

As bus fares have just been increased, their explanation being increased costs, I reckon there are more than reasonable grounds to pester Ipart for an increase in taxi fares. The other string in the bow would be the currently poor responses to radio booking which are now even less attractive than before. Is there support for a claim, (seeking to leave the meters alone) for an increase in the radio booking fee to say $3 so they can knock us back to $2?

Ernie



On 19/12/2007, Brian Ridge < brianfridge@msn.com> wrote:


To the committee, Last night while filling my cab with gas at the Legion base at 65.9 cents per litre another driver told me he had narrowly avoided paying 74.9 at Crows Nest, and he estimated that it was costing him about $100 a week extra. My recollection is that when the fare rates were increased back about July the cost of gas rose from about 48 to 52 cents per litre. If my memory is correct that equates to about a 40% rise in less than 6 months. The term "price gouging" springs to mind. I am wondering whether the NSWTDA could do a bit of probing and perhaps create a bit of noise so that these prices are justified. Brian

An Open Letter to Geoff or Anyone Who Cares

An Open Letter to Geoff or Anyone Who Cares

Further to Bhutto to Beggar, Nitrogenous waste from a mental and Debate with Idiots look like we are surrounded by vultures. These vultures have been doing anything and everything possible for their narrow personal gains! We have been fighting against them very successfully. It is hard, difficult and exhausting. However, it is worthwhile.

I can not find any logic, moral or legality behind an idea of abandoning such a moral cause and course! Because, these self-cantered greedy people want the money and power. They are not interested in Taxi Drivers’ welfare. They are shameless. Peoples are waking up and they will be condemned. I have noticed the sign during last Sunday’s meeting! A few drivers from the ‘other side’ got sick and tired of their own friends and expressed their solidarity with us.

These vultures attacked you mercilessly for an innocent mistake of yours and they wanted embarrass you further you for you honourable act. These dishonest people are unable to hold their AGM and other meetings in the local toilet blocks! These self-cantered and greedy people failed to present an independently audited “financial report” during their tenure! In my book, they are worse than a common thief. Most of these disgusting individuals are serial bankrupt and they have bankrupted the NSW TDA account!

You yourself witnessed during the highest level meeting at the Airport, ‘shonky’ Jools was embarrassingly quiet in a corner and he had nothing to contribute! You also can not ignore the fact that these peoples’ combined arrogance and ignorance made the Mac Bank laughing stock of the town and the taxi mafia is smiling!

We did the right thing according to the NSW Supreme Court direction and our membership also did the right thing by expelling these cancerous cells. I said to them before and saying it again, “I’ll see then at the High Court”.

Most of us a decent and hard working people unlike these handful professional crooks! I believe It is our moral obligation to protect the NSW TDA fund and further taxi drivers interest.

We can not walk out from our moral and legal responsibility. We can give in to criminal entity.

Trust me, we will ensure them their place in history.

"A SUBMISSION CONCERNING ALLEGATIONS OF CORRUPTION

"A SUBMISSION CONCERNING ALLEGATIONS OF CORRUPTIONWITHIN THE N.S.W. TAXI INDUSTRY: A CAUSE FOR PUBLICCONCERN AND INVESTIGATION."

Date of Submission: 24 July 1998.

From:Faruque Ahmed,
President,
Taxi Drivers' Section, NSW TWU,
6/12 Woodbury Street, Marrickville, 2204.
Phone - (02) 9564 1079, Fax 9559 6030, Mobile 0418 227 551.


To:
Independent Commission Against Corruption
Cnr George and Cleveland Street,
Redfern, 2016, New South Wales,
Fax - (02) 9699 8067.

Dear Commissioner,


I begin with two questions:

(1) Why has the Premier of New South Wales, Mr. Bob Carr, continually and consistently thwarted numerous submissions calling on the Parliamentary Stay Safe Committee to mount a full and open inquiry into the N.S.W. Taxi Industry, despite the matter having broad cross-party and cross-factional support?
(2) Why has the N.S.W. Ombudsman's Office, after a preliminary 0examination of some of the evidence presented below, privately suggested that the evidence would be more appropriately forwarded to the ICAC for examination?

Read On
Source: Sydney Taxi Corruption

Introduction:

1. Introduction:A Brief Historical Overview in the Development of a Cultureof `Lawlessness and Corruption in the NSW Taxi Industry.

Throughout this document reference will be made to the "NSW Taxi Industry" wherein matters addressed refer specifically to the Sydney taxi fleet. The use of the term "NSW" here is in recognition that the Sydney fleet is governed by the Legislature, Ministers and Cabinet of the State of New South Wales. The Sydney fleet is also subject to the industrial court determinations that apply within the state jurisdiction. Hence there is no specific attempt to address the problems that beset taxi drivers or owners in geographical areas outside the greater metropolitan region of Sydney.


Part of the political culture and folklore of Sydney is that everyone "knows a cabbie" and hence is "an expert on the taxi industry". Amongst the professional class there are many who worked part-time or on week-ends to get themselves through their accountancy or engineering degrees. Others have relied on the industry as "a second job". Hence there is the general perception that the itinerant nature of the industry means that drivers are prepared to suffer lackof industrial representation, lack of enforcement of award conditions, etc. because "it's the nature of the job". You put in thehours, earn a quid and get out. Similarly, owner-drivers have developed a certain "maverick" image derived from dealing with allsorts of people in the community. They have cultivated a certain care-free attitude, a distaste for bureaucracy and a toleration of the low return on their investment because they like the job.


Over a long period of time the "cash-in-hand" system allowed owners and drivers alike to "rob Peter to pay Paul" and delude themselves that the personal freedom offered by the "laissez-faire"-faire"nature of their industry's regulatory infrastructure more than compensated for the long hours, drunken passengers, unsafe working conditions and lack of entitlements that the "nine-to-fivers"enjoyed. While this cultural aspect to the job has continued to flourish over the past two decades the ability of taxi drivers to "earn a decent living" with "minimum interference" has not. Legislative changes have occurred which benefit a tiny minority within the industry. This minority, trading on the pre-existing culture of the industry has now manoeuvred the whole industry into a state of play where all the other players in the game are pre-ordained losers. The influence of this minority has grown into an oligarchy with inter-connecting threads in the political, trade union, media, legal, bureaucratic arenas. The result is a system approaching nepotism and favouritism that threatens the stability and quality of the industry.


The first judicial mention of "lawless bailors/taxi operators" goes back to a decision of Justice Edwards in 1940. The unresolved problem was restated by the Full Bench of the Industrial Commission in 1968.The problem began to escalate in the 1970s and early 1980s with the removal of the Seniority system for the allocation of new taxi plateleases and the expedient increase of the number of vehicles on the road beyond the customer demand or services of those vehicles. The latter development created not only excess capacity but undermined the stability of the sole proprietor as the lynch-pin in the system. A system that had as its axiom "the owner will look after his bailee driver because he is a driver too". The arrangement was invariably the owner performing the day shift with a regular non-casual night driver. A close bond existed between the two through a system oftrust (which the owner invariably exploited even then).


The system was then compounded by the deregulation surrounding taxi ownership which shifted the balance of power and numerical strength within the industry away from the single owner operator/bailee normin favour of the more corporatist fleet management/entrepreneurial ownership regime that is now in place. The final lynch-pins in this `brave new world' was the full corporatisation of the Taxi Co-operatives which drastically shifted any residual decision-making and economic power of the single owner operator out of their hands and into the clutches of the Board of Directors of the Cooperatives.Through sleight of hand and clever but questionable legal manoeuvres these Board of Directors were now in full control.


The Board of Directors were originally elected by the majority ofdrivers within the industry through owner operator attended AGMs. Thenew style Board of Directors were only responsible to a minority oftaxi owners who were "shareholders" within restructured co-operatives which bore little legal semblance to the original organisations. Yet the disenfranchised majority of owner operators were still tied to their "Cooperatives" by government legislation that coerced them to remain financial contributors to organisations that they had no realsay in running. This is the current situation in NSW.


Naturally a lot of owner operators voted with their feet and puttheir lease plates on the market. Under the deregulated ownershiprules (owners no longer required to drive their vehicles for aliving) the "big fish" in the industry further consolidated their power by either purchasing these newly available licence plates or by encouraging the new (non-industry) owners to take advantage of the economies of scale of fleet management and place their "asset" underthe fleet management control of the power brokers. The industry was moving closer to monopolisation at this stage with the Boards of Directors of the major Cooperatives being able to use inside knowledge of the taxi industry to both increase the percentage of taxi plates on the road under their direct control and extend their influence over government policy through the creation of the "TaxiCouncil" as the major advisory body to government.


Technological change in the 1980s (computer assisted dispatch system) and 1990s (computer assisted telephone booking system) saw the demiseof the two way radio dispatch system. The Taxis Combined radio network emerged as the dominant player within the industry. It now has seven of the eleven taxi networks directly hooked into their computer assisted dispatch and booking system. As a result theworking records of the majority of Sydney drivers are entered intoand continually updated on their private data bases. All drivers must now have their authority cards authorised through the networks. This system ties them, like the single taxi owner operator into a form of conscripted loyalty to their radio network. (A small group of smarter drivers used mobile phones and pagers in an attempt to break out of this conscription and emerged as the first of many "executive fleets"in the `divided & ruled' world of the taxi driver).


The Beattie Report of the late 1960s stated, after extensive investigation, that there should be no fixed pay-in system at all. The taxi owners responded with the Lake Agreement, (Lake was the nameof the President of the TIA before current incumbent Reg Kermode).This agreement was an unregistered document whereby the bailees were offered a choice between percentage pay ins and fixed pay-ins. Owners enticed bailee drivers into accepting the fixed pay-in system as the norm by offering low pay-ins at the time of introduction. As the older drivers, working on the percentage system, retired or left the industry throughout the 1970s the fixed pay-in system emerged as the dominant method of bailment. New drivers were seldom informed of the percentage pay-in option. Those that were informed were scared away from exercising this option by owners who warned them they would be incurring a heavier (and more easily detected) taxation liability.The reality was the owners were the major tax dodgers in the industry. Now they wanted to increase their income further by avoiding the responsibility of guaranteeing a basic income to their bailees.


Under the leadership of Mr. E. McBeaty the Transport Workers Union lodged a claim for taxi drivers before the industrial court inDecember 1979 [V-13] which included a Clause (8) entitled "Guarantied Earnings" whereby the driver would be guaranteed a minimum return for each shift worked. It also included a log of claims for improved sickleave, annual leave, long service and public holiday entitlements, as well as receipts for any payments made to the bailor. The Taxi Industry Association (TIA) stalled and resisted all these claims andargued for the legal entrenchment of a fixed pay-in system before they would negotiate.


Following the death of Mr McBeatty (by misadventure), the incoming Secretary of the TWU, Mr. H. Quinn, instructed the union's legal teamto break the stalemate and reach an agreement with the TIA. This occurred soon after when the TWU consented to the TIA demands for a fixed pay-in system and the erosion of other legal entitlements of the bailees. Under this consented arrangement bailors were no longer required to issue receipts to bailee drivers. Bailee driver claims to other entitlements were made unenforceable. For example, under Clauses 1 & 10 of this consented arrangement bailee's bailment could be terminated without notice or reason. Thus if a driver reached 219 shifts in a calender year he could be sacked without notice and deprived of four weeks annual leave which immediately accumulated after 220 shifts. The net effect was to remove all obligations from owners in regards to annual leave, and, ipso facto, any other obligations.


The official entrenchment of the fixed pay-in system occurred inearly 1984 with the new Taxi Industry (Contract Drivers) Contract Determination 1984 (known as `The Determination"). This "Determination" ensured the owners a guaranteed income every shift but put the onus on the drivers to raise their own incomes after they had first achieved the owners guaranteed income each shift. The implications of this Determination are obvious. Drivers would be compelled to remain on the road for longer hours to reach the same level of income as they had previously earned. Before long, the ("minimum") nine hour shifts became in practice 10 hour shifts, and with additional taxi plates released by the government, 10 hour shifts became 12 hour shifts. Today, the 12 hour night shift, (with no statutory meal break) is the norm. "Semi-double" or 24 hour shifts are also a common practice in the industry.



The machinations leading up the acceptance of the "Determination" in 1984 are documented in the T.I.S.A. submission to the Hylda RolfeCommission (1993) (See V14). In short, the TWU's cave-in to the TIA demands became the "Determination" when it was rubber-stamped by the Industrial Commission soon after their consensual arrangement. This occurred despite the consented arrangement being contrary to the procedures laid down under the Industrial Arbitration Act 1940 to1968 giving jurisdiction to the Commission to grant pay-ins only as apercentage of metered takings.


The recently strengthened optional system (where drivers had a choice between the percentage based OR fixed pay-in systems), known as the Interim Determination 1997, has been a total failure owing to widespread intimidation of drivers, government and union neglect and the corrupt failure of the bureaucracy to enforce the law. In short,drivers cannot choose to elect to return to the metered pay-in systemwhile they are still shackled to the Contract Determination which ensures the owner retains the power of instant dismissal. Out of over 20,000 drivers currently in the industry only two are known to beworking under the metered pay-in system without facing owner retribution.

Source: Sydney Taxi Corruption

The General Problem: An All-pervasive `allegations' of Corruption?

2. The General Problem: An All-pervasive `allegations' of Corruption?

Allegations of corruption, deceit, kick-backs, illegitimate pay-offs,tax evasion, collusive tendering/anti-competitive practices, political bribery, as well as official indifference to the violenceand/or death of taxi drivers, (via avoidable traffic accidents and assaults), have reached such a scale within the current N.S.W. taxi industry that, by comparison, recent public inquiries into thea dministration of the coal industry safety and the containment of tow-truck operator violence/kick-backs, etc. appear innocuous or ofmarginal concern. Of course allegations will remain just that. The truth of the matter can only emerge through the testimony of witnesses and presentation of documents. The refusal of Executive Government to allow such an inquiry through the Stay Safe Committee leaves no option except a full ICAC investigation.

The Submission:

The enclosed documentation consists of a series of extracts from government reports, correspondence/replies from various N.S.W. State Government ministries/departmental heads responding to a range of enquires from certain advocates of taxi industry reform, press coverage of contentious issues related to the N.S.W. taxi industry, Hansard transcripts, reproduction of official notices distributed to taxi drivers and minutes/summaries of certain meetings. Read a ssingle documents each will appear to be a minor glitch in the system. Read as a totality they represent a deeper and far more sinister problem.

All of this documentation has been compiled and circulated over the past decade (1988-1998). Although the issues submitted for your investigation and deliberation here are contemporary, many are endemic, and have a genesis pre-dating this decade long campaigning by your petitioner. Regardless of the time frame, a pattern of systematic maladministration and corruption of public officialdom isself-evident. The term maladministration here refers to more than simple political expediency by Executive Government or media stereotypes of a lazy and incompetent bureaucracy. It more closely resembles a `virus' within the body politic where good government andc ompetent public administration are forever beholden to a shadowyforce of vested interests. Hence the matter of corruption. Naturally this requires a greater burden of evidentiary proof. This is beyond my resources. It is not beyond those of ICAC. However, I can willingly supply, under oath, far more documentation than this original submission.

Source: Sydney Taxi Corruption