This is a loathsome idea and a ridiculous one. I can hardly bear to think about it.
The only faintly amusing aspect is the thought of all the useless suits whose salaries and expenses do so much to raise the cost of everything and whose best efforts do so much to reduce efficiency across the board waddling about at a governed 55mph in their taxpayer-funded big BMWs and Audis. I assume the rules, if adopted, will apply to the jerks who are supposed to manage the NHS, schools, council services and so on?
|
|
|
A friend of mine has the GPS tracking facility on his company car, it tracks his speed and every time he goes over 70mph he gets point, at the end of the month they are added up and you can get a diciplinary (spelling!) for it, he does sell these gadgets so he can't moan too much, I myself would find it difficult to get around and do all the other tasks i do if i couldnt do over 70mph on a motorway.
All our delivery vans are restricted to 70mph, they are sprinters, it is done for environment reasons.
Oh yeah, they cant use the evidence against my mate after 17:30 hours or at weekends, he can drive as fast as he wants then!
|
|
|
|
I think 'playing truant' is putting it a bit strongly. I've been one of those shopping suits on occasion, although not often at 10am - it tends to be something I'll do on the way home, say after a visit and when I've left home early to get there. I wasn't furtive about it, and nor was anyone I worked with who did the same; there were plenty of times when we had to start early or finish late, so it was regarded on both sides as a fair exchange.
|
We have quite a large proportion of company car drivers in our company, well we did until the company changed to a car ownership scheme whereby we buy the car and the company pays the lease cost. My company car became my car and they wont get any where near it with a speed limiter or no smoking sign or anything else. Oh and we don't pay company car tax either.
It was mentioned that the BIK would be reduced if the car had a limiter fitted. I doubt it. The Revenue would probably claim that the limiter was an added extra and charge for it.
|
|
|
|
I agree with Willdebeest. You can't legislateor regulate for everything, there has to be give and take. When I worked for a large PLC I frequently sloped off early on a Friday. No one minded as they all knew I often got in earlier and worked later on occasions. At the end of the day if you're getting the work done and the boss is happy, then all is OK.
|
Talking of sloping off early on a Friday...
Damn, it's my joint. Doesn't seem right :-(
|
|
|
I agree that sensible give and take is all part of normal employment but it just makes me laugh that most people on the road I talk to make themselves out to be some kind of martyr and they are all extremely busy and under time pressure but can still manage to do their shopping during the day instead of the weekend or evening. Clearly they are not that busy. Also most of them abuse the give and take and it is usually a bit more take than give becuase they are more difficult to manage when on the road.
Case in point - my BiL has just gone from road job to office job and has suddenly got stress - not because the role is too difficult but he just does not have the time to do all his little jobs now except at the weekend. I'm not picking on him - just stating that this is typical of all the people repping etc I observe and deal with.
|
"
The only faintly amusing aspect is the thought of all the useless suits whose salaries and expenses do so much to raise the cost of everything and whose best efforts do so much to reduce efficiency across the board waddling about at a governed 55mph in their taxpayer-funded big BMWs and Audis. I assume the rules, if adopted, will apply to the jerks who are supposed to manage the NHS, schools, council services and so on? "
Lud,
you're getting your Daily Mail-esque outrage muddled up.
This post is referring to company car drivers being governed. But seeing as you went off topic, so shall I.
1. where did the "taxpayer funded" thing come from? Company cars don't exist for public workers (the word company is a clue). People delivering public services who are an essential car users (social case worker, planning officer etc) will typically get a mileage allowance (taxable) and may get a contribution of say £1k pa to provide a car. Casual users will get a mileage rate, but no contribution. Leased car schemes used to be big in the 70s, but the efficiency drive/cuts drive of the last 20 years has seen them virtually removed.
OK, Ministers still get chauffer driven cars, but we're talking 50 minister tops, and 5 million public sector workers - not really material.
2. useless suits? I'll credit you with intellegence that you're not referring to this garment as redundant, but the employees who wear such clothes. I suspect your job doesn't require business dress, but in the real world the majority of employers do require this. To write them off as useless is a "bit" hasty. As posted above, around 30% of this country's wealth comes from the financial sector (London city to be precise). Basically a lot more wealth than comes from a grubby tradesman sucking through his teeth doing building work, or a main dealer mechanic charging £80ph to not change oil.
3. Their salaries raise the cost of everything: again I thought this was a motoring forum not a finance forum, but I recognise economic theory when I see it. Yes, wage pull inflation can happen when salaries rise within an economy, particularly when close to full employment.
But you have to recognise that since the age of currency, people have exchanged their labour in return for money so they can specialise in their work. So, when you want to buy say a new cooker, you have to accept that the cost of it includes a share of the salary of a lot of people, some of who wear suits. Without their input, it wouldn't be in the shop for you to buy, so it is not right to assume reward for their input is unnecessary.
This works equally in the public sector - your dearest one may need an operation, and OK the doctors and nurses aren't wearing business dress. But would you expect doctors to book the appointment, send out letters, arrange for the supply and purchase of bandages, administer the payroll of the maintenance staff, keep the hospital staff up to date with the latest systems and processes?
No. Without these people, the operation couldn't take place, and it is therefore legitimate that their cost is built into the tax levied to fund such activities. Note: public sector pay awards are being held well below inflation at 2%, so can't be said to be contributing to inflation. Unfortunately, as with most things, the Daily Mail never look to see if the cash in hand / bonus / piece work pay given to private sector non-suit wearing workers is contributing to inflation, because they're not an easy target and it won't generate as much "outrage".
4. Efficiencies - you're actually right here, there has been a significant delivery of efficiency savings within the public sector (and no doubt private sector, they just keep quiet and give the extra profit to shareholders). Some efficiencies are outsourcing to India, some is process improvement reducing the number or the output of public workers, and a lot is just better procurement and joined up working.
The problem with efficiencies is though, that as soon as cost is saved, something else comes along to spend it on, hence my output comment. Sticking with the NHS, as soon as they save cash, drug costs go up, and new treatments are "demanded" to keep a cancer ridden patient alive 6 months longer than they would have in 1990.
Fair enough - if this is our political priority, then so be it. But just don't complain when the cost has to be paid for.
5. jerks ... well, I doubt you've met many of them, so there's no need for insults.
6. Supposed to manage.. I take it by this you think they're not doing a good job? What amazes me is how quick people are to bash the public sector, as if it's something they never use, or is just a waste.
Do you expect some public service fairy to provide these services that are so quick to be missed when cut (read any local paper headline in February: library to be shut, park to be closed, horror, outrage).
Managing public sector industries I think is far harder than private sector- the funding through tax is tricky, as people don?t / won?t equate the cash they pay to the service they receive (unlike Tesco), so it is actually very hard to determine if it is a good deal. Natually, people think it isn?t.
Also, the governance/due process surrounding a democratic institution is a nightmare compared with just a board of directors who want the most profit at any cost. Because taxpayers are so precious about other people spending ?their? money, it actually costs far more to spend!!
But, public sector is an easy target, and lets people like you vent their spleen ad nauseaum without having to confront the uncomfortable reality that the UK demands a high standard of living and public service that it can't quite afford any more...
Ian
(suit wearing public sector manager)
|
Daily Mail, eh? Oh well, I suppose I asked for it.
I'm sure you're all right Ian. But I bet you know about some truly awful examples of what I was talking about. I'm very pro public sector myself. I'm aware that the reasons for things being less than perfect are complex, and that it's difficult to apportion blame, where appropriate, with any real justice.
Nevertheless there are forms of moral and intellectual corruption or decadence costing us all a bomb, that are apparently gratuitous, and plain to see sometimes. If the rules and practices have become a nightmare tangle through the agency of local and international political monkeying, it is surely appropriate to reach local arrangements for going round such rules and practices, preparing the ground for changing them to something more practical and economical.
Gross overspend and gross underperform seem normal here. Can it really be the same everywhere? I don't think so.
|
|
|
.....and don't even get me started on Gershon efficiencies.
I don't see why any public sector vehicle (plod excluded) wouldn't have restrictors fitted if they were compulsory for the friday-dress-down-day-three-hour-liquid-lunch-on-expenses brigade (tic!). If anything the PS vehicles would be the first to get fitted up.
Lee (another public sector suit)
-------------------------
07 Kia Ceed LS
05 Citroën C4 VT
04 Mazda MX5
85 Mini Mayfair
|
So the proposal... which won't happen...
it suggests a speed limiter on company fleet vehicles to keep them at or below speed limits.... so the point being ;-) We all stick to speed limits anyway don't we so what's the problem.
|
|
|
|
Ian
I work in an area where I see public and private sector - and there's no comparison. Public sector cannot make a decision even if you provide the wood, have endless meetings, set unmeetable targets, whinge endlessly and naff off at 3 leaving me to finish the work "out of hours" ie after 6. Private sector know they need to change to improve and keep up and (generally) get on with the job. Private sector usually has less money to spend but spends it more wisely and gets results from it i.e. value. It's not black and white but that's the general picture. If you're one of the good guys I'm sorry you feel attacked.
JH
|
wow jh i was dispairing on this thread then i read your post, first class by the way,
ps you didnt mention that the public sector has blue sky meetings to ring fence things with and they do indeed have meetings to talk about meetings that might need a meeting to discuss it with,obviously all the blackberries will need to be turned on and martha will need to come even though she is very busy at the moment setting up meetings
|
My experience of working with both private and public organisations over the years (in connection with transport) is that there is not much difference. A lot depends on the individuals you are working with, some are good and some lazy, and some bad. My experience with private UK and European (mostly German) companies is that the Germans make vastly better managers. Too many British managers are arrogant and underqualified and more interested in parading their 'superiority' than actually doing the job. The Germans tend to more 'mature' in their attitudes and interested in motivating their staff rather than acting the overlord.
The 'public sector' encompasses such a vast array of organisations that I don't think you can think of it as a homogenous block. My sister is a schoolteacher and works staggeringly hard for a paltry salary. She earns far far less than I do and, even taking account of a (relatively) good pension scheme I am astonished that they manage to recruit people to do the job. Similarly, a university I have some dealings with employs world-class engineering academics on salaries that are lower than a typical car salesman - and there are no perks such as private health insurance or cars. Wild horses would not drag me into that particular profession.
Finally, if you want to live in the 'real world' then work for yourself, as I have always done. No suckling at the corporate teat. That toughens you up a bit.
|
"Efficiencies - you're actually right here, there has been a significant delivery of efficiency savings within the public sector"
Hahahahahahaha
I worked for a council for a while and was repeatedly told to slow down my work or I'd look out of place.
My wife worked in the private sector and moved into a council office. She could tell stories of inefficiancy to make you weep. Dozens of them. She was bored utterly witless, tried to take on more work and was warned off for the same reason as me. All in the past few years.
Utter tripe. Enjoy the index-linked pension I'll be paying for you for the rest of my life out of my 100% self-funded pension.
V
|
Sorry Vin, but I simply don't believe these tales. My wife worked for a short while in the Housing Dept of a city council. The job was absolutely dreadful, stressful, understaffed, and having to deal with some very difficult people indeed - the 'dark underbelly' of society. No one telling her to 'take it easy', just piling work onto her. It was in winter and the office she was in was in a very poor state with poor heating. She ended up being ill half the time and on the edge of a nervous breakdown. In the end she walked out and went to work for a local private company selling HVAC equipment. Better pay and conditions, much less stress.
There's plenty of less savoury public sector jobs vacant - if they're so good then apply and enjoy your 'index linked' pension. The fact is that they're difficult to fill because they're lousy jobs that most people don't want.
|
The work slower thing has happened to someone on another forum I frequent. They were doing far too many letters and were told to slow down as they were clearing a backlog in days which was supposed to take months. The under resourced situation seesm to be prevalent amongst those that actually do all the work. The over resourced are the management. I worked in a council housing office for a while and there were several staff off long term sick. No one was over worked then. Now it is a different kettle of fish as everywhere is understaffed; public and private sector alike. So many employees I talk to say the same thing - idiotic managers, daft workloads, stress, long hours, poor pay. I wonder how much all this treatment of workers has contributed to accident rates not falling on the roads? Stress also increases confusion, preoccupation and reduces ability to observe, anticipate and process information. All key skills for safe driving.
teabelly
|
Aprilia: " Sorry Vin, but I simply don't believe these tales."
So, you think my wife is lying to me? How odd.
She worked in a graphic design department. If her boss took holiday, staff just didn't come in to work. She was told to slow down her pace of work as she was getting through it too quickly. If someone took time off but had deadline work, it just got left and their client had to suffer.
Those are three of dozens. Not one of those ever happened to her outside the council. None of them has ever happened to me, either.
I really don't care whether you believe those stories. That's your choice. I happen to believe your wife's story, as I've never even implied that there are no awful jobs in the public sector.
As for suggesting I should apply; sadly I prefer being in the productive sector of the economy. Along with that goes the knowledge that I won't have an index-linked guaranteed pension. I just don't want people bleating about the view we who produce have of those whom we fund.
V
|
Funny how there are all these cushy jobs in the public sector, but a lot of them stay vacant? Why isn't there a queue of people wanting them? Maybe they hold them vacant until someone particularly idle and unsuitable comes along?
Frankly I don't believe a lot of the tales about easy life is in the public sector. I know a few people who have done these sorts of jobs, including my wife, and a lot seem to be only too keen to get out and earn more in the private sector and not have to deal with dregs of society (which is so often where the public sector worker has to intervene). Would you fancy being a social worker, a paramedic, a housing dept worker, a teacher in a city school? No - neither would I. I know which side my bread is buttered.
I have always worked for myself (as did my dad before me) and its my experience that most employed people think that everyone else has it easier than them (the grass is always greener, I could do his job in half the time etc etc). The other side of the coin is that a lot of small business owners think that they are captains of industry and doing the country a big favour, work 'all hours' etc etc.
I have had people in companies that I've worked for say to me that I'm overpaid and my job is easy etc etc. I just say to them, 'well, why don't you try it then'. I have no special facilites or equipment, its just me. They could have a go - there are no barriers to entry. Funny how most people DON'T try it - they prefer corporate security, the sick pay, the guaranteed cheque at the end of the month etc etc.
I plough my own furrow and recognise that I'm jolly lucky to receive a good income doing something I enjoy doing and having plenty of leisure time with the family. I seldom have to wear a suit, don't have to get involved with office politics and get to travel and see interesting stuff. If I were to join the wonderful public sector (e.g. working as an engineering lecturer) then I would probably earn 30-50% of my current annual income for more hours worked and be bossed about by some half-wit. No thanks!. Oh, and I've made my own pensions arrangements which will hopefully be pretty good, so I don't have to continually crab about other people's pensions (which are part of their remuneration package and to which they're fully entitled). A lot of people in the private sector had decent final salary pensions a few years back (and some still do, let's not forget) - perhaps they shouldn't have rolled over and allowed them to be bought off, or taken away, without a fight. No use giving it up and then grumbling later.
|
|
I see plenty of passion in public service in my work, can we get back on topic now by any chance ?
|
I have had people in companies that I've worked for say to me that I'm overpaid and my job is easy etc etc. I just say to them 'well why don't you try it then'.
It takes a very underpaid person to say that to me. But they do it nevertheless.
Funny how they never try it though Aprilia isn't it? Of course they don't dare, but even if they did they would be humiliated.
|
Erm... well getting way off topic but I have just done it.
Was self employed for many years and earned big money but was working myself to death. Have decided on a few years rest so I now work for the public sector.
Pay is half what I am used to but at the desk by 9am , people sit in the car park listing to the car radio if they are early, hour for lunch and then out at 5 sharp.
The whole ethos is if it ain't done in that time it don't get done. And the idea of my boss ordering me to do something is laughable. He has to 'empower me' that is ask very nicely if I wouldn't mind doing it.
Sorry but that is my truth never earned money so easily.
|
Off Topic - perish the thought !
Seriously debating the the merits or otherwise on speed limiters is what the OP wanted not a debate about how good/bad Public/Private enterprise is/are. Not in a motoring website anyway. Back to motoring or the thread gets locked - I asked you once ! :-)
|
|
I've always wanted a speed limiter on any car I drive. Certainly would allow me to get on with getting from A to B and not spotting cameras etc. I am sure if more of the traffic kept to limits that the level of stress in general would go down after an initial period of adjustment. Think we'd just end up driving more like North Americans where driving is a necessary A to B thing and not alot about impressing others.
|
|
An artificial speed limiter is a dangerous and ridiculous idea. 155 on big German barges is quite bad enough. Sometimes you really, really need to exceed the limit pronto to get out of trouble. If you don't know that you are a mimser, or letting yourself in for a nasty moment.
|
Has everyone on this thread swallowed BMW's old "justification" for producing rather rapid cars that "the acceleration allows you to accelerate out of trouble in a risky situation". I've never understood this as surely in 95% of situations slowing down/braking to a halt would reduce the chance of a situation getting worse. Yes there is the odd situation where you've left it far too late to do something and need to get into a closing gap but relying on this as justification for speeding seems risky as you're heading into a possible problem at an ever higher speed.
I think if more people did not always reach for the accelerator to dash past other traffic to gain miniscule advantage then progress for all would be easier to accomplish and certainly less stressful (ie not having to spend so much time trying to anticipate what somebody going too fast (or much faster than the other vehs is going to go next)
|
What has BMW got to do with it ukbeefy?
Either the traffic keeps moving or (if it consists of beefys) it goes more and more slowly until it stops. That's very safe, but what damn use is it?
|
What has BMW got to do with it ukbeefy?
I just remember alot of BMW videos at Motorshows - prob in the mid 80s where they were always doing the "here is a smooth powerful BMW able to overtake safely because of its ample performance" type story line in video sequences with a suitably gravelly voiceover... rather than the reality of "we sell cars that are faster than everyone else's! and if you get one of ours you'll be living in the fast lane and zipping past mere mortals....."
|
I am with ukbeefy.
In 30 years the only situations I have needed the loud pedal to get me out of trouble are pulling out at junctions where you realise the approaching car is going faster than you thought. A 70mph limiter does not affect this at all.
I know there are idiots who get themselves into situations at 70 mph where the only solution is to accelerate but they should not be on the road. Also if you know the car is limited you drive within its limits - as you would in a 1.0 Corsa which has no acceleration to speak of.
|
"as you would in a 1.0 Corsa"
Even a Corsa will run out of puff steadily. A limiter will actively prevent you from going beyond a set speed, creating a real hazard if you're in the middle of a manoeuvre that requires something beyond what the limiter will allow. Not an everyday occurrence, perhaps, but you only need it to happen once...
|
A limiter will actively prevent you from going beyond a set speed creating a real hazard if you're in the middle of a manoeuvre that requires something beyond what the limiter will allow. Not an everyday occurrence perhaps but you only need it to happen once...
They don't understand JBJ. Bone from the neck up, and mimsers with it.
|
"Bone from the neck up, and mimsers with it."
Come on Lud, tell us what you really think!
:-)
|
tell us what you really think! :-)
Oh dear, have I been over-acerbic again?
I'm sure most of them are excellent chaps, simply having a distracted moment (will this do?).
|
JBJ - You miss the point.
IF you need to accellerate to avoid an incident then you have almost certainly already done something wrong to put yourself in the situation. Someone with poor judgement planting his foot hard on the loud pedal in these circumstance leads to bigger dangers - plenty of examples of this on wreckedexotics!
I have hit the rev-limiter (in one of the early 1.8d Mondeos) and know what it feels like to be on the wrong side of the road in a car which won't accelerate any more. The brakes got me out of the situation very easily and I learned the lesson that you have to drive within the cars limts (including any rev or speed limiter).
|
"Someone with poor judgement planting his foot hard on the loud pedal"
Then it's the poor judgement that needs rectifying!
"know what it feels like to be on the wrong side of the road in a car which won't accelerate any more"
And you think that makes the case for speed limiters? The brakes got you out of that situation, which is just as well, as they were your only option.
This is a classic case of political headline-chasing not being thought through. If it happens (Heaven forfend), just wait for the increase in accident figures as people get trapped in situations that they can't escape from, even by braking. Consider it from the other direction - if you were faced by someone on your side of the road and closing fast, would you really want him to be unable to accelerate?
|
Then it's the poor judgement that needs rectifying!
Agreed
- if you were faced by someone on your side of the road and closing fast would you really want him to be unable to accelerate?
I would rather they knew enough not to get themselves into the situation. Thinking they might possibly with a bit of luck, a following wind and did I remember to refill the NOx bottle manage to reach the gap in front of the lorry before hitting me is not what I want them to be doing - I want them to not hesitate before braking to drop in behind the lorry or, in the worst case, minimise the closing speed for the ensuing head on collision!
BTW it was me on the wrong side of the road and if you ever drove the original 1.8D mondeos they would accellerate in third to the rev limiter but when you put them in fourth there was, as I found, no go. 4 & 5 were geared for economy and there was an enourmous gap between 3 and 4.
|
ukbeefy: "I've never understood this as surely in 95% of situations slowing down/braking to a halt would reduce the chance of a situation getting worse."
I read in some police driving manual that one of the most common errors in driving is braking on a closing gap.
V
|
It won't happen. No company officially condones speeding, and all will have a couple of copied and pasted sentences discouraging it on the company car policy, but without it, engineers wouldn't get their calls done, and salesmen wouldn't meet their targets.
At best, companies turn a blind eye to it. At worst, they condone it through pressure and workload.
Cheers
DP (250,000 miles on the road in various support capacities in the last 10 yrs)
--
04 Grand Scenic 1.9 dCi Dynamique
00 Mondeo 1.8TD LX
|
One more point - if cars are limited, I'd bet that standard behaviour would soon be to sit, foot to the floor, mind switched off, not noticing what's going on around.
V
|
One more point - if cars are limited I'd bet that standard behaviour would soon be to sit foot to the floor mind switched off not noticing what's going on around.
An how exactly does this differ from your average BMW driver in the fast lane of a motorway?
|
One more point - if cars are limited I'd bet that standard behaviour would soon be to sit foot to the floor mind switched off not noticing what's going on around.
Like many truck drivers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
