The Cost of Motoring...

[PhilDawson8270]

Just as people have made "rational" (but now unsustainable) chioces based on cheap motoring, so have employers and businesses. One (and only one) of the factors in the development of economic/employment hot-spots has been ... yup, the availablility of cheap motoring. Corollary - economic/employment deserts.

It's a good point to raise. We do struggle to employ people in junior, and trainee roles as the wages are simply not high enough to live in the city. Nor are the wages high enough to drive into the city. And the hours are not suitable for public transport.

So far we have not yet had much of a solution, other than pay existing staff more than the industry rate to keep them here. But again, its not sustainable as at some point you need to train young people and there aren't many options.

 

[growingvegetables]

... Instead of punishing every car driver. ...

We had "penalising" above. Now "punishing".

I'm not making a personal dig, I hope.

Just pointing out how very easily we shift from discussing real issues of the real costs of an unsustainable economic model, based on the mythical promise of an eternal and limitless supply of cheap (aye, and heavily subsidised) motoring, to a rather sad and plaintive Daily Wail language.

Once again. Nobody is being punished or penalised. There's a set of costs that need to be met. A set of rational decisions to be made, plans to be developed, and very real changes to our urban enviroments that MUST come. Sorry, but I really dislike the language of "the hard-pressed motorist".

 

[marinyork]

So far we have not yet had much of a solution, other than pay existing staff more than the industry rate to keep them here. But again, its not sustainable as at some point you need to train young people and there aren't many options.

Thought you were this guru of a manager? If you're paying more than industry standard (which many employees would take with a pinch of salt as most employers say that even when it isn't true) then surely you need to employ psychology and various other tactics for better retention?

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Thought you were this guru of a manager? If you're paying more than industry standard (which many employees would take with a pinch of salt as most employers say that even when it isn't true) then surely you need to employ psychology and various other tactics for better retention?

My trainee gets paid more than senior mechanical staff at competing businesses. I know for certain we pay more than others. The downsides to my industry at the moment is lack of progression. We work in teams of 3, where at the higher levels retention is high, so there's a long time between opportunities for progression. This is before we talk about cuts, and technology taking work.

I also want to leave the industry for various reasons. However, I can only make decisions within the framework of the company still. Each time the discussion of a new venue is ongoing. I raise the issue of location and employment yet it falls on deaf ears.

I am certainly not a "guru". Just experienced, and good at my job. I make sure stuff gets done, I make sure machines are always working and maintained. While I have the experience to identify potential issues around employment opportunities, I am not ashamed to say that developing a plan to improve retention at the entry level is beyond my experience and skill set. After all, there are too many people making a mess of things trying to do stuff they don't know how to do

 

[marinyork]

I am certainly not a "guru". Just experienced, and good at my job. I make sure stuff gets done, I make sure machines are always working and maintained. While I have the experience to identify potential issues around employment opportunities, I am not ashamed to say that developing a plan to improve retention at the entry level is beyond my experience and skill set. After all, there are too many people making a mess of things trying to do stuff they don't know how to do

Just an interesting topic to me. There are a lot of low paid jobs where all sorts of emotional buttons and tactics are used successfully to motivate people to do things. It just sounds like your company is doing things wrong.

Why would developing a plan to improve retention even informally be beyond your experience and skill set? If you understand people you're on a great start to this. Yes too many other people make a mess of retention but I would argue often these people do not understand people and understand corporateness very well.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Any costs incurred by a commercial entity in the production and sale of their goods/services are generally passed onto consumers: if they swallow the cost and make a loss as a result, they usually will not be a commercial entity any longer when their money runs out. What's so special about motoring that it deserves subsidies that are not available for power, raw material, premises etc? Make your case for extra public money/favourable treatment based on the actual social worth of your enterprise, please, not on the fact it happens to involve somebody driving around.


Sometimes it's nice when the way is a gravel track or a grass path or a trail through the forest. Not every damn thing needs paving

Thanks for the business lesson.

Where did I ask for subsidies? All I said was that any additional taxation on commercial vehicles gets passed on to the consumers thereby passing the disincentive of the additional burden to the wrong people.

 

[growingvegetables]

All I said was that any additional taxation on commercial vehicles gets passed on to the consumers thereby passing the disincentive of the additional burden to the wrong people.

Really? The consumer shouldn't have to cover the costs of delivery? Whether to his/her home, or the supermarket? What an interesting perspective.

 

[FishFright]

Snort at those who moan that they wouldn't have their current lifestyle without a car . The point about change is that it includes you too.

 

[Profpointy]

Thanks for the business lesson.

Where did I ask for subsidies? All I said was that any additional taxation on commercial vehicles gets passed on to the consumers thereby passing the disincentive of the additional burden to the wrong people.

you've perhaps missed the point. Any cost of anything has to be passed on to the end consumer. If commercial transport is to be exempted from this, as you seem to be suggesting, then it means non-customers have to pay instead (ie a subsidy).If you are still struggling,think about pollution. If the polluter doesn't pay then the rest of us have to pay by "suffering" the pollution we've not benefitted from the subsidising the polluter's customers. It's the same thing

 

[mjr]

It's nowhere near to that. At 20 people daily it would be in excess of 7120 a year. You would have to go back to the 1940's to see nearly 30 a day killed. Last year was 1810 so approximately 5 day.

Is that just road casualties, or all road-related deaths?

People nowadays travel prodigious distances compared to 100 years ago when there were shops and places of employment within walking or cycling distance.

There are still shops and places of employment within walking or cycling distance for most people. I live in a small village of I think six streets (I may have forgotten some small close) and can see both from my windows. People just choose to drive to things in town instead.

I work in Sheffield & would happily drive to somewhere 3-5 miles from work. leave the car & cycle the remaining, but there is nowhere safe/secure to leave the car

Yes, that's a common failure of city councils nationwide, I think. Park and rides that don't allow parkers to cycle onwards and usually don't have buses running times/routes that visitors actually want.

The "choices" to drive, are because it is the best solution to the problem.

And it's the best solution because government has screwed up the market IMO, so government should take steps to fix it.

Recently we went down to Norwich for an interview and look for accommodation. Driving cost £62 in fuel and 4 hours driving. The train was just under 6 hours, and cost £125ish each.

That looks like it's making two mistakes often made by motorists: massively underestimating driving costs by only considering fuel and driving time, not consequential non-driving time, the cost of car maintenance (or the car itself) and the value of the driver's time where they can't do nicer things whereas a train passenger usually can; and massively overestimating the public transport cost by simply looking up the one-person fare and doubling it, not factoring in two-person ticket discounts (currently called "two together" on the trains, or "Duo" on Norfolk's buses) or advance tickets. Although I suppose I should be glad you didn't give the stonking any-route fare of £468!

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Just an interesting topic to me. There are a lot of low paid jobs where all sorts of emotional buttons and tactics are used successfully to motivate people to do things. It just sounds like your company is doing things wrong.

I wouldn't disagree. In fact, I would expand it to the industry is doing things wrong

Why would developing a plan to improve retention even informally be beyond your experience and skill set? If you understand people you're on a great start to this. Yes too many other people make a mess of retention but I would argue often these people do not understand people and understand corporateness very well.

It's a difficult one to solve. How do we pay a high salary to inexperienced staff while having prices pushed down, in a city with rising house prices. I have stayed a long time despite not being challenged or particularly enjoying work, due to the money. But I do understand that not everybody has the same motivation.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

That looks like it's making two mistakes often made by motorists: massively underestimating driving costs by only considering fuel and driving time, not consequential non-driving time, the cost of car maintenance (or the car itself) and the value of the driver's time where they can't do nicer things whereas a train passenger usually can;

Over the life of the car, I have only ever had to pay for tyres, MOT, and oil. Probably £220 ish per year factoring in tyre life. £5k on the car over 5 years and I intend to keep it till it dies. So maintenance costs have been around 6k over 5 years and 92k miles. So around 7p per mile in tyres and maintenance.

and massively overestimating the public transport cost by simply looking up the one-person fare and doubling it, not factoring in two-person ticket discounts (currently called "two together" on the trains, or "Duo" on Norfolk's buses) or advance tickets. Although I suppose I should be glad you didn't give the stonking any-route fare of £468!

We stayed in a travelodge next to a park and ride. That we couldn't actually get a bus to, as it was a Sunday and there were no buses running. Assuming I understand the two together deal, it would have still been £150 for the 2 of us to get the train, and take more time doing so.

 

[User482]

Thanks for the business lesson.

Where did I ask for subsidies? All I said was that any additional taxation on commercial vehicles gets passed on to the consumers thereby passing the disincentive of the additional burden to the wrong people.

Higher transport costs provide a competitive advantage to organizations with more sustainable supply chains.

 

[jonny jeez]

Great for those who can afford £300+ PCM for a car. Personally I find it a little disgusting that people see a car as a 2 year deal, owning nothing then chopping it in against something new.

If that car rental is about status and waste then yes I agree. However many pcp plans are about short term need. Not everyone wants to own a car for the next decade...or own one of the same size. I have two cars in the family, both paid off and owned from new. I am considering a third but appreciate that I shall not need it for long. I don't want to use my cash resources as a car cannot pay the mortgage,(if everything foes pear shaped) so will borrow. A loan long enough to match the payments of a pcp is around 10years. I don't want a car for that long nor do I want the debt for that long. Nor do I want a second hand car that is on the edge of, or out of warranty.

Pcp seems the right way to go for me and most likely millions of others who need a particular type of car for a few years.

So perhaps not as disgusting as you first thought.

As far as affordability, that's as long as it is round. Without the demands of my job requiring me to have this car, I wouldn't have the money to buy one.

I cant avoid both.

 

[jonny jeez]

@Drago I make no appologies for not being anti car.

I would have more issues with conatiner ships around the world or frivilous holidays jetting off to every end of the globe. If you are so concerned with air pollution and the use of natural rescources then focus your attention on shipping or aviation

"Shipping is by far the biggest transport polluter in the world. There are 760 million cars in the world today emitting approx 78,599 tons of Sulphur Oxides (SOx) annually. The world's 90,000 vessels burn approx 370 million tons of fuel per year emitting 20 million tons of Sulphur Oxides. That equates to 260 times more Sulphur Oxides being emitted by ships than the worlds entire car fleet. One large ship alone can generate approx 5,200 tonnes of sulphur oxide pollution in a year, meaning that 15 of the largest ships now emit as much SOx as the worlds 760 million cars.."

http://newatlas.com/shipping-pollution/11526/

Puts it in to perspective if you ask me

Not to.mention the bloody cows!