To mask or not to mask

[Theoneandonly]

Once again Roy you are reading things the way you want them to be read TAXIS are not PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLES if they are the government will include them .Lets see the regs .

I have included numerous proofs that we are public transport, all you have is whats in your dim head, most, if not all contributors here agree we are part of public transport, you are merely incapable of admitting you might be (are) mistaken.

here's another proof for you:

Transport for Ireland: Your Journey Starts Herewww.transportforireland.ie
We bring together information and services to help make public transport across Ireland a little easier for you to use. Plan your journey here.

Part of the page :


This argument is getting silly

[john m]

We are NOT PUBLIC TRANSPORT .we are private transport providers .Wait and see the SI when it is issued if it is issued .it will be only the list of services you see plastered across the advert on the back of the bus supported by TFI .

[Theoneandonly]

https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/79445/bb49040f-d831-4d42-aa80-1d07e37c0bef.pdf#page=null

[john m]

So If you have a screen you dont need to mask up


Anybody willing to say yer man John M was not only right but also correct ....These  Regulations  provide  that  members  of  the  public  shall  not,  without reasonable excuse, travel by public transport without wearing a face covering. Public  transport  under  the  Regulations  encompasses  all  bus  and  rail  services provided  under  contract  with  the  National  Transport  Authority  (NTA),  LUAS services and commercial bus services licensed by the NTA.It is an offence not to comply with a request by a relevant person to wear a face covering.  It  is  also  an  offence  notto comply  where  a  relevant  person refuses entry to a public transport vehicle or where a relevant person requestsa person to   alight   from   a   public   transport   vehicle.   Relevant   personsunder   the Regulations  are  officers,  employees  or  agents  of  public  transport  operators  or theNational Transport Authority.The Regulations do not apply to children aged under 13 years and do not apply, in certain circumstances, to driversof public transport vehicles.

[silverbullet]

So If you have a screen you dont need to mask up


Anybody willing to say yer man John M was not only right but also correct ....These  Regulations  provide  that  members  of  the  public  shall  not,  without reasonable excuse, travel by public transport without wearing a face covering. Public  transport  under  the  Regulations  encompasses  all  bus  and  rail  services provided  under  contract  with  the  National  Transport  Authority  (NTA),  LUAS services and commercial bus services licensed by the NTA.It is an offence not to comply with a request by a relevant person to wear a face covering.  It  is  also  an  offence  notto comply  where  a  relevant  person refuses entry to a public transport vehicle or where a relevant person requestsa person to   alight   from   a   public   transport   vehicle.   Relevant   personsunder   the Regulations  are  officers,  employees  or  agents  of  public  transport  operators  or theNational Transport Authority.The Regulations do not apply to children aged under 13 years and do not apply, in certain circumstances, to driversof public transport vehicles.

Well that's vague enough to allow wriggle room.

[john m]

Silver You cant explain to the deaf .If taxis were Public Service vehicles we would be entitled to claim subsidies .There is a Public service requirement for Wheelchair Accessible vehicles this is why they are asked to register and why they can receive a Grant .

[silverbullet]

Silver You cant explain to the deaf .If taxis were Public Service vehicles we would be entitled to claim subsidies .There is a Public service requirement for Wheelchair Accessible vehicles this is why they are asked to register and why they can receive a Grant .

Loads also supply school run services too.

[watty]

NTA: Minister Signs Regulation Making Face Coverings on Public Transport a Legal Requirement (Today, 12 July)

The Regulation applies to all bus and rail services provided under contract with the National Transport Authority (NTA), Luas services and commercial bus services licensed by the NTA.

No mention of taxis in today's missive.  However, on Mon 29 June, the NTA posted Face coverings to become compulsory in their taxi section.  First line said, "Face coverings will shortly be compulsory on all SPSV services" while the last line said, "We will keep you updated."  It's only been 2 weeks but who's counting...

[Theoneandonly]

Silver You cant explain to the deaf .If taxis were Public Service vehicles we would be entitled to claim subsidies .There is a Public service requirement for Wheelchair Accessible vehicles this is why they are asked to register and why they can receive a Grant .

Loads also supply school run services too.

Yeah, those are subsidised too, he'd have been better saying public transport are only vehicles that seat 9 or more people, which would be equally bullshit but a little easier to justify.
Fair play though. Only the Erm would happily argue that a vehicle officially called a "small public service vehicle" was not a public service vehicle, it's as though "small" translates to "not"?


I believe what John was trying to suggest (very poorly) was only companies that have a public service obligation:

 “ public service obligation ” means a requirement specified by the Authority in order to ensure public passenger transport services in the general economic interest which a public transport operator, if it were considering its own commercial interests, would not assume or would not assume to the same extent or under the same conditions without reward;


Which Taxis don't have, however not having a public service obligation, does not mean we're not part of the public transport service.

From what I've read of the new regulation and the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008, there is enough to suggest we are not obliged to insist on passengers wearing a mask, particularly if we have a screen fitted

[john m]

Wattie I have a pain in my hole trying to explain Taxies are NOT FUCKING PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLES .The NTA cannot legislate on health and safety grounds how we work as we are independent service providers .Read the SI why do you think it says people who work from behind a screen have no need to wear a mask  .Drivers of Trains,Busses,Trams all work in isolated compartments .Nowhere in your terms and conditions of employment in Dublin Bus or Irish rail does it say a mask is part of your uniform .Answer me this if this poison is so poisonous why are member of an Garda not compelled to wear facemasks they will come into direct contact with people during their tour of duty .The SI says passengers Not drivers .Tell me this apart from Medical staff who wear masks as personal protection what other employees are mandated by statute to wear masks .This is more window dressing there are more infectious places than public transport but the State have little if any power to mandate the wearing of masks no more than they can mandate you download the app or get a vaccination .

[john m]

Silver You cant explain to the deaf .If taxis were Public Service vehicles we would be entitled to claim subsidies .There is a Public service requirement for Wheelchair Accessible vehicles this is why they are asked to register and why they can receive a Grant .

Loads also supply school run services too.

Yeah, those are subsidised too, he'd have been better saying public transport are only vehicles that seat 9 or more people, which would be equally bullshit but a little easier to justify.
Fair play though. Only the Erm would happily argue that a vehicle officially called a "small public service vehicle" was not a public service vehicle, it's as though "small" translates to "not"?


I believe what John was trying to suggest (very poorly) was only companies that have a public service obligation:

 “ public service obligation ” means a requirement specified by the Authority in order to ensure public passenger transport services in the general economic interest which a public transport operator, if it were considering its own commercial interests, would not assume or would not assume to the same extent or under the same conditions without reward;


Which Taxis don't have, however not having a public service obligation, does not mean we're not part of the public transport service.

From what I've read of the new regulation and the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008, there is enough to suggest we are not obliged to insist on passengers wearing a mask, particularly if we have a screen fitted

Your Pathetic Roy now man up and get in touch with the powers that be and PROVE A TAXI IS A PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLE .Either put up or fucking shut up your beginning to sound like a right fucking gobshite .

[Theoneandonly]

IIt seems odd  and a bit lazy that the minister refers to the Dublin Transport Authority act of 2008 for definitions:

The Dublin Transport Authority was subsumed by the NTA in 2016: https://www.lawreform.ie/_fileupload/RevisedActs/WithAnnotations/HTML/en_act_2008_0015.htm
The Dublin Transport Authority had no jurisdiction beyond Dublin and immediate surrounds
As far as I can make out, The Dublin Transport Authority had jurisdiction only over Dublin buses and the construction of the Luas lines

[Theoneandonly]

Silver You cant explain to the deaf .If taxis were Public Service vehicles we would be entitled to claim subsidies .There is a Public service requirement for Wheelchair Accessible vehicles this is why they are asked to register and why they can receive a Grant .

Loads also supply school run services too.

Yeah, those are subsidised too, he'd have been better saying public transport are only vehicles that seat 9 or more people, which would be equally bullshit but a little easier to justify.
Fair play though. Only the Erm would happily argue that a vehicle officially called a "small public service vehicle" was not a public service vehicle, it's as though "small" translates to "not"?


I believe what John was trying to suggest (very poorly) was only companies that have a public service obligation:

 “ public service obligation ” means a requirement specified by the Authority in order to ensure public passenger transport services in the general economic interest which a public transport operator, if it were considering its own commercial interests, would not assume or would not assume to the same extent or under the same conditions without reward;


Which Taxis don't have, however not having a public service obligation, does not mean we're not part of the public transport service.

From what I've read of the new regulation and the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008, there is enough to suggest we are not obliged to insist on passengers wearing a mask, particularly if we have a screen fitted

Your Pathetic Roy now man up and get in touch with the powers that be and PROVE A TAXI IS A PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLE .Either put up or fucking shut up your beginning to sound like a right fucking gobshite .

As far as I'm concerned I've proven it beyond any doubt, I've posted links to various County council websites defining taxis as public service vehicles, I've pointed out that they're called small public service vehicles, I've linked to official definitions of public service vehicles as vehicles that carry the public for hire and reward etc etc etc
You on the other hand have offered no proof that they aren't , because there is none.... because they are .... you fucking muppet!

[watty]

This is a screenshot of the NTA homepage as viewed on a mobile phone.  Guess which button you choose for taxis?  (Hint: small Public Service Vehicles  )

[john m]

Look at the Statutory Instrument it says exactly what I said it would say .Taxies are only public service vehicles in one country in the world Egypt .Now fuck off you are making a fool of yourself .