CAPPING TO CROSS-BORDER: Private hire driver reps raise wide-ranging concerns over TfL’s Action Plan in Assembly review
- Perry Richardson
- 5 hours ago
- 4 min read
Private hire vehicle (PHV) drivers have delivered a damning assessment of Transport for London’s (TfL) Taxi and Private Hire Action Plan 2025 during the first of two London Assembly Transport Committee review meetings. The session exposed deep frustration over licensing delays, driver working conditions, platform regulation, and the viability of the green transition.
The Action Plan, launched by TfL in March, promised to make taxi and private hire work a more attractive career. However, representatives which included Abdurzak Hadi of App Drivers & Couriers Union (ADCU), Steve Garelick of GMB Union and Alex Marshall from the IWGB, told the Committee that many of the plan’s ambitions fall short of the sector’s most pressing needs.
Capping the number of private hire drivers working in the capital
During the London Assembly Transport Committee hearing, all three private hire driver representatives called for TfL to introduce a cap on the number of private hire vehicle (PHV) licences issued in the capital.
They argued that the current level of driver numbers is unsustainable and is directly contributing to worsening conditions across the sector. The over-saturation of drivers, they said, has led to sharp declines in individual earnings, pushing many to work excessive hours to maintain even basic income levels. This has raised concerns about road safety, health impacts, and quality of service.
The panellists stressed that TfL must take control of licence numbers if it is serious about improving driver welfare and creating a sustainable trade. They argued that without a cap, the Action Plan’s goal of making private hire work more attractive is unachievable.
Licensing delays and system breakdowns
One of the most consistent issues raised was the breakdown in licensing and administrative systems. Drivers reported long delays in securing licence renewals and new applications, which they say leaves many unable to work for weeks or even months. There are no interim licence options, meaning even minor processing delays can result in complete income loss.
The representatives criticised TfL’s new licensing platform, saying it was not properly tested before being rolled out. Union officials said they are routinely forced to step in and manage correspondence for drivers who face bounced emails and unanswered calls. The GMB’s Steve Garelick described the situation as a “system failure” that shifts basic administrative burdens onto worker organisations.
Long hours, falling pay and health impacts
All three unions raised alarm over the long hours many PHV drivers now work. With oversaturation of the market and increasing costs, some drivers reportedly work 16-hour days to break even. Representatives said this is having serious effects on both road safety and driver wellbeing.
The IWGB’s Alex Marshall described conditions as “unsustainable”, with fatigue and stress common across the sector. Many drivers now see no viable route to financial stability in the job, despite holding qualifications that would once have opened other opportunities. Panelists said many are stuck in the gig economy due to systemic discrimination in other areas of employment.
Platform control and lack of regulation
The panel levelled strong criticism at app-based platforms, in particular Uber. Unions said Uber has created a near-monopoly by undercutting local operators, then cutting driver pay as competition fell away. The firm’s use of dynamic pricing, algorithm-driven job allocation, and unclear commission structures were all described as unfair.
Despite a court ruling that classifies drivers as workers entitled to minimum wage and holiday pay, union leaders said platforms have continued to operate as if those protections do not apply. They also flagged concerns that refusing jobs, particularly those offering poor pay, often leads to drivers being deprioritised in the system.
Panel members accused TfL of allowing platforms to operate without meaningful oversight. There were also calls for TfL to be given enhanced powers to regulate operator conduct and sanction those found breaching rules.
Safety risks and tech-related concerns
Safety was another area of concern, with the panel calling for urgent reforms. The introduction of app features like Uber’s Trip Radar was criticised for pressuring drivers to accept jobs while driving, which unions said contravenes road safety laws.
Unions are now calling for voice-activated alternatives and for TfL to take a stronger stance on digital safety practices. They said the current lack of enforcement creates unnecessary risks for both drivers and passengers.
Criticism of TfL performance and Action Plan
Several panellists questioned the seriousness of TfL’s commitment to driver welfare. Many said the promises contained in the new Action Plan repeat pledges from previous strategies that were never fully implemented. There was also scepticism about TfL’s ability to deliver real change without stronger political will or structural reform.
Green transition difficulties
The panel discussed problems facing drivers who have made the switch to electric vehicles (EVs). Many said they have seen their income fall due to the higher upfront costs of EVs and the rising price of electricity. The limited number of affordable and accessible charging points was also raised, particularly in outer London.
Several drivers said they regretted switching to EVs, warning that the economic case for electric private hire vehicles has become weaker, not stronger, in recent years. Concerns were also raised about the potential reintroduction of congestion charges for EVs, which could push more drivers back into petrol or diesel vehicles.
National licensing and cross-border enforcement
The issue of cross-border licensing was a final key focus. Representatives said drivers licensed in cities such as Wolverhampton are now working in London under lighter regulatory regimes. This has created enforcement difficulties for TfL and put further pressure on local drivers.
There were renewed calls for a national licensing database and consistent regulations across England. A national driver ID was proposed as a way to help enforce standards and ensure accountability regardless of where a driver is based.
RELATED STORIES:
