Forced licence progression

[bogan]

You can't be aware of a final percentage of pass rate until the end of the month. When it becomes a statistic.

As you stated above in (a) ... a goal to be achieved .... and restricted to that goal.

If statistics show the goal is being surpassed .... either the test is too easy (and thus should be toughened, or the driver skill level of those tested is high. Personally ... I'm going with the former ...

Also ... I'm glad you know how to access a dictionary now ... perhaps we can expect more intelligent posts from you ...

C'mon man, put the thinking hat on. You can be aware of your running percentage just as you can be aware of your running total. You can't know the final percentage or total until the end of the month. Yes they do both become statistics at the end of the month, but you must be aware that because the statistic is a target (and the testers are adjusting the results as they go), it is not much use as a statistic except to evaluate how well the target are being met. If there was no quota, there would be no adjustment due to predicted results, so the results would show a much clearer picture.

As above, if the statistics are quota driven they don't show information about the ease of testing or the driver skill level.

[FJRider]

A system where a set % of people are failed on purpose is disgusting and always will be ( I've always believed that if you have the skills to do it correctly and safely (If applicable) you should pass ), but in the more than likely event that it doesn't change, I would be all for waiting 24 hours to hear whether I passed or not so the best will pass and the ones who are slack will fail.

You may have hit on a possible solution. If the "quotas" are achieved monthly ... perhaps we ensure ALL TESTED ... wait until the END of the MONTH to see if you have reached the required % of YOUR months tested license applicants ...


Thus ... All quotas would be achieved (fairly) to those set. And everybody would be happy.

RIGHT .. ???

[FJRider]

Well if its standards based it doesn't matter.

A new Lexus dealership may have a 99% pass rate, while Hongis Auto Werks in South Auckland has a 10% pass rate.

But if its quota based, the Lexus man will get a call to say he is passing too many, and Hongi will get a call to say he is not passing enough.

In the interest of fairness ... I shall ask my local MP to press for one (and only one) National testing station. To be situated in Alexandra (to be fair to ME) All vehicles to be tested there. No exceptions ...

DONE ...

[FJRider]

C'mon man, put the thinking hat on. You can be aware of your running percentage just as you can be aware of your running total. You can't know the final percentage or total until the end of the month. Yes they do both become statistics at the end of the month, but you must be aware that because the statistic is a target (and the testers are adjusting the results as they go), it is not much use as a statistic except to evaluate how well the target are being met. If there was no quota, there would be no adjustment due to predicted results, so the results would show a much clearer picture.

As above, if the statistics are quota driven they don't show information about the ease of testing or the driver skill level.

Being aware of a "running percentage" is as difficult as keeping a average speed on the highway.

When testing drivers ... 20 total fuckwits in one day will ruin your "running average" in the blink of an eye test.
Just as a slow vehicle ahead of you (that you can't overtake) ... will ruin your average speed.

[Zedder]

Good job if they are failing on technical non-ability. I just don't understand why a quota is required, just update the testers to test to the new standard of technical skills. Maybe it was more of an offhand comment that has been blown out of proportion, which is why I'm disagreeing with those who say a quota is acceptable, rather than insisting this is what has happened.

Off hand comment? Well, Scumdog did comment on the semantics a while back. The situation should be viewed in context is what I'm saying as well.

At the end of the day if tptb want to make it harder to get a drivers licence then that's what they'll do, "quotas" or not. To be blunt, NZ has the highest death rate for drivers 16-17 years old so it's too bad if it's tough to get a pass.

But that doesn't make for a good Dave Rave.

[bogan]

Being aware of a "running percentage" is as difficult as keeping a average speed on the highway.

When testing drivers ... 20 total fuckwits in one day will ruin your "running average" in the blink of an eye test.
Just as a slow vehicle ahead of you (that you can't overtake) ... will ruin your average speed.

I said thinking hat, not silly hat.

20 total fuckwits would throw out the running total just as it would a running average, either way, the next day you don't have to fail or catch as many.

[FJRider]

I said thinking hat, not silly hat.

Silly is what I do. Have you not read my sig. ?????????

20 total fuckwits would throw out the running total just as it would a running average, either way, the next day you don't have to fail or catch as many.

Yep fail everybody in the last week ... Or not test anybody .... that would work ... oh wait.


Note to ALL taking a license test ... don't book for later in the month. EARLY in the month is a better likelyhood of passing the test (According to statistical quota averages)

[Akzle]

And isn't it great all these ideas but do any of these moaners do anything constructive about this and make submissions in regard to how driver licensing should be managed?

Nope?
Didn't think, keyboard heros and conspiracy theorists the lot of you.

i do constructive shit all the time, i'm telling you cunts to leave your DLs at home and let them expire and refuse to deal with cops. that's constructive as shit, if we all did that, then what? the government is going to arrest and charge (court costs money, or is that makes money - depends which seat you're in eh?) every motorist?

unfortunately strongly worded letters or even constructive input, once put in the post, is just creating work for the people who empty the shredders at parliament.

Fuck Me...the Gubbermint are money grabbin assholes... police are revenue collectors and stop poor innocent bikers who aint hurtin no one speeding...... The IRD are just fuckin assholes, why should I pay my Rego when I can leave it to other suckers........ etc etc

well, at least you got some bits right....

[Ocean1]

At the end of the day if tptb want to make it harder to get a drivers licence then that's what they'll do, "quotas" or not. To be blunt, NZ has the highest death rate for drivers 16-17 years old so it's too bad if it's tough to get a pass.

Tptb? They "be" in order to administer the will of the citizens of NZ. Why don't you ask those 16-17 year old citizens if they want tougher licence tests?

[davereid]

At the end of the day if tptb want to make it harder to get a drivers licence then that's what they'll do, "quotas" or not. To be blunt, NZ has the highest death rate for drivers 16-17 years old so it's too bad if it's tough to get a pass. But that doesn't make for a good Dave Rave.

Yeah, I stand up and say my bit when I think things are dodgy. I think NZ would be a better place if TPTB always knew they would get called out over anything suspect.

But as outlined, a quota system DOESNT help. Fail those that can't drive safely. Pass those that can.

If the goal is safe drivers, safe roads and safe vehicles, then quota failing young people lets them down, lets us down, and it's lose lose.

Except for the guys that made the extra $650,000 in revenue.

[Zedder]

Tptb? They "be" in order to administer the will of the citizens of NZ. Why don't you ask those 16-17 year old citizens if they want tougher licence tests?

The best question would be: Do they want to be good drivers and stay alive/uninjured and not kill/maim others? Who, in their right mind, would say no to that?

[FJRider]

Tptb? They "be" in order to administer the will of the citizens of NZ. Why don't you ask those 16-17 year old citizens if they want tougher licence tests?

It's OK ... they don't vote until they're 18. And if the majority of the voting public don't like the policy ... they may not be in power then. (but wont necessarily mean the rules will be repealed by the next ruling party though)

[FJRider]

The best question would be: Do they want to be good drivers and stay alive/uninjured and not kill/maim others? Who, in their right mind, would say no to that?

They don'/wont ask that question. They just ask ... When can I sit the test. As I want my license NOW.

[Zedder]

Yeah, I stand up and say my bit when I think things are dodgy. I think NZ would be a better place if TPTB always knew they would get called out over anything suspect.

But as outlined, a quota system DOESNT help. Fail those that can't drive safely. Pass those that can.

If the goal is safe drivers, safe roads and safe vehicles, then quota failing young people lets them down, lets us down, and it's lose lose.

Except for the guys that made the extra $650,000 in revenue.

Good on you for caring, but they don't care about whether you (or anyone) think there's a quota system. So, it got reported in the media, big deal. Do you think anything is going to be proven or are heads really going to roll?

TPTB just want to do their thing and in this case, if it saves lives and heartbreak for families and loved ones plus all other downstream effects then resit costs are stuff all.

I really hate injustice too, but I also don't like unbalanced uninformed rabble rousing argument as well.

[Headbanger]

Personally I don't care if the rate is 90 percent if they are getting failed for legitimate reasons, and if some fuckers need to be told to get harder on the fuckers, then so be it.

As for leaving my drivers license at home?

I'm getting old, I want a system in place, Anarchy is a nice dream, But as soon as the systems were ripped apart then the more capable people would start introducing them again to once again build a better society. well, after winning the war against the idiots hell bent on being in the stone age.