Drivers Strike?

[ArrowsFA1]

Apparently (I don't read German but have seen a translation) AutoMotorSport (http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/sport/formel_1/hxcms_article_513285_13987.hbs) is reporting that representatives of the GPDA want to meet with Max Mosley before the British GP. The drivers are demanding the repayment of their licence fees in a dispute over the increase in those fees. If the FIA President does not agree there is talk of strike action :eek:

[ioan]

You got it right Arrows.
However I don't find the taxes so high (there is a list on that site) given how much they earn and that most of them don't pay income taxes because they live in Monaco or Switzerland.

What about people who earn 1000 - 1500 Euros a month and pay up to 2000 Euros income taxes?!

I find the drivers are hypocritical in this case.

[Valve Bounce]

What about people who earn 1000 - 1500 Euros a month and pay up to 2000 Euros income taxes?!

I find the drivers are hypocritical in this case.

I cannot think of anyone in this world who wants to pay taxes. But a licence fee is rather different; although why the drivers want to go the public route on this at this time is rather puzzling.

[Mark]

You got it right Arrows.
What about people who earn 1000 - 1500 Euros a month and pay up to 2000 Euros income taxes?!
.

Which is impossible?!

[Garry Walker]

What about people who earn 1000 - 1500 Euros a month and pay up to 2000 Euros income taxes?!

:rotflmao:

Now that`s a country I`d like to see!!!

[veeten]

Do it like Bill France did the drivers in NASCAR back in 1969 when they decided to initiate a strike action, open the doors to other drivers just itchin' to get behind the wheel.

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns20473.html

There have been a few previous attempts at such things but as Bill France showed at Talladega in September 1969 one can always replace the stars with new boys. On that occasion, citing the danger of exploding tyres, 37 drivers went home before the NASCAR event. France threw open the entry to anyone he could find and the crowd was still given a show. Danger is one thing but the hike in the price of a licence is quite another.

A good number of them have experience, and might even put on a better show... something that the 'well heeled' bretheren might not feel too good about. Something tells me that Bernie and Max might take a page from 'Big Bill's' book if it gets to that.

[ArrowsFA1]

Do it like Bill France did the drivers in NASCAR back in 1969 when they decided to initiate a strike action, open the doors to other drivers just itchin' to get behind the wheel.
The threat of being replaced may well have played its part at Kyalami in 1982, the Brabham drivers in particular given that Bernie was both their team owner and FOCA President!

The 1982 season review shows shots of mechanics sticking hastily prepared "job adverts" on the cars - "F1 driver wanted" - as a bit of fun :p

[ioan]

Which is impossible?!

Well I forgot to mention that the taxes are payed / year! :p :

[Valve Bounce]

Well I forgot to mention that the taxes are payed / year! :p :

Well, thank God for that.

[ioan]

Well, thank God for that.

What has God to do with taxes?! :confused:

[inimitablestoo]

What has God to do with taxes?! :confused:
I usually find myself using his name when I look at my payslip and realise how much has been deducted at the end of the month :)

[maxu05]

Good for them, I hope they do have the ba*ls to stick to the little troll.

[Tazio]

I'll bet my sig they don't strike! Any takers? http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/16/16_3_166.gif

[Knock-on]

The drivers are angry about the FIA's decision in January to increase licence fees to 10,000 euros plus 2,000 euros extra per point scored this year, up from the previous 1,725 euros cost with 456 added for each point. It means leading drivers will be paying in excess of 200,000 euros from now on.

200,000 euro is a lot of money for what? For the privilidge of driving in F1?

Lets not forget that these drivers are there as they are the best of the best. Us fans pay a lot of money to watch them which is what it's all about.

The FIA charge F1 a fortune as the administrators of F1 and then try and charge a fortune from the people that make them $millions a year?

Does this make sense to anyone else. Bit like my boss charging me to make money for him.

[Tazio]

200,000 euro is a lot of money for what? For the privilidge of driving in F1?

Lets not forget that these drivers are there as they are the best of the best. Us fans pay a lot of money to watch them which is what it's all about.

The FIA charge F1 a fortune as the administrators of F1 and then try and charge a fortune from the people that make them $millions a year?

Does this make sense to anyone else. Bit like my boss charging me to make money for him.I have to agree. 'tis folly!

[truefan72]

it is ridiculous that the license is assessed by your points scored.
There should be one fee for all drivers.

As Max Mosley said, "we are trying to recoup our costs because we spend a lot of money on safety..." which is just utter nonsense.

That is what they are supposed to do and why they get a percentage of the overall revenue that F1 brings in.

just another case of the FIA screwing up f1.

time for a breakaway series lads.

[Viktory]

Good for them, I hope they do have the ba*ls to stick to the little troll.

I very much hope not, otherwise I'll be breathing down their necks (or whoever would deal with this problem) for a refund of my Silverstone ticket...

[CNR]

lewis the face of all

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/motors/article-1027857/F1-stars-threaten-strike-7-500-driving-licence.html

he is not a member of Grand Prix Drivers' Association (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Prix_Drivers'_Association)so what would he have to do with it.

http://autospider.blogspot.com/2008/03/lewis-hamilton-no-pressure-to-gpda.html


Hamilton is one of four F1 race drivers who are not members of the GPDA and Stewart was widely quoted this week as saying he believed it wrong for him not to join up.


Stewart said: "I'm surprised and disappointed that Lewis has not yet joined the GPDA. The GPDA did an immense amount of good. It is wrong and complacent of Lewis not to be involved."


But the GPDA has not backed Stewart's stance and has made it clear that Hamilton is free to do what he wants to do - especially as non-members are still able to help out on safety matters.

[gravity]

If anything, they should charge the drivers who DON'T score points! They're the ones who need to be punished.

What happened to all the money they robbed off McLaren last year? They said that was going towards 'driver safety' costs.

[Tazio]

If anything, they should charge the drivers who DON'T score points! They're the ones who need to be punished.

What happened to all the money they robbed off McLaren last year? They said that was going towards 'driver safety' costs.I think Mike bought another dozen Harleys with some of it. :D
Jean Todt went on a hooker spending rampage to be prepared for when he takes over the FIA! :p :

[ArrowsFA1]

Formula One drivers think a strike at next month's British Grand Prix is not a realistic possibility despite their growing anger about the increased costs of a Formula One superlicence.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/68414


FIA president Max Mosley has told the Grand Prix Drivers' Association (GPDA) that he is ready to meet them to discuss the current costs of a Formula One superlicence.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/68418


Grand Prix Drivers' Association director Mark Webber believes that Formula One racers should discuss their concerns over the price of superlicence fees with Bernie Ecclestone.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/68416



Q. Is part of the anger that this is something that has been done without consultation with the drivers?
Fernando Alonso: Yeah, probably because of that and also because we asked also where the money was going. The increase they have for this year is massive - so all this extra money, we asked where it was going. We have had no answer. If that extra money was going for safety or to improve the circuits and things like that, then we are still happy to pay because it will make it safe. But we have had no answer on that.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/68415

[Hawkmoon]

I agree the fees are over the top and the pay-per-point thing is rather stupid but I won't have much sympathy for the drivers if they strike. I find it difficult to empathise with millionaires who don't want to pay what is a small fee relative to their income.

[ioan]

So Mosley is willing to discuss it with them, however Webber is saying they need to talk to BE because the FIA is not interested?!

What planet is Webber living on?!

In my opinion the drivers shouldn't pay per scored points, they should pay per their income as we all do.

[ArrowsFA1]

So Mosley is willing to discuss it with them, however Webber is saying they need to talk to BE because the FIA is not interested?!

What planet is Webber living on?!
The Webber/BE story on Autosport was timed at Thursday, June 19th 2008, 17:13 GMT, followed by the Mosley story at Thursday, June 19th 2008, 17:44 GMT. Perhaps that might explain it :dozey:

[ArrowsFA1]

In my opinion the drivers shouldn't pay per scored points, they should pay per their income as we all do.
But the licence is not income to be taxed, it is a document required by the FIA that authorises drivers to compete in F1.

Here in the UK we pay a flat fee for a TV licence (http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/). That licence funds the BBC, and every household is required to have one. We're not charged a different fee for the licence according to our income, although there are some concessions.

[ioan]

The Webber/BE story on Autosport was timed at Thursday, June 19th 2008, 17:13 GMT, followed by the Mosley story at Thursday, June 19th 2008, 17:44 GMT. Perhaps that might explain it :dozey:

30 minutes?!
They got an answer from Mosley within 30 minutes after talking rubbish?!
Why didn't he wait for an official answer to their letter to the FIA?

[ioan]

But the licence is not income to be taxed, it is a document required by the FIA that authorises drivers to compete in F1.

What part of my post wasn't clear?!
I do not agree with the license to be paid based on the points scored, but rather on their income from the sport.


Here in the UK we pay a flat fee for a TV licence (http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/). That licence funds the BBC, and every household is required to have one. We're not charged a different fee for the licence according to our income, although there are some concessions.

Are you actually comparing a F1 superlicense that gives you access to millions of income, with the UK TV fee?! Did I miss something and you get payed on how much TV you watch over there?
Apples and oranges, again.

[ArrowsFA1]

They got an answer from Mosley within 30 minutes after talking rubbish?!
Why didn't he wait for an official answer to their letter to the FIA?
Or perhaps the FIA have seen news of the rumoured strike and decided to talk to the GPDA.

Webber and Alonso have both said the GPDA had already contacted the FIA to express its concerns on more than one occasion and had no response, and as MW said "Bernie comes to the races so that's useful" :p

[ArrowsFA1]

Did I miss something...
I rather think you did :dozey:

[SGWilko]

What part of my post wasn't clear?!
I do not agree with the license to be paid based on the points scored, but rather on their income from the sport. So, you mean based upon their ability to pay. So an F1 driver who is paid the most, pays the most, and is therefore subsidising the lower paid journeymen? All licences are the same are they not, so they should cost the same, as in the perfectly valid example given.




Are you actually comparing a F1 superlicense that gives you access to millions of income, with the UK TV fee?! Did I miss something and you get payed on how much TV you watch over there?
Apples and oranges, again.

No comparison, a useful example. Are you a fruit and veg seller or something?

[ioan]

I rather think you did :dozey:

There was nothing to miss as there was nothing logical in that post of yours. Sorry but that is the reality. Comparing a F1 superlicense fee with your TV fee is not worth of discussing.

[SGWilko]

There was nothing to miss as there was nothing logical in that post of yours. Sorry but that is the reality. Comparing a F1 superlicense fee with your TV fee is not worth of discussing.

Quite why you are discussing something you deem undiscussable is beyond me? ;)

The comparison is not, believe it or not, hard though it may well be for some to unnerstand, between the types of licence, but between the pricing structure.

After all, is not the cost the issue here. Or is it the relative merits of pesticide use on Apple and Orange farming? :twit:

[ioan]

So, you mean based upon their ability to pay. So an F1 driver who is paid the most, pays the most, and is therefore subsidising the lower paid journeymen? All licences are the same are they not, so they should cost the same, as in the perfectly valid example given.

No comparison, a useful example. Are you a fruit and veg seller or something?

Things are not as simple as you are trying to make them look.
Some team and drivers couldn't afford a higher fee for their suprlicenses, while some wouldn't even realize that they paid it.

Charging a fee for a superlicense is perfectly normal, and given that they don't do it just for the sake of it than maybe 100.000 - 500.000 would be a pretty reasonable amount given that some are earning as much as USD 40.000.000, however that means that some drivers and team might not be able to afford it.

Don't forget that it's this superlicense that allows them to run in F1 and thus access to enormous paychecks, so charging them based on what they earn looks correct to me.

[ArrowsFA1]

Don't forget that it's this superlicense that allows them to run in F1 and thus access to enormous paychecks, so charging them based on what they earn looks correct to me.
But the new FIA charges (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64883) are not based on earnings.

The cost of the licence was 1,725 euros last year + 456 euros for each point scored.

The new rate is 10,000 euros + 2,000 extra per point scored.

That is a massive increase, and has nothing to do with paychecks.

[Valve Bounce]

But the new FIA charges (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64883) are not based on earnings.

The cost of the licence was 1,725 euros last year + 456 euros for each point scored.

The new rate is 10,000 euros + 2,000 extra per point scored.

That is a massive increase, and has nothing to do with paychecks.

Yeah!! I agree. I mean, if a driver like Sato won the WDC, he'd be bankrupt!!

[Knock-on]

Things are not as simple as you are trying to make them look.
Some team and drivers couldn't afford a higher fee for their suprlicenses, while some wouldn't even realize that they paid it.

Charging a fee for a superlicense is perfectly normal, and given that they don't do it just for the sake of it than maybe 100.000 - 500.000 would be a pretty reasonable amount given that some are earning as much as USD 40.000.000, however that means that some drivers and team might not be able to afford it.

Don't forget that it's this superlicense that allows them to run in F1 and thus access to enormous paychecks, so charging them based on what they earn looks correct to me.

It's not whether a driver can afford to pay it or not.

As per usual, you are totally missing the point.

WHAT is the justification for this massive price hike. What is happening to the money. Is it being used to fund new safety inititives, go into the ever increasing FIA legal representation budget or into some sort of Hooker pot for Max's end of season private party?

Max and the FIA seem to demonstrate more each day how out of step they are with reality.

[gravity]

But the new FIA charges (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64883) are not based on earnings.

The cost of the licence was 1,725 euros last year + 456 euros for each point scored.

The new rate is 10,000 euros + 2,000 extra per point scored.

That is a massive increase, and has nothing to do with paychecks.

I think that is Ioan's point. Having everyone pay 2,000 euros per point earned is penalising the drivers that do not earn that much.
Drivers should only have to pay license fee's according to their income. We understand that all the drivers have to pay the same fee at the moment which is not fair on the lower-income drivers.

To level the playing fields, the drivers should only charge a percentage of their salary per point.

eg:
Take a lower income driver (for example Sato at 1m euros per year guess).
Sato pays 2,000 euros per point. That means Sato pays 0.2% of his salary towards license fees per point.
then, take Raikkonen; and to be fair, he should also pay 0.2% of his salary (of a reported $51m) per point earned means he should pay closer to 68,000 euros per point. :eek:
That way all drivers get the same penalty for a point scored.

[Knock-on]

I think that is Ioan's point. Having everyone pay 2,000 euros per point earned is penalising the drivers that do not earn that much.
Drivers should only have to pay license fee's according to their income. We understand that all the drivers have to pay the same fee at the moment which is not fair on the lower-income drivers.

To level the playing fields, the drivers should only charge a percentage of their salary per point.

eg:
Take a lower income driver (for example Sato at 1m euros per year guess).
Sato pays 2,000 euros per point. That means Sato pays 0.2% of his salary towards license fees per point.
then, take Raikkonen; and to be fair, he should also pay 0.2% of his salary (of a reported $51m) per point earned means he should pay closer to 68,000 euros per point. :eek:
That way all drivers get the same penalty for a point scored.


But why are they charged this sort of fee for a Licence to make the FIA money?

I pay a set fee for a driving Licence and it is the same fee everyone pays. Why should it be based on what I earn?

We have income taxation laws to deal with taxing people earnings and the drivers will pay income tax according to whatever country they are resident in. It's not the job of the FIA to decide who pays what tax in this arbitary manner.

I have asked many times (without an adequate response I should add) what the FIA do outside of Motorsport that is so amazing as some seem hoodwinked into believing but the question needs to be expanded.

What is the role of the FIA inside motorsport and what should it be?

The FIA should detirmine the regulations and ensure the sport is safely run. Not go around fixing championships and taxing drivers.

[gravity]

Driver's POV:
2007 fees:
Kimi = 110 points...
1,725 euros license + 456 euros per point
costing him 51,885 euros

2008 fees:
Winner = 110 points... (for arguments sake)
10 000 euros license + 2000 euros per point
costing the driver 230,000 euros

GPDA POV:
2007 fees:
26 drivers + 39 points per race
48,850 euros + 17,784 euros per race (x 17 races)
= 351,178 euros guaranteed

2008 fees:
20 drivers per race + 39 points per race
200,000 euros + 78,000 euros per race (x 18 races)
= 1,604,000 euros guaranteed

I'm assuming that the test drivers etc don't have to pay driver licenses unless they actually take part in a race?

[ArrowsFA1]

I think that is Ioan's point.
Indeed it is :up:

However, I still do not understand how the FIA can justify such a massive, and seemingly arbitrary, increase in the fee.

[ioan]

But the new FIA charges (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64883) are not based on earnings.

I know, I was just trying to bring a new approach to the table, and all I get from you is a complete lack of will to understand what I wrote.

[ArrowsFA1]

ioan, I've acknowledged your point (post #40) but I'll admit I mis-read it initially.

There is certainly never any intentional lack of will to understand what you wrote.

[Sleeper]

Driver's POV:
2007 fees:
Kimi = 110 points...
1,725 euros license + 456 euros per point
costing him 51,885 euros

2008 fees:
Winner = 110 points... (for arguments sake)
10 000 euros license + 2000 euros per point
costing the driver 230,000 euros

GPDA POV:
2007 fees:
26 drivers + 39 points per race
48,850 euros + 17,784 euros per race (x 17 races)
= 351,178 euros guaranteed

2008 fees:
20 drivers per race + 39 points per race
200,000 euros + 78,000 euros per race (x 18 races)
= 1,604,000 euros guaranteed

I'm assuming that the test drivers etc don't have to pay driver licenses unless they actually take part in a race?
Nominated third drivers will all need a superlicence or they couldnt step in to take over from one of the regular drivers when needed. Other test drivers wouldnt need to pay for a superlicence as they will only be testing (the licence only covers FIA sanctioned running, and the teams regulate testing themselves).

[Firstgear]

A 400% increase does seem rediculous, but when's the last times the cost has been adjusted? If it hasn't been adjusted for inflation since .....say about the mid '60's, then maybe it's not so outragous afterall. Anyone know when and how much the last increase to the cost of the licence was?

[pits4me]

I cannot think of anyone in this world who wants to pay taxes. But a licence fee is rather different; although why the drivers want to go the public route on this at this time is rather puzzling.

The drivers may have no other choice with FIA at this point. Max seems to do as he pleases these days.

[aryan]

I cannot think of anyone in this world who wants to pay taxes.

You can't think of enough people then.

I for one have no qualms paying taxes, as long as the government's budget is transparent and I can track where my money is going.

[BDunnell]

I cannot think of anyone in this world who wants to pay taxes.

I do, because they are the only way of funding public services without making them all dependent upon private enterprise, and I don't agree with going too far down that road. But I digress.

[ioan]

ioan, I've acknowledged your point (post #40) but I'll admit I mis-read it initially.

There is certainly never any intentional lack of will to understand what you wrote.

Hi Arrows, sorry for going over the top there! :)

[markabilly]

Most people think that taxes are okay, as you do not have to pay them