Etags who has them, who doesn't and who actually pays

[ptashark]

Haven't got an etag. Still awaiting invoice from them. They had 39 days to get it to me, and that expired yesterday.

[alanB]

It's time companies also stand up against this e-tolling.  Why is it that only the public should fight it?  This should be fought by public and business together.

This is my point as well.

Business leaders need to realise they live in this country as well and have a moral responsibility to contribute towards making the government accountable for its actions.  If one large corporation tells the government to take a hike it has a much larger effect than the CEO saying the same thing in his personal capacity!

Falling over them selves to comply with laws, while saying that they dont agree with them just because they dont want to piss the government is morally indefinsible IMO!

[Vintage_Mania]

Firstly I personally think you should be happy that businesses get e-tags. The costs are going to trickle down to the consumer, no matter how you look at it. And the bigger businesses are easier to target by SANRAL. Thus making it very hard for them to side-step payments with all this tom-foolery mentioned on other pages.

Secondly I think that more credit must be given to business and business owners. Some of the posts here give a feeling that they are only out to trick the public to pay for their e-toll accounts with increases and "hidden costs". I'm pretty sure that in most cases that will not be true. Most successful business people I know will put their customers first and will try to incur as little extra cost to them as they can.

So in agreement with JacquesM over discounts (of up to 45% if tagged), I think that business and business owners are morally obliged if not ethically compelled to get tagged so that they can make sure that all costs that do trickle down to their consumers/customers are as little as possible.

[Ganjora]

This is why this thread will die early. Nobody wants to stand in the road and be peppered with negativity. Show me one person who lovingly pays e-toll. I don't know any but I know people who registered and are still unhappy about it. So have I because I run a business and have trucks on the road. Boycott me then if you like.

certainly,  and with the greatest of pleasure.
please advise as to your company name,  and what you do,  so that i can make certain i boycott you.

[alanB]

Firstly I personally think you should be happy that businesses get e-tags. The costs are going to trickle down to the consumer, no matter how you look at it. And the bigger businesses are easier to target by SANRAL. Thus making it very hard for them to side-step payments with all this tom-foolery mentioned on other pages.

Secondly I think that more credit must be given to business and business owners. Some of the posts here give a feeling that they are only out to trick the public to pay for their e-toll accounts with increases and "hidden costs". I'm pretty sure that in most cases that will not be true. Most successful business people I know will put their customers first and will try to incur as little extra cost to them as they can.

So in agreement with JacquesM over discounts (of up to 45% if tagged), I think that business and business owners are morally obliged if not ethically compelled to get tagged so that they can make sure that all costs that do trickle down to their consumers/customers are as little as possible.

I'm sorry I dont follow your logic at all?

The only way I can agree that businesses should get etags if their management honestly think etolls are a good idea and they are happy paying those amounts.

If - like the rest of us - they think etags are morally wrong, then they should do something about that!

And I'm saying they are in a better position to do something than us individuals!

As citizens of the country they have the moral obligation, just like the rest of us, to hold the government accountable for its actions.  And not just hide behind excuses saying profit comes first and maybe their profits will suffer if they stand up and speak out.

I wasnt at all implying they are trying to make money out of etolls - but I am insisting they should speak out and do what they can to oppose the system!

Getting etagged just to get the discount is like paying a smaller bribe than your competitor and thinking thats somehow virtuous IMO.

Why not just refuse to pay and tell the government loudly and publically why you wont?

[KiLRoy]

It's time companies also stand up against this e-tolling.  Why is it that only the public should fight it?  This should be fought by public and business together.

This is my point as well.

Business leaders need to realise they live in this country as well and have a moral responsibility to contribute towards making the government accountable for its actions.  If one large corporation tells the government to take a hike it has a much larger effect than the CEO saying the same thing in his personal capacity!

Falling over them selves to comply with laws, while saying that they dont agree with them just because they dont want to piss the government is morally indefinsible IMO!

Spot on, business in SA have a history of bending backwards for government while farking their clients.  Business (especially big business) must grow some balls.

[Vintage_Mania]

As citizens of the country they have the moral obligation, just like the rest of us,....

You are hammering on 2 different points here. As citizens? Business as a entity cannot be classified as a citizen. Although there are individuals working within the company structure that are.

If a company employs 100 people and have a fleet of 20 vehicles it comprises of a company unit that has 20 registered e-tags, but a potential 100 unregistered highway users that are fighting the system. In that structure they are at least countering for excessive cost increases by tagging the business vehicles and protecting their clients by doing so, but still as individual citizens are trying to fight the good cause.

[Koet]

As citizens of the country they have the moral obligation, just like the rest of us,....

You are hammering on 2 different points here. As citizens? Business as a entity cannot be classified as a citizen. Although there are individuals working within the company structure that are.

If a company employs 100 people and have a fleet of 20 vehicles it comprises of a company unit that has 20 registered e-tags, but a potential 100 unregistered highway users that are fighting the system. In that structure they are at least countering for excessive cost increases by tagging the business vehicles and protecting their clients by doing so, but still as individual citizens are trying to fight the good cause.

Fair enough, IF said company asks their staff NOT to get e-tags and to help them should they get a summons etc.  But sadly all companies I know of either buy e-tags for their employees or have some sort of scheme where they help SANRAL tag their employees (by making registration easier, handing out free tags or whatever).  How is that helping the public in it's fight against this system?  No, most businesses bend over backwards to comply AND to get their employees to comply.  Then, once they get their e-toll accounts it's inevitable that most if not all businesses will pass that cost straight on to the next person/company in the chain.  Maybe not initially (as businesses try to keep clients), but once they see that everybody else is starting to do it, the only link in the chain that will actually pay for e-tolls (AGAIN!) will be the consumer, who in a lot of cases will pay e-tolls to get to work.  And guess what, we're ALL consumers.

So if you think having an e-tag will save you money, you're delusional at best.  If you don't stand up (whether you're a business or individual) and do whatever you can to fight this, you WILL get shafted.  And not only by SANRAL, but by all the businesses you buy from.

And that's a FACT!

[alanB]

As citizens of the country they have the moral obligation, just like the rest of us,....

You are hammering on 2 different points here. As citizens? Business as a entity cannot be classified as a citizen. Although there are individuals working within the company structure that are.

If a company employs 100 people and have a fleet of 20 vehicles it comprises of a company unit that has 20 registered e-tags, but a potential 100 unregistered highway users that are fighting the system. In that structure they are at least countering for excessive cost increases by tagging the business vehicles and protecting their clients by doing so, but still as individual citizens are trying to fight the good cause.

A company has a legal persona, so it is a citizen of the country - that's merely from a legal perspective.

But its more than that.  If a company like say FNB or Vodacom, or some other heavy hitter issued a statement as a company saying they did not agree and would not be paying, you have to agree that would have a very large effect?

Why dont they?

[Vintage_Mania]

@Koet - I'm experiencing it totally opposite from business people and owners I know. As individuals they are not complying and are effectively not pushing e-tags. I don't know 100's, I must admit. But still.

@alanB - big business like the 2 mentioned by you has unfortunately more to loose through civil disobedience than they will ever gain from it. They have mayor foreign investments and investors to keep happy. They have a global spectator base to keep up appearances. Not only for themselves, but for all other SA companies and businesses that need and get investments locally and abroad. You must be able to see why they can't afford to be seen as "law breakers".

[alanB]

@alanB - big business like the 2 mentioned by you has unfortunately more to loose through civil disobedience than they will ever gain from it. They have mayor foreign investments and investors to keep happy. They have a global spectator base to keep up appearances. Not only for themselves, but for all other SA companies and businesses that need and get investments locally and abroad. You must be able to see why they can't afford to be seen as "law breakers".

This is precisely what I am questioning.

Do they really have more to lose?  What are they going to say when the country descends into a mess in the long term and then their shareholders/investors take flight anyway?

What about the loss of disposable income of indivuals that etaolls represents?  Thats money that could have been used fpr savings, investment, growth etc?

Hiding behind short term potential loss in profits as an excuse for not speaking up is very difficult to defend IMO.

And in any event - most companies will accept that they have a responsibilty to safety for eg and spend a lot on that - which directly affect their profits, but its considered the morally right thing to do, the same goes for environmental protection, social upliftment etc etc.  Why is etolls impossible to consider in the same light?

[Koet]

@Koet - I'm experiencing it totally opposite from business people and owners I know. As individuals they are not complying and are effectively not pushing e-tags. I don't know 100's, I must admit. But still.

@alanB - big business like the 2 mentioned by you has unfortunately more to loose through civil disobedience than they will ever gain from it. They have mayor foreign investments and investors to keep happy. They have a global spectator base to keep up appearances. Not only for themselves, but for all other SA companies and businesses that need and get investments locally and abroad. You must be able to see why they can't afford to be seen as "law breakers".

I'm glad to hear of businesses not pushing e-tags.  I work at RMB and all the big companies I know of or have friends working for (including RMB) are running campaigns to help their staff get e-tags.  It disgusts me.

[Koet]

Oh, and further to my point a few posts back - all companies are profit driven.  Bigger companies also need to keep shareholders happy.  And most big companies do that at the expense of their staff (retrenchments etc) and their clients (passing on costs).  This is a fact.

[Vintage_Mania]

And in any event - most companies will accept that they have a responsibilty to safety for eg and spend a lot on that - which directly affect their profits, but its considered the morally right thing to do, the same goes for environmental protection, social upliftment etc etc.  Why is etolls impossible to consider in the same light?

I think they are, I think they are all in the same corner. Most of the factors mentioned are legislation based, especially in SA. Environmental protection and social upliftment are all based on legislation that was passed and the companies had to conform to it or face penalties or worse, get excluded form tender processes.

[punisher]

Its funny to see how some would make such moral sacrifices , for profit , but it is still a sad fact pfffft

To say that they are morally obliged to get tagged is the same as saying it was a moral obligation to support aparthied

[Vintage_Mania]

To say that they are morally obliged to get tagged is the same as saying it was a moral obligation to support aparthied

Yes. That is exactly the same thing. 

[Skeltonsc]

My case is that I'm on debt counselling and according to a court order I cannot make any debt, so how can I therefore incur debt from the etolls?

Am I then legally barred from driving on the freeways?

[Scooterbike]

Just imagine what the Boere will do if SANRAL start e-tag in the platteland...    those tractors will come in handy 

[punisher]

To say that they are morally obliged to get tagged is the same as saying it was a moral obligation to support aparthied

Yes. That is exactly the same thing. 

Happy to enlighten you
Another example would be to say you support abortion , but not the death penalty for violent crimms

[bud500]

Also if I'm on Debt counselling how can I accumulate any more debt if the court has ordered that I cannot? 

The intention of the transaction between you and Sanral is not to sell credit, hence the credit is incidental and legal. So you qualify, congratulations...