ONE LAW FOR THE RICH...
Page 20
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
"It's the rich what gets the pleasure, it's the poor what gets the blame", runs the old music hall ditty. Put it in a language that hauliers understand and you end up with: "It's the main contractor that stands to the gain, and the subbie that takes the pain."
That's how it looks to some of the contracted tipper owner-drivers working for ARC Southern. The construction giant wants its existing contract holders, who have already bought their trucks through the company's purchase scheme, to consider splashing out on a new wagon—also through ARC's buying plan. That new truck would take the place of the original contract tipper which could then effectively be used as an outside contractor's wagon, even though there's no cast-iron guarantee that there will be work for the it.
The twin truck deal is to help ARC cope with a projected 25-30% increase in haulage at two of its sites. No quarrels there: the recovery may be slow but at least it's happening, and as British industry struggles back on its feet it will be hauliers that provide the crutches.
But is ARC asking its contract owner-drivers to take too much of a risk? And given the volatility of the market should it be prised if they are wary about taking on another vehicle when they may not have work for it? The National Owner Drivers Association reckons it is, because only one of ARC's contracted owner-drivers' trucks will be 'placed on a firm contract; ARC will be under no contractual obligation to find work for the other.
Are the ARC owner-drivers asking for guarantees that can no longer be given? ARC, like any other buyer of haulage, is after the most flexible deal it can get at the lowest price. If its predicted 30% rise in haulage fails to transpire will ARC be prepared to underwrite its contractors when the business drys up? The company seems to expect the ownerdrivers to grasp a nettle it fines too painful to embrace. Of course if ARC's projection on the likely growth in haulage is proved right then everyone could benefit, and if ARC can't provide the work to support the contractor's second truck there would be nothing to stop him looking for work elsewhere. But what would ARC's response be if it then told the contractor there was work for his second truck, but the contractor said, "No thanks, I'm getting a better rate elsewhere."? We don't think they'd be amused.
The only people who can really decide if this will be a good deal are the owner-drivers themselves. In the true tradition of subbies they stand to gain a lot—and perhaps lose even more:Twos ever thus.