e TML in perspective: this problem of grades
Page 75
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by George Wilmot University of London.
I the concept of the transport 3r's licence was first reviewed in the Paper The Transport Of Freight, only e of licence was envisaged. It became ;, however, that in an industry which s traders with one large vehicle for heir own business ranging through to )rs with several hundred vehicles, a :ype of licence was unrealistic. Some ' grading was necessary and the Act is iite specific on this point, referring on occasions to "classes of licence". Transport Manager's Licence Comas announced that it recommends only atutory grade which every future n-t manager (including owner-drivers) successful in passing by examination, tt higher grades of licence (or, more y, "certificates") should be under,oluntarily. The recommendation was y underlined by Mr. D. H. Joyce, the an, in a recent paper at the Freight oft Association conference. Few disagree with the recommendation; ly it is wise to have as little definitive on as possible, especially in regard to °nal and professional qualifications. led plans for grades were laid down in Ty manner, it could be that the educagorts of the industry might become
entangled with the legislative ery.
;rtheless, there are difficulties involved ng only one grade made compulsory gulations. The TML clauses in the ort Act have given the industry a s opportunity to improve education Ifling, to enhance the status of manage ment, to effect co-ordination of educational provision and to bring a new image in front of the general public. Of necessity one compulsory grade must be pitched at a low level to cater for everyone and this might result in the whole currency of the TML being debased. This can only be countered by giving the voluntary higher grades top priority, with their desirability generally recognized by all sections of the industry when making managerial appointments. A great deal of thought is needed in how to put "teeth" into the voluntary grades, otherwise much effort could go for nought.
Another anxiety concerns operators responsible for between one and five vehicles, which, of course, includes a very high proportion of owner-drivers. I have been impressed in recent travels around the country at the strength of the view that the small operator should be placed in a quite separate category, allowing the TML grades proper to start with managers responsible for fleets of over five vehicles.
But what is a small operator; the definition is not as easy as it seems. According to the Act each separate depot will normally have a nominated transport manager with modifications indicating that one manager may be nominated for several depots under his charge, providing that the Licensing Authority is satisfied that this arrangement is reasonable from the point of view of safety and efficient working.
But will each Licensing Authority have a different interpretation? If so, chaos could result. There is anxiety, too, that the discretionary powers of the Licensing Authority are too wide over the whole TML concept. An educational scheme being applied differently in various regions would be unfortunate to say the least. If the TINE, scheme is to work, there must be uniformity over the whole country. The Licensing Authorities will have a panel of economic advisers for other parts of quality licensing. I hope it will not be necessary to set up panels of educational advisers!