TURN-ROUND
Page 69
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
NOT so long ago only a handful of experts would have known what was meant by the science of jraffic 111 engineering. Thanks to careful tending by those experts the science has shown so vigorous a growth that at times it appears to reflect the congestion it is intended to cure. Certainly there was a wide range of weighty subjects discussed at the study week in traffic engineering held in Nice at the end of September, and some of the 600 experts it was found possible to assemble there may well have felt that a month would have been barely enough to digest the gargantuan meal of facts and figures that was placed before them.
A useful reminder of one of the important reasons for developing the science was given in a paper on the economic losses due to traffic congestion given by Mr. D. J. Reynolds and Mr. J. G. Wardrop, two research workers from the Road Research Laboratory. They were able to provide statistical proof that the cost of traffic congestion in Great Britain was a substantial and rising proportion of the total cost of road transport. They gave a figure of about £200m. for the cost of congestion in 1958, and pointed out that this was equal to about 10 per cent. of the real cost of road users' transport or about one per cent. of the net national income.
The experts evidently, regarded their assessment as the minimum. In a further calculation they added the money that the occupants of vehicles might have earned if they had not been kept idle by traffic congestion. On this basis the total Cost would be increased to £500m.
Next Step The figures set out and discussed at Nice have been given on previous occasions. They have not been seriously questioned and one may assume that they are substantially accurate. Commercial vehicle users should now take the matter a step further. Traffic engineering has proved itself a necessary science, created to deal with the evil of congestion, but it does not deal with, and therefore cannot solve, the entire problem of delays to vehicles. Where there is congestion the evil is clearly visible. The impact on the public is direct and their desire for action is spontaneous. Commercial operators, especially those with goods vehicles, are beginning to believe that the worst delays have nothing to do with congestion and are not therefore apparent to the public. This does not make them any less evil.
Reports from hauliers are that it is becoming increasngly difficult to get away from the premises of customers Nithin a reasonable time of arrival. The labour problem s usually held to blame, and in more than one way. The rader who is short of staff is unwilling to take men off a ob in order to facilitate or assist the loading or unloading
a vehicle belonging to somebody else. At other times the itaff may refuse to accept a vehicle if it arrives between loon and 2 p.m., or within an hour of the time when the vorks close, which may be at 5 p.m. Even when the /ehicle is receiving attention it may be abruptly abandoned he moment it is time to stop work.
Hauliers also complain that the customer gives 'reference to his own vehicle and leaves theirs to wait. Co their minds this proves that he knows the value of time aid is aware that their vehicles are losing money while hey are acting as involuntary warehouses for him and the [rivers are kicking their heels. The time lost may be :onsiderable. If facilities are refused at 4 p.m. on a 7riday, as is often stated to be the case, and if the customer s working to a five-day week, as is becoming increasingly
common, there will be a loaded vehicle left waiting until Monday. It cannot be used on Saturday; the opportunity is lost for maintenance over the week-end and the driver may have to be paid for standing by.
There may be little that the haulier can do in the way of direct action. Experience shows that indifferent success attends any effort to copy the railways and make a charge for demurrage. The offender may not always be the actual customer, and in any event no customer likes to receive an account for more than he had understood the cost would be. Meehanical handling devices help to cut down the time required for loading and unloading, and should therefore ease the labour problem, but it is not every firm that is willing to spend money for what it may consider purely the benefit of a haulier.
As hauliers have been quick to perceive, the problem calls for an exercise in public relations spread over a long period. What is equally important is that the public relations should be extended over a wide front, of which the road haulage industry will constitute only a part. The campaign must penetrate to all levels of trade and industry from the managing director to the man at the gate.
There is a strong case for urging a quicker turn-round of vehicles. It has become a platitude to describe transport as the conveyor belt of industry, but the description is apt for putting the case to the manufacturer. He knows that, if it is to be successful, a conveyor belt should operate smoothly, and without delays. He can visualize the operation easily while it remains within his own factory. It should be possible to convince him that there would be substantial savings if the smooth flow could be maintained throughout the whole operation. from the raw material to the processing plant, and from the finished article to the consumer.
Considerable Cost The case cannot easily be put forward by hauliers on their own. For one thing, the cost would be considerable, One can imagine that, among other things, there would have to be an advertising campaign on a fairly large scale, the widespread use of posters and leaflets and possibly the production and distribution of films. Moreover, the haulier is not the only victim calling to be rescued. The problem is equally serious for many C licence holders, and has for long been familiar to the railways, to shipping interests and even to air transport.
To be successful, the campaign should be run by at least the transport industry as a whole, with the co-operation of many other interests, including the trade unions. It is scarcely going too far to suggest that the Ministry of Transport should undertake the task, as they did in the war.
Terminal delays are not a new problem and they cannot always be avoided. If steps are not taken from time to time to deal with the matter, however, it can become intolerable. This was what happened a few years ago with the situation at the docks. On that occasion hauliers took the first step in calling together a conference to which a wide variety of organizations, representing trade and industry, transport and shipping, were only too pleased to 'send delegates. Even this fairly limited exercise achieved some good results. The campaign against terminal delays might well begin in the same Way. The next step should surely be to make an estimate—or better still persuade some such body as the Road Research Laboratory to undertake the task—of the cost of the delays to the nation.