OPINIONS
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
and
QUERIES
A STRONG INDICTMENT OF THE CONCILIATION BOARD.
[4794] As is pointed out in the article "Is the Conciliation Agreement Binding? " in The Commercial Motor dated May 1, it is two years since the National Joint Conciliation Board issued its report, and the position to-day is more chaotic than ever. The situation ' would be laughable were it not puerile in the extreme. Gilbert himself could hardly have thought out a more paradoxical one. Let us go through it piecemeal and see where we arrive.
Certain associations connected with the industry were asked by the Minister of Labour to nominate members who could advise him on the question of wages and conditions. No association was asked to nominate members to form any Board for the regulation of wages and conditions, but it appears that the members of the advisory committee usurped these powers and, behind the backs of their associations, themselves appointed a
. Conciliation Board. If this be not true, will someone in authority produce and publish the shorthand transscript of the notes taken at the meeting when the appointment was made? The Board itself admits as much ill its statement to the Press published in the Report of the Sub-Committee and quoted in your article, "... influenced in all its proceedings by the understanding that it would be regarded as a proper body . . That would make a fine defence in a speeding case; 'influenced in all my proceedings by the understanding that I would be regarded as being above the law . . . I did 40 in a built-up area." But that doesn't lift me above the law, nor does it make what I do legal.
The duties of a Conciliation Board, as they are generally understood, are to decide what are the rates of pay commonly in force in the district in which the award is to take effect. Not what rates are paid by the best class of employer, nor even the good employer, but the rates most generally in force. So far as can be ascertained, no evidence of this kind was called for by • this self-appointed Board.
If this be not true, will someone publish the notes of such evidence? In fact, if my memory serves me right, Mr. Bevan himself told a deputation that no evidence of wages in this, or any other allied industry, had been examined by the Sub-Committee. How, then, can it justify the scales of wages and conditions laid down in the Report? It is no part of a Conciliation Board's duty B42 to attempt to improve wages and conditions out of all recognition at a few days' notice, well knowing (if it be truly representative of the industry), particularly in consideration of the upheaval and extra expense put' upon the industry about that time, that the industry could not stand them ; and well knowing (since it was self-appointed and had not the industry behind it) that the awards were so much waste paper, enforceable only by the threat of labour action. In the circumstances, since the awards have no legal force, it would have been simpler if the labour side had functioned alone, and had said : "These are the conditions we want, and if we don't get them we will strike." It would have saved a lot of money and much of the ill-feeling between employers and employees which the " Conciliation " Board has engendered.
In addition, it does not appear to have been recognized that the awards can effect only the comparatively few employers. The large majority of operators consists of oneand two-vehicle men, men who can, and often do, operate their. vehicles for the maximum 66 or 77 hours a week which the law allows, whereas under the awards, an employer is heavily penalized if he operates over 48 hours a week. Owner-drivers are not affected by the wage awards, whilst their imposition means a heavy increase in costs to the employer who,' owing to the volume of owner-driver competition, is not able to increase his rates to cover this. There is also the C-licensee farmer, who operates for hire or ffeward iii increasing numbers and who pays his drivers agricultural rates of pay—about 30s. a week—and has other privileges. He constitutes another factor which prevents an increase in rates.
The whole thing is farcical. We do want fair 'wages and conditions in the industry, but the word " fair " implies fairness to both sides, employers as well as employees. The whole business has been so botched and mishandled and the N.J.C.B. is held in such contempt in the industry that it is a wonder that it does not resign in a body for very shame. Its proceedings read like those of a schoolboy debating society settling the fate of nations, and have about the same effect; apart, as I have said, from direct action by labour.
If the Government be wise it will wash out the whole thing and make a fresh start, working up from the provinces—the Area Joint Conciliation Boards—to the National Board, the policy of which must be controlled from the Area Boards.
As regards Industrial Courts, unless those in connection with this industry are a law unto themselves (this seems a disease of the powers-that-be in connection with road transport) they are directed to have regard to awards made by Conciliation Boards, but they are nowhere instructed to be bound by them, In view of the fact that in two cases recently it has been found that the Board's award is not legally binding, I take it that the Industrial Court would also have regard to that.
G. W. Istwex.
Linton. For Linton Hahlage Co., Ltd.
IN DEFENCE OF A LOCAL ASSOCIATION.
147951 My attention has been directed to, a statement made by.the Secretary of the C.M.U.A. (North-Eastern Division), which appeared in The Commerthil Motor dated April 24, with reference to the formation of the Hull and East Yorkshire Road Operators Association.
I should like to state that the founders of this Association have not at any time indicated that the national associations do not interest themselves in the problems
of Hull. To the contrary, this Association is fully aware of the revived interest taken by those associations in Hull and the East Riding of Yorkshire, particularly during the past few weeks. At the same time, my Association realizes that the fact that members are being enrolled who have held aloof from national associations, proves conclusively that a local Association meets a long-felt want and that it will be able to deal with local problems "first hand," instead of through intermediary sources.
If national associations have failed to interest the majority of road transport operators in direct membership, then the formation of local associations—if affiliated with a national body—should be supported rather than opposed.
The Hull and East Yorkshire Road Operators Association is in agreement with Mr. G. H. Brook's remarks that " unity is more vital than ever before " and it is striving -to achieve a degree of unity in•Hull and the -East Riding which national associations have, apparently, failed to attain.
T. C. BAILEY, Secretary, Hull and East Yorkshire Road Operators Association. Hull.
ROAD TRANSPORT AND THE BUDGET.
f47961 The Budget, as applied to the motor trade generally, reminds one of Ralph Bolderwood's story, "Robbery Under Arms." Robbery, inasmuch as the Chancellor of the Exchequer has again thought fit to raid the Road Fund to the extent of £5,250,000. This is the fourth raid on the Road Fund since 192, and makes a total of £28,720,000 appropriated by the Chancellor, excluding the annual £5,000,000 which is automatically deducted from the licence duties. He prescribed his reason as a necessity to provide armaments for the protection of the British Empire. But why, may I ask, do he and some of his predecessors always select a fund sacrificially provided by a section of the taxpayers for their own benefit? A fund partially built up by unrighteous taxation, and, what is worse still, by fines varying in degree according to the limitations of the experience of those who, without any knowledge of the trade, are entitled to administer what is called law, but which cannot be construed as such, as it is not just in its application.
Again, by what right does the Chancellor take this money? Is he entitled at law to do so? Surely the amount available is undeniable evidence that too much is being asked of the trade, or that it is not being applied as it was intended—for instance, are the roads as safe as they might be from a constructional point of view? Is the taxation of motor vehicles equitable? Are not the fines imposed in the courts too varied and out of all proportion to the offences alleged? 'There is surely something wrong with the British Constitution, renowned all over the world for justice and fair play, when a trade which is providing one of the largest ratios of employment in so many ways in this country at the present time, should be taxed and harassed, even, in some cases, driven out of existence. Then, to crown all, the Chancellor of the Exchequer calmly collects £5,250,000 of the fund belonging to the trade.
For years Mr. Baldwin has been seeking means for alleviating unemployment. Some years ago he addressed
himself to the Chambers of Commerce of this country in this connection, and I had the privilege of returning ,same. 36 suggestions. The McKenna duties, we were toish would kill the motor trade. Instead, the enter prise and intelligence of those who governed it, simply fed on the said duties, and to-day, notwithstanding all that is being brought against the trade, it flourishes like the " green bay tree" and has applied itself to, Mr. BaIdwin's appeal as no other trade has done.
When one considers the impediments which are being
placed in the way of road transport, even by Parliamentary enactments, dictated by vested interests, one has to ask oneself : Is this British? I am constrained to say, "No—not as I understand the constitution upon which I claim to be British." When you have a system devised by interested parties to affect the well-being of another trade and the loyal taxpayers and citizens attached thereto, which, in my opinion, is the case today, and which system is helped by Parliament, the voice of the prophet is again due, crying, "How long, Oh Lord, how long?"
Sir Josiah Stamp, at the last L.M.S. annual meeting, devoted a large section of his address to the Road v. Rail controversy. This is 'not so fierce as it was at the time of the legislation which followed the Salter Report, but the road transport industry is still labouring under a strong sense of injustice. Is that to be wondered at? Was it not the road transport industry that taught the autocratic railways what transport really means?
The industry's spokesmen are not able to agree, with
Sir Josiah Stamp that the "favouritism," as they see it, shown to the railways by Parliament, has merely gone some way to redress injustice. Gross injustices are being perpetrated daily on the road industry. Can, the application of the Road Acts, in so far as drivers' licences are concerned, be justified? Here again, gross injustices are being done : men who have driven for months without mishap are called upon to pay for and undergo the examination and tests and are at the mercy
of examiners of both sexes. If they be disqualified, they are not informed of their defects—if any—whereby they could take precaution in the interim before their next test and loss of 7s. 6d.
Recently a young man came before me. He had driven for two years. He was examined and tested last week and failed. He asked why, and was informed by the female examiner that in backing he had mounted the kerb, and she could not pass him. At the end of this month he will lose his work and will have to go on the dole until the time arrives for a further test and another 7s. 6d. is then taken from him. Is that justice?
Another enlightening instance of magisterial justice was recently laid before me. A motor driver, summoned for obstruction, was in court when a person was fined £1 and costs for brandishing a loaded lethal weapon in a public place to the danger of the public. The case of the motor driver followed, and on the magistrate fining him two guineas and costs, he naturally asked if it was British justice when compared with the case of the man with the loaded pistol. Without argument the magistrate fined him £15 for Contempt of Court. Such cases can be multiplied wholesale to the discredit of British justice. The time has long since passed when special courts fol motor cases should have been created. On the bench should be men with trained legal minds, also at least one motor technical expert. In fact, I will go farther, and say that all lay magistrates should be replaced by paid men of 15 to 20 years legal experience.
But to review the whole subject, may I ask where is the unison so badly wanted in the motor trade generally? Certainly unity of representation of road transport has recently been brought a step nearer by the amalgamation, now agreed inprinciple, of the C.M.U.A: and
A.R.O., for between them they stand for the ancillary users, and a large section of the hauliers. There is new a single body to defend the trader's right to choose what means for transport he will employ, and to speak for him in the councils of the British Road Federation. Get rid of apathy and into action, when possibly no Chancellor of the Exchequer will dare to rob yOur fund without referring to the trade; the Home Secretary will be persuaded or compelled to offer some assistance towards a change for the better in prosecution and persecution, and Parliament induced to legislate equitably.
Liverpool. G.H.W.
A NEW ANGLE ON HIRE-PURCHASE.
l47971 The article in your issue of April 17 contributed by S.T.R., under the above heading, raises some interesting issues. " When, however, he talks about the "
orthodox" method of payment for a new £500 commercial vehicle being the payment down of the total amount in cash, he appears to be ignorant of the fact that practically all the new commercial developments this century have been made. possible only by associating them with the offer of hire-purchase facilities.
In order, however, for S.T.R. to arrive at his final conclusion, that paying cash should save the user of commercial vehicles an enormous amount of money, he seems to ignore the following fundamental factors : (1) The majority of users have not £500 free capital, and if they had they would not have to pay 500, but instead would benefit like the majority of the cash purchasers of commercial vehicles by enjoying a discount of from 10 per cent. to 15 per cent, off the list price.
(2) As a user's running and maintenance disbursements must be identical, over the period of two years dealt with, whether the vehicle be bought for cash or acquired under a hire-purchase agreement, the saving to a cash owner cannot be greater than the interest paid by the hire-purchaser. put by S.T.R. at £60.
London, W.I. F. THORESBY, F.C.I.I.