" Play the Game, Durham council "
Page 57
Page 58
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
says S.T.R.
AGOOD example has been set, in some ways, by the Durham County Council's treatment of hauliers. Nevertheless, the rates which it offers in the current contract of haulage are not such as I should like to see copied by other councils or public bodies. So it is that this article., although in the first place addressed to the Durham County Council, is also intended for perusal and careful attention by other public bodies which, as part of their general routine, must engage the services of haulage contractors.
My purpose is to recommend the Durham County Council to revise its haulage rates in an upward direction and I begin by stating quite bluntly that the prices it proposes to pay its haulage contractors are inadequate. They do not afford any profit at all to a haulage contractor who obeys the law and complies with regulations as regards drivers' hours, loads, speeds and so CM. Above all, it affords no profit to one who pays, as is
• stipulated in the form of contract, "Rates of wages not less favourable than those laid down by the National Joint Conciliation Board
" or, alternatively, complies with the provisions and regulations of the Road Haulage Wages Act, 1938.
Having made my statement, 1 must now proceed to support it by authentic figures. These are set out in the various tables which accompany this article, and I commence with Table I, in which are quoted the Durham C.C. haulage rates for the employment of vehicles on the basis of time. In Table II, the running costs of the types of vehicle enumerated in Table I are set out. These figures are arrived at, not by calculation or by any process which may be termed theoretical, but are the result of actual experience of vehicles engaged in this class of work. They make provision, in particular as regards cost of maintenance, for what the expenditure is likely to be throughdut the whole life of a vehicle. They take cognizance of all the expenditure and not merely sOme of it or merely what the cost is likely to be in reference to new vehicles.
They are not to be compared with corresponding figures for vehicles engaged on work involving mileages in the region of 500 or 600 a week. It is known that vehicles on council work do not normally cover long distances. Moreover, •by reason of the nature of .their employment, they are frequently kept standing, often with engine running, a circumstance which increases the fuel and oil consumption considerably, as compared with that of vehicles engaged in normal haulage operations.
In completing this table I have assumed, as is reasonable in this class of work, that the vehicles cover an average mileage of eight per hour. That enables me to arrive at the significant figures, which complete the table, for the total of running costs per hour. Now come the standing charges (excluding wages), which are set out in Table III. These, I imagine, call for no comment or explanation, except, perhaps, to point out that the figures for insurance, as is almost essential to comply with some of the conditions of the contracts, are comprehensive. The premiums assumed 'are those which are normally paid by A-licensed operators in industrial areas such as Durham.
The figures are reduced to an hourly basis, taking alternatives for 48 hours and 40 hours per week. The necessity for this differentiation will be disclosed anon.
Next comes the question of wages. In this connection, it is possible that some operators will be expected to pay on the basis of Grade I, others Grade II. In order to meet all the possible variations in cost, I have set out data relating to both these conditions and again have assessed them on the basis of 48-hour and 40-hour weeks. This information is set out in Table IV. The amounts quoted include provision, not only for the net wage paid, but for the following three insurances:National Unemployment, National Health and Employers' Liability; also for a week's holiday per annum with pay.
The foregoing are purely vehicle-operating costs. As everyone knows, these do not comprise the total expenditure involved in the use of commercial vehicles. There are supplementary expenses which, for purposes of this article, it will be sufficient to refer to as "overheads." These and their incidence per vehicle per hour, in respect of 48-hour and 40-hour weeks, are set out in Table V.
• Influence of Weekly Hours on the Contract 0 Before proceeding further, I must explain this reference to 48-hour and 40-hour weeks. The normal week is 48 hours and sometimes, in municipal and county council work, 44 hours. If I assume the more favourable condition-that it is 48 hours-I have still to take into consideration the fact that there is no sort of guarantee of a 48-hour week in any contract of haulage such as the one I am considering The haulier himself will most likely, when the Wages Act comes into force, be com pelled to give that guarantee to his drivers. If he complies with the wages and conditions set out by the Joint Conciliation Board-and he must do so if he fulfils in every respect the terms of this contract-he will have to give that guarantee.
Most reputable hauliers, I should add, do make such provision, in effect, without that compulsion. Occasions when, in this class of work, the employment is sufficient to give the operator 48 hours' work per week for his vehicle, throughout the year, are extremely rare. The figure of 40 hours per week, which I have taken as an alternative, is likely only in favourable circumstances.
In view of the foregoing, it will be apparent that the most favourable set of conditions for a haulier who enters iilto a contract with a county council, shall be that he is called upon to pay only Grade II wages and that, by some strange good fortune, he is employed by the council .not less than 48 hours per week throughout the year.
I have assumed these conditions as a basis for the figures which appear in Table VI. In that table are set out, line by line, the conclusions derived from Tables H,
IV and V, which show that the operator's expenditure-again I emphasize that he is assumed to comply
with the terms of the contract and with the law and regulations which govern road hauliers to-day-is in every case in excess of the sum which is offered by the council. It is considerably in excess of the council's E24 rate for the smaller category of vehicles, and threefarthings per hour in xcess even in respect of the largest of these vehicles.
The figures show that, assuming conditions which are, in fact, so favourable as to be impracticable of achievement, the haulier is not merely deprived of the opportunity to make a profit : he must actually operate at a loss.
I shall return to t 'Ls subject in a subsequent article. S.T.R.