Road Transport Activities
Page 39
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
in PARLIAMENT
By Our Special Parliamentary Correspondent
LONDON TRANSPORT BILL REPORTED.
JUST before Parliament rose for the summer recess the London Passenger Transport Bill was reported to the House a Commons by the Joint Committee. The next stage will be taken soon after the re-assembly on October 20th. At the final sitting of the Committee the chairman, Lord Lytton, announced its decision regarding the directions to the Arbitration Tribunal. He said a clause had been drafted which would give the fullest discretion to the Tribunal. • The clause directed the Tribunal to endeavour to secure that the standard of the consideration payable in respect of undertakings or parts of undertakings transferred (other than those of local authorities which. were to be transferred on different terms) should be fair and equitable as between the several owners. In order to secure that result the Tribunal would take into account the consideration paid for the transfer of other undertakings, whether that consideration was fixed under the Bill or by agreement under the .Bill. It was also provided in the clause that the Tribunal, when dealing with agreements which had to be confirmed, 'would apply the same procedure as if it were itself making the award.
A clause was proposed hi.. the promoters for the purpose of setting up conciliation machinery similar to that established under the Railway Act, 1921, and it Was stated that the railway trade unions had agreed to it. The clause was onpesed by the T_Tndei:ground Group on the ground that for . the first time the administrative, supervisory and technical staffswould be brought. within a system devised for trade unions, of which they might not. be members. ,
Objection was also taken by the London County Council. Staff Association, about 600 of the ,members of which were: to be transferred to the .Transport Board. Counsel for the association stated that its members were not trade unionists and had nb intention of becoming such. If the" conciliation" body were set up they would not be" represented Upon • it, although its dceisiens would
affe,ctthem. •
; The promoters refused to 'agree to the setting up of two _separate org,anizafirms representing the employees" of the Boaid,and threafter the Committee decided
to agree to the clause proposed by the .prombters. "". • .
Before the .procee.dings. came to an endit ,was stated on behalf. of Ahe promoters that it was unlikely that the services of any appreciable number of the staffs' employed in -the. undertakings to be . transferred to, the Transport Board would be . dispensed with and that the co ordination of transport would "lead to improved facilities with increased opportunities for employment.