OPINIONS
Page 61
Page 62
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
and
QUERIES
RECORDERS HOTLY DEFENDED.
150601 May we be permitted to refer to the letter written by Mr. John Walton in your issue of May 28, regarding journey-recording equipment? We have a fairly large fleet of goods vehicles, each of which is fitted with a mechanical recorder. .
In our four and a half years' experience with these instruments we have not found it necessary to 'extract the charts "into ledger form," as a very short inspection shows if, and when, a driver has departed from his schedule.
• (1) If we suspect time is being lost on a journey, a scrutiny of the charts at once shows if we are right, and the charts' over a period invariably show if the logs is recurrent and if it always occurs at about the same point on the driver's route. Any complaint regarding one of our drivers, is always checked by the chart for the day in question and is.at once proved or disproved. The recorders protect the drivers as well as guard our interests.
(2) In our opinion, the use of the recorders has a definite _moral effect on the drivers; an all-round improvement in working was obtained and is now maintained automatically without having to call. the men to• account.
• (3) As pointed out by the Editor in his' footnote, the fact of 'the driver punching his daily record in the time clock does not indicate where such matters as wastage of time etc., is occurring, nor Would it provide any kind of check of the drivers records in many important particulars; such 'as time of rest period, average speeds between stops, etc: • . ,
(4) We have proved to our satisfaction that definite time savings can be made by using mechanical recorders, 'time savings which have paid for the instruments within 'a few months of their purchase. We regard these instruments as essential to the efficient operation of a fleet and for ensuring the observance of the provisions of the Acts relating to hours and records.
Yorkshire. CARRiER.
• [5061] I was very surprised to see Mr. Walton's letter in your issue of May 28, so strongly condemning the use of mechanical recorders, I agree with him that we do not want to be forced by the Ministry into using what he calls " expensive gadgets." The use of these must be a matter for decision by the individual and not by the State—just as one has to make up one's own mind regarding make of vehicle, oils, etc., to be used in one's business.
I do not agree with Mr. Walton that the report, as worded, is incorrect; it simply stated that the use of recorders rendered the falsification of records "much more difficult."
My experience has been that mechanical recorders have been a very useful method of checking the entries on drivers' record forms. One can check up whether or not drivers have actually taken their rest periods at the times stated, and whether the times entered on the drivers' record forms coincide with the hard facts given on the mechanical recorders. I have not found that the use of these discs creates such a large amount of clerical' work, as is stated, because if they are checked daily, hi-weekly or even weekly by individual branches the job does not take long.
• Mr. Walton refers to the use of a time clock, but a time clack does not show the time spent at customers! delivery points or standing outside cafes—when the drivers are supposed to be working. A time clock does not give any check on what happens away from the base. My own experience has been that a saving of as much as three hours per day per vehicle has been effected as a result of the information gleaned from mechanicalrecorders. Some of this has been at customers' delivery points and some by being able to cut out time spent by drivers on unauthorized halts. If one is concerned with a fleet of 250 vehicles this soon outweighs the first cost of the recorder. I think Mr. Walton will agree that you cannot check this information by any other means.
With regard to the question of tampering with the recorder, this is a matter which one must take into 'consideration when making one's choice of the type obtained. Whilst it may not be possible to tamper with a time clock, I expect Mr. Walton has found in his experience many cases of people punching the time cards for others! TRANSPORT ADVISER. London, SW.!.
.[5062] I read with interest the letter by Mr. John "Walton and your Editorial comment on this.
Whilst I agree that recorders should be used only at the discretiort.of vehicle owners and not by any Government "ruling, I also think that Mr. Walton's description of them as "expensive gadgets with no real commercial Value" is unfair. From my own experience, we run a fleet of over 20 vehicles, everyone of Which is fitted 'with a Lewis recorder, and am more than pleased with the results.
They definitely show the correct result of a day's work with the vehicle, and we have had no 'trouble whatever With any of our •drivers tampering with them; in fact; .we have given every driver a, key to the instrument and he fits his own disea.
• The men have realized that the recorders have got them out of .trouble in many instances where docks, wharves, etc., have given incorrect times.
In my view it is not necessary to extract the information into ledger form, and additional clerical costs 'are unnecessary. I personally glance through the discs • daily, and the only time when I do hold an inquest on a disc is when a driver ha,s•not completed a day's work to my satisfaction, and it is then that I Can decide where the trouble lies, without loss of temper or unnecessarily accusing the driver of not working satisfactorily. In conclusion, I consider that I have snore than saved the cost of the recorders since I fitted them a year ago. STEVE EASTIVIEAD, London, N.?. For Steve Eastmead, Ltd. ARE CLEARING HOUSES ENCOURAGING CUT RATES?
[50631 In your columns recently, Mr. Ashton Davies challenged me to authenticate a statement I made respecting him. I replied with the information he required, but instead of his issuing the apology one might reasonably expect, he has preferred to attack the principle and functioning of clearing houses and, indirectly, me and my business methods, as for 20 years I have been the proprietor of a clearing house.
' I challenge Mr. Ashton Davies to authenticate his assertions, and I will pay the Railway Orphanage the sum of £500 if he can prove one instance where my company, during its existence, has disposed of traffic at low rates as a "return load," i.e., at a rate below that which we pay for an " outward " load.
The remarks of Mr. Ashton Davies over which I join issue are. as follow :—" Another development inimical to railway interests which has spread throughout the principal towns and cities in Great Britain is the establishment of what are known as 'road clearing houses.' These are really agencies which collect information as to loads available for transport, which they offer at very
low rates to hauliers who would otherwise be .undei taking an unladen journey."
It is obvious that he has no acquaintance with either the principles or functionings of my company as a clearing house. His remarks in relation to its business are sheer bunkum.
I entered this business with the express purpose of being an agency and have never deviated. I shall never compete with hauliers I profess to serve, nor allow my name to appear on vehicles which I do not own. Its work is precisely what I intended, i.e., what the shipping agent is to shipping traffic so is my agency to road traffic. To the most casual observer the need for the latter is as great as the former, and that is the sole reason why my organization makes an extensive appeal to the trader and haulier.
Since when has Mr. Ashton Davies become the champion of road transport interests? In my opinion he fully realizes that the reputable agency is a great asset, hence his anxiety to confound it. Road-transport interests are not likely to look to railway sources for help or guidance, and least of all from anyone with monopolistic intentions.
Practically every day of our lives we reject certain traffic and remonstrate with those who look upon road (or rail) transport as "fair game for plunder." The fact is, that the bulk of our traffic is not only moved as outward loads, but mainly on vehicles owned by hauliers who have worked continually for us "year in and year out," and mainly with traffic from patrons who have supported us from the inception of our business. In other words, our business is run on lines identical to those of the reputable haulier. I emphasize the fact that all hauliers receive the same rate of pay whether on the outward or return journey.
It may interest Mr. Ashton Davies to know that certain haulage firms connected with the railways function partly as "clearing houses." They sub-let traiFfic regularly as "return loads," also they are not satisfied with the ordinary commission terms.
What Mr. Ashton Davies has discovered is a mare'snest, for far more traffic in the aggregate is moved by vehicle owners functioning as agencies than by the agencies who own no vehicles. . Nowadays it is the fashion to operate a few vehicles if only to create the impression that one knows his job, but commonsense
dictates that no haulier sub-lets the cream and works the skimmed milk on his own vehicles. Shipping agents do not own ships, otherwise they become owners and not agents, likewise the.ideal method is for road agencies not to own vehicles. Naturally I am not suggesting that hauliers should be debarred from sub-letting ; 1 am simply refuting the claim of Mr. Ashton Davies that such agencies as my own are responsible for the malpractice of which he accuses them.
As usual, Mr. Ashton Davies, like many other railway spokesmen, seems to adopt the attitude that it is tantamount to sacrilege to touch railway •interests and tha,t the railways are such a model of efficiency, whereas my view is that whilst it cannot be gainsaid that the road door-to-door method excels the rail transhipment method, the greatest cause of transference of freight from rail to road is railway delinquency. What better example of this could there be than in the frantic adoption of new and enterprising rail methods.
WALTER GAMMONS, Managing Director, London, E.C.2. For Walter Gammons, Ltd.
PROTECTING BULKHEAD WINDOWS IN PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLES.
[5064] May I comment on the letter of " J.D." (No. 5043) in the May 14 issue of your journal.
The P.S.V. examiner undoubtedly had in mind Clause 42 of the Conditions of Fitness Regulations—this states that as from October 1, 1936, glass windows or panels facing any transverse seat which are liable to be broken by passengers being thrown against them shall, unless they be of safety glass, be adequately guarded.
I can assume only that the bulkhead window behind the driver's seat in the vehicle concerned was not " adequately " guarded. N. LESTER. Guildford.
"SUPREME SERVICE."
A SCHEME FOR A TRAVELLING CLUB.
[5065] Please aecept my sincere thanks for the trouble you have taken in respect of my problem_ May The Commercial Motor go on from success to success, confident that it is fulfilling a supreme service.
Tunbridge Wells. J.H.B.
[50661 I should much appreciate your opinion as to the legal position of the following scheme : (1) Form a club comprising an unlimited number of members, each paying an annual subscription; (2) form a committee of management from the above; (3) the club to purchase, for example, two public-service vehicles to run regular journeys into adjacent towns for the conveyance of members only; (4) to enable members to travel on these journeys they would purchase books of tickets (which would be sold to members only) from the offices of the enterprise. Such tickets to be detached from the books when travelling, according to the value of the journey undertaken; (5) all passengers carried must be members of the club, and all assets, including vehicles, also any profits accruing, be the property of existing members.
If any point be illegal I would appreciate your sug gestion as to any alternative. F.W. Bucks.
LWe presume that you wish to operate without 'a roadservice licence. In that case, your scheme is illegal under Section 26 of the Road Traffic Act, 1934, which was specifically 'designed for that purpose. We know of no alternative but to obtain a road-service licence in the normal manner.—En.]