PROBLEMS THAT CON CATE MILK HAULAGE
Page 26
Page 27
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
three tables accompanying this article give addi tional actual details of milk-hattlage operations. They
further emphasize what I hope I have already proved In the previous articles, namely, that the only satisfactory basis for assessment of milk-haulage rates is gallonage per mile.
The information given in the tables relates to vehicles -run by seven operators in the Lancashire area. They compare with those in the previous article, which dealt with operation in the East Midlands.
These seven operators share, between them, 25 vehicles. One has as many as eight machines and at the other extreme is an operator running only one vehicle on milk haulage. The data given in Table I include gallonage in winter and in summer (with the average throughout the year), mileage per week, collections and deliveries, and, to sum up, that important figure, gallons per mile.
It is interesting to note that, with one exception, the gallonage during the summer is some 25 to, 30 per cent. greater than it is in the winter. The one exception is interesting, inasmuch as it illustrates the difficulty of nulk collection. It is not to be supposed that in the area served by this operator with one vehicle there is no variation in the supply of milk As between winter and Bummer. The fact appears to be that 500 gallons is the maximum quantity with which he can deal with his one vehicle and that' in the summer he has to allow other hauliers to help him out with ,the milk which he could,probably carry had he additional vehicles available for that work.
Significance of Differences in Gallonage Per Mile Another paint of interest demonstrated by the figures in Table I is the considerable difference in gallonage per mile
as between operators working in the same area. That has a significapze to which I shall refer subsequently. In this case the maximum gallonage per mile is that of operator 13 and amounts to 7.7; the minimum is that of operator C and is 5.7.
In Table If are given the actual operating costs of the vehicles. concerned. Incidentally, I have brought these up to date by substituting to-day's figures for costs, whenever there is likely to be difference between those figures and those supplied at the time.
Examination, of the figures in Table II shows, mainly, that the costs of operation per mile must also be con sidered as well as the gallonage per mile. This is
emphasized by consideration of operators C and F. The first of these is carrying 5.7 gallons per mile, actually the least quantity of the seven and, according to the figures at the end of Table II. his fair rate should he 1 13/16d. per gallon. The other, operator F, actually collects 6_7 gallons per mile, but the fair rate to give him a minimum profit must be 2d. per gallon.
Without. detailed examination of all the, figures that would seem to contradict my statement that the rate
depends upon the gallonage per mile. A closer examina
tion of the figures, however, shows that this operator covers only 170 miles per week per vehicle at a cost of approxi
mately Iltd. per mile, whilst the other operator averages 560 miles per week per vehicle at an approximate cost of a little over 9d. per mile. This, nevertheless, goes to prove that the method which I have adopted in these articles of taking cost per mile and dividing by the gallonage is the only way to arrive at a fair rate per gallon. In Table UI are scheduled rates which are actually being offered and accepted in connection with the conveyance of milk by these operators. Figures are given far revenue and these, set against the gross cost per week which is also repeated in that Table—being taken from Table II—show the profit or loss if the rate quoted be maintained. It will be noted that untilqhe rate is increased to lid. per mile no profit is shown, and even at ltd. per mite four only of the seven operators are earning a profit and of those but two operators B and 1)—are earning anything approaching a reasonable profit. There is profit to every operator at a rate of lid. per
mile, but here again the profit in the case of operator F42 8s. 10d. per week for the operation of five vehicles—is totally inadequate, thus emphasizing the claim made in Table IT that his minimum fair rate should be 2d. per
Now, I am aware that there is a movement afoot within the industry to ask for the establishment of a national rate for the haulage of milk. Just haw that national rate is to be applied I have not yet been informed, but if the intention be to ask for, say, a rate of Id. or ltd. or some such amount per gallon to apply throughout the eanntry, then I regret to say that, in my opinion, is quite impracticable.
In this Lancashire district alone, I have shown that with regard to the operations of seven milk hauliers, it is fair to expect a difference of 334 per cent, as between a rate which would be reasonably profitable to one operator and
that which would fairly recompense another. The minimum profitable rate is shown to be lid. and tfie maximum 2d. s The average rate is lid. per mile and in arriving at a Nation-wide figure, presumably the average will be taken. That, however, would mean that operators B and D would be making more than a fair rate of profit, whereas Operator F would be making insufficient profit as is indicated by Table III, where it is shown that his net profit is only 8s. 10d. among five vehicles, less than 10s. per week per vehicle, which is absurd.
I have, however, over a period of years devoted a lot of attention to this subject of milk haulage. The following conclusions, resultin,g from fairly close contact with operators, buyers of milk and farmers, may be of interest at this juncture. I shall emphasize that in this article I
am concerned with only one aspect of milk conveyance— that between farm and collecting centres or dairies.
In the first place it is by now generally accepted that the most suitable vehicle is a long-wheelbase 30 m.p.h. machine. As a rule such vehicles are fitted with light. short, upper platforms to accommodate additional churns. In dairy country vehicles of this type will collect as much as 700 gallons of milk and it is actually a fact that, in some areas, as much as 20 gallons per mile is collected during the summer months. With a gallonage such as that it will be appreciated, having in mind what has already been written, that the rate per gallon can be very low indeed. On the other hand, in some parts of the country tho gallonage per mile is as low as three, and this is the average for the year, so that it probably falls to 2i or even 2 at some periods of the year.
It is in the latter areas that difficulties will arise in attempting to apply a national scale. In such areas the outstanding difficulty is that so many of the farmers from whom collections have to be made produce a very small quantity of milk. I have come across instances of farmers offering at little as two gallons per day, a total of 60 gallons per month. This quantity seems almost too small to be worth either production or collection. On the other hand, it does mean, so far as the farmer is concerned, a regular monthly revenue upon which he can depend, and in that there is a considerable attraction.
In the haulage of milk there are four parties concerned —the factory, the haulier, the farmer, and the Milk Board. Until comparatively recently, it used to be the practice to reckon the farmer's. contribution in gallons. The haulier on his rounds could then pick up partly filled churns, checking the quantities in each by dipstick, and, of course, agreeing that quantity with the individual farmer, but subsequently, pouring the milk from several churns into one before proceeding to deliver. This meant that a load, when completed, comprised full churns.
Difficulties Created by the Purchase of Milk by Weight Some three or four years ago, however, a modification in the manner of purchasing milk made this procedure possible and introduced new difficulties for the haulier. Milk -began to be purchased by weight. The farmers used the factory's churns, the weight of which is known. The churns arc weighed when they reach the factory and the farmers are paid on the basis of the net weight of the contents thus ascertained—converted, maybe, into gallons.
Unfortunately, this means that each churn must be taken direct to the factory or dairy, no matter how little may be the quantity of milk which it holds. Thus the vehicle load of 65 to 70 churns may, possibly, mean only 200 gallons of milk, as against a possible 700 gallons. It is for this reason that in areas where the gallonage collected from individual farmers may be so very small, and where there is, secondly, such a considerable percentage of part4n11 churns, upper platforms have to be fitted to the vehicles, to enable them to cope with their loads.
Another difficulty which, for a long while, has been the subject for discussion, bat, unfortunately, without any fruitful result, is the lack of co-operation on the part of the farmer. Many farms are located at some little distance from a main road, down a narrow country lane. It is often the case that three or fourfarms are all within reasonable distance of a main road and of one central collecting point on that main road.
If, in such circumstances, the three or four farmers would co-operate and agree to cart their churns to the main road, the work of the haulier and, of course, the cost of haulage and the rate which is needed to show a profit, would be considerably reduced., At present, failing such co-operation, the vehicle has to travel down each narrow lane in turn, pick up from the farm and rettirn to the high road again from every farm. That greatly increases the mileage run and extends the time needed and the cost of operation out of all proportion.