1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152 
Janus comments
Page 90
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Rescue operation
IS there art obligation, perhaps, on the Government to make some provision for the increasing number of wrecks that are being cast up by the new wave in road goods transport? The proposal may be extreme, but there is something to be said for looking at the situation which prompts it.
Leaders of the industry have spoken of the "survival of the fittest". The phrase is justified. Legislation which is building up to a considerable head of steam in 1970 is mainly directed towards improving standards in the interests of road safety. The intention is beyond reproach. Operators must be persuaded or compelled to look after their vehicles and men properly. The drivers must be expert and fit. Persons who do not measure up to these requirements must be kept out, or driven out, of the industry.
Forbearance and compassion
Survival of the fittest has another less acceptable connotation. Society has rejected the doctrine that the weakest must go to the wall. Provision is made for the handicapped, the sick and the old. There may be argument about what should be done, and to what extent, but the need for social services is no longer questioned.
On the whole the misfits in road transport have not been treated harshly in the past. Licensing authorities have shown forbearance and compassion towards operators called to a special inquiry. There have been threats and warnings and frequent suspensions but the aim has usually been not to punish the offender to an extent that would make it impossible for him to remain in business.
Charity is drying up. There is no longer reliance merely on spot checks, domiciliary visits and reports of successful prosecutions. The examiner at the testing station cannot exercise discretion or indulgence on the lines followed by licensing authorities. From his point of view a vehicle is either fit or unfit. He carmot be influenced by—and is probably unaware of—the circumstances of the operator who may even be in such a precarious financial state that a ban on the use of his vehicle puts him out of business.
Operators' licensing also will lead to decisions that may seem harsher than before. The licensing authority will base his judgment mainly, or entirely, on an applicant's standards. If they do not come up to requirements then the operator will no longer be allowed in the industry.
It would be difficult to lament his passing. The cynic may argue that the catharsis to which the industry is now being subjected will be justified only by results—that is to say, by the extent to which it has an influence on the accident rate. But there is no excuse here for the operator. He has had sufficient warning. If he has failed to act upon it he will have to take his enterprise elsewhere.
To people employed in the industry it might be fair to take a different attitude. This applies particularly to drivers. Although in the past they have not been required to undergo formal training, or to hold a special qualification, they are widely and properly regarded as skilled men with a recognized occupation, or even profession.
Physical and mental attributes are expected of the heavy lorry driver. They inevitably decline with age, more quickly for some men than for others. The problem which then arises is not a new one to hauliers or to PSV operators. The practice has been to find the older driver other work within the organization, unless there is a place for him on smaller vehicles doing local work.
In the passenger field, where the proportion of drivers to other workers is less than elsewhere, the problem may not be so great. Goods vehicle operators are often in difficulty. The alternative jobs are few and the choice often lies between dismissing a man and finding him some supernumerary duty, perhaps in the yard.
Old-style hauliers whose drivers have been with them for many years, perhaps for the whole of their working lives, find it hard to show a man the door before he has reached the normal retiring age. It is still not uncommon to find on a haulier's premises one or two ex-drivers doing odd jobs which make it possible for their employer to keep them on the payroll.
New jobs for the old
Creditable though this may be to the operator, it is not the ideal solution to the problem. What is really required by a man with several years of working life before him is a new occupation with, if possible, the same status and dignity as the old. If he has worked continually as a driver for 30 years or more he may need guidance and training in advance of the time when his services are no longer permitted at the wheel.
The need is likely to grow rather than diminish. Drivers already in the habit of driving heavy goods vehicles should be able to claim exemption from the h.g.v. driving test but will still have to obtain a medical certificate. IF a doctor will not pass him, a man may suddenly find, like Othello. his occupation gone. More often than not he will also find that he is not entitled to payment for redundancy. For the time being he will be entitled to continue, that is to say until his ordinary driving licence expires, which may be as long as three years ahead. Subsequently the prospect is bleak for a man who is getting on in years.
Here surely is something calling for action by the Welfare State. The haulier might reasonably refer the matter to the Road Transport Industry Training Board. He has paid a levy for drivers who may soon have to leave his service against his wishes and their own. The Board shc uld be responsible for training them to take another occupation, either in road transport or in some other industry.
Testers from ex-drivers
Even within road transport there is no lack of opportunity. According to reports, the appetite of the testing centres for personnel is insatiable and the wastage a formidable problem. Ex-drivers should make ideal material for courses designed to turn them into testers. Their training could be spread over the period during which they remain in useful employment in road haulage.
This kind of activity should be to the credit of the Board whose work does not always meet general acclaim. Many operators must have been puzzled by a recent announcement that 38 out of 41 car drivers, with occupations ranging from furniture porters to garage fitters, were given training at the Board's MOTEC of 80 hours per man for rigid vehicles and 105 hours for articulated vehicles and subsequently passed the h.g.v. driving test.
According to the Board, these results "really validate the training we have been carrying out at MOTEC and elsewhere". Admittedly the results would have been invalidated if 38 out of 41 of the candidates had failed rather than passed; but it does not seem remarkable to have obtained satisfactory results after what amounts to three weeks of solid training.
How many would-be drivers, unless they are fortunate enough to be engaged by an operator in advance, will be able to afford around 100 hours of training, apart from the cost of taking a test and providing a vehicle for that purpose? The useful conclusion from the Board's experiment is that the h.g.v. driving test will be yet another of those extra costs, which are likely to be two or three times as expensive as operators had feared.
Perhaps the Board ought to pay as much attention to drivers who fail—especially those who fail the medical test after many years of driving—as to those who succeed. It is possible to go even further and suggest that the Board should help drivers who will shortly be retiring. The requirement for a medical test after reaching the age of 60 points to a belief by the Ministry of Transport that a substantial proportion of drivers over that age would fail. Apart from doing odd jobs, their only feasible course would be to retire—probably a few years before they had expected.
Some training boards have already considered the merits of pre-retirement training and have agreed to refund to employers the full cost. In view of the special problems facing road transport, the industry's Board should follow this example.