An Operator's Views on Representation
Page 35
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A Record of an Interview With a Haulier Who Has Had a Long Experience., in the Road Transport Industry and of its Politics
By "Tantalus"
Q.
THE Report of the Road Transport Organization Joint Conferenbe quite naturally has aroused considerable interest and has provided a subject for much animated discussion amongst members of the roadhaulage industry. in a recent interview with a longestablished operger.the following points Were raised :— " Have you read the Report of the R.T.O.J.C.-?"
" Yes, As a matter of fact, I read it twice." .
" And what is your considered ,opinion.?" .
".0n paper the propositions seem to me sound and certainly well thought out, but . . ."
"But what? Why the hesitation?"
'Somehow, after reading the Report, I didn't experience ally feeling of deep conviction." Won't you amplify your remarks and explain exactly what you mean?"
'f Perhaps I can expIain.fin this way. From time to time reports are , issued On , matters, of national iftteregt, and before one has finished reading through sdine such 'pocument• there comes' the thought that this is-just what' 4 needed:"
" That re' does, not satisfy iny curiosity. Will you narrow' down the issue and mention those points which strike you most particularly?" A. " The.first point concerns the Federation itself:" Q. " To what do you. especially refer?‘"
A. "To the power, of control. and influence which the FedenCtion "might exert ht Some future time." 'But the proposals state clearly that' each constituent association will have complete autonomy Doesn't, that provision satisfy you?"
A. " Not entirely. , Whilst I agree with what you say I can foresee the possibility' of the Federation imposing its will upon one or even all of the constituent bodies. Take, for example, the question of the limitation of the trader to carry his own goods; • this always has been a bone of contention with
Q. A.
Q. A.
Q. A.
Q.
Q.
the hauliers. -Should the Federation be requested by the Read Haulage Association to deal with this issue, the latter—almost to a man—will press for definite action to be taken. It can be atsumed • that the C-licensee will resist all proposals to limit thefreedom to, operate vehicles. In any such event I am puzzled to knowwhat would be the attitude of the Federation."
"What other points are there?"
'As I remarked previously, the plan appears all right on paper. It yet emains to be seen how it *ill work out in practice." Q. "Aren't you rather crossing the bridges ,before you, arrive at them?" , .
A. "Maybe I am,, but I have had long experience of the road-transport industry in all' its aspects and I have learnt to go warily and think twice before leaping in the dark. For my part I want to be convinced that those responsible for operating the Scheme Will carry the complete confidence of the hauliers." • .
"That is rather ambiguous. To whom do yon refer?" "To the 'eight chief officers who, it is propOs.ed, , Shall be appointed by the Federation. This point, by the way, ties up with -my previous remark regarding the powers of the Federation."
Q. A. Q. "I don't quite folio* you."
A. "Although it may not be admitted generally, nevertheless it is a fact that the chief executive officer usually rules the roast. It is proposed that the Federation shall have one chief executive with seven other officials. So the extent of 'bureaucratic control ean well be imagined.",
Q. "Have you any alternative suggestions?"
A. At the hioment,.no. Nevertheless, the scheme, to me, appears to be top-heavy. There is the possibility of the industry being governed by officials instead of the officers being controlled by the industry."
Q. "But the Report emphasizes the point that the scheme is entirely democratic. Does not this satisfy you?"
A. "My experience compels me to answer in the negative. There is Always the danger of a proposed democracy becoming, in fact; a bureaucracy."
Q. "Do I take it that you are not too favour-ably inclined towards the scheme?".
A, "I wouldn't say that. I doi feel, however, that the plan is too ambitious and tends to superimposeupon the industry a heavy financial liability.!'
Q. "Willyou. expl'airt more fully what you have in mind'?"
A. "The Report give noindication of the estimated cost of the headquarters' establishment,
Q. Do you consider that the members of the industry should . be given an estimate of the proposed expenditure before the scheme is ratified?"
A." Most,definitely yes. For you must remember that it is the individual operator who will be called upoh to foot the bill."
"There is one question I am anxious to ask' you. It is this. In the event of the Federation becoming an established fact, do you consider the Hauliers' -Mutual Federation should be wound up?"
4. "I consider that to do so would be a wrong policy, and a mistake."
Q. "What is your.reason for so thinking?"
A. "In the first place, the H.M.F. at this stage is little more than a blue-print which may or may not mature successfully. In the second place' there will 'probably still remain a considerable number of operators unrepresented because they are not members of any association. So if . the newly. formed Hauliers' Mutual Federation succeeds in attracting these individuals its continued activities • are justified. In the third place this latter' body does not seek to set up an expensive machine, but, on the contrary, hopes to carry out, in a practical way, its motto of All for one and' one for all .." Q. "You feel, then, that there is room for the two bodies "
A. "Yes! Moreover, if, the H.M.F. succeed g in organiing the hitherto uriorganiied section, it can act not as a dog-in-the-manger, but as an effective bafa.ncing agent,-and so fulfil a useful purpose." The foregoing serves to illustrate some aspects of the -proposed icheme as viewed from the hauliers' standpoint.