AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Bodymakers' Pay Claim Rejected

12th October 1951
Page 37
Page 37, 12th October 1951 — Bodymakers' Pay Claim Rejected
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

AN application for an all-round wage increase of 6d. per hour for employees in the bodybuilding industry has been rejected by the employers. The claim was put, last week, by the National Union of Vehicle Builders and the Amalgamated Society of Woodworking Machinists to the joint wages board of employers in the vehicle building industry.

The employers' board comprises representatives of the National Employers' Association of Vehicle Builders, the National Federation of Vehicle Trades and the Scottish National Vehicle Builders' Association. The employees received a 3d.-per-hour increase in April.

1933 ACT "OF GREAT ADVANTAGE"

AT its inception, the 1933 Act had been considered too restrictive, but by wise and fair administration it had proved to be of great advantage to hauliers. Mr. R. B. Brittain, chairman of the Eastern Area of the Road Haulage Association, made this observation when the area held a farewell dinner to Sir Alfred Faulkner, the retiring Eastern Licensing Authority, in Cambridge, last week.

In welcoming Sir Alfred's successor, Mr. W. P. S. Ormond, Mr. Brittain referred to the work of the road-rail negotiating committees, These had been viewed with suspicion by the Licensing Authorities at first, but were now accepted. it was agreed that they had assisted in reducieg the amount of time spent in the traffic courts.


comments powered by Disqus