WHY THIS INVIDIOUS DISTINCTION?
Page 37
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AS a regular reader of your journal fqr many years, 'Ti I would like your advice on a subject that is puzzling
me. I hold a full-term B licence and am at present employed by the Ministry of Fuel and Power on the open-cast coal sites. Owing to shortage of work, quite a few hauliers like myself are being laid off. The curious point, however, is that operators with shortterm B licences are being retained, although these men were employed in the first place only to help out when the sites were in full swing.
• We have complained to the Area Transport Manager, but cannot get any satisfaction from him. We are told that it is no use going to anyone higher.
Are we right in just sitting back and letting this sort of thing go on, or could we obtain satisfaction by
takingour complaints to the Licensing Authority at Manchester? II-LICENSEE. Wigan.
[The situation referred to certainly seems to us to be most unfair. We cannot understand why those responsible at the sites should encourage a particular class of operator in this way. We think that your best plan would be to get in touch with your Regional Transport Commissioner.--E.D,]
DAILY TRANSPORT FOR 3,000,000 GALLONS OF MILK ACOMMENT in "The Commercial Motor" dated June 27 suggests misunderstanding of the constitution of the Milk Marketing Board, which would seem to be regarded as a Government department. The Board is, in fact, an organization set tip by milk producer's themselves under the Agricultural Marketing Acts (1931 and 1933).
In carrying out its marketing function, the Board is responsible for arranging for the haulage of milk from 120,000 farms to 10,000 distributors' dairies throughout England and Wales. The. quantity of milk transported varies according to the season of the year, but it is rarely less than 3,000,000 gallons per day. In addition to its own fleets, the Board employs 3,945 hauliers under contract to operate on its behalf, and between 6,000 and 7,000 lorries are engaged on this work. It paid these hauliers £3,345,000 last year.
Milk is a highly perishable commodity and it is one of the Board's chief aims to secure that the route to market is "streamlined," so that the product reaches the consumer with the maximum speed and efficieney.
The Board's detailed control extends to planning the build=up of the loads, arranging the lorry routes and the times at which individual loads are delivered to the receiving dairymen, so as to secure an even flow of milk to the plant.
In consultation with the Ministry of Food, the Board has already replanned the transport of milk from farms to consuming centres and country creameries, and it is estimated that cross transport consuming 40,000 lorry miles per day has been eliminated. Whilst constant adjustments are necessary on account of changes in the volume of milk produced and the destination to which it flows, it is unlikely that any further major rationalization of this traffic can be achieved.
The Board has used every means in its power to increase milk production in recent years, and one of its senior officials acted as milk production officer for the Ministry of Agriculture throughout the war period. The success of this campaign may be judged from the fact that nearly 50 per cent. more fresh milk has daily been transported and distributed to consumers than during the period 1936-39, and this despite a 50 per cent. reduction in imported feeding stuffs on which the
industry largely depended. JOHN 0. INGLIS, Thames Di tton. Chief Transport Officer,
Milk Marketing Board.
IRREGULAR OPERATION FOR HIRE OR REWARD IWAS particularly interested in the article entitled " Losing £5 a Week on Contract Work," by S.T.R., in your issue dated June 13, especially the reference to " earning a little bit on the side."
Be,lieve me, there are many operators in the London area with contract and C licences doing work for hire or reward. The dodge is to bend the disc so that it cannot be seen by other users. Some are even advertising for work, and I know one mart with a C licence who has a regular weekly announcement in one particular newspaper.
It is those people who are cutting rates to the lowest level and ma king things so difficult for the authentic haulier. REGULAR READER. London, S.W.16.
[I am aware that the sort of thing that you mention in your letter is going on, but. for the time being at least, very little can be done abottt it beyond, as I did in the article, call attention to such irregular activity and thus, possibly, persuade the authorities to take appropriate action.— S.T.R.] INTEREST IN A PROFITSHARING SCHEME THE article on profit sharing, which appeared in
the issue of your journal dated May 16, interested me, and I am wondering whether it is possible to obtain further details of the scheme under review. I wish to see if it would be a practical proposition to put into force at a small works in which I am interested.
Rotherficld. H.W.W.
[The following extract of the regulations regarding the profit-sharing scheme which we reviewed gives all the relevant information:— (a ) That for the purpose of profit-sharing, the first of the net trading profit of each company, in each half-year, shall be untouched.
(b) That of the net trading profit of each company in each half year over and above E--, one-third should be set aside for the purposes of profit-sharing.
(c) That profit-sharing units be allocated to each member of the staff concerned.
isi) That one P.S. unit be allocated to each participant (i) for each 5s. of weekly salary, and (ii) for each three years of service or part of three years exceeding one year.
(e) That the sum available he divided by the total number of units.
if) That each participant be paid the unit profit for a given half-year, multiplied by the number of his or her P.S. units.—Eo.]