Training hgv drivers
Page 65
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Mr J. Symonds, training manager, Dunstable, Ralph Hilton Transport Services Ltd, states (CM April 20): "An increase in course length to the ludicrously expensive 12 weeks which you advocate may raise the pass rate by one or two per cent but it is more likely that the converse will apply due to over training and boredom!" The same correspondent is proud to state that his company has constantly maintained a pass rate of 80 per cent. He agrees that training drivers is an expensive exercise.
I suppose it is pertinent to say that like many other hgv training establishments the students he has -trained" were existing drivers who for one reason or another failed to obtain an exemption or failed the Ministry test.
Whatever the reason for students attending their training establishment. Mr Symonds appears to believe that the training of the heavy goods vehicle driver is complete when the student becomes possessive of his "black book".
So far as costs are concerned Mr Symonds quite rightly says training is expensive, yet a letter published in Motor Transport dated April 27, from Mr Wood of the Manchester Transport Training Group gives the following figures;—
(a) Member firms — £5 per 80 hours —6p per hour.
(b) In-scope firms — £66 per 80 hours (non-members) (c) Out of scope firms — £90 per 80 hours (own-account and private trainees) Again it appears that the standard equired is the Ministry of Transport Test. The same Group is concerned with the raining of the unemployed in a gallant effort o overcome the national shortage of drivers. "wo or even three weeks training on a :lass I vehicle, eventually passing the Ministry if Transport test, apparently produces a :lass I driver acceptable to some firms. lust think about it, trained and passed he test on an empty vehicle, in the area of raining, generally during daylight hours Ind mostly in good weather. We have a !river! !
Let me go back again to Terry Ashton's atter in Commercial Motor dated April 20; his student has had 20 years' experience Is a lorry driver and he had the courage to it down and write a letter suggesting that ll drivers, our army as he calls them, be rained to a high, safe and efficient standard. What then are we talking about when re ask about the standard or skills of this rmy of ours? Quite obviously driving skills — what should this standard be? Not • aining on an articulated vehicle only. his man could pass a Class I test and fficially have a driving licence to drive very other class of vehicle and yet never yen have been in the cab.
The Class I hgv driving licence would permit im to drive any motor car though he may ever have been in the driving seat. He fould be permitted to take 32 tons along ny road in Britain, yet never have loaded vehicle or driven one with a load. During training he may never have driven during the hours of darkness, or in conditions of snow and ice, fog and other inclement weather and in many cases never on a motorway or in a new strange town. He may never have met a traffic manager or seen a workshop.
Is this the sort of fully trained driver that Mr Symonds is turning out or is contemplating for the future? No wonder there is a shortage. There has always been a shortage of the properly trained, skilled mover of the commercial heavy goods vehicle with the multitude of different types of loads to be carried. It is not the driver's fault. The trouble is, most employers of this labour have been, in the past, too content to allow anyone with a licence to drive their vehicles without any kind of standards, Cost wise it has been disastrous — accidents, loads lost, prosecutions, damaged loads, low mileage returns, bad customer relationships, etc, etc.
The genuine employer is now taking such an interest. He is finding out that the completely trained man is trained in every aspect of the job of a lorry driver and not only in the skills of moving the vehicle.
Janus, in his article in CM on March 30, puts his finger right on the point when he says that the Government should include these men within the scope of the Training Opportunities Scheme. We might see a really skilled man in the future if this becomes a reality.
John Darker (CM April 20) even asks
-Are drivers managers?" And goes on to suggest that Mr Leslie Huckfield MP might not be so stupid after all. There is a wealth of good common sense in this article although I anticipate the usual "no change" reaction.
It obviously would be pointless to argue against other people's views unless I am prepared to provide what I believe is the answer. It is the Training Opportunities Scheme [summarized below — Ed The obvious advantage of such a programme of training is that 50 per cent of the modern heavy goods vehicle driver's job content, connected with matters other than driving, can be taught and furthered by controlled experience by qualified instructors at all levels. Proper selection in the first place by a competent panel can go a long way in obtaining the right type of work force. The cost of training would not fall on the new firms however large or small who are at present training for the Industry, but would be more widely shared by all firms in the industry who are using heavy goods drivers — either through a levy or through a small "training tax" on the' excise licences of heavy goods vehicles.
The lorry driver of the future will bear little resemblance to the driver of the past. We now have the need to select and train a new breed of man. Let us do the job properly and we shall certainly make the transport industry of this country the best in the world.
W. H. DIXON, Group Training Manager, Hull and District Road Transport Training Group Ltd.