NO REDUCTION IN SOUTHPORT FARES
Page 58
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
IT is understood that the applications recently made by members of the Southport Motor Coach Owners Association for permission to introduce special coach fares 3d. higher than the railway charges, and to operate additional vehicles, have been refused by the North-Western Traffic Commissioners.
During the hearing, which was reported in our issue dated September 27, it was stated • that the operators had lost 95. per cent, of their evening theatre traffic in two years; as -a result of drastic fare-cutting by the railways.
An: application raising the same vital principle was granted, a: short time ago; by the • East Midland Traffic Cornmissionera.
RUNNING AT A LOSS.
HW the applicant had, for a considerable period, been complaining to the Commissioners that his service was not paying, also of difficulties experienced in obtaining the -authorized fares from the miners who constituted the bulk of the passengers, was revealed by Mr. Leonard Ross (Shropshire Omiibus Association), appearing before the West Midland Commissioners, last week, on behalf of Mr. J. H. Poole, who sought permission to discontinue his stage service between Darley and Woodhouse Colliery, St. George's.
Mr. Poole had informed the Commissioners that he proposed discontinuing the service at the end of Septembee and they had replied that be must continue to operate until suit
able alternative arrangements had been made. All operators likely to be interested had been canvassed, said Mr. Ross, and none had shown the least anxiety to operate the service.
The Commissioners heard evidence by the colliery manager and miners' representatives, who agreed that the service was reliable, but said that they could not afford higher fares. If the service were discontinued, they would be content to walk; Mr. Ross agreed that another operator, charging the same fares, which were reasonable, might make the service pay, but Mr. Poole wasunder the necessity of using one vehicle only for miners..
Whilst agreeing that they could not expect Mr. Poole td carry bn operating at a loss, the Commissioners suggested that he should continue for ,a month, in order that other arrangements might be made. Mr. Poole ultimately agreed to operate for another full week. ,
MANCHESTER WORKERS SEEK HIGHER WAGES. hAANCHESTER municipal-transport 1V1 workers are, through the Transport and General Workers' Union, endeavouring to obtain higher wages, alterations in disciplinary methods and 100-per-cent. union membership in the undertaking. Bus drivers and conductors are seeking an increase of 2d. per hour per 48-hour week. At present, drivers receive a maximum of £3 3s. 6d. per week and conductors is. per week.
It is underst6od that the municipal transport committee's reply to the demands is unfavourable to the workers.
REFUSED TO CARRY RIVAL INSPECTOR
DURING a hearing before the West Midland Traffic Commissioners, at Shrewsbury, last week, when Messrs. G. H. Austin and Sons made application to take over the Newport-Market Drayton service operated by Mr. R. Edwards, the applicants alleged that considerable attention was given to this service by the Potteries Motor Traction Co., Ltd. The P.M.T. had a vehicle in front, a vehicle behind, and; it was declared, inspectors at various•'points.
Local private operators, they said, had now reached a stage when they were asking the Commissioners for a measure of protection from being harassed in this manner. Mr. Austin admitted refusing to take up a passenger whom he knew to be a P.M.T. inspector.
On behalf of the P.M.T., Mr. Lindsay Wood said that the applicants were asking the Commissioners for a new law and maintained that his company could put an inspector on the applicant's vehicles at any time, so long as the proper fares were paid.
It was contended by Mr. Austin that the inspector whom he refused to carry was not a bona-fide passenger. He was there only for the purpose of obtaining information and not for the purpose of travelling, and he (Mr. Austin) had a right to refuse to carry him.
The Commissioners declined to grant the application and voiced disapproval of the refusal to carry the passenger mentioned.