Janus comments
Page 54
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Clash of symbols
SYMPATHY is bound to be felt for those members of the Road Haulage Association who have spoken out loudly although not always particularly clearly against the proposal for a new symbol which seems to them as different as possible from the present RHA badge. Loyalty is an appealing quality even if it is no more than brand loyalty.
With the passage of time the opposition has receded slightly even if not to the extent of producing a majority in favour of the new symbol. Operators are as aware as anybody else of the danger of fighting the next war with the weapons of the last. They are prepared to agree that, however appropriate the present badge may have been for its original purpose, it may not be ideal for the situation now shaping itself.
The basic issues are simple. In the first place it has to be asked whether a symbol of any kind is necessary. The almost universal execrations from hauliers when the change was first suggested show without further argument that at least they recognize the need. In the present-day context it would seem eccentric for an association or any organization of a considerable size not to have some sort of trade mark.
:■ Internal evidence
The next point to decide is whether the present badge is adequate. The precise date when it was struck is perhaps not known but what the literary critics call internal evidence is sufficient to place it as nearly as possible in the year 1948 when the Socialist Mark I Plan for nationalization first began to take effect.
Apart from the name of the RHA the badge bears the motto "Road Transport under Free Enterprise". Until 20 years ago the point needed no special emphasis. Only with the setting up of the British Transport Commission and its subsidiaries, including British Road Services, did it seem an advantage to tbose operators left outside to distinguish themselves.
It was a wise move. The repression of many flourishing businesses and the savage restrictions imposed upon the remainder were bound to arouse the sympathy of the public and particularly of trade and industry. Many firms made up their minds not to use nationalized road transport and preferred to buy their own vehicles where there was no alternative independent haulier.
The process of shuddering withdrawal from the State-owned monolith was accelerated by the inefficiency of BRS in the early years. The opportunities to find fault came rushing at traders eager to embrace them. They found the same sorry state of affairs in the railways with the result that for a generation nationalized transport became a byword for ineptitude.
In the circumstances it was no more than common sense for hauliers to identify themselves firmly with free enterprise. Over the years, however, the situation has changed. The ugly duckling has become a swan. At least BRS is considered as efficient as any other haulier. It means nothing to the trader and may even irritate him to have the claims of free enterprise dinned in his ears. The reminder that he owes a debt of gratitude for past services may be no more welcome to him than it is to most people.
The fact that the BRS companies are now members of the RHA is relevant only to the extent that it makes the wording on the badge inaccurate. The conflict between private enterprise and nationalization was fading into the background long before the decision to accept the BRS companies was taken.
The Transport Bill has affected the situation only slightly. The campaign against quantity licensing is concerned with freedom of a different kind. The freedom of choice which is threatened is the choice between road and rail. The Transport Holding Company, translated into the National Freight Corporation, will stand to benefit as well as the railways, but its road haulage subsidiaries will have to seek special authorizations in the same way as other hauliers.
One must suspect an element of makebelieve in this. But the same may be said of the present situation of BRS. It may be doomed eternally to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. Its spokesmen have been at pains to declare themselves a part of the road haulage industry and it is to the advantage of BRS that they should make their claim good.
:64 Oudot) Nap
Another distinguishing feature of the present RHA badge is an outline map of Great Britain. Once again its relevance 20 years ago can easily be seen. Under the 1947 Transport Act hauliers with few exceptions had to obtain permits from the BTC to take traffic beyond a radius of 25 miles from their operating centre. It was feared as a result that the independent road haulage industry would disintegrate into local groups with no national identity.
It was a sound instinct that chose the map of the whole country as a symbol at just that moment. As it turned out the fears were exaggerated but the insistence that the road haulage industry under free enterprise remained a formidable national force may have helped to ensure that when the time came the Conservative Party remembered its promise of denationalization.
There is no longer the feeling that road haulage is threatened with a similar disintegration as a result of the Transport
Bill. Quantity licensing is a serious threat to certain operators but it will start at 100 rather than 25 miles and there has been little attempt to disguise that its rather pathetic purpose is to give the railways a helping hand in their declining years. Certainly the national standing of road. haulage is no longer in dispute.
If this is the case the map loses most of its significance. Most associations of any importance can claim to be national and hardly think the point worth stressing. There seems more than one reason for at least some change in a badge whose main features have been left behind in the march of history.
Considerable help
With their status assured operators should seek every means of identifying themselves to trade and industry and winning a greater measure of public recognition and appreciation than they have enjoyed in the past. The present licensing system is convenient in that it automatically provides separate categories for hauliers and for traders operating on own-account. Quality licensing will obliterate this distinction at least in the eyes of the law. In their own interest hauliers will wish to maintain it in the eyes of trade and industry. A suitable badge or symbol will be of considerable help.
If past criticismof badly maintained vehicles and "killer" drivers has upset hauliers in the past it will be nothing to the wave of attacks likely to come as the plating and testing scheme gets under way. Already there are complaints by the Ministry of Transport that vehicles are not being sent forward for testing sufficiently quickly. If the delays accumulate they will provide the occasion for sharp comments from the authorities and these will be strengthened if the published results of those tests that do take place show a high proportion of failures.
Reputable operators will wish to reassure the public that they are maintaining adequate standards. Use of an appropriate symbol will not in itself provide a guarantee of quality but it will certainly reinforce more positive action.
A new distinguishing mark will be taken as a symbol of change. The device is a familiar one. Many other organizations have found that an image which was at one time entirely satisfactory no longer meets what is required. Alterations are made at many points and a new symbol sets the seal on them. In many cases pride is taken in announcing how much the new design has cost.
It is time for a change.in the road haulage industry. Although the Transport Bill has still some way to go—and parts of it may possibly never be implemented—the effect in some strange fashion is already being felt. Operators through their associations are having to set up machinery to deal with the consequences of legislation still in the balance. The mere fact that they are doing this produces a change in their outlook. It is at this point if at all that the change ought to be given visual form.