Thoughts on Two Current Problems
Page 31
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Can Important Officials of Transport Associations Serve Both the M. of W. T. and Their Members, and What is Causing the Cutting of Haulage Rates?
By "Tantalus"
ONE vexed question which continues to provide material for discussion—and which causes some uneasiness in the minds of members of roadtransport associations—is that of the advisability of a chief executive officer simultaneously serving in an official capacity in the M. of W.T. Whilst this subject, which was raised at the recent annual meeting of one of the national associations, must be regarded as domestic in character, it does involve an important principle. It is, in fact, this aspect of the case which has occasioned much heated discussion. There is a strong feeling that, the problems and difficulties of hauliers being so serious and profound as to affect even the future destiny of the industry, such an officer should devote his whole time and undivided attention to the business of his particular
association. Even in instances where the requisite permission has been granted by the governing body for an executive to serve also in the M. of W.T. it would seem that such decision constitutes an error of judgment. .
Allowing for the best and finest of motives, no individual can serve successfully two masters. Obviously an official must be placed in an invidious position on occasion, and particularly so when the policy of an association or the wishes of its members are at variance with the Ministry as, for example, obtains in respect of the Government Road Haulage Scheme. The question which presents itself immediately is, should the executive officer who has definite obligations to members support their cause or should he oppose them as an official of the M. of W.T.? As one ,way of escape an attitude of neutrality might be adopted; but that would not solve the problem. Reviewing the matter dispassionately and without prejudice there seems but one conclusion. Members pay their subscriptions for a specific purpose and, rightfully, they expect service, which includes the protection and furtherance of their interests both present and future. Such service can be ' rendered only by the concentrated attention of the chief executive officer.
Reasons for the Revival of' Rate-cutting One of the evils besetting the road-transport industry always has been that of rate-cutting. Although, since the outbreak of war the trouble seems somewhat to have subsided, this being due, no doubt, to a greater flow of traffics, once again its ugly head is coming to the surface. Quite recently attention was called to this matter through the medium of this journal. The cause, of Course, is not far to seek. .Hauliers—like other members of the trading community—have financial obligations and overhead costs to meet. With decreasing turnover many must be at their wits' end to know how to make ends meet, let alone tie.
Until the past few months freights were good or at least reasonable, whilst satisfactory rates have been plentiful and have afforded the hauliers a reasonably optimistic outlook regarding the position generally. Now, unfortunately, the vision has proved to be a mirage; for a slumphas descended upron the industry, as a result of which the bright hopes are blotted out. Therefore, in an effort to "keep going" and retain businesses which have taken years to build up, in an endeavour also to meet their commitments, hauliers, apparently, in some instances are being forced by circumstances to obtain traffics at any price.
From every point of view this policy must be regarded. as unsound economically. Two blacks, however, do not make a white, and the fact that such a policy is unsound does not providea solution to the problem. The fact of the matter is that 'road transport has been so restricted and, consequently, starved that operators are being compelled to fight for the right to live—hence the revival of sate-cutting.
It is evidently a question of the survival of the fittest and "the devil take the hindmost." This, surely, is in complete contradiction of the principles for which the Nation is fighting; a fight in which liberty, freedom and the right of the individual to a square deal (and a square meal) are at stake. It is indeed a strange paradox that so many innocent victims should be crushed in the process.
Is Drop In Freights to be Blamed ?
Are hauliers, as a body, to blame for the revival of rate-cutting? In the main, and having regard to all prevailing circumstances, the answer must be in the n,egative. Er the reasons already stated it is apparent that with the majority of hauliers the revival of' ratecutting has been, in fact, a case of force majeure. In very truth they are being dsiven into a position in which the natural instinct of self-protection becomes uppermost in their thoughts. On the other hand, if road transport had been employed and maintained at the anticipated level to meet war needs; no operator would. have adopted the fallacious practice already described.
What is the attitude of the so-called leaders of the industry to this problem? If they are leaders in very truth they should have their fingers on the pulse of the industry and be fully cognizant of the position.
It may be recalled that some three or four years ago serious efforts were made to stabilize rates through the medium of a rates structure.. In some districts a measure of success was achieved in connection with specified traffics. Reviewing the position as a whole, however, little progress has been made in this direction. The long and tedious attempts also of the Road and Rail Conference to bring about correlation of rates so far have proved abortive. In fact, considered opinion has never regarded the latter venture with any great favour and, therefore, has expected little success therefrom. Quite frankly, why should the railways—with revenue guarantees and an abundance of frafficsnegotiate seriously with road transport to 'secure any real balancing of rates? In any case it isquestionable whether such balancing could be carried far.
The railways to-day occupy an almost impregnable position and can well afford to ignore the haulier and his difficulties. Is it not indeed a fact that this is actually happening? So the solution of the rates problem and rates-cutting cannot be found here. It may be that the question would have been satisfactorily concluded if those responsible for formulating the policy of the industry and controlling its destiny had been content with this task rather than chasing useless phantoms.