• Home
• Used vehicles
• Product news
• Dealer news
• Compliance
• Buying advice
• Archive

A GRIM STRUGGLE AHEAD

for the haulage industry

A Maze of Restrictive Decisions in Licensing Cases Makes Unity Even More Urgent Than Before. A Surprise Attack on the C-Licensee? THE First Annual Reports of the Licensing Authorities record the passing of the initial milestone in the licensing of goods ,vehicles. The figures show that there are approximately 63,000 A and B-licence operators in Great Britain. What are their future prospects, in the light of past experience?

Of one thing we can be sure ; this number is not-likely to increase, unless there is some drastic alteration in the present law. The road-transport industry is, to-day, virtually a closed trade. Although in rural areas it still may be possible to produce evidence which will satisfy the requirements of the Enston ruling, in large cities and districts where there are many hauliers it is wellnigh impossible to lead any evidence which will satisfy the Authorities that a new licence is necessary.

Having regard to the fact that, by reason of operators abandoning licences, there is a continual wastage, it may confidently be anticifiated that the succeeding annual 'worts will show a steady decrease in the number of operators. Any reduction in numbers must inevitably make lighter the task of those who seek to shackle,road transport.

Road Transport Will Continue.

No amount of Government interference can stifle the demand for the carriage of goods by road, and the tonnage necessary for the commercial needs of the nation will be operated whether it be in the hands of ownerdrivers or large transport concerns. The absence of newcomers, however, has been responsible. for an increased call an the services of established operators.

It might be felt that, having closed the door to outsiders, from whom might be expected the greatest of uneconomic competition, those already engaged would be allowed a reasonable aniount of latitude in the con

duct of their businesses. Obstructions of every conceivable kind have, however, been the lot of those applying for additional tonnage.

Where the applicant has produced a substantial list of customers and figures showing increased turnover, efforts have been made to prove triat the traffic has been abstracted and that the business has been secured by cut rates—the criterion being those charged by the railways. Over and c28 over again the Authorities have indicated that evidence should be produced which would show that the demand has been occasioned by the increase in the business of regular customers.

Where, however, an applicant has arrived; armed with evidence of business increase on the part of two or three principal customers, he has often been informed that the work should be undertaken by means of a contract licence.

The senseless policy of obstruction pursued by the railways has not been better illustrated than in a case before the Eastern Licensing Authority. In this instance, the railway concerned objected to the applicant requiring additional tonnage, although it was forced to admit that, owing to congestion at the stations, it had frequently asked the applicant's best customer to restrict supplies !

As reported in The Commercial Motor, a further attack is being launched by the railways. They seek a ruling that the Enston formula should be recognized in applications by established hauliers for extra tonnage. If this effort succeeds, it will mean that no operator may obtain further vehicles so long as there are suitable facilities in the district.

These persistent efforts to put something into the Act which was never intended—so many of which have already received the blessing of the Appeal Tribunal—make the prospects of the public carrier anything but encouraging.

Hard Times for B-licensees.

For the limited carrier, the past 18 months have proved a very unhappy time. Many of these hauliers have already made two appearances before the Licensing Authorities. Leaving the court on the first occasion with less than they required, or might reasonably have expected to receive, they have been dismayed to find their applications for B licences opposed upon renewal. Failure to prove operation up to the limit of the previous grant has resulted, generally, in a reduction of the radius. The railways appear to contemplate the continuance of this procedure ad nauseam, and. 'even the

Licensing Authorities have, in some cases, jibbed at imposing further restrictions.

The B-licence operator, from the divided nature of his work, appears to have been branded by all concerned with the same unjustifiable stigma which usually attaches to a half-caste, who, either in black or white communities, is ill-received. The public carrier looks upon him with distrust, whilst the Authorities too often seem to adopt the view that he is trying to earn two livelihoods at once.

A point that seems generally to have been overlooked is that many B-licence holders are, first of all, haulage contractors and only casually, or by established custom, traders. This fact applies particularly to those connected with the building trades. Many of them, conducting properly run carriers' businesses, bitterly regret, in the light of present knowledge, that they did not apply in the beginning for licences. Unfortunately, it has bee made almost impossible for them I change over to the unrestricte licence without falling foul of th Enston ruling.

A Valuable Fighting Force.

Although, taking the nation average, B-licence operators accou for only about 14 vehicle each, should be remembered that, numer' ally, they are stronger than the licence holders, numbering some per cent, of the total operators of country, against 124 per cent. i case of the public carrier. reason, they constitute an inv addition to any defence cruited against railway or intrigue.

This first issue of Authorities' annual re information which h been available. It most outstanding fe numerical superiority carrier, both as regart and vehicles owned.

Almost two-thirds of al vehicles in Great Britain are under C licences, whilst t tion is exceeded when examine the actual operators. There are some 150,000 private carriers operating 300,000 vehicles, as against only 62,000 public and limited carriers running 155,000 machines. It is obvious that the railways cannot feel their position secure while so much of the carriage of goods by road remains in the hands of operators whose activities are practically uncontrolled.

They have expended much time and money in attacking the haulage contractor from every conceivable angle, and by the vicious nature of this persecution have made " coordination " a term of derision among carriers and an everlasting reproach to the Government which framed the Act. The benefits which they have derived from this campaign, however, can be almost set at naught, if traders, faced with a difficulty in obtaining transport and refusing to employ the railways, can immediately make up the deficiency by operating their own vehicles.

Attack on C-licensees?

For long, there have been whispers of further legislation to control the ancillary operator. Obviously, it was desirable to discover the force of the enemy before proceeding to the more difficult battle, whilst, at the same time, gaining experience as to exactly what degree of control could be imposed on the haulage industry without shocking the public conscience.

The first period of licensing has shown that the man in the street and the popular Press are completely apathetic to the troubles of roadtransport. This disadvantage, coupled with the disorganized state in which the Act found the haulage industry, has enabled full and overwhelming advantage of its provisions to be taken by the administrators, at the behest of the railway group.

These facts have given the Ministry of Transport sufficient encouragement at last to come out into the open. The recent speech of Sir Cyril Hurcomb, Permanent Secretary to the Ministry, at the annual luncheon of the Industrial Transport Association, indicates that the powers that be have already turned their attention to the further control and restriction of private carriers. Lulled into a sense of false security by the paternal treatment meted out to them under the 1933 Act, unless they take immediate steps to safeguard their own interests, it seems more than likely that the C-licence operators will shortly be subject to a surprise attack, similar to that which overwhelmed their A and B-licence colleagues three years ago. The remedy lies in their own hands— combine !

8,000 Railway Vehicles.

At the end of 1934, the four mainline railways were operating nearly 8,000 motor vehicles, or approximately 8 per cent. of the total vehicles now operating under A licences. In some districts the proportion is even heavier. In the Northern Area the L.N.E. and L.M.S. Railways operate 560 out of a total of 4,600 A-licence vehicles.

It is interesting to note that, in spite of licensing restrictions, the railways were not deterred from increasing their combined fleets during 1934 by 1,147 units.

The railways have further consolidated their position by the purchase of more road-haulage concerns operating large fleets. Not satisfied by their success in the traffic courts and before the Appeal Tribunal, they have endeavoured to extend their-influence by such manceuvres as their effort to restrict hauliers to the transport of coal only from railhead.

The repeated demand made in The Commercial M otor and in other quarters for some amendment of the obnoxious Section 11 governing objections has at last met with some response. New regulations have been published, but the fact that, apparently, the railways were given the opportunity of choosing the wording whicl best suited them, no doubt accou ts for the meagre nature of the conce sion.

Some of the Licensing Authorities seem to be ever-ready to assume the role of railway counsel, should he falter, whilst others appear to be guilty of a sneaking sympathy for the luckless haulage contractor, but cannot give their inclinations full play.

This position is no better illustrated than by the large number of cases in which the decision is reserved. In one recent case, the contractor was able to show an enormous turnover increase and railway counsel admitted that the applicant had a very sound case. His application was supported by evidence given by an official of the local council. Nevertheless, decision was reserved.

Many persons are interested to know exactly what does happen between the reserving of a decision and the ultimate conclusion of a case. What assistance, if any, is sought by the various Authorities? Are their deliberations judicial or administrative? And who calls the tune?

The decisions of the Appeal Tribunal, in many cases, have oc casioned grave disquiet in the minds of those interested in road haulage. So often they appear to depart from the principles that might be expected from a judicial body. At other times, as in the Boston Haulage case, the decision goes against the original applicant on what appears to the lay mind to be the paltriest of legal quibbles.

In this particular instance the case developed around the omission of the word " variation " from a subsection in the Act. It would be far more creditable if the Authorities were to pay a little attention to the omission by Mr. Oliver Stanley of the word "suitable " from the place where it was intended to be inserted in Section 1/.

Unity Essential.

The way of the transgressor is hard —so also is that of the haulage contractor. The original Act has been moulded and shaped by so many forces, and complicated by so many adverse decisions, that it is beyond the comprehension of the ordinary man. So many and difficult are the obstacles in his path, that it is not only unwise; butwell-nigh impossible, to try to fight a lone battle.

With the merger of the two main associations there exists a powerful body ready and able to fight the haulage contractor's battles. Every A and B-licence operator should join.

Those ancillary users who are also still reluctant to spend the small amount of money which will qualify them for membership would do well to look upon the expenditure as a form of cheap insurance. If they need any, further encouragement, it is necessary for them only to reflect on the strangling control which has been imposed on the haulage side of the industry, as a result of defencelessness caused by disorganization and apathy. A.D.-J.