Transport service providers confer at nterfreight 71
Page 37
Page 38
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by John Darker
"SPEED on the ground — is there enough of it?" That was the provoking title of the first session of the very well-attended conference arranged in conjunction with the Interfreight '71 Exhibition, sponsored by Freight Management and Mechanical Handling at Earls Court, London, this week.
A panel of providers of transport services, who included Mr T. O'Leary, national secretary of the TGWU's Docks and Waterways Group, joined with three users of transport services. Each member of the panel made a short address and questions were invited by the conference chairman Sir Andrew Crichton (chairman of Overseas Containers Ltd) from both other panel members and from members of the audience.
Speaking as a provider of transport, Mr A. R. Matthews, marketing director Hilton Transport Services Ltd, said that when journey times from origin to destination were under six hours road haulage was virtually unbeatable. On much of our inter-city road network speeds of 45 mph average were possible. Unfortunately road improvements in conurbations were being offset by increased traffic congestion, with the number of cars likely to double in the next 20 years or so. He was concerned that as many as 71 per cent — according to one recent survey — of manufacturers were now delivering direct to retail outlets, bypassing specialist contractors who could do a more efficient and economical job.
Mr Matthews criticized some manufacturers who were prepared to spend fantastic sums on productive equipment in factories but who completely ignored the need for automated or semi-automated loading facilities. Road hauliers could not afford excessive queuing time at docks or anywhere else. He referred to haulage rates which in general were far too low and led to many bankruptcies. His firm was frequently asked to buy small firms but the present practice was to ask the proprietors for a copy of the rate schedules. If these were not reasonable it was a waste of time to inspect the premises and vehicles, for many such firms, given low rate structures, would inevitably slide into bankruptcy.
Mr Matthews urged prompt Government decision in terms of vehicle standards on size, carrying capacity, etc. He wanted all managements of user firms to accept the philosophy of the PDM (Physical Distribution Management). He was convinced that very few manufacturing firms really knew their distribution costs. He thought hauliers ought frankly to call upon manufacturers to eliminate loading delays. Transport operators should not hesitate to suggest to manufacturers how they could improve outdated procedures in loading bays, documentation and so forth.
Looking to the future, Mr Matthews forecast a considerable consolidation within the road transport industry. He thought that by the end of the decade there would be five or six major road transport operators in the UK.
Mr Tim O'Leary reminded Sir Andrew Crichton that they had both been concerned with a Statement of Intent concerning reduced manpower in the docks in 1960. He gave a powerful warning to the transport industry that the pace of containerization was greater than the trade unions could cope with. He had heard that morning of 375 men being thrown onto the labour market as a result of the closure of a firm in the docks. Said Mr O'Leary: "If you'd all stop and think before scrambling after the new system of containerization, regardless of the effect on the people employed, you would give us a chance to stabilize the position. Dockers have invested their hands and brains in the freight industry. You can't throw them into the junk yard."
Mr O'Leary said that since 1961 the dock labour force had fallen by 36 per cent nationally and in London alone by 42 per cent. The trend towards redundancy was accelerating so fast that he and his colleagues could not keep pace with it. He had been upset, he said, by the failure of governments to refuse to sanction the use of 8ft. 6in. high containers. He thought the British Government should have said "it's not on" because it was perfectly obvious that a mixture of standard and non-standard boxes would slow down operations in the docks. He ended his address: "If you can't find a way to compensate redundant dock workers, who have in many cases seen work they have done for many generations switch to inland distribution depots, then be assured that labour relations troubles in the docks will continue. All this, because certain managers want to move cargo at a saving of lp in the £ and at the same time inflate their own egos."
Mr 'J. Reid, chief executive, Containerbase Federation, said he thought speed on the ground should be related to the total exercise. The total transport planning system of many manufacturers was ineffective, and he instanced a consignment of whisky that the Scottish Containerbase dealt with at short notice which was held for three days in Scotland unnecessarily by the senders before being forwarded to Tilbury. Cargo received after this episode had caught an earlier boat from London because the whole operation was properly planned.
Mr Reid criticized the traditional habit of senders in naming a particular ship. All container cargo, in his view, should be treated like a post office parcel and sent forward by the first available service. The absurd rush of cargo over the last two days before sailing was a ridiculous matter as it made for gross labour inefficiency for some days after the boat had sailed.
Mr T. Torrance, director and general manager, Stothert and Pitt Ltd. spoke as a provider of craneage and he prefaced his remarks by saying that he would hesitate to defend some of the thoughts concerning some of the curious handling machines spawned by the container age. Speaking as an interrnodal man, Mr Torrance suggested that purchasers of handling equipment should require manufacturers to meet performance specifications. In particular, equipment makers needed to know how reliable to make their products and how much time operators would allow for maintenance. A great deal of handling plant in docks and terminals had been purchased on a lowest-cost basis and this had not proved at all cost effective. It was quite possible to build a crane with an extremely high performance but the racing car analogy applied; such a crane would need a "Jackie Stewart" to drive it, not 43 men working continuous shifts.
Mr Torrance thought straddle carriers were not efficient for lengthy movements of containers in terminals and that a simple railway would be more efficient.
During the discussion period several speakers referred to the high costs to users of British dock services. Mr S. Turner, group managing director, Felixstowe Dock and Railway Co Ltd, said critics should remember recent comments of Mr John Peyton, Minister for Transport Industries, about ports standing on their own feet and making profits. Rotterdam, Hamburg, Bremen, were all subsidized, as were many American ports. Some French ports found one of their highest expenses — dredging — was paid for by the State. It had been calculated that if the Port of London was subsidized to the same extent as Hamburg, London charges could be lower and there would be sizeable profits.