1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140 
WORLD WITHOUT ALPHABET
Page 87
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
ONE consequence of Mrs. Castle's proposals for road haulage which has been almost completely ignored by the general public is the complete abolition of the licensing system. It may yet prove the most fundamental change of all but present indications are that the whole structure is ready to crumble into dust at the first tap by the Minister.
Not even the people most closely concerned will appreciate the full effects until they take place. To most operators the two kinds of licence have become almost a law of nature like the two sexes: one must be either a haulier or a C-licence holder.
There are completely separate trade associations. In the language of the legislation, soon, perhaps, to fade out of sight, the haulier is the person providing transport, the trader is the person requiring it.
Mrs. Castle's new law would cause a much greater psychological upheaval than would the conversion of Eton and Harrow into comprehensive schools.
Other structures as well as the road haulage industry have been built on the assumption that the licensing system is one of the facts of life.
The Road Haulage Wages Council—no doubt already harassed by the suspicion that its meeting in a week's time will be made pointless by the Prices and Incomes Board—has been accustomed to work out its sums in the cosy assurance that its decisions will affect only 200,000 or so workers.
The C-licence holders have been expected merely to use the road haulage wages orders as a guiding light.
What will happen on the wages front if and when there is no longer an alphabetical key to determine who is a haulier and who is not?
Representation
A further million or more drivers might at a stroke find themselves within the scope of the wages orders. Their employers might well demand representation on the wages council and a similar request might come from those workers belonging to unions other than the road transport unions.
A body more recently set up is the Road Transport Industry Training Board. There was much discussion in advance about whether drivers employed by traders on own account should come within the scope of the Board and it was finally considered better to deal with them in accordance with the industries in which their employers were primarily interested.
The Board must already be calculating how much wider its empire will spread if all operators are hauliers and how much may have to be added to the modest L1 l-1m. needed to set up shop.
Some of the statisticians may have to think again. Over the past five to 10 years
the Ministry of Transport has produced far more information than ever before about the road goods transport industry and has consistently separated Aand B-licence holders from C-licence holders. Much of the work will have to be done again in a world where quality and quantity licences alone are relevant.
Honoured place
The Ministry of Labour for an even longer period has given particulars of the earnings of road haulage workers as part of a detailed survey of a wide range of industries. The information has been collated from the records of a large number of operators.
It has long held an honoured place in the Ministry of Labour Gazette even if, as is probably the case, the number of hours for which wages have been paid according to the documents bears no precise relation to the number of hours actually worked.
When no convenient definition of road haulage workers or road haulage employers remains the Ministry of Labour may be puzzled to know what category they can substitute. The same problem may confront the Board of Trade which has always kept a warm place for hauliers in the annual list of bankruptcies.
For all I know many other Government departments and organizations of all kinds may in due course be in similar difficulties.
If the hurricane to be stirred up by Mrs. Castle can blow gaping holes in areas so remote from the main scene of action what is the effect likely to be on the persons mainly affected?
Hauliers find it difficult enough to convince a Licensing Authority that there is work available for them to do. They will find it even more difficult to persuade a largely indifferent public in advance of the likelihood that they will lose the work they are already doing.
The gauntlet
For some idea of what might happen in individual cases one might do worse than study that facts of certain applications or objections which have run the gauntlet of both the traffic court and the Transport Tribunal.
A recent judgement chosen at random upholds with a comparatively small reservation an appeal by two operators in the South Eastern traffic area.
The decision of the deputy Licensing Authority allowed a racehorse trainer to run a horsebox under a B licence to carry racehorses in his care within a radius of 200 miles from his operating centre at Findon, Sussex.
According to the evidence the trainer had paid the appellants £1,585 for transport for 100 journeys during 1966. If the licence were granted he would still need to employ them on 40 occasions in a year.
Advantage
The total saving, the Tribunal pointed out, would be the difference between approximately 60 per cent of £1,585 and the cost to the trainer of operating his own horsebox.
Although the precise amount was not given, the Tribunal agreed with the deputy LA that the use of the horsebox would mean a financial advantage to the owners of the horses.
The Tribunal's judgement continues as follows: "It does not, however, seem to us to be right to attempt to weigh in the balance an unquantified advantage to the owners against the certain loss to the appellants of approximately £1,000 worth of work a year.
"The respondent would not be made selfsufficient by the grant. He would still require the services of the appellants at irregular intervals.
Liberation
"It may be that the quality of the appellants' services would be impaired by the creaming off by the respondent of the regular work. It is not unknown for regular customers to get better treatment than casual customers.
"We are by no means satisfied that the interests of the owners would be best served by this grant."
For the hauliers the story had a reasonably happy ending. The licence was granted but only for taking the horses to and from the sea.
Comes the day of liberation and who can doubt that the horsebox will be used by the owner for all the purposes specified in his original application—even at the risk of the unfavourable results prophesied by the Tribunal.