AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

management

20th April 1973, Page 60
20th April 1973
Page 60
Page 61
Page 60, 20th April 1973 — management
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

matters by John Darker, AMBIM

Are drivers managers?

WHEN Mr Leslie Huckfield MP suggested at a recent Davies and Robson industrial relations seminar that drivers should be treated like managers because of the value of the equipment they controlled, he aroused a lot of dissent from his audience of transport managers.

It was suggested by the critics that management was essentially concerned with organization and command. A manager must make the best use of the assets at his command — human and material — and he was held accountable for the results. While it was true that driving was a responsible job it was ludicrous to suggest that it could be compared with the responsibilities of a transport or factory manager controlling perhaps hundreds of workers.

Mr Huckfield's claim that drivers wanted much more responsible participation was refuted by one manager (in charge of over 300 drivers) whose experience — despite weekly meetings with his drivers — was that very few were interested in anything save working conditions, hours of duty and pay.

Tachographs and trust Overlaying the discussion was the effect on drivers' relationships with employers when tachographs become compulsory. Leslie Huckfield argued that the installation of tachographs would transform the historic relationship of trust between employers and their drivers. Without probing the natural suspicion of transport managers that a proportion of drivers could be worthy of less than 100 per cent trust, Mr Huckfield argued that before the era of tachographs employers generally had had no choice but to trust drivers who were virtually free agents the moment they drove through the depot gates.

Because — barring changes in the regulations — tachographs will monitor vehicle perforMance comprehensively, the driver who has jealously guarded his reputation as a "knight of the road" will feel that his independence and freedom have been eroded. The very freedom that has attracted him into the road haulage industry in the first place, and which, by and large, makes the driving occupation attractive to him, will have perished for all time.

The emotional propaganda about tachographs being "spies in the cab" can be countered in part by more direct analogies with industry. There are scores of industrial processes in which operators are timed by meters of one sort or another. Tachograph manufacturers supply equipment to industry which does not, apparently, cause any particular human problems. Lorries — even those produced by specialist makers in relatively small numbers — are assembled on moving production belts.

The work force involved, of course, has something to say if the works manager sets the belt speed too high for the comfort of the average worker. But the installation of tachographs in lorries will not make drivers or their trade unions dumb; the question of driving speeds and performance standards will remain a matter for negotiation.

Drivers cannot justifiably argue that because they are in charge of a lorry worth £10,000 they deserve a manager's pay because in industry equipment of similar value justifies managerial supervision. There are many semi-skilled factory workers in charge of equipment costing perhaps a hundred times their annual earnings who are paid modestly to be diligent and conscientious. If the operators on a steel rolling mill felt bloody-minded and dropped a coin between the glass-smooth rollers, all hell would be let loose.

Why the excitement?

Operatives mixing paint or watching temperature dials in a heat treating process don't get all fractious because a century ago the process may have been much more rule of thumb. Why therefore should drivers get excited because a small monitoring device may eliminate the tedium of compiling a 'log sheet?

Leslie Huckfield's presentation to the seminar made it clear that he was concerned with the wider labour relations background and he was perhaps unwise to indulge in some party political polemics, greatly to the annoyance of some transport managers.

It is true that the tachograph issue is inextricably mixed up with the current labour relations scene. The approach of the United Road Transport Union a couple of years back that a "tariff' for using tachographs could cost an employer a fiver a week per vehicle, does not meet the case today when participation is much more of a vogue word. I find it difficult to refute Mr Huckfield's arguments in favour of a closer identification of drivers — and other employees — with the management of their firms.

As he says, "It is no good expecting drivers to assume management hopes and aspirations unless they are a party to far more information than is usually the case. They want to know how the firm stands, where it is going and what the underlying aims of management are. I believe that things should be taken to the extent of. . trade union representatives being involved in rate bargaining alongside management in the negotiation of contracts, but also in long-term decisions like the purchase of vehicles and the installation of capital equipment".

Although Mr Huckfield's views might have sounded radical a decade ago, in the context of the Industrial Relations Act and its accompanying Code of Conduct, they make sense.

If a road haulage contractor's major rate negotiations are conducted in conjunction with the drivers' shop steward(s) the drivers will be much better informed as to the competitiveness of the industry. If the choice is between standing vehicles against the wall and declaring a number of drivers redundant or accepting a keen rate which is just viable if the job is tackled with goodwill by all concerned, then a typical work-force would under-write the contract — and incidentally provide the customer firm with some assurance of reliability.

In situations where the rate a customer is prepared to pay does not provide drivers with a reasonable wage — or employers with a modest profit — it would be salutary for the potential customer to be compelled to go to the sector of the industry which indulges in irresponsible rate cutting and its corollary — unreliable service.

Makes of vehicles By now, there must be few road transport employers who do not consult drivers on the merits of different makes of vehicles. Vehicle manufacturers are certainly sensitive to the informed criticisms of drivers' trade unions. Office workers and maintenance staffs, whether or not they are members of trade unions, are likely to be consulted about new equipment purchases to the degree that they hold an informed view.

Leslie Huckfield received some support for his theme on drivers' responsibility from Mr Frank Woodward, transport services executive of Plessey Ltd, another conference speaker. He contrasted the value of a load of men's suits worth perhaps £50,000 with certain loads of electronic equipment which could be worth Lfrn. "Why shouldn't a driver have management status, with staff salary and good fringe benefits? British drivers are increasingly affected by the better-class European drivers they are meeting. As living standards level out across Europe we can expect drivers to get the same levels of pay commensurate with their professional abilities."

Long hours of work Mr Woodward admitted that many drivers of 32-ton vehicles exercised more responsibility in their daily work than many office managers. Drivers made more decisions in a day than he did himself. We were fast approaching the day when the four-day week would be general — a state of affairs making road transport a more onerous calling than it was today, and inevitably highlighting the difference between the comparatively long hours of transport workers in contrast to those they served in industry. • This sort of discussion, despite the heat it can easily engender, is surely to be welcomed. The underlying fear of many of Leslie Huckfied's critics — that more responsibility for drivers encourages demands for higher pay — is a poor reason for resisting increasingly rapid professionalism. There is plenty of evidence that driver training schemes have been unduly compressed in the interests of economy.

The cost of vehicle repairs due to avoidable accident could be offset against higher training costs. The semi-skilled pay rates of the majority of drivers may not be in the interests of their firms or of the customers they serve.

If drivers are ever to deserve the designation of drivers/managers it follows logically that they must be involved in the kind of management decision-making that justifies managerial pay and perks.


comments powered by Disqus