Foreign exchange
Page 62
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
WHATEVER is happening in the UK is bound to be happening twice as much somewhere else. Transportation is global and the trials, tribulations and occasional triumphs of British operators find themselves reflected all round the world.
A recent speech contained the warning that "any technological advances we may make in moving freight by all modes between cities will be more than offset by the tremendous costs that will be incurred in final distribution within these urban zones". The context might easily have been a paper read by a town planning expert or an industrialist or a statement by a leading haulier that growing congestion means higher rates.
In fact the occasion was the annual conference of the Canadian Industrial Traffic League and the speaker Mr. Robert C. Barnstead, president of Smith Transport Ltd. of Toronto. He was making a plea for closer co-operation on the turnround problem among hauliers. shippers, consignees and "various levels of government". Simulated models should be prepared, he said, to provide a comparison between the economic costs for industrial locations in satellite cities and in the present "urban sprawl".
More co-operation was also urged between hauliers and the architects, engineers and other people concerned in building industrial premises. "We must establish appropriate criteria," said Mr. Barnstead, "as to the number of docks, doorways and other freight handling facilities required in factory, warehouse and terminal installations."
A survey by his company in selected areas of Toronto had shown running costs of 16s a mile for goods picked up and delivered in the central business area; 9s 8d for "fringe areas around the core"; 7s 7d in the inner suburbs; and 6s in the outer suburbs. A similar investigation in any large British town might produce even more disturbing figures. They would show plainly how much money is being wasted as a result of congestion.
Problem variation A variation on the problem of turnround at the ports is provided by a recent decision of the US Federal Maritime Commission. There are terminal operators in New York who undertake the loading and unloading of vehicles. Where they do not carry out the work within a reasonable time there must clearly be provision for some kind of demurrage or detention payment to the vehicle owner.
The terminal conference argued that because the supply of labour was in the hands of other organizations it should not be held responsible for delays caused by a labour shortage. The FMC did not agree. "As terminal operators with tariffs on file providing truck loading and unloading services,the verdict ran, "the conference members obtain the status of a public utility." The provision of the necessary labour was a responsibility directly contingent on the obligations the conference had voluntarily assumed.
The FMC plan which is to come into operation by the end of March provides for arbitration to decide who should bear the cost of delays due to weather. There will be a panel consisting of a haulier, a terminal operator and a third member acceptable to both sides.
British operators on regular dock work may wish there were some body like the American commission in this country. Demurrage charges and other payments to meet the cost of delays can normally be expected only from the customer. The Prices and Incomes Board, while admitting that the haulier is justified in seeking recompense, have assumed that this can be only for delays which are the customer's responsibility. It would be a welcome change if recalcitrant port authorities and other bodies could also be forced to pay.
Proposals along these lines are not inconceivable. It is difficult to envisage in the UK another proposal recently put forward at a meeting of the Commons Transportation Committee in Canada. Economic development is being urged of the Atlantic Provinces which it is hoped will become an export link not merely for Canada but for other parts of the world. To meet the problem of transport costs it has been suggested that subsidies should be paid to hauliers.
What a pity nobody thought of incorporating such a provision in the Transport Act. To judge from some recent statements there are plenty of impoverished hauliers who could do with a subsidy and the services of road transport are essential in any plan for improving the lot of the development areas.
On some points British hauliers would not be anxious to take the lead over foreign operators. The problem of vehicle thefts has at least been contained in recent years and some of the credit must be due to the work of the Road Haulage Association's vehicle security committee and to the co-operation of the police.
Statistics from abroad Comparable statistics from abroad are not always easily available. It would appear that in some European countries lorry thefts are few in number and hi-jackings a rarity. The true picture may be concealed by the differences in the methods used to compile facts and figures about crime. With the US some comparison can be made. It would seem to indicate that the problem in Britain is still relatively minor. Some alarming statistics have recently been published for the New York area. It is admitted that they are not complete. They are based on returns from operators, from insurance interests and from such organizations as the Babaco Alarm Systems Inc. rather than from the police as in London.
The latest assessment is that the number of cases of hi-jacking of lorries in New York has increased to an average of 10 a week at a cost of more than £120,000 a day. No figure has been given for vehicle thefts of all kinds. An indication of what is happening is the report that thefts from the garment industry alone come to £20m a year.
Another estimate is that losses from hijacking and thefts from trailers, lorries and automobiles throughout the country during 1968 were more than £240m as against £150m in the previous year.
These astronomical figures, says the New York Times, make the "legendary pilferage on the New York waterfront dwindle into petty larceny". Insurance companies are becoming more and more reluctant to accept the risk and the authorities are being forced into action. A traffic study panel set up by Mayor Lindsay of New York has put forward several recommendations.
Convoy system A convoy system, it is hoped, would protect certain routes for trucks leaving the area at certain times of the day. Brighter sodium lights are proposed for the district in which the garment industry is concentrated. Secret marks are recommended to make it possible to identify stolen goods. A special telephone system will link operators and their customers and consignees so that collection and delivery times can be reduced.
Hauliers themselves are taking special measures. They are arranging for valuable loads to be followed by car and offering rewards for information.
It is interesting that all these proposals or others similar to them in content have been examined and in some cases tested in the UK. Even the importance of adequate floodlighting has been impressed upon the owners of protected vehicle parks although it has not so far been suggested that new street lighting should be installed.
The New York plan does not stress sufficiently the importance of the human element. In Britain the police and other experts have more than once expressed the opinion—in the nature of things it cannot be completely substantiated by evidence— that in the majority of cases of vehicle theft there is collusion either by the driver or by some other member of the staff of the operator or the consignor. Much of the recent work on vehicle security has gone into the problem of choosing the right people for the job and ensuring that as far as possible temptation is not placed in their way. The danger is recognized in the US but perhaps not enough is done about it.