Merger Collapse from the Inside
Page 31
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
INSTEAD of becoming clearer, the position with regard to Associated Road Operators and the merger seems to grow more confusing. Allegations and counter-allegations by the various parties concerned do not, in the main, assist in a ready understanding of the situation, but we publish below the substantial part of a vitally interesting statement to The Commercial Motor by Mr. F. A. Min.
Mr. Min, one of the most untiring leaders the industry has ever been fortunate enough to have, reveals for the first time some of the innermost details of the merger fiasco from the A.R.O. side. He says:— Allegation Refuted.
" In your issue dated January 8 you
published what purports to be a report of recent happenings in Associated Road Operators, Ltd., as issued by the committee of management of that organization. As that statement suggests that I, among others, agreed to a certain course and yet failed to abide by that agreement, I think it necessary to answer that suggestion.
"The National Council's recom.
mendation for the establishment of a committee of management comprised the actual names of the four members from the anti-merger side and from the pro-merger side. The extraordinary meeting, far from 'supporting unanimously' this recommendation, as the statement incorrectly puts it, refused to accept the nomination of the proit erger four.
'Mr. R. Birch was the 'certain independent member' who originally proposed this conciliatory course. He was ti.3( immediate leader and, although
what he proposed was in direct confliction with my own personal opinion, I accepted the position on the National Council. You can imagine that I was forced to change my views when the National Council members who, from the anti-merger side, had helped towards unanimity with regard to the council recommendation, not only made no effort, with one exception, to convey to the extraordinary meeting that they were agreeing parties to the recommendation, but accepted the opportunity to attack the personnel of the pro-merger group. . .
Barracking the "Pro-mergers.'
"The statement, 'it was clear that a large majority of votes would be against the merger' is accepted by me, judging from the noise made at the extraordinary meeting when any of those who were for the merger attempted to speak. As, however, the attitude of the majority was based upon an entire misconception as to what was the truth. . . I do not feel that the slightest value should be placed upon the majority view on that occasion.
" In any case, I deny that the majority was against the broad outlines of a merger which I had embodied in a resolution. The persons concerned ignored the broad outlines, because they had, as was obvious from the questions asked, but recently been told, among other things:— " (a) That the passenger section was a liability on the organization, and yet was ' running ' the National Council. (b) That the funds of A.R.O. had been purposely and indiscriminately dissipated by the chairman and treasurer, prior to the extraordinary meeting, to weaken the A.R.O. position. (c) That efforts were being made to divert nearly, 23,000 balance of funds of the old R.H.A., to the C.M.U.A., and so to deprive A.R.O. of that sum. (d) That Mr, Sewill's appointment udder the merger was to be for only one year. (e) That Major Eric Long had been suspended from his duties'. " The truth about these matters was,
and K that the passenger members had not been a liability on A.R.O., that a profit had been made out of their mem bership, and that, because they took
the same view as certain ex-R.H.A.
members, they were charged with ' run ning ' the organization.
"No monies were expended, except those that were approved by the finance
committee or by the National Council. The sums that were paid were not paid to dissipate the funds of A.R.O., but were paid on overdue accounts.
"It is a pure fabrication that any effort or suggestion was made that the liquidator of the FULA, should pass the funds in his possession to the C.M.U.A., and his failure to hand them over to A.R.O. was, as A.R.O. National Council was told, because he had notice of a claim by Mr. Sewill upon those funds for an alleged breach in the contract for his employment as national director, which was a contract entered into by the R.H.A., prior to the merger with the M.H.C.S.A. into A . R ,O,
Mr. Sewill's Position.
"There was never any agreement that Mr. Sewill's appointment in the merged organization was for only one year. He wa,s tO be employed definitely for one year on similar organizing duties to those carried out by him in A.R.O. At the end of that time the full National Council, representative of both sides (A.R.O. and C.M.U.A.) was to consider his future employment.
!' Major Eric Long was not suspended from his duties. When Mr.. Sewill was given leave of absence, Major Eric Long absented himself from the A.R.O. offices.
"The majority of those present believed some or all of these things and was in no mood, therefore, to heed the broad principles which, in any case, were never before the meeting for discussion, as an immediate_ amendment was moved. That none of these points had the slightest foundation in truth did not affect the matter.
"In any case, A.R.O. committee of management makes it clear, in its statement, that the only complaint over the merger that arose was in connection with the principal details on which recommendations were made by one representative from each side, If that be true, the ' anti-mergers ' disclose that, although they themselves could find no fault with the already settled broad principles, they had apparently persuaded their followers td be against that which they themselves accepted . . .
Keeping Away from Details. .
"That suggests that the 'anti-mergers,' in spite of their own views, preferred to have the merger question discussed on the broad principles, rather than to go into detail of the principal factors.
"As to the details, A.R.O. National .Council was told by Mr. H. J. Lloyd, who led the anti-merger party, that if Mr. Sewill's position were satisfactorily secured over a long term, other questions on detail matters would not arise.
"I think what I have written is sufficient to justify my change of views and my joining the C.M.U.A."