AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Solving the Problems of the Carrier

22nd May 1942, Page 24
22nd May 1942
Page 24
Page 25
Page 24, 22nd May 1942 — Solving the Problems of the Carrier
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?

The Leeds Schedule: Is It Workable?

A Welcome Criticism of the Demurrage Proposals. Considerations of the Principles Underlying the Leeds Schedule IWAS pleased to have the criticism, by the traffic manager of Dickinson and Co., Ltd., of my suggestion that, in conjunction with a schedule of rates for haulage there should be applied charges for demurrage in the case of detention beyond the period allowed for loading and/or unloading, in calculating the rates. The criticisms were, in fact, not directed so much towards the principle of the payment for demurrage as towards the behaviour of hauliers generally, and the fact that they are prone to unpunctuality. It is to be regretted, that, generally speaking, those criticisms are fully justified.

On the other band there are many occasions when hauliers can, with equal justice, complain of delays which are in no way due to any unpunctuality on their part but to a lack of appreciation by traffic managers, that, in the case of commercial motors, time is money. In this letter, indeed, there is in the suggestion that hauliers should wait while the loading gang takes its lunch, an example of the sort of treatment of which hauliers may justly complain.

There are three parties to a contract of road haulage— the consignor, the haulier and the consignee. It may well be that the haulier has been precise and punctual in his attendance on -the consignor. It may even be that the consignor has prepared the load for the vehicle and has despatched it within a reasonable period. The time of departure from the consignor's premises and the time necessary for the journey determine the arrival at the premises of the, consignee and if that time coincides with the commencement of the lunch hour of the unloading gang it is unfair to expect the haulier to allow his vehicle to stand idle for that reason. The lunch hours of loading gangs should be staggered so that there is always a party available to load and unload any vehicle which arrives.

• The condition might be aggravated supposing that the consignor was unpunctual in dealing with the haulier, thus again upsetting a time-table. Both of those conditions are factors which justify the application of a charge for demurrage (a) to the consignee, if he fails to make reasonable arrangements for unloading at any time during the working day, (b) to the consignor, if on the punctual arrival of the vehicle he is not prepared to load it.

When It Is Reasonable to Charge for Demurrage There are faults on both sides. Whilst I am sure that no one can logically deny that provision for charges for demurrage is inevitable in the event of the application of a schedule of rates calculated on the basis of predetermined times for loading and unloading, it is equally obvious that for a haulier to attempt to charge demurrage when he has failed to maintain a reasonable standard of punctuality would be absurd.• It will have been fairly obvious to many readers that in the articles, which have appeared in the three previous issues of " The Commercial Motor," I have'been leading up to a discussion ef what is now known as the Leeds Schedule. That schedule was published in the issue dated April 3. It gave rates per ton for .haulage over all distances from • leads of one to 200 miles and it is suggested that these rates apply to all traffizs handed out by the National Traffic Pool.

Accompanying the schedule was what appeared to be a suggestion that classification should be based on cubic capacity. So far as that is concerned, I dO not believe it to be practicable and I gave reasons for tha.t disbelief in the preceding article. If, for the , time being, the factor of ,value (considered as being interpreted as what the traffic will bear) be ignored, the only difference as between one kind of traffic and another which need be considered, as affecting the rates, is the time needed to load and unload.

This difference could be provided for by making the standard rate applicable to a reasonable minimum period of time for loading and unloading, an addition being made to the rate whenever that time be exceeded. In that way the need for classification of any kind would be eliminated, which, in my view, is essential, having in mind the peculiar characteristics-of road transport and especially the organization of the industry as it exists to-day.

I have qualified this view by assuming that the factor of value be ignored. Whilst that may be practicable during the war it will not be so, in my opinion, in normal circumstances, when every haulier will find it necessary to take it into consideration in respect of low-grade traffics. I think that the situation might reasonably be met by an agreed percentage reduction on the standard rate.

The reduction should not be so much as to eliminate the net profit provided for in the standard rate. That rebate should be counterbalanced by a corresponding percentage addition in the case of valuable traffics which, by their nature, will bear that increase. Therefore, so far as the question of classification is concerned, I am not in agreement with that put forward in the Leeds Schedule.

In the meantime, whilst writing these articles, I have made fairly close contact with Mr. Harry Wood, chairman of the Leeds Area Committee of the Pool. I think that, therefore, I am well acquainted, not only with the schedule, but with what lies behind it, and, what is in the minds of those who are responsible for it, and what is its object.

Mr. Wood himself and many others have asked me frankly to criticize the schedule in the pages of " The Commercial Motor" and I propose to do so.

Aspects of the Schedule , Analysed and Criticized, It seems to me that the subject must be considered from three aspects. First, whether, on broad grounds, any such schedule is needed, or is practicable. Secondly, whether the principles underlying this schedule and the way it is compiled are sound. -Thirdly, assuming that the answer to the second question is In the affirmative, whether the figures, the rates suggested, are adequate or otherwise.

I have already, in what I have written, acquiesced in the need for such a schedule and in its suitability. It is, in fact, precisely the kind of schedule which I think the roadtransport industry needs. It has always wanted it, but I think it needs it more at the present than ever before.

In arguing along these lines, Mr. Wood has cited a number of inconsistencies in current rates for haulage. I will not go so far as to enumerate them, but will cite one example as showing the kind of thing he has in mind. A rate from A to B over a lead of 75 miles. 26s. per ton from A to C, 150 miles, 27s. 6d. per ton. To Mr. Wood's mind, and I assume to the minds of his colleagues on the committee which agreed upon this schedule, there is an inconsistency here which may cause serious trouble when the AccountantGeneral comes to check the rates which the various Pools are paying for haulage.

It should he realized that in ordinary commercial practice, a haulier is at liberty to quote whatever rate may seem to him to be profitable. His customer at B is not at all likely to encounter his customer at C, so that comparison is improbable and even if it does occur he will find ways and Means of dealing with the problem.

lathe matter of this Pool traffic, he is dealing with one customer all the time, the Government, for although he may-one day. be carrying traffic for the Air Ministry, the next for the Ministry of Supply, and the next for the Admiralty, it Is one supreme department of the Government which will ultimately have to check the rates, in which event the above example, and many others like it, will need

some explanation. In default of some plausible excuse the rate from A to B is likely to be reduced to something in the neighbourhood of 13s. 9d. per ton, that from. A to C being taken as the standard.

The condidons, therefore, are such as to emphasize the need for consistency and the most satisfactory way of achieving that is the nation-wide application of a yardstick something like this Leeds Schedule.

On broad grounds, therefore, the answer to the first question, as to whether the general principle of such a rate can be approved, is " yes."

Coming now to the broad principles of the Leeds Schedule, and whether it is acceptable or not, there are in my mind certain doubts which will be resolved only when I come to consider the third aspect.

"Weighting" the Rates is Not an Entirely New Method The method of " weighting " the rates, as employed in this schedule, is not new. In fact, as I have before explained, it was actually originated by Mr. Harry Wood and me, acting together in compiling a schedule of rates for the haulage of industrial coal in Yorkshire. The application was successful and has since been copied in respect of rates for the haulage nf sand and gravel, bricks and similar shorthaul traffics in the Yorkshire area.

I am not so sure that the principle can so easily be justified in the case of Jong.distance traffic and more especially am I doubtful of the wisdom of extending this series of weightage over so great a distance as 142 miles.

When we applied it to local traffics we had in mind the fact that over ultra-short distances there were interferences which considerably reduced the number of complete journeys which could be made in one day. Waiting time is more important in connection with short journeys, as are any kind of terminal delays. Moreover, terminal delays tend to increase in connection with short hauls. For a short run there is usually a preponderance of mileage through congested traffic areas which, again, has the effect of seducing the potential earnings of the vehicle per day. It was found impracticable to measure these interferences and represent them in any practical way other than the

one adopted—of weighting the rates for the ultra-short hauls. The procedure adopted was to assume that the average miles per hour applied throughout all the mileages from one upwards and, having assessed the rate on that basis, to add this weightage of as much as 1s. per ton for the first, mile in order, arbitrarily, to correct the rate to allow for these difficulties

In these case3 the critical mileage was 13, so that below that distance the weightage was added and for a corresponding number of miles above 13 it was subtracted. The total distance over which the weightage applied was thus 24. In some cases. the critical mileage was taken as 16 and the total distance thus became 30.

, Now, I am of opinion that in long-distance haulage normal conditions are reached within 20 miles of the point of departure or arrival so that, in effect, allowance must be made for a total distance of 40 miles within which there are such interferences as will justify weightage. I cannot, however, see that it is necessary to carry the principle over a distance of 142 miles.

Inconsistency in the Way the Rates are Calculated In reading the explanation of the way in which the rates are calculated there seems to me ko be considerable inconsistency. Two bases are taken for consideration—one, the Government Chartered Fleet scale, and two, earnings which are being achieved by vehicles operating with the Pool. ' The first, to my mind, is not eligible since it applies to vehicles which are continuously engaged on contract and, moreover, are paid per mile run whether loaded or empty.

So far as the second is concerned, it has already been stated that current rates show wide discrepancies and they would, therefore, seem to be unreliable as a basis for assessment of a standard schedule.

The foregoing are broad criticisms and lead me to the consideration of the third aspect as to whether the rates quoted in the Leeds Schedule are adequate or inadequate. That aspect of the .matter I propose to deal with by building a schedule based on " The Commercial Motor" Tables

of Operating Costs. S.T.R.

(To be continued.)


comments powered by Disqus