Owner-clriv-ers Protect the Industry
Page 40
Page 41
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The One vehicle Carrier a Safeguard Against a Railway Monopoly. Why Rates Need Not be Cut to Compete with Fleet Operators TBE owner-driver and his position in the event of ' any successful attempt to stabilize haulage rates, are somewhat of a problem. To a large extent, I believe, this circumstance is due to a lack of under-, standing of the peculiar conditions under which the average owner-driver works. The basic cause of distrust of owner-drivers by employers is the outcome of the tendency on the part of many owner-drivers to take up the attitude that there is no driver's wage to pay. In other words, the amount which otherwise would have to .he paid as wage to the driver is regarded by this class of haulage contractor as his legitima,fe and, in many casei, sufficient profit. That this is a fallacy is easy to deinonstrate.
Before proceeding to do So, however, I would like to _
disabuse the mind of the owner-driver of the belief which many of them hold, namely, that there is any antagonism lc/wards them on the part of the bigger operators. Act4lly,,the Converse is the case. Most of the leaders of the industry realize that the whole stability and continued existence of road transport is, to a large extent, dependent upon the maintenance of a fair leaven of the owner-driver class.
It is realized that, whatever may be the pious hopes of those who convened the Salter Conference, friendly co-operation and co-ordination between the railway companies -and the road-transport industry is something analogous to bed-fellowship on the part of the lion and the Iamb. Whatever may be the views of road-transport operators, the railway companies are of one mind; they regard road transport operators as their active and persistent 'enemies, and are determined, if possible, to exterminate or. absorb them.
The gteatet the number of independent units in the road-transport industry and, in particular, the more the proportion of small. operators, the more difficultwill it
be for the railway, companies to effect their designs. They cannot treat successfully with a large number of. -Operators. Their plan of campaign must inevitably involve, in the early stages, the gradual elimination of small operators and the merging of the industry into the hands of a few large concerns. Once that feat is accomplished, the ultimate objective—elimination or absorption, the latter partial or whole,' as circumstances may compel—will be a comparatively easy matter. , The more far-seeing members of the industry realize this fact and are particularly anxious that the ntifnber of small operators should not be unduly diminished. They also realize that any operator who works at unecondmic rates will be bound sooner or later to lose his place.
In this sfatenient is embodied the broad policy of the industry as a Whole, in respect of its less influential members. Wherev6r I go to deliver addresses on costs and charges, I find that that is the feeling. The object in inviting me to lecture on costs and charges is that those who do operate at uneconomic rates may have that fact demonstrated to them, in the' hope that they will mend their ways and thus save themselves.
Now to expose the fallacy that an owner-driver can operate for rates appreciably less than the minimum
profitable to a larger concern. His actual operating costs are not less than those of the larger carrier. In fact, if regard be had to the conditions under which large concerns can obtain their supplies, it is safe-to say that the operating expenses of the owner-driver are in excess of those of the big haulier.
True, he may personally effect some of his vehicle maintenance, but even in that matter he is no better off than the operator who arranges his schedule so that the drivers of vehicles take care of their own machines. His business expenses, that is to say, his establishment costs, may be just as great, or even greater, particularly in respect of such items as legal charges.
An owner-driver must look to the future, even if it be assumed that he is entirely unambitious and is not looking forward to the time when his business will enlarge he must still make provision for buying a new machine when his present vehicle becomes obsolete. All these are expenses which, if the operator regards himself only as a driver, he is, to a large extent, ignoring. If he be in any way ambitious, and expects to .Put a second and a third vehicle on the road, he is at a double disadvantage.
In the first place; If liebe operating at cut rates, he will never be able to amass sufficient 'capital to enable him to increase his fleet and to take the necessary steps to obtain licences for the additional vehicles. Even, however, if we suppose that by some means he is able to buy additional machines, he then finds himself in the curious predicament of having to. pay his drivers a full wage.
If he continues to work for those rates which satisfied him when he was an owner:driver, he will make no profit on the new machines. Indeed, as with a fleet, however small,, it will be necessary for him to manage the business and engage a driver for every vehicle, he will, at his old rates, cease to make a profit on any machine. He will, therefore, have to endeavour to increase his rates, and only those who have tried to take that course with old customers know how difficult it is.
Generally speaking, the owner-driver operates as a jobbing haulier. Unfortunately, it is inevitable, in those
circumstances, that for considerable proportions of his time he is disengaged between one job and the next. He loses work as the inevitable outcome of having only one vehicle, because with one machine he cannot fulfil two contracts. He must, therefore, if he is to _earn a profit, make some provision for the lost time. His net profitable charges must consequently be higher than those of a Man whose vehicles are regularly employed throughout the week.
On the other hand, it is generally admitted that an enterprising owner-driver is actually in a position to demand and receive rates in excess of the normal, in
• the majority of cases he is called upon to fill a gap to carry out some job of haulage which cannot be done by means of facilities ordinarily available. It is expected, in such circumstances, that rates will be exceptional.
Again, the owner-driver is in personal contact with his customers and can give service of a kind which is impossible where the operator is concerned with a comparatively large fleet and can only occasionally make personal contact. Employers of road transport find it worth while to pay for that extra service and will go so. The owner-driver is, therefore, neither justified in cutting rates, nor is there any need for him even to consider so doing. S.T.R.