AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

lagful of trouble for rorkshire company

25th January 1986
Page 11
Page 11, 25th January 1986 — lagful of trouble for rorkshire company
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?

CARRIER BAG full of .ograph charts, left anonytsly at the North Eastern nsing Authority's office, led to a Leeds company ig fined s.:2,030.

he company, K. Smart , which still laces Road ilage Association oppos

bid to add 16 .ides to its operator's ice,:idmitted 19 offences permitting drivers to do -and-a-half hours' colltills duty, two offences of tinting drivers to fail to

c the necessary weekly , one offence of unatitho

d use and one of failing to ilay a manufacturer's plate. ii ch ad 13roorn, priisectitfor the LA, told Leeds sti.diary magistrate David r, that the offences, which lived six of the company's Yen-, came to light when cials examined the charts in the bag.

Then the drivers were in'iewed, they claimed they had been compelled to work excessive hours under the threat of the sack.

One driver, _James Griffiths, said he knew he had worked 12 continuous days. He said .there was a notice displayed saying that drivers had to work seven days a week. Drivers who refused to work were sacked.

A representative of the company, a Mr Dickenson, said he had to accept the violations in the absence of the then transport manager, who had since left the company. He was not aware that additional vehicles should be specified on the 0-licence before they were used.

For the company, Ronald Sedler said that very often drivers did not use their mode switches. There were many cases where breaks had been taken and not recorded.

The company admitted that at the time the offences were committed it was inefficient

in supervising the work.

One problem was that the business had been run from two premises with the administration taking place away from the operational depot.

It had since moved into single premises. There had been a considerable tightening up with transport manager being replaced and a management consultant has been brought in.

The notice referred to had said that all employees were expected to he available to work seven days a week, and that 48 hours' notice was required of any specific day they could not work. The object of that was to ensure that there was always a rota of drivers to cover the work.

Robert Mullen, counsel for driver 13rian Roberts, said they had been told they were required to work the hours or be sacked and that they were required to work seven days a week. Roberts had been taken on by the company after a period of unemployment and he had been anxious to keep his job.

Another driver, Frederick Holroyd, said they had been chasing the clock all day. He was told that there were plenty of drivers on the dole who were prepared to do his job if he did not. He needed psychiatric treatment as a result of what had happened.

The company was fined )7 on each offence of permitting drivers to exceed five-and-a-half hours duty, k:251) on each offence of permitting them to fail to take a weekly rest period, 4:100 tbr unauthorised use and s:I00 for failing to display a manufacturer's plate. It was ordered to pay prosecution costs of' 200, total .C2,230.

Griffiths was hoed Roberts .:42 and Holroyd Of the other drivers, Alex Jones was fined A:40, Stewart McKay .:31) and Leonard Har

vey Announcing the tines, Loy said it might be that breaks had not been recorded from time to time, but the company had a clear duty to see that breaks were taken. The company was well aware that it was acting in breach of the regulations, as evidenced by the notice displayed, and it was a serious breach.


comments powered by Disqus