Opinions and Queries
Page 44
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
"Free" Lifts that are Not So Free
TOUR leading article of April 5 on private-car owners -carrying -passengers on a cost-sharing basis highlights the dangers of ignorance when dealing with points or law which are not Universally known.
As the habit is probably more deep-seated than people realize and has every prospect of increasing on a larger scale, some new thoughts and clarification of the law become a near necessity. The main problem is one of travel to and from work, and cost sharing has arisen• aUtomatieally as a matter of convenience through the shortcomings of public services. Whilst the element of reward may be present, profit making is the least object
of concern. •
Two symptoms of the post-war period have been the rising standard of living and the spread of industry and housing over greater landward. areas. The creation of satellite towns and industrial estates has added to the difficulties of travel. The private car gives door-to-door service by the shortest or most convenient route.
Using public services, road or rail, a worker (the word is all-embracing) may have a walk of some distance at each terminal and a wait of varying time often exposed to the elements, before embarking. He mainly, requires public transport at the peak travel periods, morning and night, when the scramble and waiting are intensified. Where his route between home and work lies across the main lines of travel he may have to change his means for transport several times before his daily journeys are completed.
Whilst the wasted-time element may not be so important, many winter ailments can be attribued to queueing and waiting for transport during the peak hours. That is not the fault of public services but the changing face of travel calling for other Methods. The worker in the higher income groups has solved it by running a car; albeit in the process creating a parking problem. He thus gives himself a greater choice of residence by being in a position to live farther from his 'work, if desirable.
It is freely admitted that this class of individual is being lost to public services in considerable numbers and those numbers will go steadily upwards as wages and salaries rise. Yet any attempt at legislation to restrict • the single person in his car would rightly be considered as interference with the liberty of the subject.
Why then should the wage earner in the lower-income groups be debarred from the same standard of comfort and convenience if it can be attained by running a ear to and from work, and sharing the cost with three or four other persons?
Where the car hirer is an outside individual hiring a car to a small group, the element of reward arises and legitimate objections could be taken to this type of practice. It should not be illegal, however, where the hirer is the owner and works in a specified place, to carry passengers to and from work, and make a charge for this. Whilst in some instances reward or profit might be a factor of the transaction, the good sense of the passengers would prevent it being carried to excess.
It is not out of place to mention that when public transport is not available—through strikes, etc.— motorists are officially encouraged to give "free lifts." Not all of those lifts are free and whilst it may be an emergency, the parallel is similar.
There is another aspect of the situation. The evera I rising cost of travel by public transport has become a serious burden to many wage earners, not all of whom are able to recoup the cost by wage rises. No incometaX allowance is made for necessary travel between home and work.
1.1 workers can reduce their travel outlay by sharing, Should they not be allowed to do so? Stand at any large factory ,gate and watch the employees leave; note the
number who eschew public services, All modes of transport are used bicycle, motorized cycle, solo and sidecar motorcycle and cars—soncie of doubtful vintage. Not all the cars leave with drivers only. No doubt the passengers are being given " free lifts," which makes enforcement Of the law next to impossible, except in isolated eases.
IL 'afay be argued that cost sharing would do untold harm to public services, but it does not follow, as only the peak hours would be affected and that slightly. Some public-transport authorities have complained that they must keep excess plant and labour solely for the morning and evening rush hours; and that those cannot be put to work during the remainder of the day.
The cry now is for more production and any measures which would ensure that workers arrive on time and in better physical condition without travel strain should not be overlooked.
ARTHUR R. WILSON, M.I.R.T.E. Scotstoon. Glasgow, W.4,
Using a Van as a Private Car
IN your issue dated April 12. there is a letter from A Mr. J. C. C. Jordan making certain inquiries concerning the use of a van as a private car.
agree that the inquiry related solely to the matters covered by your published reply; I think, however, that it is desirable in a case of this kind to point out that a van, however used, still remains a goods vehicle and therefore is subject not only to goods vehicle speed limits, but also to Section 19 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930.
London, W.1. F. D. FITZ-GERALD,
Secretary, Traders Road Transport Association.
Distance Does Not Lend Enchantment
kip( attention has been drawn to a letter under the ivi heading Unfair Competition in Private Hire." which appeared in your issue dated March 29.
It is obvious that an operator based 9+ miles from the hire pick-up point is at a disadvantage as compared with a locally based operator.
It would appear that your correspondent Mr. Lodge is content when his price is lower than another operator, but dissatisfied when the reverse applies.
Chelmsford. F. BRYAN, Traffic Manager, The Eastern National Omnibus Co., Ltd.