AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Western S.M.T. Losing £1,250 on Workers Service

26th May 1961, Page 49
26th May 1961
Page 49
Page 49, 26th May 1961 — Western S.M.T. Losing £1,250 on Workers Service
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 Western S.M.T. Co., Ltd., admitted at Carlisle last week that they were losing £1,250 a year by running workers from Carlisle to No. 14 Air Ministry Maintenance Unit.

The Northern Traffic Commissioners granted an application by Passenger Transport (Gilsland), Lid., to run a service to two of the unit's depots.

The hearing began at Hcxham in March and was adjourned for further evidence from Western S.M.T. who were objecting to the application. Mr. George Ramsey, for the objectors, said the company were losing £24 a week on the existing services and to run them economically the workers' fares would have to be increased in price from is, to is. 3d.'

If the application were granted it would mean 100 per cent. abstraction from S.M.T.; furthermore, the Gilsland firm would very soon come back to the Authority to increase the fare.

Mr. J. A. T. Hanlon. chairman, said that

the Gilsland firm used part-time drivers who worked at the maintenance unit. leaving their buses stationary for the rest of the day.

Mr. R. Farrell, for the applicants, said that whether the unit subsidized the S.M.T. or whether the firm carried on running the service at a loss, the fact that it was a nationalized concern meant that the public paid for the loss in the end.

A further application to run buses to the unit was objected to by Cumberland Motor Services, Ltd., and the S.M.T. Mr. Jacob W. Messenger had the support of a petition by 40 maintenance unit .workers who objected to the 30s. 6d. fares they paid each week. The petition claimed that unless this•was reduced substantially they would have to try to seek work elsewhere. Mr. Messenger claimed that he could run the-service for £1 a week.

Mr. Hanlon found that the existing services were.suitable and adequate and that fares were not unreasonable. He refused the application.'


comments powered by Disqus