1HA's boundary .eorganisation
Page 17
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
WOULD be grateful if you vould allow me to comment on four report "RHA's Boundary 'oily" which appeared in .7ommercial Motor on March !0th.
A part of Mrs Chettle's letter to ne was correctly quoted but the etter itself reflected an
naccu rate interpretation of the IHA reorganisation proposals. rhis fact has been made clear to Ors Chettle.
The plan which I have placed before the RHA National Council, for that body to accept or reject as it sees fit, was the result of a comprehensive analysis of the RHA's organisation, finances and general circumstances. It does not contain any proposal to "eliminate the East Midland Area and merge it with the existing West Midland Area".
The option (one of four options presented) which I have suggested as most suitable for the Association's circumstances involves contracting the present highly diffused permanent administrative network by reducing the area offices from fourteen to eight.
My proposals leave all the area and sub-area chairmen, committees, funds and autonomy intact. I have suggested that the committee structure of the RHA should be subject to a later study to be carried out by a working party composed of members. All that is affected now is the permanent administrative machinery; "dissolution" is quite the wrong word.
The effect of my proposals in the Midlands would be to have two areas administered from one district office. Hitherto each area has had its own office. Tipton was suggested as a suitable location for the new district office because it will be nearer than Nottingham to the geographical centre of the new Midlands District. It is by no means certain that Tipton will be the final location. A visit to Nottingham recently by the National Chairman and me when we discussed the issue of reorganisation with a large gathering of East Midland Area members was, I believe, most valuable in clarifying the proposals.
In these days of swift road, telephonic and indeed electronic communication, it is and will remain my belief that it is not necessary to maintain two permanently staffed RHA offices in the Midlands; one office staff suitably located and with up-todate management aids would and should be adequate for the task. Other trade associations reached this conclusion years ago and having reorganised accordingly, have avoided the escalating overheads which bear down so heavily on a highly diffused permanent administrative structure.
This was the burden of my message to the membership so far as it related to the Midlands. Whether or not that view is acceptable is for the membership to decide. There are bound to be dissenters. It would be odd if it were otherwise in an organisation consisting of many thousands of strong-minded members, but any attempt to please everyone will end up by pleasing no-one.
I do not know where the spokesman quoted in your article obtained the information for his view that the general opinion of the membership was in support of the proposals. I would like to make it clear that I have made no comment on that issue. The decision is one for the RHA's National Council to take; I am content to wait for it.
F. J. PLASKETT Director-General Road Haulage Association Upper Woburn Place London WC1