AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

How the New Act Affects Drivers' Hours

29th December 1933
Page 44
Page 44, 29th December 1933 — How the New Act Affects Drivers' Hours
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 Road Traffic Act Provisions Indirectly Modified. Amendment of the Section Dealing with the Transfer of Licences Desirable

ALTHOUGH the Road and Rail Traffic Act does not directly alter the provisions of Section 19 of the Road Traffic Act with regard to the limitation of the periods for which drivers of goods and public service vehicles may remain continuously on duty, it does indirectly affect those provisions.

The general rule is that it is not lawful for any person to drive such a goods or public service vehicle, or to cause or permit any person employed by him to drive such a vehicle for any continuous period of more than 51 hours, or for continuous periods amounting in the aggregate to more than 71 hours in any period of 24 hours commencing two hours after midnight, or so that the driver has not at least 10 consecutive hours for rest in any period of 24 hours calculated from the commencement of any period of driving.

Present General Rules.

There are other general rules, such as that any two or more periods of time which are not separated by an interval of at least half an hour shall be deemed to be a continuous period. Furthermore, any time spent by a driver on other work in connection with a vehicle or its load shall be reckoned as time spent in driving. Such other rules are, however, not affected by the new Act.

Section 31, sub-section (1), of the Road and Rail Traffic Act provides that for the purposes of those provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 79 of the Road Traffic Act time during which the driver is bound to obey the directions of his employer, or to remain on or near the vehicle, or during which the vehicle is at a place where no reasonable facilities exist for the driver to rest away from the vehicle, shall be deemed not to be time which the driver has for rest.

It is never particularly easy to understand the provisions of the section of an Act which have been amended by another, and the best course is to endeavour to set down the section of the original Act in the form in which it should appear as amended. If this be done in the present case, it appears that the provisions of Section 19 of the Road Traffic Act, so far as they relate to 3334 the consecutive hours of rest, should read as follow :—

" It shall not be lawful for any person to drive, or cause or permit any person employed by him or subject to his orders to drive, so that the driver has not at least 10 consecutive hours for rest in any period of 24 hours calculated from the commencement of any period of driving. The following shall not be treated as being time which the driver has for rest :—

(1) Time during which the driver is bound by the terms of his employment to obey the directions of his employer.

(2) Time during which the driver is bound by the terms of his employment to remain on or near to the vehicle.

(3) Time during which the vehicle is at a place where no reasonable facilities exist for the driver to rest away from the vehicle."

.Real Rest of 10 Hours.

It is easy enough to understand the reason of the second and third restrictions. They have the effect of requiring that the driver shall have a real rest during the 10 hours, without having to remain on or near the vehicle, and that he shall have a proper opportunity of resting at an inn or other suitable place.

On the other hand, it is difficult to suggest the cases in which the first restriction is intended to apply. Surely it is not intended to provide that an employer shall not direct a driver to stop at a particular town, and to stay the night at a particular place?

An interesting point that should be noticed is that, although the first two restrictions clearly apply only to a paid driver, the third restriction appears to apply to an owner-driver as \Nell as to a paid driver. In the article headed "How the New Regulations Could be Improved," which appeared in our issue dated December I, reference was made to Regulation 23. This requires that, in the event of the death, incapacity, bankruptcy or liquidation of the holder, or the appointment of a receiver or manager in relation to the business of the holder of a licence, notice shall, within five days, be sent to the licensing authority. If application be lodged within 14 days of the date of notification, the legal representative of the holder shall be deemed to be the holder of the licence for such period as shall be necessary to enable the application to be determined.

The Question of Partnership.

It was suggested that this provision should apply only in the case of the death of the holder of the licence, but reference to the Act, which has now, been published, shows that the Regulation was based upon the provisions of Section 21, which are followed in the Regulation. It is, however, necessary to point out that the section of the Act does not deal with the case of the holder of a licence taking another person into partnership, or to the case of an existing partnership being altered.

Normally, when a partnership is created, the assets of the partners which form the subject matter of partnership are assigned to the partner jointly. Where a new partner is taken into the business, the assets of the partnership are vested in the whole of the partners. No provision appears to be made by the Act for such a case, as Section 21, which provides that a licence shall not be capable of being transferred or assigned, contains special provisions which apply only to the case of death, bankruptcy, liquidation, or the appointment-of a receiver or manager.

Except where a partnership is finally wound up, it is not usual for a liquidator to be appointed. It is, therefore, most desirable that some provision should be made to meet the case of an alteration in the constitution of a partnership, so that the new partners may be assured of the right to continue the business under the existing licences.

Tags


comments powered by Disqus