1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152 
Do you want to comment on any stories In Commercial
Page 24
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Motor? Does someone in the Industry deserve a pat on the back, or a dressing down? Drop us a line at Commercial Motor, U, Quadrant House, The Quadrant, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5AS or fax us on 020 8652 8971. Alternatively you can e-mail brkumeatherley@rbl.co.ulL We are
happy to protect your identity, but will not publish anonymous letters.
TIME OUT
Having just read your article on the Working Time Directive (CM 15-21 May) I would like to share my thoughts, as a humble driver, on the revelation by Mr Speller that not all work time will count towards the 48-hour total. What a load of old toffee!
I have spent the last year or so worrying about how I am going to feed my family on the money I get paid per hour when I can only work 48 hours a week, and how my life is probably going to be altered if I am expected to work at any tick of the clock on some rota scheme to get the job done (for the same money, no doubt).
It will be a nightmare trying to sort out what is and what is not waiting time, and just how Joe driver will keep track of this time—more paperwork and stopwatches? It would be like asking an office worker to include time spent waiting for the printer to finish spooling and produce the finished document, and then add it to the end of their 48-hour week.
It won't work. I believe we should wholeheartedly welcome the WTD, and then do exactly what I reckon the French will do and selectively enforce it—you try telling a Frenchman he can't work if he wants to. Any worker who wants to work should be allowed to opt out and do what he/she wants as a fundamental human right. Employers who exploit, or coerce the employee into working longer hours, should feel the full force of the directive and pay the price. I think it will be easy to sort the wheat from the chaff on this issue so the enforcers can target the cowboys and get shot of them.
The haulage industry is a vital part of the UK economy and I for one feel the government has not fully appreciated what the effect on the workforce will be. Driver morale is at an all-time low now and many are seeking a way out. I am not interested in working anti-social rotas, shifts or rolling weeks for less money just because some Eurocrat (who probably only works Monday to Friday) thinks it's a good idea. It's time for this government to realise that our industry cannot afford to be shackled by this wellintentioned directive and get us out of it.
Just to clarify a point for Mr Spellar: if I get up, go to work in my truck, then I am working for the entire day (whether the wheels are turning or not). Graeme Cunningham_
NIGHT SHIFTS
The article carried in CM8-14 May on the Working Time Directive su ested that a worker subject to the Sectoral Directive would have to work the entire four-hour core period at night time in order for that shift to be classed as a night shift. Our understanding is that when the four-hour core period is selected, in all probability midnight to 4am or lam to Sam, any work undertaken, even for a minute, within that core period will deem that shift a night shift, and therefore subject to a maximum of 10 hours.
In addition, when an unspecified number of nights is worked this will qualify the worker as a night worker and eligible for the offer of a free health assessment. These are the facts as we understand them from our reading of the legislation and it is the interpretation which is shared by the Department for Transport.
RM Armstrong,
Regional director Scotland and Northern Ireland, Freight Transport Association,
PICTURES FOR PLATES
Having today experienced considerable frustration when trying to obtain a set of number plates for a recently acquired vehicle, I am keen to know the requirement. If new legislation with regard to this has appeared in CM, then I missed it. My first port of call was a local motor spares company. I proffered my driving licence (albeit one without my mugshot), a recent utility bill and my V5, whereupon I was told that I would need my passport as well.
I then went to another company that I use regularly and was successful in obtaining the plates. However. I'm still confused as to whether photographic identity is compulsory or whether it was some sort of April Fool's prank.
This appears to be yet another case of overengineering on the part of some jobsworth, introduced to aggravate us. Since it is an offence to drive a vehicle without a legible number plate, I can envisage many sets of circumstances where a driver could find himself in a catch-22 situation on this.
Do you carry your passport with you at all times or your utility bills? What a field day a mugger could have with all that extra information to hand. RIX Milton.
MG CHARGE
The £11 M6 toll charge raises some interesting questions. You wonder if, for instance, the price has been set so high for our industry in order to keep trucks off the road, thus ensuring long life for this expensive bit of tarmac that has taken 14 years to complete?
Or is the charge set knowing that at some time in the near future the M6 in the Birmingham area, most of which is on stilts, will suddenly be found to be in a dangerous state of collapse?
Another question is
whether the private company running it for profit plans to compensate us all for delays during its construction? Mind you, lain quite prepared to forgo my compensation if it removes a vast number of cars from the M6 which is therefore less congested.
But why, when both Conservative and Labour governments were prepared to blow 21bn on a tent, were they not prepared to spend a measly £5m on a road?
Peter F Orr,
Plymouth.