AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

R.H.E. Tactics Exposed

30th June 1950, Page 42
30th June 1950
Page 42
Page 42, 30th June 1950 — R.H.E. Tactics Exposed
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?

Keywords : Business / Finance

A S soon as the increase in fuel tax and

the addition of purchase tax to the price of vehicles were announced, the Road Haulage Association recommended its members to add 10 per cent. to their charges to cover the cost of these and certain other increases in cost of operation which had occurred recently, and for which provision had not at that time been made in hauliers' rates and charges.

I had myself gone carefully into the same subject and arrived at an identical conclusion. The increase of 10 per cent., judged by any standards, is fair and reasonable. It was accepted as such by the general run of operators, many of whom communicated with their customers advising them of this proposed increase. In the majority of cases the customers accepted the increase and all would have gone well but for a corresponding announcement by the Road Haulage Executive that it proposed to increase charges by 71 per cent.

At hauliers' meetings up and down the country the subject was discussed and the faint-hearted amongst operators were immediately worried. if, they said, the R.H.E. is going to increase its rates by only 71 per cent. we dare not do otherwise.

was asked my opinion on the matter by a committee man in one of the R.H.A. areas. He WAS about to attend a meeting and desired to support the R.H.A. recommendation. He asked me what line of argument he should follow. I told him that in my opinion

u24 the matter was perfectly simple. The R.H.E; proposed to increase rates by 71 per cent., but I pointed out there was nothing to show what rates were being taken as a basis for that increase. There is. I said, no indication, whatever that the rates which the R.H.E. are to increase by 71 per cent, are in any way parallel to those being charged by hauliers, which undoubtedly should be increased by 10 per cent. At the time I had no definite brief for my assertion! it simply seemed to me to be a logical argument.

Notwithstanding active support by the loyal and level-headed members of the Association, there were many cases 'where the amendment to apply a figure of only 71 per cent, instead of 10 per cent. was carried. This was the case in respect of one particularly important traffic largely carried by short-distance free hauliers.

Regrettable Action

It was much to be regretted that this attitude was taken. Those who took it will be inclined to rue their action in face of the following figures which have been shown me by a fr■end who is particularly well placed to be able to get hold of the essential information.

It will be seen that the R.H.E.. so far from increasing charges by only 71 per cent, has actually increased them by 10 times that amount-77 per cent.—and other percentages, falling to a minimum of 19 per cent.

In one case, general traffic from London to Manchester, the old rate for I-4-ton lots was £2 per ton. The R.H.E. is now charging £3 6s. per ton plus 71 per cent, which makes £3 I Is. per ton, an increase of 77 per cent.

In the case of general traffic from London to Newport, Mon., the original rate was also £2 per ton. It has been increased to £2 19s. Per ton plus 71 per cent., making it £3 4s. 3d., an increase of 60 per cent. •Similar traffic from London to Hull was also charged at £2 per ton and is now £2 15s. per ton plus 71 per cent., or £2 195. 2d. per ton, an increase of 46 per cent.

I have been given to understand that these big increases in rates have arisen from a preliminary attempt to adjust some rates which were considered to be uneconomic. As the various operators were taken over, the rates at which they had been working were scrutinized and compared with others already taken over.

It may be suggested that the low rates previously charged were uneconomic, but surely if that were so the operators concerned would have been forced out of business. As they were not so forced, but actually made a reasonable living out of those rates it is to be assumed that they were economic and fair.

The point I wish to make is that hauliers who have sabotaged the R.H.A. effort to maintain the free hauliers' rates at a reasonable and economic level have made a serious: mistake, one which they should take immediate steps to rectify. S.T.R.

Tags

Organisations: Road Haulage Association
People: Tactics Exposed
Locations: Manchester, Newport, London

comments powered by Disqus