Time on
Page 40
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Their Hands
By a Special Correspondent Who Finds "a Peculiar Relationship Between the Inefficiency of British Road Services, the Discontent of the Drivers and the Continuance of the 20 m.p.h. Speed Limit" THE Road Haulage Executive is inefficient for a variety of reasons, most of which have been thoroughly analysed by its critics. There is, however, a pecu
liar , relationship between the inefficiency bf the British Road Services, the discontent of the drivers and the continuance of the 20 m.p.h. speed limit for heavy goods vehicles, which is symptomatic of the failure of nationalization.
The 20 m.p.h. limit is in contempt; it is disregarded by drivers except as a talking point, and its strict enforcemerit is recognized by all experienced road users, including many police officers,. as undesirable. Commercial vehicles form much of the traffic on all main highways, where safe overtaking is usually restricted to short stretches of road, and uniformity of speed reduces congestion and promotes safety.,
No Faster In practice, raising the limit would have little effect on the rate of flow of goods traffic between centres. On the roads at the present time vehicles travelling at 20 m.p.h. or less do so for recognized technical reasons, and they would not travel• at a higher rate if the law were changed. The only drivers who might increase their pace are those who at present would rather proceed slowly than dispose of the time on their hands in other ways.
, The average wage of long-distance drivers has dropped from about 112 per week to £8 since nationalization. It is not surprising, therefore, that some of them seek to make the most of their limited " perquisites," Hours to Spare
Schedules of 20 m.p.h. vehicles are based on a maximum average speed of about 16 m.p.h., and even the most careful and conscientious driver covers the distance on a normal full day's run with two or three hours in hand, Often this allows ample time to reach his depot and his home on the night before he is due back. He cannot report to his depot early, so he parks his vehicle in the most convenient place, spends a comfortable evening with his family and subsequently collects his subsistence allowance for a night on the road.
The inspectors whom the R.H.E. intended to employ would have stopped or curtailed this practice. By modifying its decision under the threat of a continued strike, the Executive "legalized a fiddle," and by implication recognized that drivers were justified in breaking the speed limit.
The R.H.E. is not, however, alone in making it 'necessary for drivers to waste their time. Men employed by sortie big operators of C-licensed vehicles are given fixed times for certain journeys which are often far too generous. The result is either that the men have to dawdle all the way or spend the spare time at their favourite cafe.
One large 'operator allows two hours for a journey of 25 miles when running light and 2+ hours when loaded. The vehicles are maximum load eight-wheelers and the schedules are based on the 20 m.p.h. speed limit, but the I.Orries could make light work of the, journey in 1+ hours.
The drivers find that the time spent in cafés passes _not only pleasantly but quickly, and in the end they have to drive at high speeds to complete their journeys in the time allowed. Thus, the whole object of the time schedule is defeated.
These comments are not in disparagement of the driver, and, in the circumstances, some excuse can be found for the attitude of the Unions in opposing any change. The personal views of drivers are closely in accord with the economic needs of the country. The financial loss resulting from State employment is naturally a source of grievance, and to this is 'added a sense of frustration fostered by genuine concern over the inefficiency of the system. The time on their hands is rightly regarded as wasted time and wasted money.
Many B.R.S. drivers view with feelings akin to disgust the growing office staffs, which, in their opinion, must be employed so to complicate the bookwork that no one can pinpoint the fallacy of unification. The drivers who remember a privateenterprise "boss " Working all night have no illusions regarding the three men and two girls who have taken his place. They believe, with at least some justification, that the money they have lost goes to pay the surplus office workers; it is poor comfort that industry and the Nation suffer with them.
It is not unusual to hear a mathematically minded driver give an estimate of office salary payments in terms of ton-miles. He is critically aware that much of the work which his private employer formerly entrusted to him is conducted by means of form-filling in triplicate.
Why the Opposition?
Why, therefore, should there be opposition to a revision of the limit from men who genuinely desire to take advantage of the modern vehicle's capabilities to reduce delivery times and transport costs?
In the days of private operators, long-distance schedules were often based on higher average speeds than could be achieved if the limit were observed. The drivers willingly accepted the risk of police prosecution. They earned high wages and the traders were satisfied. Official raising of the limit was, nevertheless, resisted; its retention strengthened the position of the drivers and their right to make decisions regarding running times. Under nationalization, the motive to resist is more urgent. To be paid for time off provides the shadow, if not the substance, of individual privilege, and the driver knows that a privilege lost to a virtual monopoly cannot be regained in the employ of another concern.
Salary Cheque First An often heard comment by freeenterprise operators on the attitude of their experienced friends employed by the R.H.E. is that "they have got the bug." This means that they have ceased to worry about economic running, so long as they are assured of their salary cheque.
The drivers are made of sterner stuff and are daily encouraged to worry by close personal contact with their customers. They have a greater understanding of detail than any other critics of nationalization and may well force the B.R.S. out of business. Pay palliatives will not satisfy them unless confidence in the wisdom of the instructions which they receive is restored.