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
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164 
Campaign against TMLs
Page 54
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Acknowledgment in your leading article of June 26 that a campaign has been built up against the introduction of TMLs, was timely. It is even more timely to inquire from which quarters this campaign has been mounted.
Without being offensive in any way, I would suggest that the anti, TML lobby is composed mainly of the "academics" while the "practical" transport manager sees the licence as a qualification which he has hankered after, but been unable to obtain, all his life.
Many of those who hold qualifications from the professional associations and institutes realize that they are likely to be on the losing end of any licensing scheme. Because they are not holding an appointment directly in control of a transport fleet, they feel there may be no automatic grant of a licence to them and the simple, practical test envisaged. for the grant of a certificate could present problems.
While it is invidious to categorize, I am sure all will admit that in a contest between "academic" and "practical" the former will always prove the more articulate and possibly have more time in which to be so. Hence there is this impression that there is a gigantic campaign against TM Ls.
Down at the grass roots, however, there is a different view. The idea of a licensing scheme to go hand-in-hand with the other provisions of the Transport Act is welcomed. The original syllabus, I may add, is not acceptable, but there is still time for further discussion on that point. As well as the obligations and responsibilities it brings, the licence will also give a degree of protection to the manager (heaven knows he needs it!) and raise his status.
To suggest that the new Government may be more amenable than the old to suggestions for dropping this scheme is, I think, a pious hope of the minority.
May I quote the following words of our former president (Mr Michael Heseltine MP) who is now Parliamentary Secretary at the Ministry of Transport: "You (the Guild) will have a significant opportunity to contribute to the impending introduction of transport managers' licensing. The need is to ensure that the new system achieves its object with the maximum degree of co-operation from the managers themselves. Advice by consultation and agreement; theory blended with practice and experience; that is the way to make progress and I hope I may play some part in achieving it."
That statement was made to members as recently as June 1 and unless his Minister takes an entirely opposite view I cannot see Mr Hese!tine going back on such a pledge.
The National Guild of Transport Managers stands for the protection and enhancement of status of all engaged in transport management and we believe the licence will help this aim and we shall fight hard for its introduction.
In conclusion, may I stress that the Guild has no quarrel with the professional bodies. A difference of opinion with some of their members on this particular matter only serves to prove the vitality of the industry and, in any case, there are an equal number of their members who already consider that membership also of the Guild is to their advantage.
FRANK P. COULT General Secretary, National Guild of Transport Managers, Grimsby.