ALL THIS COD ON OVERNIGHTS
Page 37
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
One wonders how much longer the Alice in Wonderland codswallop about subsistence, etc, is going on, and also, in view of all the rubbish spoken, and published about it, is ever going to end.
Perhaps some of us need some enlightening, and to this end I pose the following, to which sensible answers, (as opposed to what has occurred so far), may be forthcoming: 1. Does not the law oblige the licence holder to operate his business within the Act, as laid down, in regard to drivers' hours, and rest. During "off-duty" hours, a driver must not be "under the instructions of the employer" — the interpretation must therefore be that the driver is then his own boss.
2. There is also an obligation upon the licence holder, to pay subsistence whenever a driver is away from depot, beyond his legal hours. In this respect, it has not mattered where the man stays, so long as he stops within his legal hours. No onus can be placed upon the employer in this matter, if only because, until he is either advised by phone, etc, or reads the driver's log, he cannot be expected to know.
3. Whether subsistence is, or is not, subject to tax, is, and must remain, a matter strictly between the individual, and the tax authorities, just as all other tax matters are. The employer should not be brought into this at all, once he has discharged his legal obligations in seeing that his operations are within the law, and he has paid any subsistences due.
No sensible operator can wish to become involved in these matters, which can be no concern of his, and the authorities should be informed of this in exactly the manner in which the unions did, and got away with it.
Employers, in the main, or otherwise to a great extent through their associations, have been clobbered too much already, with matters that should be the concern of others, such as collecting the exorbitant income tax, and National Insurance contributions, and for which no recompense whatever is made. If they are, collectively, or otherwise, soft enough to accept this further imposition, then it can be said that they will deserve all they get in the future.
Almost without exception, we have been far less militant than, in fact, we have had a right to be, and it is now time for us to speak up against this latest rubbish.
If we need an example, then we have only to judge the results obtained by organised labour, against what they considered to be an injustice. If it was an injustice to them, then there can be no doubt but that it is a far greater one against the employer, if only for the reason that the whole matter is nothing to do with him.
If, because of our lack of guts, we are saddled with this further imposition, then I suggest that all the vast amount of paperwork, which we understand, may have to be kept for three years, is stuffed into as many large hessian sacks as necessary, and handed to anyone with nothing better to do than to inspect them, with the employers' compliments, but no assistance.
The rot started when our representatives agreed (without the authority of members, in my opinion), to not only check, sign, and file these bits of paper, (including entering the driver's National Insurance number, above all things), but even to paying to provide those same bits of paper. If this was not proof of our lack of guts, then I should like someone to enlighten me.
I have no desire to remain associated with such a gutless lot, but shall, if necessary, in time, decide what action to take, whilst stating now, that I shall not act without guts in whatever decision I make. I hope that I may not be the only one to adopt this attitude towards those who, day by day, are interferring with, and controlling our whole lives more and more. No doubt, one day, when they have meddled as much as possible, someone will suggest that we all have permits to use the toilet. W. A. G. SAYERS
Director, Sayers Transport Service, Newbury.