Two-way Stretch
Page 65
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Political Commentary By JANUS
ONCE again the trade-union leaders appear to have successfully outflanked the representatives of independent hauliers by winning an immediate increase in wages for the workers of British Road Services. Although the wages council have so far not even been called together, the results of their discussions are almost a foregone conclusion. Employers in one section of the industry can hardly refuse what has already been granted in another section, nor can they hope to have the ultimate support of the independent members. The present situation is complicated by the drift of nationalized workers to free enterprise as a consequence of disposal. Any wage advantage they enjoy at the moment will have to be transferred with them, and in a short time the wages of all road haulage workers will be drawn up to the same level.
As matters stand, it is difficult to see the purpose of introducing the national joint industrial council into the negotiations. The procedure is less rigid than that of the -statutory body. There are no independent members, ind decisions cannot be enforced by law. Both sides can argue until they come to an agreed figure. There is more scope for widening the discussion so as to take in such subjects as the 20-m.p.h. speed limit on heavy ;Dods vehicles. On the other hand, unless there is great anrest in the industry and an immediate settlement is essential, it is assumed that -the industrial council would inish their deliberations befote further action is taken. Ilere would have been no point, for example, in calling :he industrial council together if at the same time an ipplication had been lodged with the wages. council.
Industrial Council Hamstrung
However, the simultaneous negotiations with B.R.S. lave had almost this effect. Knowing that B.R.S. have Oven way, the employers' side of the industrial council nust have found it difficult this week to give objective :onsideration to the items on their agenda. To offer less han B.R.S. would invite trouble; to offer more would eem ingratiating.
Left to themselves, the industrial council had many vints on which discussion and agreement would be raluable for both sides. The railway wages dispute has nade us familiar with the contention that higher wages ,hould be earned by the co-operation of the workers in ,chemes to improve efficiency and economy. In road iaulage this would particularly apply to the 20-m.p.h. peed limit, which obviously has the effect of lengthening he journey time of the heavier vehicles. Largely as a .esult of the previous long-drawn-out haggling on the ubject, the workers have a fixed dislike for accepting he raising of the limit as a bargaining counter for an ncrease in wages. The more informal machinery of he industrial council might produce a formula that vould meet the workers' objections and satisfy the :mployers.
The times are favourable for wage increases. The ndsx of retail prices, now generally accepted as neasuring the cost of living with reasonable accuracy, ias not. risen so steeply lately as a few years ago, but Is course is still upwards. The volume of production :ontinues to increase, and there is consequently more ,d more traffic for hauliers to carry. Whether this neans a corresponding increase in their profits is more questionable. It is not easy to put up transport rates at the best of times, and the increased competition brought about by disposal and the abolition of the 25-mile restriction has depressed certain rates to an uneconomic level.
Nevertheless, most operators are doing reasonably well. Their wish to prevent further upheavals in the industry makes them anxious to look after the welfare of their employees. There is a commendable desire not to be behind B.R.S. in this respect. The Road Haulage Association are seriously discussing a standard pension scheme that can be recommended to members. Some progressive operators have bonus or profit-sharing schemes. These matters scarcely come within the province of the statutory wages council, but opportunity could be found to bring them before the industrial council, where the views of the trade unions could be made known and discussed, and their advice sought on the welfare of transport workers., Rubber-stamping H.R.& Decision
Events of the past two weeks have not necessarily prevented the industrial council from dealing with points such as I have mentioned, but the unequivocal decision of B.R.S. to increase their wages has undoubtedly added to the difficulties. The application to the wages council for similar increases is inevitable, and the shift of the centre of attraction must leave the industrial council with doubts on the value of continuing the discussions they began a month ago. The membership of both bodies is practically identical, except for the independent members, and the representatives of the employers will find, when they switch to their statutory function, that they have power to do little mode than rubber-stamp a decision made for them by B.R.S.
It is not part of my purpose to suggest that the increase in wages is unjustified, or even that the trade unions have taken an unfair advantage by the use of their two-way stretch. There is some ground for thinking that, by persevering with the industrial council, they might have done rather better. What should not be overlooked is the attitude of the thousands of employers. They have come to accept the decisions of the wages council as equitable.. They saw the point of setting up the industrial council in a time of crisis a few years ago. They agree that sometimes one body, sometimes the other, is more suitable for dealing with the :problems that arise. They cannot approve of a situation whereby both bodies are made to look ridiculous. Ultimately, they are the people who have to pay whatever increases are agreed, and they like to feel that through their representatives they can claim some of the credit.
For various reasons it seems unlikely that the Government will adopt the obvious solution, which is to bring B.R.S. within the scope of the wages council. One objection is that a State-owned organization can be expected to pay agreed wages without legal compulsion. There seems no reason, however, why B.R.S. should not be represented on the industrial council. The abolition of the long-distance monopoly means that there is no longer any essential difference between the two sections of the industry, and there is everything to be said for their working together on wages and on other matters.