AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

OPINIONS and QUERIES

5th February 1937
Page 50
Page 51
Page 50, 5th February 1937 — OPINIONS and QUERIES
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?

THE MERGER COLLAPSE FROM THE INSIDE.

[4970] There are three facts which Mr. Flin, in his article under the above heading, appears to have overlooked :— (1) In 1935 the Motor Hirers' Association, as a separate body, unanimously rejected the terms then offered by the C.M.U.A. Mr. Flits was at that time one of the most untiring leaders that that Association has ever been fortunate enough to have. Nobody will deny that the terms obtained by Mr. Flin and his friends in recent negotiations were far less favourable to A.R.O.; but, despite this, Mr. Flin and those associated with him endeavoured to force them through against the wishes of what has been proved to be an overwhelming majority of members of the A.R.O.

(2) For the privilege of effecting an amalgamation. the Road Haulage Association shouldered debts to the amount of not less than £500, which had been incurred by the Motor Hirers' Association.

(3) When Mr. Flirt and his friends expressed a desire to leave the A.R.O. it was mutually agreed between them and the committee of management that the departure should be effected without recrimination, in the frien(jliest possible manner, and with the least possible disturbance.

In the face of these facts, common decency called for

silence, even from Mr. Film. ' JOSEPH DOVITNES. Egremont.

WAS MR. MARSH UNSUPPORTED BY A.R.O.?

• [4971] I deeply regret that Mr. F. E. Marsh, in a letter published in your issue dated January 22, should • revile the Road Haulage Association (now Associated Road Operators) because the Licensing Authority for this traffic area has decided to revoke Mr. Marsh's A contract and A licences. As a result, your readers may have been inclined to believe that Mr. Marsh has had to fight his battle entirely unaided, which is certainly not the case.

Throughout the continued periods of trouble, since the granting of his original licence, Mr. Marsh has used his Association office, and never on any occasion has time been spared, either by day or night, to assist him in his difficulties. In seven letters to this office Mr. Marsh has expressed his appreciation and thanks of the services that have been rendered. On one occasion he went so far as to express the opinion that he has two valuable friends in the form of this office and the Association itself, for which services he subscribes a s36 donation to the Association, which was g atefully' appreciated. These expressions and thank quite obviously challenge his own statement: "W sat did the Road Haulage Association do? Nothing wh tever."

From the nature of the correspondence rece ved by Mr. Marsh from official quarters, it was quite obvious to the writer that it was the commencement o a very distressing period for Mr. Marsh and, realiz ng the seriousness of the situation that had developed, he was advised to employ solicitors immediately. Trou ale continued to grow, with the inevitable public inq dry, at which inquiry he was represented by a very a le firm of solicitors, who also briefed a barrister.

At the commencement of the inquiry the learned advocate listened to the observations of the L censing Authority in connection with proved instances • illegal operation of vehicles by the applicant and epeated breaches of the conditions of his licences. The a a vocate, on behalf of the applicant, admitted all of these •ffences and elected not to put his client in the witne. -.chair,

expressing the hope that the Authority would be content to deal with the applicant in his own court rat er than carry the case farther. This will probably ve the reader some indication of the circumstances whi h have led up to this unpleasant situation for Mr. Mat h.

Subsequent to the public inquiry, a further co ference

was held between the writer and the solicitors re )resenting Mr. Marsh, in the hope that something tilt be done to retrieve Mr. Marsh's position. There seemed but little hope, and time has proved that our le, rs were not unfounded.

Associated Road Operators—in the future, a in the past—is always anxious on a question of policy to fight in a case or cases where a " principle '.' is i volved; but it should be understood that "principle ' must exist, otherwise there is nothing to fight for.

What were the circumstances? A prosecu •n had been taken with a subsequent heavy fine for not observing drivers' hours. A-licensed vehicles were per istently used for the conveyance of ancillary material; ontract vehicles used in connection with general-haula. e work for back loads. An additional vehicle used wi •out a licence at all; after warning the vehicle was wi hdrawn from the road, but even then used again unlice sed.

Such being the circumstances, then, sur y the " principle " for which we fight must have de rted.

The reader is left to draw his own conclusi ns, but might I add, if there had been any possible c a ance of success at an appeal we should have been the first to render that assistance. Respect for the con dentistl nature of Mr. Marsh's affairs, which were place in my hands, prevents the publishing of further details, yet, as distressing as it is to me to forward you this corn a unication, I feel it a responsibility to the reading p blic to reveal it for their understanding.

Cambridge. P. J. AUTHERS,

Secretary, Eastern rea, Associated Road Ops',3 tors.

WHY VISITORS WERE EXCLUDED FROM AN A.R.O. MEETING.

[4972] I write to apologize for any incon caused to members of the C.M.U.A., or represe of the Press, by their exclusion from the meet in Manchester on January 13. I would point the circular was sent out under a misapprehensi I am sure you will realize that as this meeting make up its mind as to the future course of a A.R.O. in that Area (a matter domestic to A. would have been quite improper to have discus before strangers. enience tatives g held it that n, and had to tion of .0.) it ed this I must, therefore, protest at the unfair suggestion contained on page 777 of your issue of January 22, that non-members were excluded " from a justifiable fear of intense criticism." At the meeting a resolution to support the Association and its leaders was unanimously approved. .

Do you seriously suggest that " the intense criticism " from the Press and members of other associations, of whose exclusion you complain, could have been permitted to have any weight in deciding.a domestic issue?

Now that the decision has been taken, you can be sure that all members of other organizations, and representatives of the Press, will be welcome at open meetings in the East Lancashire Area. REG. HINDLEY Manchester. (Chairman, East Lanes Area, ARC).).

THE VALUE OF A HAULAGE BUSINESS.

149731 I read with interest in The Cornmo-cial Motor dated January 15 a letter (No. 4964) by" R.W." of North Wales, asking for advice as to how best to dispose of his haulage business, owing to the ever-increasing regulations, etc.

He states that he has three vehicles with A licences, a total unladen weight of 9 tons, and an annual turnover of 212,000.

According to my calculations this works out at about 2231 per week for the three vehicles-277 per week for each vehicle all the year round, and that for 3-tonners. (I am certainly not getting enough for my work !) Asstime the cost of running the three vehicles to be 23,000 per annum, and he could no doubt obtain the services of an expert traffic manager at 21,000 per annum, This would leave him with 28,000 per year just to look on. Surely this would be worth while putting up with against a few regulations and red tape.

Wales is certainly not such a depressed area as I have been led to believe, and I should not think of disposing of such a profitable business as this.

The sum mentioned (212,000 turnover from three small vehicles) is too fantastic to comment upon. I have had dreams myself in the past, and I can only suggest that your correspondent will do the same as I have done= wake up and find that after all it was only a dream.

Sudbury. A. CHiNERY.


comments powered by Disqus