AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

DISPUTES OVER THE EDINBURGH-GLASGOW ROUTE

5th May 1931, Page 58
5th May 1931
Page 58
Page 59
Page 58, 5th May 1931 — DISPUTES OVER THE EDINBURGH-GLASGOW ROUTE
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?

South Scotland Commissioners Faced by Problems of Wages and Statutory Protection

A T the second public sitting in Gins/1..gow of the Southern Scotland Traffic Commissioners applications were considered from Glasgow Corporation, the Scottish Motor Traction Co., Ltd., and Midland Bus Services, Ltd. Mr. A Henderson is the chairman of the Commissioners for this area.

An important objection was that put B40 forward by the Lanarkshire Traction Co., Ltd., in respect of the existing Edinburgh-Glasgow service of the Scottish Motor Traction Co., Ltd. The argument raised was that the route in eluded a section between Newmains and Uddingston, via Wishaw, Motherwell and Hamilton, on which the Lanarkshire Traction Co., Ltd., submitted that it was entitled to protective treatment on the ground that it was under a statutory obligation to provide an adequate and satisfactory service of motorbuses. The picking up and setting down of

passengers on this section by buses operating between Glasgow and Edinburgh was therefore objected to.

Mr. T. Muir Wilson, appearing for the Scottish Motor Traction Co., pd., said that there was nothing in the Lanarkshire Traction Confirmation Act of 1929 to the effect that the licensing authority was prohibited from granting licences to other persons than those protected by the Act. It will be remembered by our readers that tramcars on this particular section of route were removed as from October 6th of last year.

In the course of examination by the chairman, the general manager of the Lanarkshire concern stated that the company ran a six-minute bus service, whilst the S.M.T. Vehicles ran once per hour. It was also shown that other companies ran 19 buses per hour on the route, and Mr. Henderson remarked that it was very difficult to understand how the S.M.T. vehicles could make Very much difference, considering that the company running them was only one of 30 operators.

Mr. Gee appeared on behalf of the Transport and General Workers Union and dealt with alleged anomalies in wages and conditions of employment of drivers and conductors in Edinburgh and Glasgow. He was informed by the chairman that careful consideration to the section of the Act dealing with this subject had been given, and that the Commissioners' opinion was that this was not the proper stage at which such representations should be made.

In closing the hearing of this application, Mr. Henderson said that if it were felt that a good purpose could be served by calling a conference of the various Parties concerned, intimation would be sent to them.

An application by Midland Bus Ser

vices, Ltd., in respect of the route between Glasgow and Ayr was, at the request of the applicant, adjourned so that it should come up for hearing at the same time as an application by the Scottish General Transport Co., Ltd., in respect of the same route, the object being that the two companies might be able, in the meantime, to prepare a scheme of co-ordination to put before the Commissioners, thus altering the position.