Road Transport Representation
Page 11
Page 12
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
SOME weeks ago—to be Why We Consider That An exact, on July 20—we ciliary Users and Haulier s "Keep Haulage RepresentaNeed Individual Organizations tion Apart." In this we mentioned that the problems of A and B licensees vary widely in some respects from those of ancillary users. This article started a controversy, which is still proceeding, both in our own and other journals, in the transport field. .
As a result we have been practically accused of endeavouring to introduce dissension into the industry, and have been challenged to state wherein lie the differences which were alleged. .
To commence with, we need not, we think, consider as important any accusation of this type. It has always been our aim to achieve the largest possible degree of unity in the industry, but unity does not necessarily mean the sinking of individuality.
Unity can be achieved in two ways—the Hitler way, by repression of all disagreeing elements, and the democratic method by which, within reason, everyone can have his say and the respective arguments are blended and, where necessary, modified.
To suggest that if all the haulage interests be brought together into one body and the ancillary users into another they must necessarily fight, appears to us to be ark assumption for which there are no proper grounds. Apart from this, the representation of hauliers and that of ancillary users are of quite different natures; the former is usually direct, whereas in the case of the ancillary user it is normally through a transport manager. We do not suggest that there is anything wrong with either method, but it is hardly to be expected that the views of employers and employees, although not in the same concerns, will coincide.
Mixed Views May Weaken Case Likewise, in any mixed body, there may well be a reduction of strength in putting forward any particular case concerning only one branch, for such views must be tempered by the thought of how they may affect the other and, possibly, more numerous members who might, in extreme cases, hold out the threat of resignation or the transference of their interests and power, to another body.
If every member of an association be concerned in more or less the same class of business, then the representation is far more likely to possess a higher degree of uniformity in its views, and if there is to be any clash, then it is better that this should be external rather than internal, on the principle of the chain being as strong as its weakest link.
For presentation to Government Departments, etc., due consideration to any important divergence of opinion between the two or more representative bodies could easily be arranged by a joint council, possibly by something of this nature already in existence.
That the Government is inclined to take this view is shown by the encouragement which has been given to the formation of the new Consultative Committee representing. only A and B licensees.
Business Requirements Often Differ We do not think it advisable to go deeply into the matter of differences between these interests and others. In fact, we prefer not to allude to them as differences; they are more basic factors pertaining to the nature of the business involved. Take, for example, the matter of fuel. Whereas ancillary users are, as a whole, not greatly dissatisfied with their normal ration (particularly as for essential work they are able to obtain supplementary supplies), hauliers, in most instances, find the ration to be quite out of proportion to their requirements, as the average mileage performed by a vehicle engaged in the latter class of work is normally much greater than with the former. No fair comparison can be made in respect only of the numbers of vehicles concerned. It is mileage that counts.
If we take the manufacturers' point of view, this greater mileage operated by hauliers means that vehicles wear out more rapidly, and, consequently, there is a greater demand for renewals than would seem to be implied by the numbers in service. In any case, it is not for the manufacturers or their representative body to interfere unduly with the internal politics of transport operators. They are producers who wish to dispose of their wares, and they should adopt the merchant,' S policy that " the customer is always' right.".
It is our definite opinion that it would be to the undoubted advantage of the ancillary users to possess their own representative body entirely devoted to their particular interests. At present they have rather a greater measure of freedom than do their brethren the hauliers. It is up to them to fight for a continuation of any such concessions, and they s'hould be able to do this far better than when their forces are weakened by a leavening of purely haulage interests. The hauliers should also he busily preparing their after-the-war campaign, which might well involve more " mass" trading departments on the lines of Traffic Movement.
Our Industry Needs a Showman
I N the "twenties" the advantages of road transport spoke for themselves—speed, economy and, on the passenger _side, comfort. With the " thirties" came restrictions that cramped the industry's style in many ways. Road transport went along fighting to do its job, going on with its .work, but generally hiding its light under a bushel. Rather timid attempts were made at publicity; when railway claims were hit in the direction of road transport the ball was patted back. Since the commencement of the war the industry's publicity has faded away almost to nothing. MeanWhile restrictions knot themselves around the operators, and the railways grow bolder in their demands on the public.
Those in the industry know well enough the burden that is being carried by motor haulage, but on the present showing the railways will start after the war with all the medals, simply because they had the foresight to pin them upon their own chests.
In the present circumstances it may be thought that the duty of seeing that road transport gets a share in any glory is a matter for the Ministry of Transport, but there are obvious difficulties in that direction. The new Consultative Committee, upon which the A.R.O., C.M.U.A. and N.R.T.E.F. are represented, might be an appropriate body to initiate the necessary action. Be that as it may, there are great stories of human interest waiting only to be told. Take care of those, and 90 per cent. of the political actions will take care of themselves.