1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140 
Father Figure
Page 86
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
INTROSPECTION is not one of the infirmities of the average haulier. The reason may be partly because he has not to think very deeply into his own situation before realizing that he has always been in the house of bondage. He is oppressed by the licensing system, by the Socialists, by the Government in the interests of the railways, and by trade and industry in the interests of cheap haulage.
When he is in his rare mood of self-examination, it is beside the point that he makes a decent living out of his business, perhaps more than he could make in any other way. He regards himself as the slave where others are free, and as a minnow among tritons. Where other industries fix their prices to suit themselves, he dare not so much as publish his own rates for fear that a rival will undercut them. Where the manufacturing tycoons carve up. the world between them, he must go "cap in hand "—a revealing phrase that he frequently uses—for any small change that is available.
A more normal mood among hauliers, particularly when there are several of them gathered together, is one of selfesteem. They proclaim the importance of their industry, and assume that whatever they say ought to be heard by the Government with respect, and repeated at length in the Press. When the event fails to come up to expectation, hauliers do not blame the Government or the Press, but decide that the fault lies with the Road Haulage Association. As a result, they are continually pointing out ways in which the R.H.A. could be improved.
The favourite proposal, which has recently come up again from several parts of the country, is for the appointment of a president. He is at one and the same time the symbol of their discontent and of their pride. For most hauliers, he is no more than an idea emanating from the mental processes I have outlined. He is what the psycho-analysts would call a father figure. He is the man destined to bring the hauliers out of the house of bondage. If they must come to terms with giants, they see the advantage of having a giant of their own, Where they think big, he will talk big; and the authorities will listen to him.
Light of Day
The fantasy does not stand up to the light of day. Road haulage is an important industry, but not so important as to tempt a man of the calibre that the hauliers have in mind. He would want a wider and more complex field for his talents, where he would command a salary probably greater than the R.H.A. would be prepared to offer him. The comparison sometimes made with the National Farmers' Union illustrates the point, •Sir James Turner, the N.F.U. president, has to cope with a formidable range of agricultural activities, which enter into every aspect of public life, national and international. He has done valuable work for his organization, but it is the status of the industry he serves that has made him an important figure.
Road haulage is merely one section, and that not the most considerable, of the transport industry. Could the British Transport Commission, the hauliers, the bus operators, and perhaps the C-licence holders and the airlines, agree to form one federation, there might be scope for another Sir James Turner to run it. There is no likelihood of such a federation, and the hauliers would not want it. They must be content to have an association of their own, and to recognize that, however well it may be led, its influence and power must be limited.
This does not mean that there is no room for improven32 ment in the R.H.A. Their methods of dealing with this very proposal to appoint a president appear, to the outside world at least, to demonstrate certain weaknesses. The proposal, it is understood, has been referred back to areas, and in the light of their opinions a decision will be reached or attempted when the Association's executive committee meet this month.
The areas might complain that their terms of reference are not clear. They do not know, for example, whether they are asked to recommend, or otherwise, the appointment of a father figure, or of a superior kind of contact man, possibly an M.P., or a peer, or even a television personality, who can put the case for the road haulage industry in places or circumstances where the ordinary Association member or official would not get a hearing. No attempt has been made, for the benefit of areas, to mark out the likely functions of a president, and to suggest how they would fit in with those of the present officials.
Exalted Position The decision, if it can be called that, to seek the views of areas was made by the executive committee themselves, who are the chosen leaders of the industry, and have reached their exalted position after a series of local and national elections. Without having been present at the meeting, one can only suspect that the majority opinion of the committee was against the appointment of a president, but that there was a minority of members determined enough to postpone the final verdict until they could summon up fresh support. The assumption may be wrong, but it is at least reasonable to suppose that, if the executive committee on the whole had wanted a president, they would have said so.
Their failure to give a lead in the direction they preferred must be construed by the public as indecision. The minority of otherwise harmless eccentrics who are asking for a father figure get the credit for at least knowing what they want, although in fact the precise nature of their demand is not clear. Provided they remain a minority, the executive committee will be able to cope with the problem, and can turn the proposal down at the next meeting, as probably they secretly long to do. On the other hand, if the minority wins sufficient support in the areas to turn the tables, the executive committee may be forced into agreeing to make an appointment of extremely vague scope, and fundamentally against their inclinations.
There was no need for the committee to drift into this false position. There were several possibilities open to them. They could, for 'example, have had the courage of their convictions, and thrown the proposal out; or they could have taken the reasonable attitude that at any time they would be willing to appoint a president, part-time or fulltime, paid or unpaid, if a sound and detailed case were put up. Such a case could come only from the leaders of the Association, who are aware of what is being done at top level, and of what is being left undone.
This is one of many points on which the members in general must be taught to trust their leaders. To the question: "Do you or do you not want a paid president?" which is in effect being put to him, the ordinary member is almost bound to reply: "Yes!" and is tempted to add, "if only because you find it necessary to ask me the question." From his limited point of view, the Association cannot have too many strong leaders and able advisers. He usually leaves it to the existing leaders to decide what help they want and what should be paid for it.