Management and the driver
Page 40
Page 41
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
CM-sponsored seminar looks at pay and productivity; drivers' hours; load security; tachographs; European regulations. Britain has asked EEC for five-year delay on new-tachograph rules, confirms DoE
• The difficulties of recruiting and retaining good drivers and the need for operators to pay increasing attention to conscious and planned driver management was the theme of a seminar held in London this week.
The seminar, "Managing and controlling drivers" was sponsored by Commercial Motor and covered drivers' pay and working conditions; implications of recent legislation; load security; tachographs; and the Common Market. The team of speakers included the chairman of the Eastern area of the Road Haulage Association, a leading trade union official, a security expert and a senior representative from the DoE.
An employer's view Road transport drivers work without supervision so the employer had to have some way of obtaining a proper level of productivity and he had to see that he received an adequate amount Of work for the money he paid out in wages, Mr Edward Smith, managing director of Reece Bros (Transport) Ltd, said when presenting the first paper.
On the assumption that some kind of productivity payment was essential in addition to a standard wage or salary, Mr Smith said that any such payment must offer security of employment, reasonable status, recognition of long service and acquired experience; and it should be simple enough for everybody to understand.
The desirable features in an incentive scheme were that it should discourage restrictive practices; encourage skills and the care of sophisticated and expensive equipment; avoid vehicle running such that accidents and excessive speeds may result; encourage maximum co-operation with customers and stimulate the proper regard for provision of adequate customer service; and avoid stimulation of unofficial strikes.
Assuming that there were inadequacies in many existing agreements, it might be a good idea to break entirely new ground, said Mr Smith. One way might be to place a driver on a salary plus share of profits. He would have a direct interest in his firm, which should encourage a very responsible attitude.
Learning the right way It had become necessary to increase the skills of transport personnel and train them to do things in the correct way, emphasized the speaker. There was a need to train drivers to drive vehicles and handle properly all the tasks that went with driving. There was a need for refresher training to eradicate faulty driving techniques originating from self-taught hgv drivers and a basic need for unions to recognize that rates of pay should be adapted to relative skills and experience of individual drivers, Mr Smith said. In other words pay rates should differentiate between older, experienced drivers and newcomers.
The whole structure of transport had changed since the present wages negotiating structure for the industry was formulated; the 1970s could well see the disappearance of the Road Haulage Wages Council, he thought. By whatever standards they were judged; drivers of the 1970s were professionals, Mr Ken Jackson, national secretary of the commercial transport group, TGWU, said when opening his address to the seminar on Wednesday.
They were responsible men, accepting the obligations associated with their calling and having to satisfy a high medical standard and pass a strict driving test which in some respects was equal to the standard required by the Institute of Advanced Motorists, he said.
This professionalism had to be recognized and be seen to be recognized in the wages and conditions of employment that applied. Associated with this was the need to establish a career structure in which the driver had security of employment.
High wages went with high standards of performance and efficiency and in Mr Jackson's view there was nothing wrong with high wages if efficient operation was achieved. The transport industry had been bedevilled for years by the "11-hour" complex, he said.
Wasted hours Planning and scheduling were, by and large, unknown, he alleged. Vehicles stood loaded for hours, and sometimes days, awaiting discharge and it was only recently that recognition had been given to productivity agreements.
Mr Jackson defined productivity as a means of achieving the maximum utilization of capital, equipment and labour by making every working hour a productive hour. It meant planning, examination of administration and costing. It meant management accepting the obligation to create the circumstances through which a productivity scheme could work—at times capital investment was needed in providing up-to-date equipment and facilities. It also meant that the worker must get his fair reward for accepting the changes and co-operating to make the exercise successful. Productivity had to be paid for, he said. On the subject of industrial relations, Mr Jackson said that good relations would only be obtained by developing confidence and trust between management and men. Full and sincere consultation and maximum participation in the actual negotiations would develop confidence, and good industrial relations would be established. This was the only way, he said: legislation or compulsion would never produce confidence.
The National Negotiating Committee foundered because the constituent members of the RHA did not have the confidence of the negotiating members, and it was soon demonstrated that the procedural agreement was being rejected by employers, suggested the speaker.
On tachographs, Mr Jackson confirmed that the opposition of the union to the universal application by compulsion or indiscriminate application was on the basis of safeguarding the membership. The suggestion of compulsory use of these devices was a measure of compulsion without any safeguard for the drivers, he said.
The fundamental point, said Mr Jackson, was that there must be increasing recognition of the union at local level and of meaningful consultation and negotiating at local level.
Recognition that in order to achieve maximum co-operation in creating the right atmosphere for improved efficiency or productivity negotiations, there must be "more decisions by the workers instead of for them".
The title of this seminar (managing and controlling drivers) should, he said, really have been "Improving efficiency in road transport by co-operation".
A review of legislation
Some of the problems caused by the introduction of the changed drivers' hours and new records were discussed by CM staff member David Lowe in his paper.
Principal among the problems was the very number of changes which had been made in the regulations since their introduction just over a year ago. Mr Lowe gave a brief summary of all the statutes covering the subject.
Since the introduction last March of the new hours and records, the relationship between drivers and employers had changed, Mr Lowe had found. The severe penalties for failure to comply with the regulations—fines up to £200 on summary conviction and the chance of the operator losing his 0 licence and the driver his hgv driving licence—probably accounted for this change. Convictions incurring such high penalties obviously had a grave effect on the operator or driver.
Mr Lowe went on to outline the responsibilities of the operator and the driver.
The operator had to ensure that his drivers observed the hours and records regulations, particularly in regard to exemptions if these applied. The speaker considered that it should not be left to the driver to interpret the conditions under which he could make use of the exemptions.
Driver security
Thieves had always been obstacles to the road haulier whose job was to deliver goods to the right consignee at the right time in a condition as good as when they were collected. Mr Jack Brown, managing director of Atlas Express Ltd, told the delegates. He added: "But never before have their activities and greed been so extensive as at the present time. Contrary to all intelligent expectancy, it now seems that the more affluent the community the higher is the level of dishonesty."
Security action must be taken right from the start when a man applied to join the company, said Mr Brown. It was with this in mind that the RHA vehicle security committee made its first two security points for the guidance of hauliers: "take up references for the previous five years, and be suspicious of unexplained gaps". When checking references by telephone be sure to check the number for yourself, said the speaker. One supplied by a dishonest applicant could connect you to his accomplice. Until you have seen his driving licence and have in your possession his P.45, National Health card and photograph, do not allow a newly engaged driver to take out a vehicle.
Transport managers were faced with two basic theft problems—internal and external. The latter was usually more spectacular but, in total, the former, said Mr Brown, imposed a far heavier levy on the transport industry. It was not only freight that was stolen, but also equipment, such as tyres, spare parts, tarpaulins, ropes and fuel, to say nothing of payrolls.
From the point of view of parcels carriers, theft appreciation was clouded by the numbers of packages which were wrongly delivered. For instance, parcels displaying two labels bearing the names and addresses of different consignees were commonplace. Sometimes these were the deliberate machinations of crooked senders but the majority were genuine mistakes. The recipients of these packages could also be split into two groups: (a) those who failed to realize that the goods were not intended for them; and (b) those who knowingly kept them and hoped that the mistake would go undiscovered.
Mr Brown emphasized that greater care and attention to security must commence in the premises of the senders of goods. The express carriers group of the Road Haulage Association had issued a pamphlet on secure packing.
Periodical reviews and updating of security procedures were musts, otherwise cunning thieves had time to work out the weaknesses—and it was also surprising how many sensible safeguards were allowed to fall into disuse during the course of only a few weeks.
Good supervision of loading was vitally important to crime prevention in transit and it was encouraging that the transport industry was now paying more attention to the proper training of depot superintendents and warehouse foremen.
Internal theft was terribly contagious, said Mr Brown, and no effort should be spared in fighting it.
Tachographs—alive or dead?
Was the tachograph issue alive or dead, asked Mr Peter Massey, of Lucas-Kienzle Instruments Ltd, when he introduced his paper. He admitted that this might seem a strange question in view of the claims made by tachograph manufacturers, but unfortunately the instruments had first been brought to the notice of drivers and operators by Mrs Castle's White Paper, followed by the Transport Act—with results which were now well known. His company, said Mr Massey, had always been opposed
to the implementation of the tachograph sections of that Act until such time as these instruments had been in fleet use for some time, and become thoroughly understood, on a voluntary basis.
In the meantime, he said, vehicle and tachograph manufacturers had, following the Transport Bill, studied the implications of the legislation, and an SMMT working party had later made recommendations to the DoE which took care of all installation and field service problems.
The use of tachographs in this country was still in its infancy, said Mr Massey, but over 3000 Lucas-Kienzle models were nevertheless in daily use, and the results already showed that the savings could produce generous bonuses for drivers and higher revenue and lower costs for operators.
The future efficiency of the service industries—notably transport—was essential to national prosperity, and tachographs had to play a vital part in ensuring that road transport met the future demands upon it.
Common Market problems
The effects on employer /employee relations of European transport policies were discussed by Mr Reginald Dawson, assistant secretary, Road Transport (Goods) Division of the DoE, in an authoritative and wide-ranging paper.
Mr Dawson commented that the two bodies whose deliberations had a direct bearing on British transport operation—the Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) and the European Economic Community (EEC—the Six) had produced regulations which conflicted in some respects.
The EEC, he said, had set itself the task of producing a common transport policy, which had the effect of ensuring that no one member state had a competitive advantage over the others because its drivers were allowed to work under different conditions. Mr Dawson explained some of the principal regulations affecting drivers—which were binding upon drivers of commercial vehicles of whatever nationality, whether EEC members or not.
The specification for the EEC tachograph was, he said, far more complicated than any tachograph currently in production. In particular, the instrument would have to record distance travelled, speed, driving time, opening of the case containing the record, other periods of work or of availability for work or, for the crew member(s), breaks in work, and daily rest periods.
All new vehicles (within the scope of the regulations) first registered after January 1 1975 must be fitted with an EEC-type instrument. All other relevant vehicles must be so fitted by January 1 1978, unless already fitted with a non-EEC type instrument approved by the member state; such instruments could continue in use until January 11980.
The UK expressed its willingness to accept all the provisions of the regulation except that requiring all new vehicles registered after January 1 1975 to be fitted. Britain wanted this date deferred to January 11978, said Mr Dawson.