R.H.A. OPPOSES MEMBER ON RATES DECISION was reserved by the
Page 23
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
'L./South Wales Lifensing Authority, last week, in an interesting caseY in which the Road Haulage Association (Barry branch) opposed an application by one of its members. On the ground that he had secured a contract from Barry Urban District Council to carry coke, etc., and haul for the electricity department, Mr. Horace C. Sewell, of Barry, sought permission to acquire an additional lorry, as his present vehicles would not be available.
He would, in this case, act as ownerdriver and he repudiated the representations of the Barry committee of the R.H.A. that he could not make a profit on the rates under which his contract was accepted by the council, vie., 2s. 3d. per hour hire rate; 3s. 4th per ton carriage rate for coke, and
day-hire rate, 19s. lid. As ownerdriver of this lorry, he would, he declared, make a good living from 'it. In addition, he started work at 7 a.m., and, when he completed his council contract work, did other work.
For the R.H.A. it was submitted that the licence should not be granted, because the rates of the accepted tender were uneconomic and harmful to the haulage industry generally. It was denied that the R.H.A. wished to throttle free competition, or to lay down ,hard-and-fast limits of prices, but it had the right to regard the general welfare of the trade and oppose uneconomic rates. It was contended that, against Mr. Sewell's rate of 2s. 3d, per hour,. the former contractor obtained 4s. per hour.
Mr. T R. Williams, a member of the R.H.A. Barry committee, said that the committee called Mr. Sewell before it and asked him to amend his tender, which was demonstrated to be uneconomic. The committee undertook, in the event of his amending his tender,not to compete with him, so that if he had revised it, he would
still have had the work. In Mr. Williams's opinion, 24s. 6d. per daywas the minimum figure at whidli this
work could be effected.
Mr. William C. Adams, Barry, declared that his price for the work would be 29s. per day.
For Mr, Sewell it was submitted that, as he uenuld drive this lorry himself, the question of paying fair wages to an employee could not arise.
Mr. A. T, James, KC., the Authority, pointed out that where any question of paying fair wages to employees arose from council ce-tracts, there were appropriate committees to investigate it, and he would see that everywhere in his area licence conditions were observed. No such question arose in this case. In the event. of any licence being granted, it would apply to a radius of only 10 miles.