AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Staff Car Problems

9th February 1962
Page 68
Page 71
Page 68, 9th February 1962 — Staff Car Problems
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?

The very ubiquity of the modern motorcar can belie the problems inherent in fleet operation

THE provision of cars for business purposes is a long-established practice which has been applied to a much wider range of personnel in post-war years than previously. Whilst there is no precise record of the number of cars used for business purposes, it must form a substantial proportion of the present 5.85m. car population in this country. Correspondingly, the capital investment in staff car fleets must be considerable. Yet it is by no means universal for companies operating such fleets to give to their provision and subsequent operation the• same careful thought that they give to other aspects of their businesses. Where such omission does occur it could be partly psychological, stemming from the belief that, because the modern motorcar is so commonplace, few, if any, serious problems are involved.

Those, however, who appreciate that this form of transport requires adequate consideration before it can be run efficiently can be divided into three groups. There will be those who are providing transport for their staff for the first time; those who are adding to their fleet and, at the same time, are wishing to review existing policies; and, thirdly, those who, in any case, operate an ancillary •fleet of commercial vehicles.

Because the allocation of a staff car to a particular individual normally implies that he holds a responsible position, problems in relation to the convenience of the driver and the maximum availability of the vehicle have to be given much greater weight than would be the case with a commercial vehicle. Whilst, as always, the amount of expenditure involved in both the initial outlay and subsequent operating costs must be kept to a minimum, this cannot be allowed to interfere with the standard of service provided. Otherwise there may be greater, if deferred, losses resulting from lower overall efficiency of the individual concerned, and his contribution to the business as a whole.

Consequently, before considering the merits of adopting the policy of hiring or owning vehicles and, in the latter case, renewing them at varying intervals, an assessment of some of the problems likely to be involved in the operation of car fleets should be made in order to temper any decisions that might be arrived at purely on a comparison of relative costs.

Where an ancillary fleet of commercial vehicles is already operated it would seem logical and, indeed, economic to take advantage of the existing organization if it is intended to add private cars to the fleet. Whilst such an existing maintenance organization could be adjusted to serve this dual purpose, there can be many pitfalls. Despite the greater utilization of maintenance equipment which this dual arrangement would involve, some organizations have found that, in practice, the disadvantages can outweigh the advantages.

SOMETIMES, after the addition of staff cars to the existing commercial fleet, it has been found that there has been a deterioration in the efficiency of the maintenance department. This has resulted from the division of loyalty and responsibility between interests which to some extent are not readily compatible.

Enlightened trading and industrial organizations appreciate the responsibility carried by the department responsible for the distribution of their goods and reward their transport manager accordingly. Within his own department he would normally have complete control of day-to-day operation and, additionally, play a substantial part in determining the forward planning in relation to vehicle replacement, maintenance schedules and, possibly, branch depot location. Whether or not the commerial vehicle fleet is housed at one central depot or dispersed over a wide area, there would normally be a nucleus of vehicles at each point. Such a disposition of the commercial fleet would facilitate the operation of maintenance schedules based on a rotary system. It would be possible also to provide, economically, for replacement vehicles to be available, whilst maintenance of the original vehicles was being undertaken, in order to ensure continuity of the delivery service.

Whilst such an arrangement would be common practice when operating commercial vehicles, few, if any, of these conditions might apply where car fleets are concerned. It therefore follows that a policy which has proved efficient and satisfactory. when applied to commercial vehicles may be quite unsuited for staff cars. •

A major difference in these two types of operation results from staff cars being located, in many instances, for a substantial proportion of their working life either at the representative's home or within the area of his weekly' round.. Because of this the dead mileage and wasted time involved bringing the vehicles back to a central point for maintenance could be totally uneconomic. This factor, in turn, would then necessitate an assessment of the comparative merits of contracting out the maintenance of a vehicle or, alternatively, hiring outright. •

IT could rightly be claimed that there are several occasions where a substantial number of staff cars are either housed at one point regularly, or are at least brought in daily to that point by their respective operators on completion of their home-to-office journey. It would seem in such instances that existing maintenance facilities provided for commercial vehicles could readily, be made available for car fleets. Even in connection with the equipment itself, however, this would not be wholly true, as some of the facilities would not be entirely interchangeable because of the difference in Overall dimensions of the two types of vehicle.

Although less readily apparent, greater difficulties are likely to arise from maintaining car and commercial fleets under the same roof because of disarrangement of previously satisfactory schedules and differences arising from priority of attention.

Even where the position of transport manager has been given a status compatible with the responsibility entailed, the personnel to whom staff cars have been allocated will be in the majority of cases at least equal, if not senior, to the transport manager. Despite good will on both sides, it is inevitable in such a situation that a request for some attention, even though it may not be immediately essential, could be interpreted as virtually an order for the work to be done. If, to cope with such a situation, the maintenance of the commercial fleet is allowed to take second place, overall efficiency in that section of the fleet could deteriorate.

Ideally, it is an advantage where dual maintenance is undertaken for there to be separate garages, each with their own maintenance schedules. But even where limitations of space do not permit this, some segregation of staff for specific duties should be attempted. Otherwise, priorities may be determined on factors other than genuine need—to the dissatisfaction of all concerned.

The differences which can arise between staff car and commercial vehicle fleets can be considerable in their daily operation. • A transport manager would normally have complete control of the drivers of the, commercial fleet. This would include the initial vetting at the time of the recruitment interview, engagement and day-to-day supervision. Additionally, in some organizations at least, actual training or refresher courses in driving techniques might be arranged with the established schools of motoring. Overall, therefore, the transport manager of an efficient organization can go a substantial way to ensuring that he has a capable driving' staff for his commercial vehicles.

NO such fortunate situation would be likely to exist in connection with staff to whom cars are allocated. Whilst adequate driving ability is legally implied by possession of a driving licence, this• assumption is not necessarily valid when viewed in the hard light of operating costs. Where staff cars are concerned, a transport manager would not normally be able to take the positive action available to him when operating a commercial vehicle fleet.

From the viewpoint of the representative who has been allocated a company's car, the vehicle so provided is merely a means to an end. It must enable him to carry Pout his. duties more readily, with the minimum of attention and inconvenience and, ideally, should be available at all times. The greater the seniority of such a representative, or executive, the greater his value to his company. Any disruption in the execution of his duties resulting from non-availability of transport could well have serious repercussions on the prosperity, of the organization.

Fulfilment of all these requirements in respect of car fleets is seldom compatible with policies of vehicle replacement and maintenance generally associated with commercial fleets. Recognition of this fact is shown by the frequency of replacement of staff cars. As an example, one of the largest distributors in the south of England reports that of all the cars sold by them for business purposes, 65 per cent. are replaced annually, 25 per cent. biennially and the balance every third year. These figures are, of course, in marked contrast to the general practice adopted in connection with the replacement of commercial vehicles. And, because of this substantial difference in replacement policies, there must inevitably be correspondingly substantial differences in maintenance policies and overall management if staff car fleets are to be operated efficiently.

In, previous articles in this series devoted to various aspects of costing the operation of commerciaj vehicles, the interrelationship of the 10 items of costs into which it is convenient to segregate expenditure has been persistently emphasized. There is similarly an inter-relationship between the requirements (particularly regarding maximum availability) of the operator of a staff car and the maintenance and replacement policy adopted in connection with such a vehicle. For this reason a too-rigid isolation.. or over-emphasis, of one particular comparison of costs could lead to the adoption of a policy which would subsequently prove unsatisfactory.

Whilst the advertising value of a smart fleet of commercial vehicles is generally recognized, this aspect assumes even more importance in connection with the provision of a staff car. Although to a lesser degree than the representative that drives it, it provides some indication of the standing of the company concerned, regardless—and this is an important point—of whether such indication is desired or intended. This aspect would be of particular importance in conditions of keen competitive trading, when a marked comparative disadvantage relative to cars supplied, as compared with those of competitors, could introduce an unfortunate atmosphere of inferiority complex. .

Standardization is another aspect of vehicle operation which may require different treatment in relation. to staff cars as compared with commercial vehicles. In the great majority of cases a substantial number of commercial vehicles would normally be housed at one depot. The advantages of some measure of standardization would then be readily apparent, both in connection with the reduced number of spare parts it would be necessary to carry to ensure, continuity of operation and the familiarity of the'fitting staff with a limited number of types of vehicle.

ALSO, because the traffic carried by a well-established haulier or ancillary fleet tends to become regularized, standardization of operation from the traffic aspect—both in respect of goods carried and weekly mileages averaged—is facilitated.

Again, the majority of the conditions relative to standardization would not necessarily apply to car fleets. It is common practice, for example, in any sizeable staff car fleet for the types of vehicle allocated to be graded in relation to the seniority of the staff concerned. Additionally, even when a company markets only a limited range of goods, the representatives' average weekly mileages may vary substantially. Such variation may result from a number of reasons, such as the density of population served or a change in policy involving the canvassing of new territory.

Superimposed on this likelihood of a greater variation in the possible requirements of individual operators of staff cars is the equal likelihood that the several vehicles concerned would not normally be housed at one point, so that the benefits of standardization could then be more imaginary than real. In such circumstances selection of a car to meet the representatives' precise needs would be a more realistic policy and would carry with it few, if any, of the disadvantages of nonstandardization if maintenance were contracted out to the local .distributor, as would often be the case.

Continuing this review of factors influencing policies of staff car provision, operation and maintenance, it is proposed next week to give comparative operating costs of the types of car commonly used for business purposes, together with relative

costs of manufacturers' maintenance schemes. S.B.

Tags


comments powered by Disqus