The Attitude - Towards Grouping Some Comments on Recent Press Publicity
Page 25
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
and a Reference to the By Activities of the National Association of Road Transport Groups E. B. Howes THE subject of the grouping of hauliers is, even to-day, 10 years after its inception, hardly understood by the majority of those concerned. The movement, a commendable one no matter from which angle it be viewed, may suffer if some of the misconceptions be not corrected, and that quickly.
In this connection, the article by Mr. Bottomley, published in the issue of " The Commercial Motor " for February 2, 1945, is a case in point The writer states, in his preamble, first, that he ha.s.attended only one meeting—and that so far back as November of last year—and, secondly, that he is not an operator I should be inclined to the opinion that Mr. Bottomley s experience of hauliers is as brief and all-insufficient as might be expected from his above-mentioned preliminary confession. He chatted with hauliers; they were irresponsive. he was surprised that they needed a little leadership, amounting, in his view, to coercion, before they would acquiesce it the proposal to form a group. These attitudes are typical of the rank and file of the industry; they cause no surprise to those of us who understand and know our colleagues (or competitors). In his criticisms of grouping, and especially where he throws doubts upon the bona fides of local groups, in so far as their reaction to operators of foreign-based vehicle is concerned, the writer again emphasizes his lack of knowledge of what has been, and is being, done in that connection. Such interchange of traffics is carried on in all good faith and with entire absence of friction.
As regards his suggested " Corporation," here, in very truth,. is a case where the haulier may exclaim: " Save me from my friends." In an earlier part of his article, he suggests that grouping, as at present envisaged, may lead to monopoly. I cannot conceive of a more direct apprcach to monopoly that that which will be thrown open if his ideas of a Corporation ever come to fruition.
In my view, he had no right to speak at all, let alone write, on such short acquaintance with a subject which is of paramount interest to _our industry.
Criticism of a " C.M." Leader .
I should now like, if I may, to refer .to, and to some extent criticize, the leading article in " The Commercial Motor " of February 9. Whilst the views therein expressed were, in the main, sciund and certainly, as usual, directed towards the best interests of the industry, there were certain points made which, I sincerely believe, would have been modified had the Editor been fully acquainted with all the facts.
That he was not so acquainted, that he was, in fact, presented with only a half or, shall I say, three-quarters of the story, is the fault of the Association itself. In this the National Association of Road Transport Groups is but following the example set by other associations in our industry, not excluding some of the most important, in that these associations do not throw their meetings—committee as well as national—open to the Press. The discretion of these gentlemen of the " fourth estate," heir knowledge of our industry, its weaknesses as well as its Strong points, are such that the likelihood of their making any tactiCal error in reporting these proceedingr, is extremely remote. •
In this particular case, I think the Editor came down too heavily on what is, after all, a new Association; ne which, moreover, has done a great deal of work in a very short space of time and may therefore reasonably be excused if, in the exuberance of youth, it has done a little snore, rather than a little less, than the Editor, in his maturity and wisdom, deemed advisable. With -1.1 due respect, I would suggest to him that, in this case at least, he would have done better to have adopted his own motto, implied in that very article, of festina At any rate, I hope that the executive committee will extend to him a cordial invitation personally to attend the next general meeting of-the National Association of Road Transport Groups, and hope that he will be given full liberty to report and comment on that meeting as he
thinks fit The same invitation and the same liberty should apply to subsequent meetings. [The Editor of this journal, like many of his colleagues, is short of staff and unable to attend as many meetings as he would wish. He was invited to the 'Manchester meeting.—Eol
I would now like, in clarification of the foregoinc, to refer briefly to the meeting of the N.A.R.T.G. which took place at the Grand Hotel, Manchester, on March 2. •
It was attended by no fewer than 100 people, all operator members of groups from the north, south, east and west • of the country Only two groups, of the number in the Association, were not represented.
Members Against R.H.O. Liaison Particular attention was directed to the items on the agenda by which liaison with the R.H.O. was suggested. By a unanimous vote it was agreed that these proposals be not accepted, but be left to lie on the table for an indefinite period. The vote of confidence in the chairman and executive committee was duly proposed and' passed. The meeting was clearly of the opinion that the procedure that had been adopted in respect of the approach to the Ministry was not approved. but it felt that, matters having gone so far; there was no option but to take the course followed
The meeting was fairly conducted, especially having in mind the intransigence of many in their attitude, not only. to what was proposed to be done, but as regards what had already been done. In that light, the vote of confidence was well deserved. Nevertheless, it was made perfectly plain to the executive committee that its immediate past activities (in relation to the meeting with Mr. Noel-Baker) -were not approved. It was even more definitely and positively demonstrated that the members in no way approved of the proposed alliances with the R.H.O.: that proposal, with most. of the others on the agenda, was vetoed.'
The meeting was unanimously in favot1r of a return to the status quo (of 1939), which, plus co-operative grouping, would be an ideal plan for the after-the-war development of the road transport industry