AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

THE DARK

9th May 1996, Page 7
9th May 1996
Page 7
Page 7, 9th May 1996 — THE DARK
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?

4 i.m rotection is not a principal, but an expe

dient." Benjamin Disraeli's words have a marvellous ring to them. The kind of ring that would add weight to the United Road Transport Union's call for an amnesty for drivers who blow the whistle on bent haulage bosses. When it comes to blowing the whistle what have put-upon drivers got to lose? In short, everything. While the URTU is to be commended for trying to negotiate an amnesty with the VI and the police, offering protection from the enforcement authorities is surely missing the point. At the risk of stating the obvious, it's the unscrupulous employers that the drivers need protection from! Imagine what would happen if a dodgy haulier is taken to court and the prosecution fails to deliver. Now imagine if said dodgy haulier finds out who set him up for a f011. ,.instant dismissal would appear to be the very least painful option that a whistleblower could expect to receive for his troubles. You could always argue that drivers, like operators, are their own worst enemies. They don't have to take jobs with bent hauliers, just as hauliers don't have to run bent to make money out of appallinQ rates. Both can say no and save themselves a lot of grief. Yet even that little word seems to get stuck in their throats when they ought to be shouting it at the top of their voice, We all know better, even if we don't do better.

While we're on the subject of whistleblowing, has anyone bothered to ask the one question that any potential candidate must be pondering: "What will I do for a job once the company I work for has been shut down for running an illegal operation?" Even bent hauliers pay wages. While good intelligence is undoubtedly the key to successful crime fighting, when we have to rely on insiders to tell us who's been breaking the law what does that say about the enforcers? If sufficient resources were available for more silent, weekend and night-time checks by the VI and the police then surely we wouldn't need to lean on dri

vers to tell us who's been a bad /IN boy—we'd know it already' ilik: And we wouldn't need to offer whistleblowers an amnesty either, as the chances are we'd be prosecuting them along with their bent employees. Disraeli was right, we should all be protected: but not from the law when we break it.

Tags


comments powered by Disqus