Prepacks Again

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
1

Dom Perry has an article on RT.com about the simplicity of prepacking a business. For once the RHA are expressing doubt, but I think they have already left the stable door open and the nag has gone. It reads like it has come as a surprise to them, transport people have been going bump since they used the aforementioned animal as a flagship.

Unfortunately prepacks have made it much too easy and a company director who is simply unhappy with the design & colour of the corporate toilet block and drivers uniforms can change it while remaining in full control. It is doubtful whether the previous decorator or the workwear supplier will ever see a penny.

roadtransport.com/Articles/2 … dustry.htm

Shouldn’t the same people in the RHA use these same arguments about agencies and driving consultancies?

that they do nothing but create “significant market distortions” and “undermine quality and sustainable jobs” in the industry.

It is our view that, within the road haulage sector, far from protecting jobs, pre-packs undermine quality and sustainable jobs within the industry

I believe the former journalist and now director of policy (RHA) Jack Semple was better placed at RBI than in the ivory towers of Weybridge to promote and provoke change, although his following quote does go along with my thinking.

Finally, we’re very concerned that some buyers of transport, for example major supermarkets, make unreasonable demands on the haulage sector in their application of ‘just in time’ delivery principles.

2

Malc,

The RHA are a waste of time, they’re just another kind of politician, I can’t think of a single thing that they’ve done to help the industry, save for standardising conditions of carriage :unamused:

Jack Semple is a decent bloke, he’s got the right idea & he’s no shrinking violet, but I doubt he’ll get anywhere with the stuffed shirts in Westminster, more’s the pity :cry:

3

newmercman:
Malc,

The RHA are a waste of time, they’re just another kind of politician, I can’t think of a single thing that they’ve done to help the industry, save for standardising conditions of carriage :unamused:

Jack Semple is a decent bloke, he’s got the right idea & he’s no shrinking violet, but I doubt he’ll get anywhere with the stuffed shirts in Westminster, more’s the pity :cry:

That is why I think he was more use in RBI then in the RHA. to mix my metaphors, it would be like a turkey shooting at its own foot with a loaded Christmas present!

Even in the blurb in the link, the RHA say they cannot stop prepack companies being members of their sordid little association, well if they had any balls they could, especially if another RHA member was owed money!

But I suppose as long as they get their foreign holidays and self indulgent praise they will not change road transport any time soon.

Nominations are now open for:

RHA Personality of the Year (Chairman’s Award)

RHA Transport Manager of the Year

RHA Subcontractor of the Year

Unsung RHA Hero of the Year

RHA Employee of the Year

4

Like you say they could stop them becoming members, but then they would lose money :unamused: At Motor Transport, Jack Semple had an audience of every O licence holder in the country, his new audience are politicians & lobbyists, maybe he will stand a better chance with them, you couldn’t get two hauliers to agree on the price of a free meal, so perhaps it’s best leaving them out of the equation altogether, he has the conviction to get things done, he doesn’t care who he upsets either, that’s just what the industry needs, he may have been strolling along the corridors of power for many years, but he certainly doesn’t conform to the ‘old school tie’ methods, be interesting to be a fly on the wall in some of those meetings :laughing:

5

newmercman:
Like you say they could stop them becoming members, but then they would lose money :unamused: At Motor Transport, Jack Semple had an audience of every O licence holder in the country, his new audience are politicians & lobbyists, maybe he will stand a better chance with them, you couldn’t get two hauliers to agree on the price of a free meal, so perhaps it’s best leaving them out of the equation altogether, he has the conviction to get things done, he doesn’t care who he upsets either, that’s just what the industry needs, he may have been strolling along the corridors of power for many years, but he certainly doesn’t conform to the ‘old school tie’ methods, be interesting to be a fly on the wall in some of those meetings :laughing:

Nice to hear that, someone with commitment :wink:

6

I didn’t get this issue of Comical Motor, so has anybody seen the 19th August article written by Peter C Clarke?

You should only get one chance to get an O-licence

Having just read Geoff Dunning’s (above) opinion article (CM 22 July), he states that the Road Haulage Association (RHA) “are to level the playing field” .

What have the RHA been charging members for? Have they just woken up?

There are hauliers out on the road that have been running bent, with dodgy vehicles and dodgy O-licences, etc, and this has been going on for years.

I think it is far too easy to obtain an O-licence. I personally know of instances, now some years ago, where operators owing millions of pounds went bust, then formed a new company, got a new O-licence and did the same thing all over again.

This was a double whammy for the legitimate haulier. They worked as a subcontractor and never got paid, then a Traffic Commissioner would give these companies another chance to rip off another legitimate haulier.

If you go bust through debts of your own making, you should only be allowed one chance and, most certainly, one O-licence.

If things were done this way, there would be no need for public inquries and the money could be reinvested in the roads, for the use of legitimate operators.

Peter C Clarke
Durham

Ed’s note: Peter, thanks for your rather radical suggestion. Is there a widespread desire for O-licence reform in the industry? Would a ‘one strike and you’re out’ approach work? We would love to print your opinions on this emotive issue. Email them to christopher.walton@rbi.co.uk

Another interesting quote in RT.Com about this same issue from Aled Thomas.

I believe we should overhaul the O-licence system, making entry into the sector more difficult. The consignor should only be able to ship goods via a company with an O-licence, not a clearing house or forwarder. Thus if they fail to pay their debts or go into insolvency, they could not get another O-licence and they would not be able to enter the industry again.

The consignor and consignee should be accountable to regulating bodies such as the police, VOSA and Trading Standards. This would stamp out the cowboys, as the consignee could also be punished if the consignor takes short cuts and they have not done everything necessary to uphold the law.

If these measures were put in place, the industry would be quickly cleaned up and would start to thrive. It would become more professional and legitimate operators would not be driven into the ground.

Aled Thomas
Depot manager
Switch International

roadtransport.com/Articles/2 … lvency.htm

It happened in Germany, the camp guards in Hoechst Gendorf and BASF Ludwigshafen were far more strict over the legislation& papers than BAG could ever dream of being. :blush:

7

In the pre-operators licence days A&B licences were difficult to obtain. In many instances you had to buy the company to get hold of the licence. Another factor was that other operators could object to the issue of a licence. This was normally BRS, British Railways etc . who wanted to protect their interests. Now it is normally just on enviromental grounds that local authorities can object.

The arrival of the O-licence opened the flood gates to every man and his dog getting licences.

As has been stated above there is nothing to stop a comapny going to the wall owing millions of pounds and starting up again days later. This is unfair to the creditors and honest operators alike.

The O-licence has been in existence for 40 years and it has been abused, so perhaps is the time to review it and give other parties a chance to put their views forward prior to the grant of new licences. If suitable evidence is produced and objections are based on behaviour rather than just objecting becuse they would be competition then it should work.

With regard to the way supermarkets behave, perhaps if suppliers took a bit more interest in how their goods were dealt with, then the situation might improve. Until that happens, there will be no changes for the better and supermarkets will continue to stick two fingers up to the rest of the industry.

8

waddy640:
In the pre-operators licence days A&B licences were difficult to obtain. In many instances you had to buy the company to get hold of the licence. Another factor was that other operators could object to the issue of a licence. This was normally BRS, British Railways etc . who wanted to protect their interests. Now it is normally just on enviromental grounds that local authorities can object.

The arrival of the O-licence opened the flood gates to every man and his dog getting licences.

As has been stated above there is nothing to stop a comapny going to the wall owing millions of pounds and starting up again days later. This is unfair to the creditors and honest operators alike.

The O-licence has been in existence for 40 years and it has been abused, so perhaps is the time to review it and give other parties a chance to put their views forward prior to the grant of new licences. If suitable evidence is produced and objections are based on behaviour rather than just objecting becuse they would be competition then it should work.

With regard to the way supermarkets behave, perhaps if suppliers took a bit more interest in how their goods were dealt with, then the situation might improve. Until that happens, there will be no changes for the better and supermarkets will continue to stick two fingers up to the rest of the industry.

I have often mentioned that the A, B & C licensing was a fairer system although it was just before my time but I do remember the discs in the screens and it was a bit of a hobby to spot them.

I was going to mention consignor liability, but was beaten to it by 5 years, this is what I read and posted recently, from an article from 2005 by Paul Frampton.

A Financial Times Headline of the 4th April read: ‘Tesco and Asda to invest £167 million in savings for shoppers.’

Forgive me, Madam Chairman, but I am going to use an expletive - ‘Up the Arsenal!’ - all their suppliers - including hauliers, will have to make this investment.

The Bank of England’s April 2005 Summary of Business Conditions stated: “The distribution sector found it much harder to raise prices, so that rising transport costs were squeezing margins. Major supermarkets continued to resist most pressure for price increases by suppliers.”

Can we afford to involve ourselves in Factory Gate, Back Load and Supermarket Pricing? Isn’t it time for Road Haulage Industry pricing?

Remember Paul Frampton is a haulier who’s other family businesses also supply supermarkets and wholesalers.

Consignor Liability - you can’t be party to your freight being carried illegally, in an unsafe manner or inefficiently. Incidentally - white van man is the most expensive and inefficient form of transport there is, and as far as I am concerned they should be issued with Anti Social Behaviour Orders.