Olog Hai:
What is even more bizarre is that one poster in this thread regards it as ‘reasonable’ behaviour on Suttons’ part.
Correct! but like I said I don’t know the full story only going by what is mentioned in this thread. If Nynas(think thats what they are called) have decided on paying lower rates then Sutton will be out of pocket due to reduced revenue.
Also I doubt most of you know the full story either.
I may be wrong I’ve only dealt in the pallet/parcel business but I’ve seen this happen before. Contractor at a well known parcel company got told your only getting £200 per truck you have here a day when it used to be £250 a day. He turned round and said fine I’ll pull my trucks out then and he lost the contract and all his drivers lost a job.
The contractor couldn’t afford to run 10 trucks a day and pay his drivers so he decided to leave; that extra £50 was pretty much what he made for himself the £200 is ■■■■■■■ in the trucks and driver wages.
If this is similar to the situation at Suttons then it does sound reasonable; considering the alternative will be job losses. THAT BEING SAID I and probably most of the people here don’t know the full story and this is just my initial thoughts on the affair.
I will say I’m not a big fan of going back to the union days of the 70s like some of you no doubt are when black outs and shortages in food and petrol due to strikes was common place.
Here is a meaningless platitude to appease the angry crowd.
BOOOOOO BIG COMPANIES SCREWING THE DRIVERS!
You make valid points, however, them drivers signed a contract in good faith … why should they say, you know what let’s just bend over and just do as we are told, … they work and expect a decent wage … the company are making the driver suffer because of a profit margin … … the drivers deserve to stick together and not just be a puppet to the company … I’m sure non of the office staff are taking a direct pay cut or managers etc …
albion:
I do genuinely try to be a decent employer and unlike Suttons, there’s only me and 25 staff to please, not a board and several hundred jobs.
Suppose my customer came along and said I’m not paying you £1.50 a mile, I’m paying you ;£1.30. Now I’m a stubborn old bat so I’d tell them our worth and if they didn’t like it, they can Foxtrot Oscar (I have said no on contractual terms before and been prepared to walk). And if the customer says no, then we all head off into the sunset. From the drivers perspective I’m not sure what that achieves…
Now Suttons have far more to lose and if they’ve been told to take it or leave it, they really can’t decide to give in, their only option is to cut costs. The council aren’t going to cut business rates, fuel suppliers will have the price down to the bone, truck sales and maintenance, maybe shave a few grand off that over 4-5 years. The only cost they can try to cut is wages.
There really isn’t much difference. Customer tells suttons they need to work for less. Drivers customer (Suttons) tells the drivers they need to work for less. Same principle, someone further up the chain hits you with a big stick.
But this is the problem companies know they can cut costs by reducing pay and conditions, so contracts are negotiated with that knowledge, (although I wonder if the Swedish based contractors of Nynas would find that so easy?)
This doesn’t help workers, it doesn’t help people like you who want to treat their staff properly, it doesn’t really help most small business as they now making the same or less percentage profit on a smaller turnover, but it does benefit the owners (shareholders) of large multi-national corporations who drive these deals.
So unless we can get to a point where companies know they can’t make saving purely on reducing pay and conditions, we will continue with a race to the bottom and an increasing gap between the wealthiest top few percent and the average person.
I agree 100%, I was making the point that Suttons have as much choice as drivers. It would be nice if hauliers would stick together and not accept low rates. What the answer is, I have no idea.
albion:
I do genuinely try to be a decent employer and unlike Suttons, there’s only me and 25 staff to please, not a board and several hundred jobs.
Suppose my customer came along and said I’m not paying you £1.50 a mile, I’m paying you ;£1.30. Now I’m a stubborn old bat so I’d tell them our worth and if they didn’t like it, they can Foxtrot Oscar (I have said no on contractual terms before and been prepared to walk). And if the customer says no, then we all head off into the sunset. From the drivers perspective I’m not sure what that achieves…
Now Suttons have far more to lose and if they’ve been told to take it or leave it, they really can’t decide to give in, their only option is to cut costs. The council aren’t going to cut business rates, fuel suppliers will have the price down to the bone, truck sales and maintenance, maybe shave a few grand off that over 4-5 years. The only cost they can try to cut is wages.
There really isn’t much difference. Customer tells suttons they need to work for less. Drivers customer (Suttons) tells the drivers they need to work for less. Same principle, someone further up the chain hits you with a big stick.
If you have a client that plays hardball like that with a contractor, then as workers you just keep forcing the contractors to fold in bankruptcy until the client is radioactive and has to hire direct labour, and then they pay what the union demands after all. Of course, that depends on workers being unified, because when they are, there’s only one price in town no matter where the client goes.
Fine. But at the moment there’s a big gap between fantasy and reality.
merseycool:
SOLIDARITY TO OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS
To be fair where is the support within the TUC as a whole for road transport to be given a level playing field regarding fuel taxation as other transport modes like rail to at least give the employers some breathing space and remove that justifiable excuse.As it stands road fuel taxation is effectively a tax on the wages of road transport workers.
Doesn’t make any odds what the price of derv is. (Unless you are competing with someone using red or foreign fuel, but as that’s almost certainly not the case here, let’s put that to one side.)
Back to my customer paying 1.50 a mile. As from Monday, fuel duty is abolished. As with pretty much all contracts, I have a fuel escalator in built. From Monday I now, pay much less for my derv, I charge much less, and end up earning the same profit margin. (Drivers will feel richer because of the reduction, but I’d bet it would be temporary.)
My market has only a few small hauliers in it and they will pay to all intents and purposes the same price for derv as me. We can’t negotiate with Shell etc. Suttons can no doubt get a cheaper rate than us be cause of volume, but so can their competitors.
Personally I think Suttons should tell them to do one, but the big boys won’t stick their heads up over the parapet. Whilst I’ve done it successfully, had my customer given the work to someone else, I’d be working on the checkouts at Tesco and my drivers would still be calling me fit to burn as they worked for someone else.
albion:
I do genuinely try to be a decent employer and unlike Suttons, there’s only me and 25 staff to please, not a board and several hundred jobs.
Suppose my customer came along and said I’m not paying you £1.50 a mile, I’m paying you ;£1.30. Now I’m a stubborn old bat so I’d tell them our worth and if they didn’t like it, they can Foxtrot Oscar (I have said no on contractual terms before and been prepared to walk). And if the customer says no, then we all head off into the sunset. From the drivers perspective I’m not sure what that achieves…
Now Suttons have far more to lose and if they’ve been told to take it or leave it, they really can’t decide to give in, their only option is to cut costs. The council aren’t going to cut business rates, fuel suppliers will have the price down to the bone, truck sales and maintenance, maybe shave a few grand off that over 4-5 years. The only cost they can try to cut is wages.
There really isn’t much difference. Customer tells suttons they need to work for less. Drivers customer (Suttons) tells the drivers they need to work for less. Same principle, someone further up the chain hits you with a big stick.
If you have a client that plays hardball like that with a contractor, then as workers you just keep forcing the contractors to fold in bankruptcy until the client is radioactive and has to hire direct labour, and then they pay what the union demands after all. Of course, that depends on workers being unified, because when they are, there’s only one price in town no matter where the client goes.
Fine. But at the moment there’s a big gap between fantasy and reality.
For a stubborn old bat, your view is spot on.
Costs are costs, no chance of the government or the oil companies or the banks are going to loose their end so that leaves the operators profit margin and drivers wages ripe for a hair cut. I am picking you have a healthy desire to stay in the business you have spent years developing and not being a blue chip “logistics provider” so there is only so far you can bend over which leaves the only cost which can be cut. The seat kebab.
I left the industry for this very reason because I had a choice. The old Renault I kept going through sheer determination was completly worn out and was about to sign my life away on a newish Mercedes but realising it would be rinse and repeat for evermore to stay in the haulage game, I got out.
Some people get ahead, most fail. But while ever there is a line of hopefulls willing to put themselves into dept slavery and financial ruin, the big boys with their big stick will continue to encourage the little guy to work for nothing.
Apart from the healthy desire to stay in business. But yes, the times they are a-changing and my still very good customer I believe is becoming more corporate. The amount of people who are either counting their days to retirement or going a few years early and planning frugality is sad to see. The new business degree laden types in HQ know the price of everything and the value of bu88er all. I know one bright spark will say one day, let’s ask Wincantons what they will charge.
They did that with one of my other customers that had several hauliers on their books. Went to see Wincantons, thought you lot don’t actually know what a truck is and made the ‘mistake’ of telling them that. Still do some work for the customer , the awkward loads that monkeys can’t organise but it’s around 20% of previous figures. Fortunately it coincided with an unexpected uptick in work elsewhere so it didn’t really matter apart from seeing another customer lose its character/soul.
merseycool:
SOLIDARITY TO OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS
To be fair where is the support within the TUC as a whole for road transport to be given a level playing field regarding fuel taxation as other transport modes like rail to at least give the employers some breathing space and remove that justifiable excuse.As it stands road fuel taxation is effectively a tax on the wages of road transport workers.
Doesn’t make any odds what the price of derv is. (Unless you are competing with someone using red or foreign fuel, but as that’s almost certainly not the case here, let’s put that to one side.)
Back to my customer paying 1.50 a mile. As from Monday, fuel duty is abolished. As with pretty much all contracts, I have a fuel escalator in built. From Monday I now, pay much less for my derv, I charge much less, and end up earning the same profit margin. (Drivers will feel richer because of the reduction, but I’d bet it would be temporary.)
My market has only a few small hauliers in it and they will pay to all intents and purposes the same price for derv as me. We can’t negotiate with Shell etc. Suttons can no doubt get a cheaper rate than us be cause of volume, but so can their competitors.
Personally I think Suttons should tell them to do one, but the big boys won’t stick their heads up over the parapet. Whilst I’ve done it successfully, had my customer given the work to someone else, I’d be working on the checkouts at Tesco and my drivers would still be calling me fit to burn as they worked for someone else.
As I said, I don’t know what the answer is.
It’s obvious that general mileage rates ‘including’ any so called ‘fuel escalator’ aren’t a true reflection of the amount of unsustainable fuel costs being imposed on the industry.Those costs obviously being reflected in profitability and wage levels across the board because the customer isn’t prepared to pay for it.As in this case the customer is dictating a downward move in the rate while fuel costs remain the same or even increase.That obviously isn’t evidence of any supposed fuel escalator working but it is evidence of drivers wages being cut to meet unsustainable costs and their result on profitability.
There is a post on the OD’s forum which mentions that 35 years ago the rate for a fridge from Paddock Wood to Krefeld was over £900 and that today it is around £400. So perhaps the University educated wunderkinder who now run UK transport would like to comment on what has happened to fuel, insurance and all the other operating costs in the meantime and exactly how the brain which they borrow from time to time arrives at the conclusion that they can now quote a lower rate still.
Oh I forgot, they can now get more on the more expensive to run lorry so that means they can hand over that potential increase in revenue to their customer.
There is clearly an argument for selective euthenasia for the terminally stupid in business.
Alf Sutton had a reputation for being a hard man to work for, I am sure that his boot would have made contact with his current management’s arse at the first mention of cutting his rates to comply with a customer’s demand. This quite probably followed by a letter to that customer informing them that the rate was now going UP
Suttons bought Imperial Tankers to get their hands on the Nynas contract, I worked for Imperial for 15 years and still have a lot of mates who work there (well, the ones that haven’t jumped ship to Halcyon Tankers which is a new start up by the ex boss of Imperial) and they to a man despise the management of Suttons and their complete contempt for the workforce.
Reading between the lines I feel that Nynas want out of the contract with Suttons and are trying to force their hands with this rate reduction, if it wasn’t that it’d be something else. Mark my words, within the year the Nynas contract (and any drivers left on it) will be under the control of Halcyon.
I have read every argument and opinion and feel that there are some clued up posters here. Sutton’s WAS the tanker operator to be seen with but from what I have seen over 30 years they appear like the poor relative. Harry Lawson had Nynas for a long time. I see Halcyon or Turners having a livery change very soon. How much longer have the refineries got, electric cars, avoidable plastics ban, greenpeace and little Mary in the school classroom.
albion:
I do genuinely try to be a decent employer and unlike Suttons, there’s only me and 25 staff to please, not a board and several hundred jobs.
Suppose my customer came along and said I’m not paying you £1.50 a mile, I’m paying you ;£1.30. Now I’m a stubborn old bat so I’d tell them our worth and if they didn’t like it, they can Foxtrot Oscar (I have said no on contractual terms before and been prepared to walk). And if the customer says no, then we all head off into the sunset. From the drivers perspective I’m not sure what that achieves…
Now Suttons have far more to lose and if they’ve been told to take it or leave it, they really can’t decide to give in, their only option is to cut costs. The council aren’t going to cut business rates, fuel suppliers will have the price down to the bone, truck sales and maintenance, maybe shave a few grand off that over 4-5 years. The only cost they can try to cut is wages.
There really isn’t much difference. Customer tells suttons they need to work for less. Drivers customer (Suttons) tells the drivers they need to work for less. Same principle, someone further up the chain hits you with a big stick.
But this is the problem companies know they can cut costs by reducing pay and conditions, so contracts are negotiated with that knowledge, (although I wonder if the Swedish based contractors of Nynas would find that so easy?)
This doesn’t help workers, it doesn’t help people like you who want to treat their staff properly, it doesn’t really help most small business as they now making the same or less percentage profit on a smaller turnover, but it does benefit the owners (shareholders) of large multi-national corporations who drive these deals.
So unless we can get to a point where companies know they can’t make saving purely on reducing pay and conditions, we will continue with a race to the bottom and an increasing gap between the wealthiest top few percent and the average person.
I agree 100%, I was making the point that Suttons have as much choice as drivers. It would be nice if hauliers would stick together and not accept low rates. What the answer is, I have no idea.
I understand your point, you and other hauliers I know walk out of jobs before taking crap work, but there is always somebody willing to take it and run at bugger all profit cutting costs in everyway possible.
Although I’ve seen people try and do this with specialist work and fall flat on their face.
But the point is, as workers we have to draw the line somewhere and make a stand and a 32% paycut would definitely focus my mind on making a stand.
And if Sutton’s drivers don’t make a stand which tanker firm is next?
To those people who say it’s futile to try, well it has been made as difficult as possible to make a stand and there are risks, but not doing anything is completely futile, no chance of victory and still risky.
Two Factors in the Sutton Saga are the companies auditors who I believe have been with the firm since the days of Alf resigned last year and the companies latest accounts are due for publication any day now,the money paid for Imperial seems to be high at 27m.Its a shame that Alfs son Michael died soon after his son John was given the helm,Michael was always in the background as far as I can tell preferring to employ professional management to run the operation.
Gardner6LYT:
preferring to employ professional management to run the operation.
^^^^ a collection of words that just about sums up all that is wrong with industry today! The mere thought that there actually is a market for a collection of spivs and nonentities who actually call themselves "professional management " fills me with despair. If any of them actually could manage then why aren’t they running their own highly successful enterprises?
Its a sad state of affairs but the only way to cut more costs is staff.
Now i support the workers actions but i can also see it from the other sides point of view.
Some people/firms are still willing to pay for service.
Most are not. I could send two people to do the same job, one of them will do it for half of what the other one will do it. Now i know who i’d send, but if the bean counters found out it could be done for less i know who they would send.
muckles:
I understand your point, you and other hauliers I know walk out of jobs before taking crap work, but there is always somebody willing to take it and run at bugger all profit cutting costs in everyway possible.
Although I’ve seen people try and do this with specialist work and fall flat on their face.Stobarts tried to do that with our work. Given that we run explosives, do you have to be Brain of Britian not to crank up your primus stove to cook your soup while waiting to load. I think there was a whoosh of air as they were ejected rather quickly
But the point is, as workers we have to draw the line somewhere and make a stand and a 32% paycut would definitely focus my mind on making a stand.
And if Sutton’s drivers don’t make a stand which tanker firm is next?
To those people who say it’s futile to try, well it has been made as difficult as possible to make a stand and there are risks, but not doing anything is completely futile, no chance of victory and still risky.
I’m still nor arguing with anything you are saying. 32%, no I wouldn’t be standing for it. ( Full disclosure: I have once asked my lads to take a 10% cut over 6 months in 2009, management took a 20% cut, in the end it worked out at less than that. 2009 was just a bad year and fair play, they agreed with the obligatory grumbling).
I was talking to one of Lynch’s drivers not far from Sutton’s yard and he said he was on £9.40 an hour, which I think is pretty average for the area. No idea how that compares with what Suttons pay. If Suttons pay similar, then 32% would see them on minimum wage, if they pay a lot more, well that explains why they feel the need to cut wages. Not defending it, just pointing out what may be going through their heads.
Gardner6LYT:
preferring to employ professional management to run the operation.
^^^^ a collection of words that just about sums up all that is wrong with industry today! The mere thought that there actually is a market for a collection of spivs and nonentities who actually call themselves "professional management " fills me with despair. If any of them actually could manage then why aren’t they running their own highly successful enterprises?
I know at least three people very well who failed in Business and are now taking several holidays abroad, running nice cars and charging decent companies a fortune to act as their business consultants.
bobbya:
You really don’t appreciate what the unions have done for us over the years do you you’re not alone it’s all taken for granted,for instance this year I will get thirty days holiday,that would never have happened without unions,what I’ll do with thirty days god knows,but I’ll have it,thank you.
I agree unions have done good things over the years but the right to PAID holiday was an EU thing. The UK actually fought against the right to PAID holidays at the time
I had paid holidays in 1975 when the referendum to join the EEC was held so I don’t think that is an entirely accurate statement in this context. I was working in a unionised industry so may be that was why. The EU regs were, as I recall, aimed at setting a minimum which affected mainly NON unionised workplaces that used to behave in the manner similar to Suttons behaviour in in this instance.
I should add I support the drivers and would be doing the same thing in their position.
Companies screwing over other companies with this race to the bottom crap. Managers won’t take a pay cut so it falls on the drivers. It could well be that a company like Wincanton offered to do it for peanuts so nynas put the ball in Suttons court to match it.
