STEADY FLOW
Page 55
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
IF the number of committees is any guide, a far more serious effort than ever before is now being made to solve the problem of delays to road vehicles collecting and delivering at the docks. The Rochdale Committee now inquiring into the major ports of Great Britain has the subject well in mind. Some of the ports concerned, perhaps imitating the Government's example, are setting up committees and working parties of their own. An encouraging sign is that port authorities and users are busy discussing their common problems. For example, timber hauliers arranged a Meeting not long ago at which ship owners, wharfingers and the Port of London Authority were represented.
The nature of the interest determines the approach to the problem. The railways make few complaints. They are themselves responsible for a number of docks; most ports were designed primarily to take rail traffic; and on the whole the railways do not seem to be worried when trucks are kept waiting for long periods. Other users of the docks. and especially road operators, attach more importance to the full and active use of their vehicles.
THE attitude of -hauliers, and of C-licence holders to a slightly lesser extent, is that the setting up of the Rochdale Committee is long overdue. The ports are regarded as no longer adequate for the work they have to do. There are accusations of a railway mentality, under the influence of which the dock authorities favour a leisurely pace and see no reason for the faster turnround of vehicles. Complaints are made of inadequate approach roads, the lack of proper mechanical equipment for loading and unloading, and above all the restrictive practices of dock labour.
Recent joint discussions with the authorities have helped the road operator to realize that on many points they agree -with him and are doing their best to improve matters within the limited resources at their disposal. Lack of money and of space are among the difficulties. The ultimate responsibility lies with the Government, and naturally enough the port authorities do not find it politic to be too outspoken, although they may wish as warmly as hauliers that a proper dock system could be provided. In the meantime their efforts must be concentrated on making the best use of the ports as they are at present, with all their imperfections.
IT is in this direction that early improvements may be expected. As with most other traffic problems, the main concern is to spread the flow as evenly as possible. London Transport have in their time made sustained efforts, assisted by widespread publicity, to flatten the traffic peaks and to persuade the public to stagger their working hours. If the success has been limited or even negligible, the reason is 'that people do not like to be told at what time they are to travel. With goods there is more chance of progress, but. even here the preferences of the customer may mean that • far more vehicles are crowding the streets of busy towns at certain times than at others.
With port traffic special circumstances apply. To some extent each ship presents a separate problem. It lies at the dockside for an agreed number of days in order to unload and take on a new cargo. It is possible for the merchandise to be on the move throughout this period and if only the arrival and departure of vehicles could be regulated. there would be far fewer complaints of delays. This fact has been recognized for a long time. As long ago as April, 1956, the Ports Efficiency Committee, in a report to the Minister of Transport, singled out the introductions of arrangements for regulating the flow of cargo into the docks as the greatest hope" for reducing delays and avoiding congestion.
THE committee also pointed out that there are several interests involved. The ship owners set the process in motion by calling the traffic forward and it is then up to the shippers to send the goods. Other necessary links in the chain are the port authorities, the road hauliers and the railways, but the Committee put the main responsibility on the owners and the shippers. It was suggested that they should introduce regulatory schemes. With one or two exceptions, little progress has been made so far along these lines. Hauliers, who carry at least two-thirds of the dock traffic and possibly substantially more, are still dissatisfied, and the authorities (who seem to come in for• most of the blame) continue to complain about the traders andthe ship owners.
The trouble is not hard to diagnose. The trader is notified of the days when the ship will accept delivery. The human preference for working to a deadline, or in other cases the pressure of circumstances, leads him to wait until the end of the period before asking the haulier to call. As a result. the greater part of the consignment reaches the docks during the second half of the period. Facilities that would be ample if the same 'number of vehicles arrived each day, prove inadequate when there is a build up of traffic. Drivers• are kept waiting for hours, perhaps even for days.
Various solutions have been put, forward from time to time, some of them probably impracticable, such as the imposition of penalties on shippers who send their goods forward late. Tiresome delays may arise when several vehicles in a queue have comparatively small consignments. In some ports reception depots are available for bulking this kind of load, and more use might well be made of them. The real answer to the problem, to judge from the opinions and experience of the authorities themselves, could be to persuade the shipping companies to nominate specific days for accepting delivery of the different sections of a cargo. If this were possible, there should be little trouble in securing the co-operation of the other interests. The elimination of waiting time means a reduction in costs.
ONE final point for hauliers whose vehicles have remained a long time in a dock is t6 check whether the fault necessarily lies with the authbiities or withthe-sYstem. It is not unknown for a driver, perhaps because he wishes to avoid being sent out on another journey,. togive up his place at the front of a dock queue when he arrives there and return to the rear end. By this manceuvre he takes twice the time to complete the task. When he returns, it is natural that he should try to divert the anger of his employer in the direction of the authorities. There are causes enough for complaint without artificial additions. Whatever plan is ultimately adopted t6._ educate port authorities and port users, it will have to be comprehensive and well publicized.