1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156 
Truck driver Lucy Radley says the RHA and unions should get their facts right before 'mouthing off'
Page 16
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I'm not a great one for laying into established institutions, but after the furore over what Jeremy Clarkson (pictured above) said the other week, I must make an exception.
The Road Haulage Association (RHA) complained about Rikki Chequer's column, obviously failing to notice that it's compiled from the opinions posted on drivers' website TruckNetUK. For the record, I'm a truck driver, and I thought the Top Gear episode concerned was hilarious. It showed many of the problems we encounter, with enough humour so as not to bore the audience, whichever side of the fence they were sitting.
Unlike the RHA, which was heard recently to spout on Radio 4's You and Yours programme that drivers' night-out payments were intended to cover the cost of parking, and those who do not use them for such are simply "wanting to keep the money for themselves in order to supplement their wages".
Wrong! Night-out money is an allowance made by the Inland Revenue to enable companies to reimburse drivers for their personal expenses. Parking the truck is a business expense, and it is expected by the IA that employers will refund and claim tax relief for it separately.
So, I'm nervous that the RHA, which maintains that it represents drivers, sometimes fails to get its basic facts right.
The unions are no better. I joined the URTU. It represented me once very effectively at an employment tribunal. But it was the Working Time Directive that finished it for me. The union decided its membership was in favour of reduced working hours, and hence reduced earnings, without actually polling us.
So!, being very much against it, penned a letter and sent it to the union magazine. Three days later I received a call saying that I would get a lot of flack for the letter and was I sure I wanted it printed. "Yes," I replied. "Of course. At least then we might have a debate on the subject.' My letter was never printed, so I stopped paying my subs.
So often, nowadays, it feel that drivers will never get anything changed...