Jobs for the girls
Page 32
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
GIRLS as well as boys leaving school and seeking a career in road haulage would be encouraged by the advent of the new training scheme for young people said E. L. Williams, md of Williams Bros (Wales) Ltd and chairman of the education and training committee.
Illustrating the theme of his paper by a film, Mr Williams pointed out that the Association had, for 10 years, been discussing with other industries the best way of bringing such young people into the industry. They were invariably discouraged when they found out that they were forbidden to drive heavy goods vehicles till they were 21 years old.
There were valid reasons for that prohibition for accident statistics showed that, in general, young drivers of cars and motorcycles were a greater insurance risk.
However, there was no evidence that the young driver keen to make a career in road transport conformed to the accepted pattern for his age group.
As well as the strict requirements of the hgv driving test, the industry called for the desirable qualities of alertness, initiative and all-round intelligence. This was all the more reason for not discouraging likely boys and girls.
In Mr Williams' own organisation, a scheme had been adopted some time ago to provide training to young drivers within the limits prescribed by Jaw. Vehicles with swop bodies had been used so that the chassis cab was under 3 tons unladen enabling a driver under 21 years of age to drive them.
Other than school leavers others up to the age of 21 were accepted but in that case the company was even more selective to ensure that no bad habits had already been instilled.
The results had exceeded expectations. Standards had improved not only of individuals passing through the scheme but throughout the staff.
There had been an improvement in the fleet accident record which had reduced maintenance costs, reduced downtime on vehicles, and ensured an improved service to customers.
Standing on its own, the company's experience was sufficient to justify the momentous step forward that would be made by regulations. The resultant scheme would involve a kind of apprenticeship for people aged 16 years for a five-year period to work under controlled conditions through the various classes of hgv licences until they were entitled to the highest class of all. All that was awaited was the green light. However, a number of RHA members had undertaken already to put the scheme into effect in their companies.
There were massive operational advantages for operators who took the trouble to participate and credit should be given to the trade unions for their assistance with the scheme.
The screening pro ce ss through which applicants had to pass would ensure that those accepted would be motivated and encouraged to understand not only what was involved in the work of a lorry driver but how that work fitted into the undertaking as a whole, the national economy and the international scene. A better understanding of a company's activities had to lead to better industrial relations, said Mr Williams. Many disputes in the past had arisen because the management and the workers were not speaking the same language. It was hoped that the scheme would improve the stability of the labour force in the industry.
Perhaps the most important justification for the scheme was the immense improvement in driving standards that were implied. It was hoped that the bad driving habits picked up at an impressionable age would be eradicated.
To assist the employer who paid levy to the Road Transport Industry Training Board there would be grants from this source and additional special payments through the Training Services Agency. The small operator would have opportunities to use the scheme through the group training associations.
There was already evidence of acceptance of the scheme by insurers and it would not be long before the final barriers were lowered. The accompanying table showed the improvement in Williams Bros accident record.
As well as thanking the trade unions for their support, Mr Williams paid tribute to the work done for the scheme by the RTITB; indeed, they had• been of immense assistance in making the film.
On the same subject, Jackson Moore, general secretary of the United Road Transport Union, said that the miracle of a subject mutually acceptable to management and unions and one on which agreed progress could be made had surprised the Minister for Transport into showing the green light for the young driver scheme.
There was always a good percentage of children who dreamed about becoming a heavy goods vehicle driver. When school was over they themselves, in former days, had trained to achieve their goal working as vanboys and so on. Over the years, the industry had changed and that training field had been lost along with the young recruits.
It took some years for employers to realise that youngsters were not prepared to change their jobs after working in other industries for a few years; even those who still had an interest in transport were reluctant to change. The result was that many of the recruits to the industry were sometimes not a credit to it.
The proposed scheme would give a first-rate follow-up education, including t h e chance to study for the Royal Society of Arts young driver hgv further education certificate. It would give a youngster entry into any branch of the industry and perhaps even the boardroom.
Mr Jackson Moore appealed to employers not to sit on the fence but to join the scheme now while the market was slack to get the pick of the market.
On the completion of the two papers the session was thrown open for discussion.
One questioner, Mr M. Brown (Eastern area), asked what sanctions the scheme contained, since it was difficult to be tough on youngsters these days.
Mr Jackson Moore replied that entrants to the scheme had to sign a covenant which was revokable if the boys or girls. proved untrainable or could not keep up with the academic work.
Mr Williams added that there were many safeguards in the scheme and the first was the selection procedure itself.
But the main sanction was that a licence was issued to the trainee on the condition that he continued to work for 'his em ployer. If dismissed the licence automatically became null and void and that, commented Mr Williams, "is one hell of a sanction."
Mr E. C. Partridge (East Midland area) asked about the proposed training programme for the entrants between 16 and 18 years of age. Mr Williams replied that a special package about on-the-job training and a booklet for further education was sent to companies who joined the scheme. A log book similar to that used for craft practices was also sent with it.