When truck drivers hit the roads before the 2008 election to protest an increase in Road User Charges, perhaps they should have been protesting about their pay and how they are being driven into the ground.
The Sunday Star Times reports today that truck drivers are driving up to 100 hours a week, scrimping on maintenance, not taking breaks and speeding – all to try to earn a living as owner drivers in an intensely competitive industry.
I know some of these drivers. They borrow to buy the big rig, put their name on the side and are all set to go into their own small business.
Trouble is, as owner-drivers, they have little or no bargaining power. If the company decides to slash their contract price, the only recourse they have is to the Courts – requiring expensive lawyers and thousands of dollars the drivers don’t have.
I met some of the drivers mentioned in the SST. They work for large well-known iconic companies and they are at the end of their tether, so have decided to speak out.
They told us that driving 100 hours, seven days a week is common, how they put bald tyres scraping on the rims onto the inside of the truck because they can’t afford replacement tyres, how some of them found themselves asleep at the wheel, and how one had a crash on the way home from work because he was so knackered.
We heard how the company had unilaterally cut $700 a week from their pay, and there was almost nothing they could do about it without spending thousands of dollars they don’t have on lawyers and court action.
In Australia, after several enquiries, clear links have been established between the pay of truck drivers and safety and the government is moving to establish a “safe rates” system, where there is minimum pay for truckers and better bargaining power across Australia.
In New Zealand, we’ve implemented just about every type of safety law and rule you can imagine to improve truck safety since 1999, when there was a Select Committee enquiry into serious safety concerns in the trucking industry. Steven Joyce seems to have run out of ideas, except to permit heavier and longer trucks.
However, with one person a week dying in truck related crashes in New Zealand, the government needs to think more about this issue.
National boasts about being the friends of small business. Well, here’s some small business owners who have so few rights they are breaking the law and putting themselves and other road users at risk to make a living.
That’s terrible
Love the title
Well this phenomenon was predicted decades ago by the Northern Drivers Union in particular and was spearheaded by the oil companies, and other firms offering enticing OD contracts that became way less attractive once signed. The ECA era and 90s high unemployement helped cement in the change to owner drivers from the previously predominant wages drivers. The subtext being that wages drivers were 90% Union members, thats what the oil and frieght companies were really after-deunionising their haulage operations.
Owner or Wages, heavy truck drivers, courier drivers and bus operators have never been remunerated adequately or treated with the respect they deserve. For safety reasons alone
these people are important members of the transport industry. Time for a Union and industry campaign? as if there isn’t enough to be going on with, under the do nothing tory government we have.
Darien interesting post. We are in transport, my husband is the owner/driver this report talks about. I do the accounts. Our biggest cost and bane of our existence is actually the 100% increase in ACC levies that Labour put through in 2007. THIS along with high taxes AND Road Users is what has affected us most.
I am happy to discuss things with you in more detail privately,
Spud: there is a reason why people like me were not happy with Labour and why we are pushing so hard for them to come out with policy that shows they would do things a little differently 6th time round!
@Rebecca – I guess it’s good news for you that Darien cares about this issue enough to write a post on it!
Sorry to hear about your husband’s predicament.
Spud thank you and true though of course we have been paying these levies for 2 years and onto our 3rd bill soon.
And it’s our families predicament as it is for every single other owner/driver out there and their families.
As I have pointed out earlier, we are paying $1.47 MORE per $100 of income than employees doing the exact same job. This is not fair given that all the big transport companies push for people to be owner/drivers than employees so as to save on compliance costs.
One more point Darien, I have to say, on behalf of the said transport company, I do resent your implication that it is the truck drivers who are at fault when you state ” with one person a week dying in truck related crashes in New Zealand, the government needs to think more about this issue.” which of course implies that the trucks are at fault.
Not true. See the report below. Truck crashes have been on the decline for the last decade and further, only 33% or one third of truck drivers are deemed to be at fault in all fatal crashes involving trucks.
http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/Trucks_2009.pdf
If the monkeys in their cars don’t understand the basics like judging the speed of an oncoming vehicle, that following too close means the truck can’t see you (e.g. “if you can’t see my mirrors I can’t see you”), don’t switch their indicators on appropriately at roundabouts, and that they need a lot of extra space when turning (often 2 lanes) then so be it if they end up in crash. People need to take a bit more personable responsibility.
And what really annoys me is that when those monkeys crash into us, we like ALL other owner/drivers have to then go and pay to rent another truck while the one we are already paying for, is being repaired.
Yes we have issues!
Sorry! One more thing Darien: I am confused as to who these contractors are – the story seems to contradict. If you are a contractor – that is self employed, you are not covered by the Department of Labour and are responsible for everything from truck repairs, tyres to taxes.
If you are a salaried person which indeed the main complainants are when they say they were on a “$30,000 salary” and how “in his last pay review his income was cut so low that he now earns $9 an hour before tax for an 80-hour week”
If salaried then aren’t these conditions against the law? Why hasn’t the Department of Labour taken up these cases? Why did Harry Duynhoven do nothing?
In terms of iconic companies there is only Mainfreight, Peter Baker, Toll (formerly Tranzlink) Linfox & AF Transport. Of these only only one works predominantly with employees.
Further a run is as only good as you make it. If it is a rubbish run where you are working 80 hours for $9 gross per hour then they should walk away as they would be better off working in the storeroom, working at a supermarket or signing themselves up as a Corrections Officer.
Thanks at least for taking this issue up of Labour – while I consider it well overdue, I am still happy that someone at least cares!
“… I do resent your implication that it is the truck drivers who are at fault when you state ” with one person a week dying in truck related crashes in New Zealand, the government needs to think more about this issue.” which of course implies that the trucks are at fault.”
When you read that part of Darien’s post in context with the whole past, it is plain to see that Darien was making no such implication Rebecca. I resent your tendency to indulge in misinformation about what some authors here on Red Alert are actually saying.
Anne I resent your tendency to nitpick instead of debate the actual issue; you to seem only want to try and make digs at me which does nothing but bring down the tone of what this site is about.
This is a very big issue for thousands and thousands of people. Please have the respect to debate the issue at hand.
Anne, that is amazing. It turns out that Labour is the cause of the problems and Darien is the one indulging in misinformation and you are still able to be negative to someone who has suffered as a result of it. Untruckingbelievable !
Anne: further, with Darien being quoted in article as saying “I’m really pleased some drivers are coming forward because I’m increasingly concerned about the crash statistics that we’re seeing.” there is nothing misinformed about what I am saying.
This article in the Sunday Star Times is completely skewed and in parts, anything but factual.
The reporter has mixed and matched at whim the so-called conditions of salaried drivers with that of owner/drivers and worse still, actually mixed industries – parts of her article clearly refer to courier drivers not transport drivers.
And this is all done in a feeble attempt to say that owner/drivers are poorly paid, stressed, fatigued and causing more crashes – the latter especially is a fallacy as shown by the above stats.
What articles like this do is make things even worse for ALL drivers in the industry as it gives the CEOs and government alike an out as instead of debating the actual issues they get to nitpick over the facts.
Meanwhile the poor driver is still working long hours, paying high tax, Road Users and ACC levies.
Bottom line I can not honestly see how someone is working for $9 per hour – that is, $3.75 per hour below the minimum wage for 80 hours when you can earn the minimum wage for less hours at The Warehouse and the like.
Especially when good drivers are like gold meaning relief drivers are very hard to come by.
I’m going to have a stab at this,
, I think the guts of the article is that the Truckies aren’t getting enough money and that’s forcing them to take risks. 
I don’t think Darien was villifying Truckies.
@ Spud you got it!
@Rebecca : I would be really happy to talk with you in private about this issue. I have been working on it for some time and want to encourage all players in the road transport industry to put forward their views. I don’t pretend to know everything, but I have no doubt that the drivers in the article are genuine. I spent some hours with them and in fact, they are taking great risks in speaking out.
In response to your comments :
ACC levies : Employees have their employers pay a levy as well, so the self employed levy is intended to match that. However, I agree with your comment about the incentive for companies to push people into being owner drivers to avoid compliance cost (in other words, holidays, sick leave, minimum wage etc). That’s the problem with dependent contracting.
Driver fault : I am not blaming the drivers – far from it. I am saying that with the rates of pay and cost recovery models many are being forced to work with are so uneconomic, they are taking risks they shouldn’t have to take. Yes, crash stats have come down since a 1999 enquiry into what was an extremely dangerous industry, because of safety measures and efforts by the Labour government (including funding safety programmes through ACC) but they are stuck at the current levels. However, the problem that hasn’t been looked into is the rates of pay and whether that has an impact on safety.
“I am confused as to who these contractors are” – you have named the big transport firms, but there are also many other large firms who supply goods who contract with large numbers of owner drivers to deliver those goods. The reporter has NOT mixed and matched. Her reference to the $30,000 salary is the total income for that particular driver after costs were deducted. We went through the economics really carefully, including those of the $9 an hour driver. Yes, it’s below minimum wage, but there’s no requirement for contractors to be paid any minimum in anything. The reference to courier drivers is from the union secretary – and he is right – there are problems in that industry as well.
These drivers came forward of their own volition and I have heard from many more. No-one’s nitpicking over the facts – I’m trying to get to the bottom of them. I’m sure we can agree that drivers should be better treated and respected?
@Tigermountain : Thanks for that. I think you will see that this issue gathers pace over time.
The same applies in the building industry. Labour contract firms, companies and people are screwing down the price in the delusional belief that the price is what the market says it is and not taking into account the simple fact that it costs to do the work. Unfortunately, the builders have to do some work else they’d lose everything even faster effectively forcing them to work for less than cost.
My nephew, who’s a builder, estimates that in 10 years there’ll be another leaky building crises due to costs being cut and the use of substandard materials.
Oh, forgot to mention, despite having to pay both the employees and employers part of ACC it seems that him getting ACC is like finding hens teeth. When he was down in Queenstown he was earning good money (in excess of $100k/year) as a contractor but, due to changing circumstances, had to change to a waged job earning significantly less. He had an accident and,although his income for the previous 52 weeks was very high he only got ACC on the 2 weeks he’d been working as a wage earner. He pretty much considers paying ACC as lost income with no return.
Darien thank you.
Re ACC. The figure I quoted took into account the employers levy that is:
An employee in the transport industry – particularly road freight, pays (like all employees) a flat rate $1.70 per $100 of income and their employer pays a flat rate of $0.70 per $100 of income.
An owner/driver in the transport industry pays $3.87 per $100 of income.
Note these figures are before the new ACC changes which although no where near the increase we were subjected to by Labour, will still make things worse.
Re the article – it was a very poorly written piece and made no effort to differentiate between the types of workers and industries.
Further, as you stated that the people who came forward “work for large well-known iconic companies and they are at the end of their tether, so have decided to speak out” then one can only deduce from that that you do indeed at least one of the companies I have listed above – these companies that do bulk freight and food. They are our biggest and most iconic companies.
In terms of an owner/driver who works in the transport industry 80 hours per week for $9 per hour it sounds so extreme that I can’t help but question the credibility of the people coming forward. Perhaps it is true for couriers who are often on call 24 hours and work for sometimes very low hourly rates.
But in terms of the transport industry, as I have said before good drivers are like gold & are currently in very short supply.
If they are good drivers then they should get in touch with other companies as there is a huge demand for good relief drivers and even good permanent drivers.
Thanks again Darien for taking the time though – it is sincerely appreciated.
@ Draco: gosh that sounds hideous, but yes, ACC are very cunning making sure they only pay out on the income pertaining to the last filed tax return. In our first year of business with huge upstart in costs it was our worst fear that my husband would get injured as his previous salary wouldn’t have even paid for the cost of paying for the truck each month!
@Rebecca – well, they could and may well get in touch with other companies, but there are costs with moving on tied up with the ownership and branding of their trucks. If you read the article properly, you will see that some have moved on. However, it doesn’t get away from the fact that some drivers are being screwed, and I don’t think that’s good enough. Nor is it good enough for us to say they should just go elsewhere, because some other poor driver will come along and be treated in exactly the same way.
Darien I did read the article very thoroughly as did my husband who has worked in the industry for years and knows it inside out, hence my criticism of both the article and your post above.
Tonight TV1 showed the results of the latest polling. It is things like this that show why voters are still so unhappy with Labour as you don’t seem to acknowledge the current climate.
Your post and the article failed to differentiate between the tiny companies living off the smell of an oily rag who always cut corners and don’t do what they ought including paying drivers at least the minimum wage versus the iconic companies that I have outlined above that do, by and large, play by the rules.
Yes of course some drivers are being treated badly but not in the big companies.
These companies pay all drivers better (some better than others of course), because they need good drivers as can’t afford to be constantly paying out to suppliers for pellets of goods, food or chemicals that the useless drivers inevitably drop.
However, no doubt the transport forum etc will take issue with the article where appropriate.
The best thing Labour can do is apologise first and foremost for making the ACC levies so unfairly high for contractors and then promise that you will sort out the anomalies should you be re-elected in 2011. This alongside the increases in Road Users is what is hurting the most.
The regulations are there and so are the facilities (weighbridges by State Highways)… The only thing missing is the funding for CVIU (Police Commercial Vehicle Investigation Unit) to utilise these bridges anywhere enough…
How about a review of whether truck companies are paying their fair share into road costs, the same the rail system is expected to..? A shift of more freight onto rail is important as freight is expected to rise 20% of the next couple of decades (IIRC)…
Darien – I see half the problem being with the contractors concept, which is helpful/workable/desirable for highly skilled workers (IT,Dr), but not so for easily replaceable or a highly fractured industry. As Draco has mentioned builders (and I know a few), some may go through periods of under or different employment but none that I know of will work for less than cost + x. They are in demand and have connections through industry organizations and working mens clubs.
A salaried driver only needs a license (aprox 3-6 weeks + waiting for LTSA clerance). They have unions talking about raises in % terms (3-4) rather than what they should be paid ($x). The fact is that the companies find it too easy to replace single workers from WINZ driving school connections. Personally I have also found the drivers unions (and there are many) are too fractured, and some even work for the managers (we won an illegal union case in court where mgmt bought in a union and conned people into a poor contract without reading it, but still did no good). The other question as Rebecca alluded to is that good drivers get paid as much as the bad drivers. I would love to see a professional license grading system, similar to what we have now, but with a professional grading system overlaid (also like to see 15-17 yr olds start on moped only). Or even an insurance rating for drivers?
My views on contract drivers were formed early on. Scabs who shoot us all in the foot by allowing corporates to avoid their responsibilities. My first story was from another driver from a oil company in the 80s. They were convinced/conned/forced to become contractors, assisted to buy their old truck, loan arranged with finance company then 65% of contracts were cut up 2 years later, $80,000 in debt and with a tank that could only transport hazardous substances and a glut on the market as they all tried to sell. Took another couple of years to sell & pay back the debt. The second story is from forestry, where used to do 3 runs in the 80s they now (on contract) have to do 4 for the same pay.
The solution to this might not be comfortable, but unionizing the contract workers would would be ideal. Ie a professional body to help set rates and conditions of contracts, help with loans to enforce contract and lobby and work with lawmakers.
JMH – Good point re rail, but we still need trucks at each end remember.
I have been a truck driver for 15 odd years, 7 Australia, 8 NZ, fortunately most of my jobs have involved a lot of time waiting to be unloaded or loaded, in that waiting time instead of reading trucking mags, I studied the entire history of banking and commerce, the entire history of NZ debt management, read most NZ historians Maori and European, read the national overveiw of Waitangi Tribunal, district reports and theme reports, sat an extremural level 3 cert of NZ Public Sector Knowledge.
Please stick with me below, I assure you it ties in, infact is the common denominator in the poo rolls down hill effect that repeatedly afflicts most realsectors of commerce.
As we as a nation are once again reducing services as ever increasing ammounts of the nations generated profits are going to service an exponentially increasing gross debt across all sectors, and we once more under the instructions of our international creditors running the rule over whats left of our resources and necessities of life with a veiw to once more, as in 1961 and 1984-99,selling those assets to reduce our debt repayment crisis.
On both occasions we reduced our public sector debt to near zero and were told it would never rise again. On both of those occasions as conditions of refinancing we had to allow the foreign financiers greater open access to directly lend to the private citizenship, which in the pursuit of ever increasing profit the credit flowed in, on both occasions more credit was issued than there was the collective means of repayment, saturation of credit/debt, thus as more and more struggled to stay in the game, we first suffered inflation as those who got their hands on disproportionate ammounts of free flowing capital paid premiums for what markets they wanted to monopolise and those that had not so much money struggled to keep up with price v wage gap, falling behind they borrowed even more far to freely available credit to keep up or to attempt to stay above the foreclosure line.
The ever increasing debt for those below the line causes a drop in discretionary income for consumption spending, as this occurs those struggling to get the next debt repayment increase the the cost of debt on top of debt already priced into what is a debt based system, further inflation. This of course only exsaperates the problem like a self for filling prophecy, then follows deflation as those who failed in surviving by first increasing prices then out of desperation sell at loss making prices just to get the next repayment.
Then follows foreclosure, a handing over of assets to the lender and in many cases residual debt for the borrower.
This is happening at both private and nationstate level around the world at present.
It is the above boom, bust, bankruptcy cycle that is seeing the poo rolling down hill effect of ever increasing debt stress upon most levels in the industry, many are being forced to act in a manner they would far rather not.
Just who the hell are these people? that have earned and saved so much money that the almost the whole world is in debt to them and have they gained that money they loaned everyone legitimately?
Sadly the evidence from my research that I have documented below shows it is not the case, and barring some sort of intervention in real quicktime, these foreign lenders and their bogus loans are going to go on causing ever larger repayment crisis in even shorter cycles until they all but own everything via predatory lending of loans for which they had no consideration on their side of the balance ledger.
So my fellow Truckies, next time you have a few minutes, give up reading about CATS and KW’s, try a bit of history and economics:
http://publiccreditorbust.blog.com/2010/04/16/perhaps-the-greatest-three-pages-from-the-greatest-new-zealand-political-book-ever-written-by-one-of-the-labour-movements-greatest-forgotten-and-much-wrongly-besmirched-heros/
In Truckie speak, be safe, keep it straight and upright.
cheers
Iain
Both Jeremys: great points.
We would love to see a rating attached to the vehicles on the CVIU checks which translates into a more risk orientated ACC levy – the less risk you are (e.g. truck in good working order, logs up-to-date, appropriate signage and safety books etc) then the less you pay.
Another thing re the whole moving on thing for contractors: the only people who have problems selling their trucks if they want to move on are those who don’t keep them in good working order.
Otherwise, once you already have a truck then the additional costs in terms of paint & signage are a fraction considering that your pay would no doubt double!
The trucking magazine advertises for drivers every issue.
Jeremy: yes I agree with your view that many employees were pushed into contracts they didn’t really want….IRD vs TNT was the start of that.
Regardless of whether you are an employee or contractor the terms and conditions are identical with only difference being that the employee’s backside is covered.
There was a very interesting article by Mark Ngatuere from the Transport Forum recently that showed how much discontent there is in the industry.
What people seem to forget most, including the members of parliament, is that extra costs on us translate more often than not to increase costs on consumer goods.
As for rail all the major transport companies want it as it becomes cheaper to get freight up & down the country. However, we will always need linehaul guys (since rail can’t guarantee overnight delivery) and trucks to pick the freight up & deliver it.
I expect that there will changes with Kiwirail that reflect these things.
Regards Darien,
I believe I have broken none of the forum guideline, I beg of you a fair go re a debate that is very close to my heart.
cheers
Iain
While the debate is active, not days after its disappeared off the recent post list would be greatly appreciated.
cheers
Iain
Rebecca – “Regardless of whether you are an employee or contractor the terms and conditions are identical with only difference being that the employee’s backside is covered.”
Not 100% sure what you mean by terms & conditions. I know road laws are (normally $1 fine for employee = $10 for company), but surly not the contracts. For example, if we find a bald tyre on our trucks we ask for another, or we stop the run and still get paid (as long as we sit at depot or on truck), sometimes this needs a union to fight for the payment, but is well established. A contractor I assume has to ring truckstops for the new truck, unload & reload, all at personal cost/time?
@Rebecca – tbe drivers referred to in the article and my post do work for a large company and that’s what so horrific about what they had to say. This was not a story made up on the hoof – there’s weeks of investigation gone into it and I know the reporter was very careful. It’s not the first group of drivers I’ve met who work for large companies as owner drivers who are having real problems. I have no doubt that the Road Transport Forum and their mates will come out fighting on this one, but if they’ve got nothing to hide, they should have nothing to be concerned about. In fact, if everything’s so rosy, they will welcome an enquiry into payrates and safety in the industry.
@Jeremy and Jeremy M Harris – thanks for constructive comments.
Regards Darien,
something I said or did?
How far have Labour moved from the ideals they aspouse to support, transparent democracy for a fully informed electorate.
Not even the respect to acknowledge me in any way?
My hope for this nation and its common peoples is dissapearing by the day.
@Iain – I don’t moderate this site or post. Just sent you an email.
Regards Darien,
Thanks where thanks should be given, but how long am I going to have to suffer this draconian moderation censorship?
cheers
Iain
Jeremy by same terms and conditions I meant in terms of the employer/employee or contractor relationship.
With regards to the actual work yes everything the contractor has to do is at their own cost and on their own time – they have to work around things such as arranging to find time to get new tyres put on, pay rental for a truck while their own one is being repaired or serviced – even if it is leased etc.
In terms of being overweight: the company pays the fine the same as they have to do things like pay for the cost of goods etc if someone drops a pellet.
If the contractor is overweight or drops a pellet they are up for the cost themselves.
In terms of fines – if you’re overweight it is something like $1 per kg – so a huge cost and never worth the risk. Especially in you’re in an accident as it makes your insurance null & void.
Darien you don’t seem to have any interest in reading and validating the points I have raised.
Disappointing but not surprising considering that Labour seems to have only started to care about this industry and the issues we face once out of government and in Opposition.
As far as people like my husband and his workmates are concerned, Labour can not possibly ever be in a position to criticise Steven Joyce and co without coming across like hypocrites.
And I share this view too seeing as it is me that does the books and in the last 3 years especially have had to find thousands and thousands of dollars at the last minute all because Labour decided it was in everyone’s best interest (except ours) that our costs should go up.
@ Rebecca 3.32pm.
Just seen your comment. Sorry to have to labour the point, but you have a tendency to extract a small part of a post and twist it in such a way that you bring an element of disrepute to the whole post. I object to such practises and I think you do yourself no credit by persisting with it. The last thing Darien was doing was “villifying” truckies or trying to lay the blame at their feet. By all means have a debate about the issue but do it in a fair and reasonable way then people will be more inclined to read your comments and take them seriously.
Hi Anne
Anne: Darien stated that it was iconic transport companies that were at fault, further the reporter clearly alluded to situations that occur in the courier industry NOT transport.
While I can understand your clear devotion to Labour – and make no mistake I share the same ideological views – this post and the article has in part misrepresented the issue and in doing so, gives cause for the CEOs and governments to overlook those of us who actually work in the industry.
As I stated before, there are many small companies that are barely legal however, it is doubtful whether they would do things like travel outside a 50km radius so in that sense have no logbook obligations.
In terms of pay – the same small companies no doubt skimp on wages for their drivers or contractors but like I said before when there is job after job advertised in the main truck magazine there is alternatives.
The big companies can not possibly afford to do the things outlined in Darien’s post and in the article as competition is tight and there is always someone standing by ready to buy them out – just look at Linfox & Mainfreight!
While I accept that it was not Darien’s intention to vilify contractors like us, it was irksome as I felt it was misrepresentative of the real issues – that is, high ACC levies, high road users and high taxes.
@ Iain: “fortunately most of my jobs have involved a lot of time waiting to be unloaded or loaded”…why didn’t you just grab a forklift and unload yourself?! :p
Iain in terms of your post – while interesting and relevant in terms of how we got to where we are today, government policy or rather change in government policy is the most pertinent course of action in terms of assisting those on the ‘floor’ in the transport industry.
@Rebecca – I have offered to meet you privately on this matter. If you are still interested, I would be too, because tit for tatting on this blog is not going to help get drivers better pay – which is ultimately what I am keen to see.
Darien I agree. However, rather than meeting me – there mere bookkeeper, perhaps you may want to meet with some of the drivers of the larger transport companies and hear what concerns them most?
While I am quick to be cross at Labour for the things I consider they/you did wrong, there were still plenty of things they/you did right.
Further, we are one of the few contractors that earn a decent wage for the 50-60 hours my husband puts in – primarily because of lower overheads compared to the other contracts or runs.
If you like I can help arrange a meeting with drivers from Wellington.
And again I must stress that while I found aspects of your post and the article misrepresentative of the most pertinent issues the transport industry faces and felt you had not validated my concerns, I do sincerely appreciate your efforts to at least discuss the issue.
@Rebecca – it’s a deal. I would love to meet more drivers and listen to their concerns. I’m easy to find on darien.fenton@parliament.govt.nz
@Rebecca – PS – you are not a mere bookkeeper. Your opinions matter too!
Oh thank you! :p Okay, deal. I will ask around and get back to you
Rebecca,
You cant use a forklift to lift liquid, fortunately many of my jobs have required pumping liquids on and off, crude oil etc, I say fortunately, or I would not have had the opportunity to learn what I have to now attempt to help out my fellow members of the realsector, that being the opposite of the false sector.
Iain apologies but didn’t see you specify what kind of freight you were working with. Yes obviously there is safety regulations with the likes of hazardous chemicals & oils however, I am not aware of any restrictions on using a forklift for thinks like the various drinks (poweraid, juices, fizzy etc) to flaxseed oils, body washes & body spray – but then I haven’t read any safety manuals for a couple of years as it’s not like I’m the one at the wheel! :p
Darien, where have you been? This has been the norm in the road transport industry for years.
Companies like Mainfreight and co have screwed the owner drivers to the wall for years. On a return on investment basis you would be better off leaving your money in the bank instead of investing in a truck to earn a living.
Transport proves that competition and choice works, not many operators cream it for long on a job before some competitor undercuts them and takes their business.
Oh by the way, ask the truckies what they think of the emissions trading scheme and if they will be able to pass on the extra 5c a litre in cost, most will end up having to absorb it just to keep working.
Its a bit scary when you think they would have been paying double that under Labour aye?
Please dont worry Rebecca I have done my physical apprenticeship prior to taking up driving and falling into some cruzy jobs, stacking blocks in a block plant, brickies labourer, 10 years in sawmilling game, sorting table and tailing out on benchsaw, all whilst playing and training for rugby which I played in 3 senior A grand finals, unfortunately losing all three. My current job is no longer pumping oil and involves a reasonable ammount of trolley work to keep the collesterol out of the arteries.
Anyway, not here to have a who is the greatest saint contest, I hope I a basically decent chap in amongst what I believe is a basically decent majority, here to present some facts from my learnings, mostly from the very mouths of the major players, in order that those who’s coincidences in life have not afforded them the same learning opportunities I have had, might gain a better understanding of what shaped the present and make better informed opinions on what might need to be done to improve the future.
My studies lead me to believe that there is compelling evidence that monetary policy, that is our debt dealings with the outside world, are a large common denominator in what most people observe as the erosion of societal decency.
Thus when I present my factual evidence to support my thesis and proffer as a solution the very same solution that has already been used successfully by the very first NZ Labour government and in other nations, I am not trolling.
I get sick to death of people who just love an argument, keep presenting the well known symptoms over and over, but never proffer a viable solution.
Monetary, banking and credit system reform is my solution, for which I can present precedence of its tried and tested effectiveness when done properly in the past.
As part of getting to know me, I will also add that in the interest of holding my young family together Tues, Thurs, Sat are computer and politic free zones in our house, so please dont be offended if you get no reply from me on those days or on the reasonably regular occasion I do 14 hrs and have little time. The joys of finding the time to fight the world of trickery whilst finding the time for family responsibilities, research and then trying to have some effect with your findings.
Right now I say goodnight all, as I need to get some sleep for an early start in the morn.
Thankyou for the moderators for allowing me my freedom, although I won’t the Labour movement to take a good hard look at themselves worts and all, I assure you I mean Labour no harm, it is because I believe the international Labour movements very founding ideals are the only thing that stands a show of stopping the agenda of foreign corporate raiders and their locally recruited co-operatives.
Godber – care to quantify that? Big call naming & blaming an “iconic” company…
You need to specify who as companies and their treatment of staff varies greatly.
Take Mainfreight: Bruce Plested started Mainfreight up in 1978 as an owner/driver and from the start as always made approximately 10% of the profit was distributed amongst the staff.
In terms of owner/drivers they review contract rates roughly every 2 years or so and regularly keep the fuel surcharge inline with current oil prices.
Iain re your forklift thing I’m confused: my husband who like you has been in the industry for many years, says that is common place for people to use a forklift to pick up 200litre oil drums and 1000 litre tanks (flammable liquids to concrete setting stuff)…
That was mean’t to want, not won’t.
Would be great to have an edit, because lots of the time I know what I want to say, it just won’t come out right.
Iain: ohhh sounds like you were in a different kind of road freight thing like petrol tank or oil pump over…
Re “I get sick to death of people who just love an argument, keep presenting the well known symptoms over and over, but never proffer a viable solution.”
I agree. I want solutions. We all know the problems, we need real answers, real solutions!
“and make no mistake I share the same ideological views”
????????
Aaah Spud dear Spud: ideology and realism are not always synonymous…especially when your bills go up by 100%!!!!